[House Report 106-943]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-943
======================================================================
WET WEATHER WATER QUALITY ACT OF 2000
_______
October 6, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Shuster, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 828]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 828) to amend the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act to require that discharges from combined
storm and sanitary sewers conform to the Combined Sewer
Overflow Control Policy of the Environmental Protection Agency,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Wet Weather Water Quality Act of
2000''.
SEC. 2. COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS.
Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1342) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(q) Combined Sewer Overflows.--
``(1) Requirement for permits, orders, and decrees.--Each
permit, order, or decree issued pursuant to this Act after the
date of enactment of this subsection for a discharge from a
municipal combined storm and sanitary sewer shall conform to
the Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy signed by the
Administrator on April 11, 1994 (in this subsection referred to
as the `CSO control policy'), and shall provide for the
development and implementation of long-term control plans to
meet applicable water quality standards as expeditiously as
possible.
``(2) Water quality and designated use review guidance.--Not
later than December 31, 2000, and after providing notice and
opportunity for public comment, the Administrator shall issue
guidance to facilitate the conduct of water quality and
designated use reviews for municipal combined sewer overflow
receiving waters.
``(3) Report.--Not later than September 1, 2001, the
Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report on the
progress made by the Environmental Protection Agency, States,
and municipalities in implementing and enforcing the CSO
control policy.''.
SEC. 3. WET WEATHER PILOT PROGRAM.
Title I of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 121. WET WEATHER WATERSHED PILOT PROJECTS.
``(a) In General.--The Administrator, in coordination with the
States, may provide technical assistance and grants for treatment works
to carry out pilot projects relating to the following areas of wet
weather discharge control:
``(1) Watershed management of wet weather discharges.--The
management of municipal combined sewer overflows, sanitary
sewer overflows, and stormwater discharges, on an integrated
watershed or subwatershed basis for the purpose of
demonstrating the effectiveness of a unified wet weather
approach.
``(2) Stormwater best management practices.--The control of
pollutants from municipal separate storm sewer systems for the
purpose of demonstrating and determining controls that are
cost-effective and that use innovative technologies in reducing
such pollutants from stormwater discharges.
``(b) Administration.--The Administrator, in coordination with the
States, shall provide municipalities participating in a pilot project
under this section the ability to engage in innovative practices,
including the ability to unify separate wet weather control efforts
under a single permit.
``(c) Funding.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this section $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2002,
$15,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, and $20,000,000 for fiscal
year 2004. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
``(2) Stormwater.--The Administrator shall make available not
less than 20 percent of amounts appropriated for a fiscal year
pursuant to this subsection to carry out the purposes of
subsection (a)(2).
``(3) Administrative expenses.--The Administrator may retain
not to exceed 4 percent of any amounts appropriated for a
fiscal year pursuant to this subsection for the reasonable and
necessary costs of administering this section.
``(d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 5 years after the date of
enactment of this section, the Administrator shall transmit to Congress
a report on the results of the pilot projects conducted under this
section and their possible application nationwide.''.
SEC. 4. SEWER OVERFLOW CONTROL GRANTS.
Title II of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 220. SEWER OVERFLOW CONTROL GRANTS.
``(a) In General.--In any fiscal year in which the Administrator has
available for obligation at least $1,200,000,000 for the purposes of
section 601--
``(1) the Administrator may make grants to States for the
purpose of providing grants to a municipality or municipal
entity for planning, design, and construction of treatment
works to intercept, transport, control, or treat municipal
combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows; and
``(2) subject to subsection (g), the Administrator may make a
direct grant to a municipality or municipal entity for the
purposes described in paragraph (1).
``(b) Prioritization.--In selecting from among municipalities
applying for grants under subsection (a), a State or the Administrator
shall give priority to an applicant that--
``(1) is a municipality that is a financially distressed
community under subsection (c);
``(2) has implemented or is complying with an implementation
schedule for the 9 minimum controls specified in the CSO
control policy referred to in section 402(q)(1) and has begun
implementing a long-term municipal combined sewer overflow
control plan or a separate sanitary sewer overflow control
plan; or
``(3) is requesting a grant for a project that is on a
State's intended use plan pursuant to section 606(c).
