[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 23606-23609]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   CLARIFYING FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY FOR STORMWATER POLLUTION

  Mr. PERRIELLO. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from 
the Speaker's table the bill (S. 3481) to amend the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act to clarify Federal responsibility for stormwater 
pollution, and

[[Page 23607]]

ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 3481

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY FOR STORMWATER 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Section 313 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1323) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Reasonable Service Charges.--
       ``(1) In general.--For the purposes of this Act, reasonable 
     service charges described in subsection (a) include any 
     reasonable nondiscriminatory fee, charge, or assessment that 
     is--
       ``(A) based on some fair approximation of the proportionate 
     contribution of the property or facility to stormwater 
     pollution (in terms of quantities of pollutants, or volume or 
     rate of stormwater discharge or runoff from the property or 
     facility); and
       ``(B) used to pay or reimburse the costs associated with 
     any stormwater management program (whether associated with a 
     separate storm sewer system or a sewer system that manages a 
     combination of stormwater and sanitary waste), including the 
     full range of programmatic and structural costs attributable 
     to collecting stormwater, reducing pollutants in stormwater, 
     and reducing the volume and rate of stormwater discharge, 
     regardless of whether that reasonable fee, charge, or 
     assessment is denominated a tax.
       ``(2) Limitation on accounts.--
       ``(A) Limitation.--The payment or reimbursement of any fee, 
     charge, or assessment described in paragraph (1) shall not be 
     made using funds from any permanent authorization account in 
     the Treasury.
       ``(B) Reimbursement or payment obligation of federal 
     government.--Each department, agency, or instrumentality of 
     the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the 
     Federal Government, as described in subsection (a), shall not 
     be obligated to pay or reimburse any fee, charge, or 
     assessment described in paragraph (1), except to the extent 
     and in an amount provided in advance by any appropriations 
     Act to pay or reimburse the fee, charge, or assessment.''.

