Requires the Administrator, before making a final determination with respect to the Proposed Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program and Federal Antidegradation Policy and the Proposed Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulations Concerning Total Maximum Daily Loads of August 1999, to: (1) review the NAS report and incorporate recommendations into the proposed revisions; and (2) publish in the Federal Register and receive public comment on incorporated recommendations and those that weren't incorporated, with an explanation why they were not incorporated. Bars the Administrator from making such final determination until the conclusion of the public notice and comment period.
Prohibits the Administrator, for purposes of ensuring that States continue to have exclusive authority to regulate nonpoint sources of pollution, from: (1) taking any action to affect any definition of, or distinction made between, point and nonpoint sources of pollution contained in an EPA rule in effect on June 1, 2000; and (2) requiring approval of any measures set forth by a State to control nonpoint sources of pollution pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, except as authorized under specified provisions regarding nonpoint source management programs.
[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4502 Introduced in House (IH)]
106th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 4502
To improve the implementation of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, and for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
May 19, 2000
Mr. Combest (for himself, Mr. Stenholm, Mr. Goodlatte, Mrs. Clayton,
Mr. Barrett of Nebraska, Mr. Berry, Mr. Bishop, Mr. Boyd, Mr. Cooksey,
Mr. Cramer, Mr. Dickey, Ms. Dunn, Mrs. Emerson, Mr. Etheridge, Mr.
Ewing, Mr. Goode, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Mr. Hayes, Mr. Herger,
Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Ryun of Kansas, Mr.
Sandlin, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Shows, Mr. Spratt, Mr. Sununu, Mr. Turner,
Mr. Chambliss, and Mr. Riley) introduced the following bill; which was
referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To improve the implementation of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, and for other purposes.
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 Pollution Program Improvement
Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Pollutant loadings from both public and private point
sources have decreased dramatically since the enactment of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act in 1972 and such reductions
have greatly contributed to achieving national water quality
goals.
(2) Appropriate emphasis on the management of nonpoint
source pollution through a variety of flexible management
practices is necessary to meet water quality standards and the
goals of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
(3) Comprehensive watershed management strategies
(including estuary management programs, source water protection
programs, and other voluntary or statutory programs) are
important tools in coordinating point source and nonpoint
source water quality programs.
(4) State and local governments, businesses, and landowners
are expected to spend billions of dollars over the next 20
years to implement watershed management strategies and other
programs to address nonpoint source pollution.
(5) In order to complete the total maximum daily load
calculations required for currently identified waters, States
will be required to develop one total maximum daily load
allocation per week per region for each of the next 15 years at
an estimated cost to the States ranging from $670,000,000 to
$1,200,000,000.
(6) States have overwhelmingly cited a lack of credible and
reliable data and a lack of the resources necessary to collect
and analyze such data, as significant limitations to carrying
out their responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, including the identification of impaired waters
and the development of total maximum daily loads.
(7) The General Accounting Office recently concluded that
only 6 States have the majority of data needed to assess the
condition of their waters.
(8) In cases in which there are no reliable monitoring or
other analytical data to support a listing or total maximum
daily load allocation, waters of the United States are being
identified as impaired and total maximum daily loads are being
developed under section 303(d) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)) on the basis of anecdotal
evidence. The data used are frequently not subject to quality
assurance or quality control measures.
(9) Any Federal regulatory or nonregulatory water quality
management program--
(A) must be based on sound science, including
credible and reliable monitoring data;
(B) must be subject to rigorous cost analysis;
(C) must be effectively and efficiently
implemented; and
(D) must have the strong support of affected
stakeholders, including State and local governments,
landowners, businesses, environmental organizations,
and the general public.
(10) Any Federal water quality management program or
initiative must recognize and accommodate--
(A) State water rights allocations and management
programs;
(B) the clear distinction between point and
nonpoint sources of pollution provided in the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.);
and
(C) the exclusive authority of the States to
regulate nonpoint sources of pollution.
SEC. 3. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY.