``(c) Financially Distressed Community.--
``(1) Definition.--In subsection (b), the term `financially
distressed community' means a community that meets
affordability criteria established by the State in which the
community is located, if such criteria are developed after
public review and comment.
``(2) Consideration of impact on water and sewer rates.--In
determining if a community is a distressed community for the
purposes of subsection (b), the State shall consider, among
other factors, the extent to which the rate of growth of a
community's tax base has been historically slow such that
implementing a plan described in subsection (b)(2) would result
in a significant increase in any water or sewer rate charged by
the community's publicly owned wastewater treatment facility.
``(3) Information to assist states.--The Administrator may
publish information to assist States in establishing
affordability criteria under paragraph (1).
``(d) Cost Sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of activities
carried out using amounts from a grant made under subsection (a) shall
be not less than 55 percent of the cost. The non-Federal share of the
cost may include, in any amount, public and private funds and in-kind
services, and may include, notwithstanding section 603(h), financial
assistance, including loans, from a State water pollution control
revolving fund.
``(e) Administrative Reporting Requirements.--If a project receives
grant assistance under subsection (a) and loan assistance from a State
water pollution control revolving fund and the loan assistance is for
15 percent or more of the cost of the project, the project may be
administered in accordance with State water pollution control revolving
fund administrative reporting requirements for the purposes of
streamlining such requirements.
``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $750,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2002 and 2003. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
``(g) Allocation of Funds.--
``(1) Fiscal year 2002.--Subject to subsection (h), the
Administrator shall use the amounts appropriated to carry out
this section for fiscal year 2002 for making grants to
municipalities and municipal entities under subsection (a)(2),
in accordance with the criteria set forth in subsection (b).
``(2) Fiscal year 2003.--Subject to subsection (h), the
Administrator shall use the amounts appropriated to carry out
this section for fiscal year 2003 as follows:
``(A) Not to exceed $250,000,000 for making grants to
municipalities and municipal entities under subsection
(a)(2), in accordance with the criteria set forth in
subsection (b).
``(B) All remaining amounts for making grants to
States under subsection (a)(1), in accordance with a
formula to be established by the Administrator, after
providing notice and an opportunity for public comment,
that allocates to each State a proportional share of
such amounts based on the total needs of the State for
municipal combined sewer overflow controls and sanitary
sewer overflow controls identified in the most recent
survey conducted pursuant to section 516(b)(1).
``(h) Administrative Expenses.--Of the amounts appropriated to carry
out this section for each fiscal year--
``(1) the Administrator may retain an amount not to exceed 1
percent for the reasonable and necessary costs of administering
this section; and
``(2) the Administrator, or a State, may retain an amount not
to exceed 4 percent of any grant made to a municipality or
municipal entity under subsection (a), for the reasonable and
necessary costs of administering the grant.
``(i) Reports.--Not later than December 31, 2003, and periodically
thereafter, the Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report
containing recommended funding levels for grants under this section.
The recommended funding levels shall be sufficient to ensure the
continued expeditious implementation of municipal combined sewer
overflow and sanitary sewer overflow controls nationwide.''.
SEC. 5. INFORMATION ON CSOS AND SSOS.
(a) Report to Congress.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall transmit to Congress a report summarizing--
(1) the extent of the human health and environmental impacts
caused by municipal combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer
overflows, including the location of discharges causing such
impacts, the volume of pollutants discharged, and the
constituents discharged;
(2) the resources spent by municipalities to address these
impacts; and
(3) an evaluation of the technologies used by municipalities
to address these impacts.
(b) Technology Clearinghouse.--After transmitting a report under
subsection (a), the Administrator shall maintain a clearinghouse of
cost-effective and efficient technologies for addressing human health
and environmental impacts due to municipal combined sewer overflows and
sanitary sewer overflows.
Purpose and Summary
The purpose of H.R. 828, as amended, is to prevent and
reduce water quality problems caused by wet weather flows
throughout the U.S. by taking various actions, including
authorizing grants to municipalities and to states for combined
sewer overflow (CSO) and sanitary sewer overflow (SSO)
projects, authorizing grants for a wet weather pilot program,
and codifying the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
existing CSO Control Policy.