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 3481, a 
bill to amend the Clean Water Act to clarify Federal responsibility for 
stormwater pollution.
  I applaud the outstanding work of the sponsors of this legislation, 
the distinguished Senator from the State of Maryland (Mr. Cardin), as 
well as the sponsor of the House companion bill (H.R. 5724), the 
Delegate from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), for their efforts 
to move this important legislation for the protection of our Nation's 
waters.
  Simply put, this legislation clarifies that Federal agencies and 
departments are financially responsible for any reasonable Federal, 
state, or locally derived charges for treating or otherwise addressing 
stormwater pollution that emanates from Federal property.
  Madam Speaker, over the past 4 years, the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure has examined the progress made over the past few 
decades in improving the overall quality of the Nation's waters, as 
well as the challenges that remain to achieving the goals of ``fishable 
and swimmable waters'' called for in the enactment of the 1972 Clean 
Water Act.
  Although significant progress has been made in the past four decades, 
approximately 40 percent of the Nation's assessed rivers, lakes, and 
coastal waters still do not meet water quality standards. States, 
territories, Tribes, and other jurisdictions report that poor water 
quality continues to affect aquatic life, fish consumption, swimming, 
and sources of drinking water in all types of waterbodies.
  In a recent report on the National Water Quality Inventory, States, 
territories, Tribes, and interstate commissions report that they 
monitor only 33 percent of the Nation's waters. Of those, about 44 
percent of streams, 64 percent of lakes, and 30 percent of estuaries 
were not clean enough to support their designated uses (e.g., fishing 
and swimming).
  While these numbers highlight the remaining need to improve the 
quality of the Nation's waters, they also demonstrate how this 
country's record on improving water quality is slipping--demonstrating 
a slight, but significant reversal of efforts to clean up the Nation's 
waters over the past 30 years.
  For example, in the 1996 National Water Quality Inventory report, 
States reported that of the 3.6 million miles of rivers and streams 
that were assessed, 64 percent were either fully supporting all 
designated uses or were threatened for one or more of those uses. In 
the 1998 report, this number improved to 65 percent of assessed rivers 
and streams. However, in the 2000 National Water Quality Inventory 
report, this number slipped to only 61 percent of assessed rivers and 
streams either meeting water quality standards or being threatened for 
one or more of the waterbodies' designated uses, and in the 2004 
Inventory, this number slipped again, to 53 percent of rivers and 
streams fully supporting their designated uses--a significant reversal 
in the trend toward meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act.
  According to information from the Environmental Protection Agency, 
stormwater remains a leading cause of water quality impairment. For 
example, in the 2004 Water Quality Inventory, discharges of urban 
stormwater are the leading source of impairment to 22,559 miles (or 9.2 
percent) of all impaired rivers and streams, 701,024 acres (or 6.7 
percent) of all impaired lakes, and 867 square miles (or 11.3 percent) 
of all impaired estuaries.
  The continuing negative environmental impacts of stormwater are 
echoed in a National Academy of Sciences 2009 report that expressed 
concern about the ``unprecedented pace'' of urbanization in the United 
States. According to this report, ``the creation of impervious surfaces 
that accompanies urbanization profoundly affects how water moves both 
above and below ground during and following storm events, the quality 
of stormwater, and the ultimate condition of nearby rivers, lakes, and 
estuaries.''
  Madam Speaker, this National Academy of Sciences report made several 
findings on national efforts to understand and manage urban stormwater. 
A key finding was a lack of available resources to implement and 
enforce Federal and state stormwater control programs. According to the 
report, ``State and local governments do not have adequate financial 
support to the stormwater program in a rigorous way.'' While the report 
recommended that the Federal Government provide more financial support 
to state and local efforts to regulate stormwater, such as through 
increased funding of existing Clean Water Act authorities, the report 
also highlights the importance of Federal agencies contributing to the 
costs of environmental and water quality protections, including the 
costs of addressing sources of pollution originating or emanating from 
Federal facilities.
  This finding echoes concerns raised by numerous state and local 
governmental officials over how some Federal agencies have seemingly 
rejected local efforts to assess service fees to curb stormwater 
pollution originating or emanating from Federal facilities.
  Several states and municipalities, including the District of 
Columbia, have taken aggressive action to address ongoing sources of 
stormwater pollution. Yet, when a significant percentage of Federal 
property owners take the position that they cannot be held responsible 
for their pollution, it places a greater financial burden on our 
states, cities, communities, and local ratepayers, and makes it less 
likely that significant reductions in stormwater pollution can be 
achieved.
  For example, in April 2010, the Regional Commissioner of the U.S. 
General Services Administration, GSA, rejected efforts by the District 
of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority, DCWASA, to collect an assessment 
under its Impervious Surface Area Billing Program for impervious 
surfaces under the control of GSA. According to DCWASA, this charge is 
a ``fair way to distribute the cost of maintaining storm sewers and 
protecting area waterways because it is based on a property's 
contribution of rainwater to the District's sewer system.''
  S. 3481 amends section 313 of the Clean Water Act to clarify that 
``reasonable service charges'' for addressing pollution from Federal 
facilities includes reasonable nondiscriminatory fees, charges, or 
assessments that are based on the proportion of stormwater emanating 
from the facility and used to pay (or reimburse) costs associated with 
any stormwater management program.
  This is a simple effort to clarify, again, that the Federal 
Government bears a proportional responsibility for addressing pollution 
originating from its facilities, and should remain an active 
participant in improving the nation's water quality and the overall 
environment.
  The intent of subsection (c)(2)(A) of Section 313 of the Clean Water 
Act, as added by S. 3481, is to ensure that there is no increase in 
mandatory spending pursuant to the U.S. Treasury's permanent authority 
to pay, without further appropriation, the water and sewer service 
charges imposed by the government of the District of Columbia. The 
reference in such section to ``any permanent authorization account in 
the Treasury'' refers to any account for which a permanent 
appropriation exists, such as the U.S. Treasury account entitled 
``Federal Payment for Water and Sewer Services'', and does not imply 
that GSA's Federal Buildings Fund may not be used to make such 
payments.

