[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 14626-14627]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



    IN SUPPORT OF THE EPA RULE CONCERNING TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 13, 2000

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, the Environmental Protection Agency has 
taken a bold and necessary step toward fulfilling the promise of 
fishable, swimmable waters that the Congress made to the American 
people in the Clean Water Act nearly 30 years ago.
  EPA has finalized the rule on Total Maximum Daily Loads. This will 
address the last frontier of the Clean Water Act--discharges from open 
spaces, runoff from land that gets into our waters through creeks and 
streams, into rivers, lakes, and estuaries.
  EPA proceeded in all proper fashion in developing this rule. It 
provided for an extended comment period, which was further extended by 
Congress for a full 5 months. EPA subsequently received and responded 
to over 30,000 comments. The agency made changes in the rule to make it 
more flexible, more responsive, and more effective in addressing water 
quality needs. EPA even went as far as to withdraw the proposal for 
forestry, choosing to focus efforts on comprehensively, effectively, 
and thoroughly addressing the fundamental issue of runoff from nonpoint 
sources.
  Notwithstanding this monumental effort, Congress responded with a 
direct assault on TMDL rule and the Clean Water Act.
  Regrettably, it seems as though we go down this road every year--EPA 
seeking to advance protection of human health and the environment, and 
the Congress pushing anti-environmental riders in appropriations bills.
  Just a few short weeks ago, the majority, with much fanfare, claimed 
to have adopted a policy of no anti-environmental riders in 
appropriations bills. Unfortunately, that policy lasted only until the 
first vote on a conference report, when the majority inserted language 
to prevent EPA from improving the quality of the Nation's waters. The 
majority's rider would prevent EPA from proceeding with the TMDL rule 
by prohibiting the agency from spending any

[[Page 14627]]

money to advance the process of developing and implementing the 
program.
  The opposition to the TMDL rule is badly misguided and fueled by an 
unwillingness to achieve water quality in a fair and timely manner. The 
TMDL process is an effective, rational, and defensible process by which 
to achieve the water quality goals of the Clean Water Act.
  The EPA estimates that some 20,000 rivers, lakes, streams and other 
bodies of water in this country are polluted to the point of 
endangering public health. The TMDL rule would help states address this 
problem by setting a daily limit on the amount of polluting substances 
entering these waters, in effect, creating a ``pollution budget'' for 
them.
  This is how the process works: First, states identify those waters 
where the state's water quality standards are not being met.
  Second, states identify the pollutants that are causing the water 
quality impairment.
  Third, states identify the sources of those pollutants.
  Finally, states assign responsibility for reducing those pollutants 
so that the waters can meet the uses that the states have established.
  We have made great improvements in water quality through the 
treatment of municipal waste and industrial discharges. Thanks to 
billions of dollars invested by industries and municipalities, these 
point sources are no longer the greatest source of water quality 
impairment. Nationally, the greatest remaining problem is nonpoint 
sources--not pollution from a single, easily identifiable source such 
as discharge from a sewer pipe, but from a wider area, such as runoff 
from a farm field or parking lot. Now, nearly 30 years after the Clean 
Water Act, it is time for the states to get all sources of pollution--
including nonpoint sources--to be part of the solution.
  I have heard the arguments that the TMDL rule is not based on 
science. In my considered judgment, the TMDL rule is not only based on 
science, it is based upon the facts.
  Just this June, EPA published its biennial report entitled National 
Water Quality. This report provides Congress with information developed 
by the states, and the states tell us that there are still major water 
quality problems to be addressed. Further, the states tell Congress 
that for rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs and ponds, the leading 
source of water quality impairment, by far, is runoff from urban lands 
under development and from those agricultural lands that are not 
properly managed to contain runoff.
  The TMDL process is the most fair and efficient way to finish 
cleaning up the Nation's waters. The TMDL rule is not perfect, and EPA 
has been responsive in making adjustments to the rule. Many have 
criticized it, including some in the environmental community, but the 
TMDL process is the tool the states need to achieve water quality.
  EPA has changed the TMDL rule to make it clearer and more responsive 
to the concerns of the agriculture community. EPA has also withdrawn in 
its entirety the rule relating to forestry, and has promised to work 
with stakeholders to develop a new rule sometime next year.
  Now, the vast majority of the environmental community supports going 
forward. The Department of Agriculture supports going forward.
  I applaud EPA for going forward, and will work to allow EPA to fully 
implement the rule and achieve the water quality goals of the landmark 
Clean Water Act of 1972.

                          ____________________