Background and Need for Legislation
Overview
Our national wastewater infrastructure is aging and its
capacity has not kept pace with economic and population growth,
leading to increased sewer system overflows. Combined sewer
systems, which carry both storm water and sanitary (municipal
and industrial) flows, and separate sanitary sewer systems
often overflow with untreated (or partially treated) waste
during wet weather episodes, like rain or snow melts. CSOs and
SSOs may also occur during dry weather periods due to poor
maintenance, deteriorating infrastructure, or infiltration and
inflow, among other factors.
Over 1,100 communities across the U.S. have combined sewer
systems. The combined sewer systems are remnants of the
country's early wastewater infrastructure, constructed before
wastewater treatment standards and requirements were
established. These systems were constructed with approximately
15,000 relief outlets designed to prevent flows in excess of
system capacity from damaging the treatment plant, by allowing
discharges (``overflows'') to occur before the water reaches
the plant. CSOs typically occur in nearby streams, rivers,
lakes or estuaries, and are among the major sources responsible
for beach closures, shell fish restrictions and exceedances in
water quality standards.
Separate sanitary sewer systems, on the other hand, are not
designed to carry stormwater flows, therefore, generally do not
have built-in relief outlets like combined sewer systems.
Although these systems are intended to carry all the sewage
that flows into them to a treatment works, EPA has estimated
that more than 40,000 SSOs a year occur from the nation's
19,500 sanitary sewer systems often as a result of undersized
or deteriorating systems, or failures within the system. SSOs
can occur in parks, streets, and basements, among other areas.
CSOs and SSOs present significant public health and safety
concerns because they often occur in areas of potential human
exposure, and result in exceedances of water quality standards
negatively impacting the environment.
Combined sewer overflows
CSOs are point source discharges under the Clean Water Act,
subject to permitting under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) by EPA or authorized states. Given
that causes of CSOs are typically site-specific, permits
usually include technology-based standards determined on a
case-by-case basis (rather than categorical standards) and
appropriate water quality standards.
Over the years concerns have been raised over whether NPDES
requirements have been applied consistently across the U.S.
regarding the control of CSOs. In order to achieve national
consistency and clarity, EPA issued a CSO Control Policy in
April 1994. The CSO Control Policy provides guidance to states
and municipalities on the minimum necessary controls to develop
appropriate, site-specific permits to address the unique nature
of CSOs, and provides municipalities with flexible solutions
for controlling CSOs by taking into consideration not only the
CSO's environmental impacts, but how long it will take and how
much it will cost to develop and implement appropriate
controls.
The CSO Control Policy requires immediate implementation of
nine minimum controls, such as proper system operation and
maintenance and pollution prevention, followed by
implementation of a long-term control plan so that
municipalities will come into compliance with Clean Water Act
requirements and water quality standards can be achieved.
Sanitary sewer overflows
Similar to CSOs, SSOs are also point source discharges
under the Clean Water Act, and generally are considered to be
unauthorized, unpermitted discharges in violation of the Clean
Water Act. However, some permits have authorized SSOs under
limited circumstances (e.g. if they occur through ``peak excess
flow treatment facilties,'' analogous to the CSO built-in
relief outlets). Questions about the regulatory treatment of
SSOs remain, such as whether separate sanitary sewer systems
should be permitted to allow such discharges, and what level of
treatment should be required. EPA has not issued formal
guidance for addressing the control of SSOs, although the
Agency is currently working on proposed regulations to provide
clarification and consistency on this issue.
Estimated costs to control CSOs and SSOs
Recent EPA and industry analyses have revealed that a
significant investment in the nation's wastewater
infrastructure is needed to achieve water quality standards.
The Water Infrastructure Network's April 2000 report, ``Clean
and Safe Water for the 21st Century'', and EPA's recent draft
``Needs Gap'' study estimate more than $300 billion over the
next 20 years in wastewater infrastructure needs, and that
there is an enormous gap between such needs and current
federal, state, and local spending trends.
While the EPA ``Needs Gap'' study is not yet final, it
currently estimates $45 billion will be needed over the next 20
years to control CSOs, and $80 to $90 billion will be needed to
control SSOs. (These estimates do not include operations and
maintenance or all sewer system replacement costs, which
typically are a local responsibility.)
Congress, EPA, states, municipalities and other
stakeholders agree that both nationally consistent regulatory
treatment and additional funding are needed for controlling
CSOs and SSOs. This bill codifies the CSO Control Policy to
help ensure its implementation and consistent application, and
provides an initial modest authorization of funding needed to
control wet weather flows until a more comprehensive, long-term
approach can be developed and implemented.
