April 7, 1970
Page 10484
S. 3687 – INTRODUCTION OF A BILL ENTITLED "NATIONAL WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ACT OF 1970"
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I introduce for myself and Senators RANDOLPH, BAYH, SPONG, and EAGLETON, the National Water Quality Standards Act of 1970.
This bill is part of the legislative program which I announced on January 23 and would broaden the coverage of the water quality standards program, toughen the enforcement of those standards, and double the level of Federal assistance for the construction of treatment facilities.
I ask unanimous consent that the analysis of the bill's major provisions be printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the analysis was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as .follows
ANALYSIS OF THE BILL
1. State assistance grants. – Beginning in fiscal year 1972, the bill doubles the authorization for grants to State and interstate water pollution control agencies to $20 million annually.
The bill provides that this money be used to supplement, not supplant, State and interstate funds.
The bill adds a new requirement that Federal assistance funds be used to help develop and carry out effective plans for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of water quality standards and effluent requirements under the water quality standards program. If a State fails to have its plans approved or implement them in timely fashion, grant money can be forfeited.
2. Waste treatment construction grant program. – The bill continues the present direct grant program for construction of waste treatment works for five fiscal years (1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976) with several changes designed to improve the program, achieve more efficient waste treatment, and make it more consistent with the national water quality standards program.
The bill increases the authorization from $1.25 billion in fiscal year 1971 to $2.5 billion annually through fiscal year 1976. If fully funded, this authorization would generate the construction of $25 billion worth of municipal waste treatment works.
The bill also extends the reimbursement provisions of the Act to June 30, 1976. Funds allotted to a State would be available for new treatment works to reimburse communities for works constructed since 1966.
The present provision of the Act for allocation of the first $100 million appropriated each year on the basis of a formula designed to help rural areas is retained. The bill requires that funds not obligated within six months after the beginning of the fiscal year because of a lack of State approved and certified treatment works shall be reallotted to States eligible for 50 to 60 percent grants.
The present grant program authorizes 30, 40 and 50 percent grants for treatment works depending on the level of State assistance and water quality standards.
RIVER BASINS
As an additional incentive to river basin planning the bill authorizes a Federal share of 60 percent of the cost of treatment works located in basins designated by the Secretary. 40 percent of the cost of construction would be shared by the participating States, communities and industries located in the basin.
The Secretary would designate basins eligible for these increased grants and would make such increased grants after a finding that an effective and economical system for the collection and treatment of all waste discharges in the basin has been established consistent with approved water quality standards.
CONSTRUCTION PRIORITIES
Under the present system, each State sets its own priorities for the funding of treatment works construction. This bill requires that the criteria for determining these priorities must at least be consistent with the State plan for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of water quality standards. The Secretary is authorized to withhold grants from States that do not have priority systems consistent with this plan.
3. Water quality standards. – The bill establishes that the purpose of water quality standards is to protect and enhance the existing quality of all waters; encourages public participation in the development, enforcement and revision of such standards; extends the water quality standards program to all navigable waters and their tributaries in the United States; requires that all standards include effluent requirements and compliance schedules; requires a review and, where appropriate, a revision of standards by the States at a minimum of every five years; extends water quality standards to the waters of the contiguous zone; and authorizes the Secretary and his representatives to enforce all standards.
4. Enforcement. – This bill prohibits the discharge of any wastes in violation of the standards, the plan for implementation, the compliance schedules or the effluent requirements.
If a violation occurs, the Secretary must promptly issue an order to the discharger requiring abatement and prescribing time to abate. The State is provided with a copy of the order.
In the case of a violation of effluent requirements, the time prescribed in the order must not exceed 72 hours. If this particular order is violated, the Secretary could immediately proceed to enforcement proceedings in the Federal district court.
A person who receives an order to abate any other violation of water quality standards has 30 days to appeal to the Secretary and request a public hearing.
Upon completion of the hearing, the Secretary must promptly make findings of fact and issue his decision vacating, arming, or modifying the order.
Review of the Secretary's decision may be made by the United States Court of Appeals. The court must hear the appeal on the records made before the Secretary without a new trial on the facts. The court may affirm, vacate, or modify the decision or remand it back to the Secretary.
