Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - AMSA in the News
New Duncan-DeFazio bill advances infrastructure debate
WATER RESOURCES
Daily
03/14/2002
The push to revamp the Clean Water Act's multi-billion dollar infrastructure
account took another step toward fruition this week when House Transportation
and Infrastructure Subcommittee leaders unveiled a bipartisan, five-year $20
billion legislative proposal.
The bill, H.R. 3930, from Reps. John Duncan (R-Tenn.) and Peter DeFazio
(D-Ore.), chairman and ranking member of the Water Resources and Environment
Subcommittee, differs in several ways from its Senate counterpart, S. 1961,
primarily in that it focuses solely on wastewater.
A House committee source said H.R. 3930 is also clearer in terms of maintaining
infrastructure accounts on a state-run basis. Paul Schwartz of Clean Water
Action, who testified at a Duncan-led legislative hearing Wednesday, said he
sees added benefits to the House bill because of its specific authorization
language directing states to consider funding the most environmentally friendly
projects.
Ken Kirk, executive director of the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage
Agencies, said he was pleased to see language in H.R. 3930 that would require a
state to use 25 percent of its federal funds above an annual $1.4 billion
threshold for additional infrastructure subsidization. A committee source said
the provision was taken from H.R. 3792, wastewater infrastructure legislation
introduced last month by Reps. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.) and Sue Kelly (R-N.Y.).
Kirk also said the House bill's conditions for financial assistance appear to be
less burdensome than S. 1961.
A markup of H.R. 3930 is not likely to take place until some time after the
Easter recess, DeFazio said. Duncan would not comment on a markup date except to
say he hoped to have the bill before President Bush before the end of the
legislative session.
In the Senate, the $35 billion infrastructure proposal from Environment and
Public Works Committee Chairman Jim Jeffords (I-Vt.), committee ranking member
Bob Smith (R-N.H.), Water Subcommittee Chairman Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and
subcommittee ranking member Michael Crapo (R-Idaho), is expected to go to markup
after the Easter recess, Senate sources said. Jeffords had originally slated the
markup for mid-March but it stalled because of several overarching issues such
as the inclusion of Davis-Bacon prevailing wages in infrastructure construction.
The Bush administration's pleas for fiscal constraint are another stumbling
block before both the House and Senate infrastructure bills. Benjamin Grumbles,
Environmental Protection Agency deputy assistant administrator for the Office of
Water, testified Wednesday that while the White House is in favor of many of the
components described in H.R. 3930, it can not support the bill's authorization
levels due to the increased spending needs that are tied to the war on terrorism
both domestically and abroad. Grumbles, a former counsel to the House Science
Committee, gave similar news to the Senate during a legislative hearing last
month.
In an interview, Grumbles said the Bush administration's opposition is not
intended to discourage Congress from its work on the issue, adding that the
debate is "more than looking at the right dollar amount." Duncan described
Grumbles' testimony as "almost entirely positive." And DeFazio said he believes
the White House -- which has come out in favor of empowering local governments
and against unfunded federal mandates -- will ultimately support the
legislation. Kirk said many different organizations will have to make the case
to the White House that water infrastructure funding is good for the economy and
environment.
Looking ahead, Schwartz said Davis-Bacon will be the "marquee ideological
struggle" once S. 1961 and H.R. 3930 come up for votes, noting that the issue
stalled brownfields legislation for more than a year. On the House floor, he
added that it is entirely possible that lawmakers will see the infrastructure
bill as an opportunity to tinker with other components of the CWA, perhaps
dropping amendments on the Total Maximum Daily Load program, wetland regulations
and water quality standards. The bill's ultimate passage, Schwartz noted, could
be boosted should lawmakers press the economic stimulus issue, with estimates
saying that 30,000 to 50,000 jobs are created for every $1 billion spent on
infrastructure projects.
S. 1961 would boost the authorization levels of the EPA's Clean Water State
Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) and the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund (DWSRF)
to $35 billion over five years. H.R. 3930 addresses only the SRF, phasing up the
account's funding authorization by $1 billion per year until it reaches $6
billion in 2007.
On drinking water, jurisdiction on infrastructure issues fall to the House
Energy and Commerce Committee. Rep. Paul Gillmor (R-Ohio), chairman of the
Energy and Commerce Water Subcommittee, is focused on drinking water security
components within the bioterrorism legislation (H.R. 3448/S.1765) that is
currently in conference with the Senate, said his spokesman, Bailey Wood. Once
the conference is complete -- likely by the end of the month -- Gillmor will
turn his attention to drinking water infrastructure, Wood said.
Other components of H.R. 3930 include provisions that would: authorize $15
million a year for a new program for rural and small community technical
assistance; reauthorize the Clean Water Act Section 106 state pollution control
grant program to $250 million a year; require states to use at least 15 percent
of the federal contribution to the SRF for assistance to communities with
populations smaller than 20,000 people; and make permanent the existing
authority for states to transfer up to 33 percent of their funds between the SRF
and the DWSRF.
Since 1972, the federal government has provided more than $90 billion for
wastewater infrastructure, a small amount compared with what ratepayers and
local municipalities pay. Adding to the legislative debate, EPA is developing a
new estimate of wastewater infrastructure needs that many expect to exceed $300
million over the next 20 years. Still other surveys say the total cost for
replacing aging pipes and sewage systems is between $400 billion and $1
trillion. -- Darren Samuelsohn