Discussion of Committee Bill and Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
This section provides that the Act may be cited as the
``Wet Weather Quality Act of 2000.''
Section 2. Combined sewer overflows
This section amends section 402 of the Clean Water Act by
adding a new subsection (q) entitled ``Combined Sewer
Overflows'' that codifies EPA's CSO Control Policy.
Specifically, it requires that each permit, order, or decree
related to CSOs issued after enactment of this Act pursuant to
the Clean Water Act, at a minimum, conform to the CSO Control
Policy and provide for the development and implementation of
long-term control plans to meet water quality standards as
expeditiously as possible.
This section also requires the EPA Administrator to issue
guidance by December 31, 2000 to assist states in conducting
water quality and designated use reviews for CSO receiving
waters. Finally, EPA is required to report to Congress by
September 1, 2001 on progress made in implementing and
enforcing the CSO Control Policy.
Section 3. Wet Weather Pilot Program
This section creates a new Clean Water Act section 121
entitled ``Wet Weather Watershed Pilot Projects.'' Under the
new section 121, the EPA Administrator is authorized, in
coordination with states, to provide technical assistance and
grants for wet weather watershed pilot projects. The technical
assistance and grants are to be used for projects involving
treatment works (as defined in Clean Water Act section 212)
that control CSO, SSO and stormwater discharges on an
integrated, watershed or subwatershed basis to demonstrate the
effectiveness of a unified wet weather approach.
Regarding controlling pollutants from municipal separate
stormwater systems, this section emphasizes the use of pilot
projects to demonstrate controls that are cost-effective and
that use innovative technologies. The Committee is aware of one
particular new technology that involves ``stormwater inserts.''
These so-called ``smart sponges'' have been utilized in
Springfield, Massachusetts and other locations to trap debris
and soak up hydrocarbons and other contaminants. The pollutants
are then encapsulated in fiber that can be burned as a fuel
source. The Committee intends that stormwater controls funded
under this new section should be demonstrated in different
locations and under different situations, and the results of
those tests should be made available to communities around the
country.
In order to facilitate the development of wet weather
watershed pilot projects, this section states that the EPA
Administrator, in coordination with the states, shall provide
municipalities the ability to engage in innovative practices,
including the ability to unify separate wet weather control
efforts under a single permit. The EPA Administrator should
afford municipalities the maximum flexibility possible within
existing statutory and regulatory authorities to engage in the
innovative practices envisioned under this provision.
To carry out the pilot projects, $10 million, $15 million
and $20 million are authorized for fiscal years 2002, 2003 and
2004, respectively. The EPA Administrator is directed to set
aside at least 20 percent of annual appropriated amounts for
pilot projects related to stormwater controls, and may retain
up to 4 percent of annual appropriated amounts for
administering this section.
Finally, the EPA Administrator is directed to report to
Congress not later than five years after the date of enactment
of this Act on the results of the wet weather watershed pilot
projects and their possible application nationwide.
Section 4. Sewer overflow control grants
If at least $1.2 billion per year is available for
obligation for the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund (Clean
Water SRF) program, this section authorizes the EPA
Administrator to make grants to states for the purpose of
providing grants to a municipality or to make a direct grant to
a municipality for the planning, design, and construction of
treatment works to intercept, transport, control, or treat CSOs
and SSOs.
When EPA or the states are selecting among municipalities
applying for these grants, EPA or the state shall give priority
to municipalities that: are financially distressed communities;
have implemented or are complying with the implementation of
the nine minimum controls of the CSO Control Policy, and have
begun implementing a long-term CSO or SSO control plan; or, are
requesting a grant for a project that is on a state's intended
use plan that states develop to identify priority projects to
receive Clean Water SRF assistance pursuant to Clean Water Act
section 606(c).
State-established affordability criteria determine whether
or not a community is ``financially distressed,'' if such
criteria are developed after public review and comment. States
are to consider, among other factors, if the rate of growth of
a community's tax base has been historically slow such that
implementing any CSO or SSO long-term control plans would
significantly increase water or sewer rates. The EPA
Administrator is authorized to publish information to assist
states in developing the affordability criteria.