[[Page 23608]]

  In addition, the intent of subsection (c)(2)(B) of Section 313 of the 
Clean Water Act, as added by S. 3481, is to require that Congress make 
available, in appropriations acts, the funds that could be used to pay 
stormwater fees, but not that the appropriations act would need to 
state specifically or expressly that the funds could be used to pay 
these charges.
  Nothing in S. 3481 affects the payment by the United States or any 
department, independent establishment, or agency thereof of any 
sanitary sewer services furnished by the sanitary sewage works of the 
District of Columbia through any connection thereto for direct use by 
the government of the United States or any department, independent 
establishment, or agency thereof. The rules for those payments are set 
forth in law, codified at section 34-2112 of the D.C. Code, and nothing 
in this bill amends or otherwise affects those rules.
  Madam Speaker, this legislation has the strong support of several 
organizations representing state and local elected officials, including 
the National Governors Association, the National Conference of State 
Legislatures, the Council of State Governments, the National 
Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, the U.S. 
Conference of Mayors, and the International City/County Management 
Association. It also has been endorsed by the National Association of 
Clean Water Agencies, NACWA.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 3481.
  Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3481 
to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which clarifies that 
the Federal Government, like private citizens and businesses, must take 
responsibility for the pollution it produces. This bill is the Senate 
companion to my bill, H.R. 5724, cosponsored by my good friends from 
Virginia and Arizona, Representative Jim Moran and Representative 
Gabrielle Giffords. The bill passed the Senate with strong bipartisan 
support because the Senate understood that this is simply an issue of 
fairness and equity to users and a matter of managing pollution and 
protecting the environment. In fact, this bill simply clarifies current 
law, that the Federal Government has a responsibility to pay its normal 
and customary fees assessed by local governments for managing polluted 
stormwater runoff from Federal properties, just as private citizens 
pay. The consequence of failing to pass this bill is that we give the 
Federal Government a free ride and pass its fees on to our constituents 
throughout the United States.
  Section 313 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act states, ``Each 
department, agency, or instrumentality . . . of the Federal Government 
. . . shall be subject to, and comply with all Federal, State, 
interstate, and local requirements . . . in the same manner, and to the 
same extent as any nongovernmental entity including the payment of 
reasonable service charges.'' However, the Government Accountability 
Office issued letters to Federal agencies in the District of Columbia 
instructing them not to pay the District of Columbia's Water and Sewer 
Authority's, D.C. Water's, Impervious Area Charge. D.C. Water 
calculates the charges to manage stormwater runoff based on the amount 
of impervious land occupied by the landowner. Impervious surfaces, such 
as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks and other hardened surfaces are the 
major contributors to stormwater runoff entering the sewer system and 
local rivers, lakes and streams, causing significant amounts of 
pollutants to enter these waters. This bill clarifies that in my 
district and all other congressional districts, Federal agencies must 
continue to pay their utility fees instead of passing the fees to our 
constituents.
  Nothing in this Act was intended to affect the payment by the United 
States or any department, independent establishment, or agency thereof 
of any sanitary sewer services furnished by the sanitary sewage works 
of the District through any connection thereto for direct use by the 
government of the United States or any department, independent 
establishment, or agency thereof. The rules for those payments are set 
forth in law codified at section 34-2112 of the D.C. Code and nothing 
in this Act amends or otherwise affects those rules. This bill requires 
that Congress make available, in appropriations acts, the funds that 
could be used to pay for stormwater management charges, but not that 
the appropriations act would need to state specifically or expressly 
that the funds could be used to pay these charges.
  This bill is supported by The National Governors Association, the 
National Conference of State Legislatures, the Council of State 
Governments, the National Association of Counties, the National League 
of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the International City/County 
Management Associations, as well as the National Association of Clean 
Water Agencies. All of these national groups understand that stormwater 
