Search

Clean Water Advocacy Newsroom

Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - AMSA in the News

No. 98
Tuesday, May 21, 2002 Page A-1
ISSN 1521-9402
News

Water Pollution
House Chairman Would Consider Bill To Secure Wastewater Plants, Aide Says

The chairman of the House subcommittee with jurisdiction over clean water is willing to take on legislation to address security concerns of wastewater treatment plants, a House aide said May 20.
Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, "would be happy to consider" a bill requiring wastewater systems to conduct vulnerability assessments and strengthen emergency response plans, according to Susan Bodine, the subcommittee's staff director.
The legislation would not be wrapped into a bioterrorism bill (H.R. 3448) currently in conference that has provisions to protect food, drug, and drinking water supplies, she told the annual meeting of the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies.
House-Senate conferees are continuing to work on the bioterrorism bill, and it could go to the House floor the week of May 20. As part of the drinking water discussion, debate is taking place on wastewater security, but conferees are not expected to approve this provision, Bodine said.
As yet, no separate wastewater security legislation has been introduced, and no discussions have taken place, she said. However, "if the House and Senate get on the same track early on, things can happen very quickly," Bodine added.

SRF Funding Measure Uncertain

In other legislation affecting wastewater utilities, the fate of a Senate bill (S. 1961) authorizing $35 billion over five years for state revolving loan funds to make infrastructure improvements is "up in the air," Michele Nellenbach, a Republican aide to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said.
The bill was approved by the committee May 17 (97 DEN A-2, 5/20/02).
Although S. 1961 started out as a bipartisan bill, it was unable to remain one, she said. The main stumbling block has been the formula to distribute money to states, Nellenbach said. Sen. Robert Smith (R-N.H.), the committee's ranking Republican, voted against the bill because he believes it does not help small states, she said.
Smith also voted against the bill, she said, because of a provision applying the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires that prevailing wages be paid for construction projects that receive federal funding. Once on the Senate floor, any senator can put a hold on it, according to Nellenbach, although she did not indicate whether Smith would try to block the bill. "I don't know where we go from here," she added.

House Bill Seeking 80 Cosponsors

A similar bill in the House (H.R. 3930) has been able to retain its bipartisan posture, Bodine said. "We hope to add 80 cosponsors by the end of the week--40 from each party, and we'd like to take it to the floor," she said. H.R. 3930 would authorize $20 billion over five years for the wastewater state revolving loan fund. The Senate bill would cover both wastewater and drinking water revolving funds.
Although the Davis-Bacon provision is also controversial in the House bill, Bodine predicted a compromise would be reached. "If members are aware of the importance of the bill, a deal has to be struck," she said. "We can't let Davis-Bacon hold up infrastructure."
Ryan Seiger, minority counsel for the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, said the panel understands there needs to be a "huge federal commitment" for wastewater infrastructure.
The committee also recognizes that more needs to be done in watershed management and is encouraging innovative and alternative approaches, such as watershed-based pollutant trading, to achieve water quality improvements, he said.

Watershed Trading Encouraged

For example, a publicly owned treatment work (POTW) might offer to help farmers upstream control their nutrient runoff, Seiger told BNA after the meeting. The resulting net reduction of nutrients might allow the POTW to forego tertiary treatment, he said.
In the long run, it could be cheaper for the POTWs to work with the farmers upstream to put controls on nonpoint sources than it would be for the POTW itself to do the treatment, "and it would achieve the same net improvement in the water body," he said.
H.R. 3930 also has provisions for alternative financing that could be used to fund those kinds of innovative projects, according to Seiger.
One provision of the bill would allow a municipality or other entity to borrow money from the state revolving loan fund to conduct "nonpoint activities outside the community," but utility rate-payers would still be able to pay for the loan, he said.


By Patricia Ware