The Federal cost-share of projects under this section is
not less than 55 percent. The non-federal cost-share may
include public and private funds and in-kind services in any
amount. To help ensure the grant program authorized under this
Act is coordinated with the Clean Water SRF program, this
section: authorizes municipalities to use Clean Water SRF
assistance as the non-federal match; and, if a project receives
Clean Water SRF assistance that is more than 15 percent of the
cost of the project, the applicant may apply Clean Water SRF
administrative reporting requirements to the entire project for
the purpose of streamlining such requirements.
This section authorizes $750 million for each of fiscal
years 2002 and 2003 for sewer overflow control assistance. For
fiscal year 2002, all amounts authorized to be appropriated are
for grants to municipalities. For fiscal year 2003, the EPA
Administrator is authorized to award not more than $250 million
to municipalities, and to award all remaining amounts to states
to award to municipalities.
To allocate the grants to states in fiscal year 2003, EPA
is directed to develop a formula, with an opportunity for
public review and comment, that calculates the proportional
share of available amounts to each state based on the total
state CSO and SSO needs identified in the most recent Clean
Water Needs survey conducted pursuant to Clean Water Act
section 516(b)(1).
The EPA Administrator is authorized to use up to 1 percent
of appropriated amounts for administering the overall grant
program, and the EPA Administrator or a state, may use up to 4
percent of any grant to a municipality for administering such
grant.
The EPA Administrator is required to transmit a report to
Congress by December 31, 2003, and periodically thereafter,
recommending funding levels sufficient to continue implementing
CSO and SSO controls nationwide.
Section 5. Information on CSOs and SSOs
This section requires the EPA Administrator to transmit a
report to Congress no later than three years after enactment of
this Act, summarizing: the extent of human health and
environmental impacts caused by CSOs and SSOs, including the
location of discharges causing the impacts, the volume of
pollutants and the constituents discharged; how much
municipalities have spent to address such impacts; and, an
evaluation of the technologies municipalities used to address
these impacts.
After transmitting this report to Congress, the EPA
Administrator is required to maintain a technology
clearinghouse on cost-effective and efficient technologies for
addressing the human health and environmental impacts from CSOs
and SSOs.
Hearings
On June 22, 1999, the Water Resources and Environment
Subcommittee held a hearing on clean water infrastructure and
wet weather flows legislation, including H.R. 828, the
``Combined Sewer Overflow Control and Partnership Act of
1999,'' and a draft of H.R. 3570, ``The Urban Wet Weather
Priorities Act of 1999.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from
EPA, state and local officials, and representatives of
environmental, and water and sewer infrastructure groups.
Committee Consideration
On September 27, 2000, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open session, discharged H.R. 828 from
the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, and
ordered the bill reported, as amended, to the House by voice
vote.
The Committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute that, in general, combines portions of H.R. 828 and
H.R. 3570, and specifically: authorizes $1.5 billion total for
fiscal years 2002 and 2003 for grants to municipalities and to
states for CSO and SSO projects; authorizes $45 million total
for fiscal years 2002 through 2004 for grants for a wet weather
pilot program to demonstrate the effectiveness of a unified
approach to wet weather flows and the application of stormwater
best management practices; and, requires reports to Congress on
CSO and SSO related matters, and the maintenance of a
technology clearinghouse on controlling CSOs and SSOs.
Rollcall Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives
requires each committee report to include the total number of
votes cast for and against on each rollcall vote on a motion to
report and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter,
and the names of those members voting for and against. There
were no recorded votes taken in connection with ordering H.R.
828 reported.
Committee Oversight Findings
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.
Cost of Legislation
Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is
included in this report.
Compliance With House Rule XIII
1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee
references the report of the Congressional Budget Office
included below.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform on the
subject of H.R. 828.
3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 828
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, October 5, 2000.
Hon. Bud Shuster,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 828, the Wet
Weather Water Quality Act of 2000.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susanne S.
Mehlman.
Sincerely,
Steven Lieberman
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 828--Wet Weather Water Quality Act of 2000
Summary: CBO estimates that implementing this legislation
would cost about $1 billion over the next five years, assuming
appropriation of the necessary amounts. The bill would not
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply. H.R. 828 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs
on state, local, or tribal governments.