management fees, without any exceptions, are necessary for managing and 
reducing water pollution caused by stormwater runoff. Moreover, they 
understand that many agencies in states and localities may stop paying 
their water and stormwater management fees if we do not act, putting 
even more financial burden on residents.
  Federal law has mandated that these local governments must collect 
these fees. No exemption has been granted to Federal facilities. Please 
support S. 3481 to clarify the original intent of the law.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong 
support of S. 3481, a bill that would clarify Federal responsibility 
for stormwater runoff from buildings, facilities, and lands owned or 
operated by the Federal Government. This common sense bill ensures that 
the Federal Government maintains its equitable responsibility for 
stormwater pollution runoff originating or emanating from its property.
  I applaud the outstanding work of the sponsors of this legislation, 
the distinguished Senator from the State of Maryland (Mr. Cardin), as 
well as the sponsor of the House companion for this bill, the Delegate 
from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), for their efforts to move 
this legislation so quickly to the President's desk.
  Madam Speaker, simply put, this legislation clarifies that Federal 
agencies and departments are financially responsible for any reasonable 
Federal, State, or locally-derived charges for treating or otherwise 
addressing stormwater pollution that emanates from Federal property.
  Existing section 313 of the Clean Water Act states that ``Each 
department, agency, or instrumentality . . . of the Federal Government 
. . . shall be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State, 
interstate, and local requirements . . . including the payment of 
reasonable service charges.''
  Unfortunately, over the past few months, Congress has learned of 
several Federal agencies, including some here in the Nation's Capital, 
that have made the determination that stormwater management fees are 
``taxes'' for which the agencies have claimed sovereign immunity and 
have refused to pay.
  This has left several State and local municipalities with the 
financial responsibility of addressing ongoing sources of pollution to 
the nation's waters that any other private business, landowner, or 
homeowner would otherwise be responsible for paying.
  Polluted runoff from urban areas is the fastest growing source of 
water pollution in America. As urbanization increases, impervious 
surfaces such as highways, roads, parking lots, and buildings replace 
non-impervious surfaces that absorb stormwater.
  Runoff from impervious surfaces is a central cause of pollution for 
the nation's waters, and is estimated to be the primary source of 
impairment for 13 percent of rivers, 18 percent of lakes, and 32 
percent of estuaries in the U.S. These are significant figures, 
especially given that urban areas cover only 3 percent of the land mass 
of the country.
  Even here, in the Nation's Capital, pollution from stormwater runoff 
poses a significant challenge to the quality of local receiving waters, 
and negatively impacts the overall environmental health of the 
Chesapeake Bay.
  According to the Environmental Protection Agency, stormwater runoff 
from urban and suburban areas is ``a significant source of impairment 
to the Chesapeake Bay.'' According to Agency statistics, 17 percent of 
phosphorus, 11 percent of nitrogen, and 9 percent of sediment loads to 
the Bay come from stormwater runoff.
  In addition, chemical contaminants from runoff can rival or exceed 
the amount reaching local waterways from industries, federal 
facilities, and wastewater treatment plants.
  Several states and municipalities, including the District of 
Columbia, have taken aggressive action to address these ongoing sources 
of pollution.
  Yet, when a significant percentage of property owners take the 
position that they cannot be held responsible for their pollution, it 
places a greater financial burden on our States, cities, communities, 
and local-ratepayers, and makes it less likely that significant 
reductions in stormwater pollution can be achieved.
  S. 3481 amends section 313 of the Clean Water Act to clarify that 
``reasonable service charges'' for addressing pollution from Federal 
facilities includes reasonable nondiscriminatory fees, charges, or 
assessments that are based on the proportion of stormwater emanating 
from the facility and used to pay (or reimburse) costs associated with 
any stormwater management program.
  This is a simple effort to clarify, again, that the Federal 
Government bears a proportional

[[Page 23609]]

responsibility for addressing pollution originating from its 
facilities, and should remain an active participant in improving 
National water quality and the overall environment.
  The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third 
time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________