August 3, 1979
Page 22609
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, today, the Senate is again considering S. 1146, the 1979 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act. These amendments were passed by the Senate in June. The House of Representatives acted on this legislation earlier this week.
The bills passed by the Senate and House of Representatives are nearly identical. They conform closely to the suggested amendments proposed by the administration earlier this year. Several differences should be noted.
The bill as passed by the House of Representatives, the bill which is before the Senate today, does not contain an amendment authored by Senator CULVER. That amendment was designed to encourage the Environmental Protection Agency to dedicate additional resources to developing affordable treatment technologies for small community water supply systems. This was a good provision. However, EPA has agreed to pursue this research program under existing authorities. It is a credit to Senator CULVER for raising this issue. Clearly, his legislative work has borne fruits in the administration of this program.
A second difference in the bills passed by. the two Houses of Congress is the provision of an emergency fund in the House bill. The House bill maintains authority in present law to fund emergency cleanup efforts in public water supply systems. The administration omitted this from its recommendations pending the enactment of the "superfund" legislation. Due to the delay in enactment of a comprehensive compensation and liability program for chemical spills, this authority is necessary. It will provide needed flexibility to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to deal with localized emergency water contamination problems.
The House bill provides somewhat higher program authorization levels than did the Senate bill. This increment will give EPA the resources necessary to fully implement the drinking water program in States which have not assumed primacy. This is consistent with congressional intent. This legislation authorizes EPA to administer all elements of the program, including enforcement, monitoring, information collection, granting of variances and exceptions in the absence of a State program.
The 1962 Public Health Standards for drinking water were voluntary. The 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act mandated uniform national regulations. In enacting the 1974 act, the Congress intended States to assume primary enforcement responsibility, or primacy, once minimum standards had been met. Meeting national standards in the absence of State primacy is the responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency. In short, the added authorization provides necessary operating room to manage these responsibilities effectively.
The House bill also provides somewhat higher authorizations for the underground injection control program. The administration figures, upon which the Senate bill was based, contemplated only 22 States participating in the program. That assumption is no longer valid. At present, EPA anticipates that all 50 States will be included in the program. Supervision of programs in all of the States and territories will make even the higher House authorization inadequate. These sums will be stretched, but it is clear they will be effectively employed in this program.