(a) Study Required.--The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall make arrangements with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a study on--
(1) the scientific basis underlying the development and
implementation of total maximum daily loads for pollutants in
waters identified under section 303(d)(1)(A) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)(1)(A));
(2) the costs of implementing measures to comply with the
total maximum daily loads; and
(3) the availability of alternative programs or mechanisms
to reduce the discharge of pollutants from point sources and to
reduce pollution from nonpoint sources to achieve water quality
standards.
(b) Scope.--The study shall include an evaluation of the following:
(1) The scientific methodologies (including water quality
monitoring and monitoring plans) that are being used by States
to identify waters under section 303(d)(1)(A) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)(1)(A)) and to
develop and implement total maximum daily loads for pollutants
in such waters, and the costs associated with the
methodologies.
(2) Any procedures or programs that are being implemented
by States and Federal agencies to coordinate and improve
monitoring methodologies and the quality of monitoring data.
(3) The availability of alternative programs and other
regulatory or nonregulatory mechanisms (including Federal,
State, and local programs that operate as a functional
equivalent to the total maximum daily load program) that may
achieve comparable environmental benefits in an impaired water,
watershed, or basin.
(4) The results achieved by regulatory and voluntary
programs, activities, and practices that are being implemented
to reduce nonpoint source pollution and the costs of such
programs, activities, and practices to State and local
governments and the private sector.
(5) The feasibility of implementing a pollutant trading
program between point sources and nonpoint sources of
pollution.
(6) An assessment of the total costs (including the costs
to Federal land management agencies, State and local
governments, and the private sector) associated with programs
to reduce the discharge of pollutants from point sources to
meet water quality standards on waters currently identified
under section 303(d)(1)(A) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)(1)(A)) and with programs to
reduce pollution from nonpoint sources in such waters under section 319
of such Act (33 U.S.C. 1329).
(c) Peer Review.--Before submitting a report under subsection (d),
the National Academy of Sciences shall provide appropriate Federal,
State, and private sector interests an opportunity to review and submit
written comments on the report.
(d) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment
of this Act, the National Academy of Sciences shall submit a report on
the study to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives, and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of
the Senate. The report shall include recommendations of the National
Academy of Sciences for improving the methodologies evaluated under the
study, as well as any recommendations received pursuant to subsection
(c) that are not otherwise incorporated into the report.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000. Such sums shall
remain available until expended.
SEC. 4. RULEMAKING.
(a) Proposed Rules Defined.--In this section, the term ``proposed
rules'' means the Proposed Revisions to the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Program and Federal Antidegradation Policy
and the Proposed Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management
Regulations Concerning Total Maximum Daily Loads, published in the
Federal Register on August 23, 1999.
(b) Consideration of Study.--Before making a final determination
with respect to the proposed rules, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency shall--
(1) review the report submitted by the National Academy of
Sciences under section 3(d) and incorporate, as appropriate,
into the proposed rules the recommendations contained in the
report, including recommendations received pursuant to section
3(c); and
(2) publish in the Federal Register and receive public
comment on--
(A) the recommendations described in paragraph (1)
that were incorporated into the proposed rules; and
(B) the recommendations described in paragraph (1)
that were not incorporated into the proposed rules,
including an explanation of why the recommendations
were not incorporated.
(c) Effect on Proposed Rules.--The Administrator shall not make a
final determination on the proposed rules identified in subsection (a)
until the conclusion of the public notice and comment period provided
under subsection (b)(2).
(d) Prohibited Actions.--Except as specifically provided by an Act
enacted after the date of enactment of this Act, to ensure that States
continue to have exclusive authority to regulate nonpoint sources of
pollution--
(1) the Administrator shall not take any action to affect
any definition of, or distinction made between, point sources
and nonpoint sources of pollution contained in a rule of the
Environmental Protection Agency in effect on June 1, 2000; and
(2) the Administrator shall not require approval of any
measures set forth by a State to control nonpoint sources of
pollution pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), except as authorized by section 319
of such Act (33 U.S.C. 1329).
<all>
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Hearings Held by Committee on Agriculture.
Llama 3.2 · runs locally in your browser
Ask anything about this bill. The AI reads the full text to answer.
Enter to send · Shift+Enter for new line