H.R. 828 would authorize the appropriation of $45 million
over the 2002-2004 period for the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to provide new grants to states to conduct pilot
projects related to the control of stormwater and improved
sewer management practices. The bill also would authorize the
appropriation of $1.5 billion over the 2002-2003 period for new
grants to states and municipalities to address sewer overflow
problems. In addition, this legislation would require EPA to
report to the Congress on local government resource needs to
improve sewer management practices, and to maintain a
clearinghouse for technologies used to control sewer management
problems. We estimate that these activities would cost about $1
million in 2003, subject to the availability of appropriated
funds. In subsequent years, the cost of maintaining the
clearinghouse would be less than $500,000 a year.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: For this
estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized will be
appropriated for each fiscal year and that outlays will occur
at rates similar to those of other grant programs to control
water pollution. The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 828 is
shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation
fall within budget function 300 (natural resources and
environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 204 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level................................. 0 760 766 20 0
Estimated Outlay.............................................. 0 40 153 345 460
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector imact: H.R. 828
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments. Enacting sections 3 and 4 would benefit
state and local governments by authorizing the Environmental
Protection Agency to make grants for projects to control
stormwater discharges and sewer overflows.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Susanne S. Mehlman.
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Victoria Heid
Hall. Impact on the Private Sector: Tim VandenBerg.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or
joint resolution of a public character shall include a
statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in
the Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act. (Public Law 104-4.)
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this
legislation.
Applicability to the Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. (Public Law
104-1.)
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italic and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
TITLE I--RESEARCH AND RELATED PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 121. WET WEATHER WATERSHED PILOT PROJECTS.
(a) In General.--The Administrator, in coordination with the
States, may provide technical assistance and grants for
treatment works to carry out pilot projects relating to the
following areas of wet weather discharge control:
(1) Watershed management of wet weather discharges.--
The management of municipal combined sewer overflows,
sanitary sewer overflows, and stormwater discharges, on
an integrated watershed or subwatershed basis for the
purpose of demonstrating the effectiveness of a unified
wet weather approach.
(2) Stormwater best management practices.--The
control of pollutants from municipal separate storm
sewer systems for the purpose of demonstrating and
determining controls that are cost-effective and that
use innovative technologies in reducing such pollutants
from stormwater discharges.
(b) Administration.--The Administrator, in coordination with
the States, shall provide municipalities participating in a
pilot project under this section the ability to engage in
innovative practices, including the ability to unify separate
wet weather control efforts under a single permit.
(c) Funding.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000 for
fiscal year 2002, $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, and
$20,000,000 for fiscal year 2004. Such funds shall
remain available until expended.
(2) Stormwater.--The Administrator shall make
available not less than 20 percent of amounts
appropriated for a fiscal year pursuant to this
subsection to carry out the purposes of subsection
(a)(2).
(3) Administrative expenses.--The Administrator may
retain not to exceed 4 percent of any amounts
appropriated for a fiscal year pursuant to this
subsection for the reasonable and necessary costs of
administering this section.
(d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 5 years after the
date of enactment of this section, the Administrator shall
transmit to Congress a report on the results of the pilot
projects conducted under this section and their possible
application nationwide.
TITLE II--GRANTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TREATMENT WORKS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 220. SEWER OVERFLOW CONTROL GRANTS.
(a) In General.--In any fiscal year in which the
Administrator has available for obligation at least
$1,200,000,000 for the purposes of section 601--
(1) the Administrator may make grants to States for
the purpose of providing grants to a municipality or
municipal entity for planning, design, and construction
of treatment works to intercept, transport, control, or
treat municipal combined sewer overflows and sanitary
sewer overflows; and
(2) subject to subsection (g), the Administrator may
make a direct grant to a municipality or municipal
entity for the purposes described in paragraph (1).
(b) Prioritization.--In selecting from among municipalities
applying for grants under subsection (a), a State or the
Administrator shall give priority to an applicant that--
(1) is a municipality that is a financially
distressed community under subsection (c);
(2) has implemented or is complying with an
implementation schedule for the 9 minimum controls
specified in the CSO control policy referred to in
section 402(q)(1) and has begun implementing a long-
term municipal combined sewer overflow control plan or
a separate sanitary sewer overflow control plan; or
(3) is requesting a grant for a project that is on a
State's intended use plan pursuant to section 606(c).