If a person issued an order does not comply with the order or appeal within the time prescribed, the Secretary shall bring an action in the Federal district court to abate the violation.
If a person knowingly violates the water quality standards or if he knowingly fails to comply with any final order or decision issued under this new section of the Act, such person shall be fined up to $25,000 per day of violation, or be imprisioned for up to a year, or both. The fine and imprisonment term is doubled after the first conviction.
5. Protection of employees. – The bill protects workers who give information in any proceeding under the Act, including testifying in a proceeding to enforce water quality standards, by making the discharge or discrimination of such worker illegal. The Secretary of Labor shall review cases and investigate. If Secretary finds illegal discharge or discrimination, he shall issue a decision ordering the rehiring or reinstatement of the employee with compensation.
6. Imminent endangerment. – The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to bring suits in the United States district courts in cases where he has evidence that an effluent source presents (a) an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons or fish and wildlife, or (b) an imminent and substantial endangerment of economic injury to persons marketing shellfish or shellfish products. This provision should enable the Secretary to act promptly to protect people, fish and wildlife, and our commercial shellfish industry.
7. General. – The bill abandons the conference procedure in favor of the quicker and more effective enforcement of water quality standards.
In the case of pollution that endangers the public health or welfare of another Nation, the bill provides that the Secretary, at the request of the Secretary of State, shall convene a hearing board to recommend appropriate action to abate the pollution.
The bill directs the Secretary to issue regulations requiring that persons subject to water quality Standards install and use up-to-date pollution control techniques in new facilities.
The bill prohibits Federal agencies from making loans or grants to or issuing licenses or permits to, or entering into contracts for financial assistance with any person to construct, install, or operate a commercial or industrial facility that does not comply with water quality standards. A similar prohibition extends to the purchase of goods and services by Federal agencies.
Mr. MUSKIE. In 1965 the water quality act established a broad Federal-State-local program of water quality standards and enforcement. In 1966 the clean water restoration act created a program of Federal assistance for the construction of municipal waste treatment facilities. Both laws broke new ground in their approach to the enhancement of the quality of our waters, and together they were an experiment in partnership of different levels of government.
It is time to examine the results of that experiment, to strengthen the effort, to make changes where they are needed, and to make a greater financial commitment to clean water.
The water quality program has lagged far behind the goals set by the Congress in 1965 and 1966:
Although the Water Quality Act was passed in 1965 and standards were submitted by the July 1967 deadline, only 14 States had approved water quality standards for all interstate waters as of 3 months ago. I ask that a list of the status of exceptions to the standards be printed in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the list of exceptions was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[LISTING OMITTED]
Mr. MUSKIE. Enforcement, through private conferences with the polluters, and on a hit-or-miss basis, has been contrary to the congressional intent of public involvement, uniform procedures for the development of standards, and court action where necessary.
Millions have been spent on research and planning, but little improvement has been made in the quality of our waters: $3.4 billion was promised in assistance for the construction of municipal facilities over a 4-year period, but only $1.2 billion has been appropriated. And now some have asked that we cut back on the goals we set in 1966.
We must require stricter standards, faster timetables, tougher enforcement, and greater public participation. And we must spend much more money.
Money is the first requirement. We cannot build the waste treatment facilities we need without it.
Last year we made a start on fulfilling our commitments. The Senate voted to appropriate the full authorization of $1 billion for waste treatment facilities. Although we had to compromise with the House at a figure of $800 million, we made a significant start.
Fiscal 1971 is the last year of the 5-year program approved by the Congress in 1966, and an appropriation of $1.25 billion is authorized. We must appropriate the full $1.25 billion. We must not retreat from our goals.
At the same time, we must make a decision on the form the program of Federal assistance will take after this fiscal year. We cannot afford to reduce the level of Federal assistance. We cannot afford to move back to a level of $1 billion a year. The bill I introduce today doubles the present level of assistance to $2.5 billion yearly, a level that I believe reflects the commitment the American people are willing to make to clean water.
Hearings on this bill, the administration proposal, and other legislation introduced by other Members of the Senate will begin on April 20.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BELLMON). The bill will be received and appropriately referred.
The bill (S. 3687) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, introduced by Mr. MUSKIE (for himself and other Senators), was received, read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Public Works.