Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - NACWA in the News
House Measure Would Establish Trust Fund To Upgrade Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.) has introduced legislation (H.R. 4560) to establish a Clean Water Trust Fund to upgrade the nation's aging wastewater treatment facilities.
If enacted, the Clean Water Trust Act of 2005 would raise $7.5 billion each year from "an equitable system of user fees," which the Environmental Protection Agency would recommend to Congress 180 days after enactment.
Congress would have to approve those fees in separate
legislation, Jonathan Pawlow, majority counsel for the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee, told BNA Dec. 16.
Specifically, the trust fund would help control sewer overflows, enhance
fisheries and wetlands, encourage research, enhance investment in small and
rural utilities, and protect critical regional waters such as the Great Lakes,
the Chesapeake Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico, according to the National
Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), which has been lobbying Congress
for creation of such a fund.
Duncan, chairman of the water subcommittee, acknowledged the need for such
legislation to protect the nation's clean water supply.
In a statement Dec. 16, he said he was aware that in some older systems "pipes
were laid as far back as the 1800s. ... We must meet the challenge of finding
more-efficient and less-expensive ways to address our wastewater needs."
NACWA Executive Director Ken Kirk said the bill was a "bold move" to create a
"deficit-neutral Clean Water Trust Fund," address EPA's estimated clean water
funding gap of $300 billion to $500 billion, and guarantee continued progress
that began more than 30 years ago under the Clean Water Act.
Dedicated Revenue Source
Duncan's bill does not "conclusively determine" the source of revenue, but
rather relies on EPA to recommend user fees that "of course" would be subject to
congressional approval, Pawlow said.
G. Tracy Mehan, a principal with Virginia-based Cadmus Consulting Group and a
former EPA assistant administrator for water, said the critical question is
whether the bill has identified a dedicated revenue source.
"I find it very incongruous that Congress is deferring a taxing decision to an
administrative agency," Mehan told BNA Dec. 16.
Pawlow acknowledged that identifying a dedicated revenue stream was one of the
sticking points in crafting the bill. However, "we are only at the starting
point," he said, adding that he expects to meet with stakeholders to resolve
outstanding issues.
Once the revenue stream is identified, Pawlow said, $6 billion of the total
authorized amount of $7.5 billion would be spent on upgrading the wastewater
infrastructure. Roughly $4.5 billion would be disbursed as grants to
high-priority wastewater projects, while $1.5 billion would be given as loans to
local communities, he said.
The remaining $1.5 billion would be spent on other projects identified in the
bill, including wetland restoration, research, and water quality protection of
the Chesapeake Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Great Lakes.
The existing Clean Water state revolving fund (SRF) would continue to operate,
but under the aegis of the Clean Water Trust Fund, Pawlow added.
EPA Unwilling to Commit
Despite the provision that requires EPA to recommend user fees, NACWA said the
bill enjoys widespread support among engineers, builders, contractors,
environmental advocates and local and state officials. Kirk noted that Duncan is
a "noted fiscal conservative" who recognizes the importance of clean water
infrastructure.
Benjamin Grumbles, EPA assistant administrator for water, said he had not
reviewed the legislation.
"We look forward to reviewing the bill and working with Congress on various
approaches for sustainable infrastructure," Grumbles told BNA Dec. 16.
According to information on EPA's website, the Office of Water envisions a
"sustainable infrastructure" with four pillars of action, including full cost
pricing.
Most of the funding for water and wastewater comes from ratepayers in their
monthly sewer and water bills. "Therefore, pricing water to accurately reflect
the true costs of providing high quality water and wastewater services to
consumers is needed to both maintain infrastructure and encourage conservation,"
the website statement said.
Grumbles said he was "very interested" in working with Congress and state and
local officials to learn more about permit fees and full-cost pricing, or the
full cost of drinking and wastewater services that are provided to the public.
EPA's four pillars of action are available at
http://www.epa.gov/water/infrastructure/pricing/index.htm.