(c) Financially Distressed Community.--
(1) Definition.--In subsection (b), the term
``financially distressed community'' means a community
that meets affordability criteria established by the
State in which the community is located, if such
criteria are developed after public review and comment.
(2) Consideration of impact on water and sewer
rates.--In determining if a community is a distressed
community for the purposes of subsection (b), the State
shall consider, among other factors, the extent to
which the rate of growth of a community's tax base has
been historically slow such that implementing a plan
described in subsection (b)(2) would result in a
significant increase in any water or sewer rate charged
by the community's publicly owned wastewater treatment
facility.
(3) Information to assist states.--The Administrator
may publish information to assist States in
establishing affordability criteria under paragraph
(1).
(d) Cost Sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of
activities carried out using amounts from a grant made under
subsection (a) shall be not less than 55 percent of the cost.
The non-Federal share of the cost may include, in any amount,
public and private funds and in-kind services, and may include,
notwithstanding section 603(h), financial assistance, including
loans, from a State water pollution control revolving fund.
(e) Administrative Reporting Requirements.--If a project
receives grant assistance under subsection (a) and loan
assistance from a State water pollution control revolving fund
and the loan assistance is for 15 percent or more of the cost
of the project, the project may be administered in accordance
with State water pollution control revolving fund
administrative reporting requirements for the purposes of
streamlining such requirements.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section $750,000,000 for each
of fiscal years 2002 and 2003. Such sums shall remain available
until expended.
(g) Allocation of Funds.--
(1) Fiscal year 2002.--Subject to subsection (h), the
Administrator shall use the amounts appropriated to
carry out this section for fiscal year 2002 for making
grants to municipalities and municipal entities under
subsection (a)(2), in accordance with the criteria set
forth in subsection (b).
(2) Fiscal year 2003.--Subject to subsection (h), the
Administrator shall use the amounts appropriated to
carry out this section for fiscal year 2003 as follows:
(A) Not to exceed $250,000,000 for making
grants to municipalities and municipal entities
under subsection (a)(2), in accordance with the
criteria set forth in subsection (b).
(B) All remaining amounts for making grants
to States under subsection (a)(1), in
accordance with a formula to be established by
the Administrator, after providing notice and
an opportunity for public comment, that
allocates to each State a proportional share of
such amounts based on the total needs of the
State for municipal combined sewer overflow
controls and sanitary sewer overflow controls
identified in the most recent survey conducted
pursuant to section 516(b)(1).
(h) Administrative Expenses.--Of the amounts appropriated to
carry out this section for each fiscal year--
(1) the Administrator may retain an amount not to
exceed 1 percent for the reasonable and necessary costs
of administering this section; and
(2) the Administrator, or a State, may retain an
amount not to exceed 4 percent of any grant made to a
municipality or municipal entity under subsection (a),
for the reasonable and necessary costs of administering
the grant.
(i) Reports.--Not later than December 31, 2003, and
periodically thereafter, the Administrator shall transmit to
Congress a report containing recommended funding levels for
grants under this section. The recommended funding levels shall
be sufficient to ensure the continued expeditious
implementation of municipal combined sewer overflow and
sanitary sewer overflow controls nationwide.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--PERMITS AND LICENSES
* * * * * * *
national pollutant discharge elimination system
Sec. 402. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(q) Combined Sewer Overflows.--
(1) Requirement for permits, orders, and decrees.--
Each permit, order, or decree issued pursuant to this
Act after the date of enactment of this subsection for
a discharge from a municipal combined storm and
sanitary sewer shall conform to the Combined Sewer
Overflow Control Policy signed by the Administrator on
April 11, 1994 (in this subsection referred to as the
``CSO control policy''), and shall provide for the
development and implementation of long-term control
plans to meet applicable water quality standards as
expeditiously as possible.
(2) Water quality and designated use review
guidance.--Not later than December 31, 2000, and after
providing notice and opportunity for public comment,
the Administrator shall issue guidance to facilitate
the conduct of water quality and designated use reviews
for municipal combined sewer overflow receiving waters.
(3) Report.--Not later than September 1, 2001, the
Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report on
the progress made by the Environmental Protection
Agency, States, and municipalities in implementing and
enforcing the CSO control policy.
* * * * * * *