within three years of approval. Ocean discharges would be regulated through permits granted by the Administrator. Negligent violation of a water quality standard, requirement of an implementation plan, or an order of the Administrator would be liable to a civil penalty of $10,000 per day. A knowing violation would be subject to criminal penalty of $25,000 per day or imprisonment for up to one year. Administrator may enter and inspect effluent sources. Any person may sue a polluter to abate a violation of water quality standards. Discharge of hazardous substances would be prohibited.

S. 573 (Senator MUSKIE)-amends Clean Air Act & Water Pollution Control Act*

Provides for standards for the manufacture of certain products to protect the quality of the Nation's air and navigable waters.

S. 601 (Senator SAXBE)-to amend the Water Pollution Control Act Provides assistance for river basin programs, not to exceed 50% o administrative, investigatory, operator training, and water quality control inspection costs of carrying out a basin water quality manage ment plan.

S. 679 (Senator STEVENS)-to amend the Refuse Act of 1899

Increases penalties relating to wrongful deposit of certain refus injury to harbor improvements, and obstruction of navigable water from $2,500 to $100,000, and repeated infractions would be treated a separate violations each day they continue.

S. 927 (Senator SPONG)-amends Clean Air Act & Water Pollutio Control Act

Prohibits false or deceptive statements, representation, or clair in advertising a product, service, system, or device to prevent control air or water pollution. Administrator of EPA shall issue reg lations designed to prevent the making of such statements, includi provisions for the Federal Trade Commission to receive and investig complaints concerning such statements.

S. 1011 (Senator WILLIAMS)-National Marine Waters Pollut Control Act

Provides means and measures to control the discharge of was transported by any means from areas within the U.S. and to pro and enhance the quality of the marine environment. Prohibits discharge or cause or contribution to discharge of wastes from vessel, except sewage discharged from marine sanitation devi There shall be a civil penalty of not more than $100,000 a violat Within 180 days after enactment, the Administrator of the F shall issue proposed regulations governing the discharge of by any owner or operator of a vessel or onshore or offshore into or upon all or any portion or portions of the waters beyond contiguous zone. The Administrator shall make grants to any S municipality, or other political subdivision for the constructio treatment works annually.

W

fac

S. 1012 (Senator COOPER)-amends Water Pollution Control Ac Amends Sections 5, 6, & 7 providing increased authorization appropriations to assist the State and interstate water pollution co programs. Provides additional flexibility to the Administrat *Will be subject of later hearing.

the EPA in awarding such grants through increased use of incentives. Provides additional research and development authority. Provides for development of new technology in the area of advanced waste treatment, combined sewers, and industrial waste treatment.

S. 1013 (Senator COOPER)-amends Water Pollution Control Act Amends Section 8 providing new program of financial assistance to States and municipalities for the construction of treatment works. Includes new provision to assure the development of financial and operation and maintenance capability in the States and municipalities in construction and maintenance of waste treatment works. Authorizes $6 billion Federal; $2 billion for each of the next 3 fiscal years, to match on a 50% basis, State and local funds for the construction of a total of $12 billion of waste treatment works throughout the Nation. Revises the allocation formula to provide greater flexibility to meet the most critical water pollution problems, and provides a new formula for reimbursement of prefinanced Federal shares.

S. 1014 (Senator COOPER)-amends Water Pollution Control Act

Amends Section 10 providing for a strengthened program to establish, implement, and enforce water quality standards. Extends the Federal-State program for the establishment and approval of standards and plans applicable to all navigable and ground waters. Establishes effluent standards as the primary pollution abatement mechanism in implementation plans to achieve water quality standards. Modifies enforcement provisions to include immediate Federal abatement, information acquisition, and emergency authority.

S. 1015 (Senator COOPER)-Environmental Financing Act

Creates the Environmental Financing Authority under the supervision of the Secretary of the Treasury. Insures that inability to borrow necessary funds on reasonable terms does not prevent any State or local public body from carrying out any project for construction waste treatment works. Authorizes up to $100,000 for initial capital. EFA would be authorized to buy the State and local bonds at rates to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury. EFA would be authorized to issue taxable obligations on the market, with the Secretary of the Treasury authorized to buy these bonds.

S. 1017 (Senator MONDALE)-Clean Lakes Act

Authorizes the Administrator of the EPA to increase the Federal grant percentage for treatment works to a maximum of 65% of the costs for treatment works which are located near or adjacent to any lake and which discharges wastes into the lake or tributary waters, if the States pay at least 20% of the costs. Authorizes the Administrator to provide technical and financial assistance to the States and municipalities in carrying out a comprehensive program of pollution control.

COMPARISON OF PROVISIONS (MAJOR BILLS)

BACKGROUND

The first general Federal legislation in the field of water pollution was the Act of 1948 which established the policy that the primary responsibility to control and abate water pollution rests with the States. That Act provided that if pollution occurred in one State which affected the health and welfare of citizens in another State enforcement proceedings could be undertaken at the request of the affected Governors. The Act also authorized water pollution research and technology development and assistance to States. In addition, a limited loan program to provide for the construction of water treatment plants was authorized.

In 1952 the Congress extended the program authorized in 1948 for three additional years. In 1956 the Congress upgraded the water pollution legislation to provide Federal-State cooperation in developing comprehensive programs, increased technical assistance, intensified and broadened research, provided $3 million a year in grants for Fiscal Years 1957-1961 to assist in the preparation of State plans for pollution control, $500 million for grants to help local communities build sewage treatment plants for Fiscal Years 1957-1966, and modified enforcement measures for controlling pollution of interstate waters. In 1961 Congress provided further authorizations and some limited additional authority.

In 1965 Congress rewrote the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorize the basic water quality standards procedure. Although the Act continued the policy of primacy of the States for the control and abatement of water pollution it added new provisions establishing a Federal-State framework for the establishment of water quality standards and implementation plans, and for the enforcement thereof The Water Quality Act of 1965 established the Federal Water Pollu tion Control Administration in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, which authority was subsequently transferred to the Secretary of Interior on May 9, 1966 and again in December 1970 transferred to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Under the 1965 Act the States were required to submit to the Fed eral agency standards for the quality of water applicable to all inter state navigable waters in such State, which standards were to includ a designation of water use, a numerical level of water quality, and plan to implement that level of quality. Intrastate navigable water were not within the scope of the 1965 Act. The standards were to b submitted to the Administrator by July 1, 1967 for his approval.

The approval process has taken considerable time because of th inability to reach common understanding or agreement between th States and the Federal Government on what the statute required an because of the omission of enforceable timetables in the Act. As result, as of this date there are only twenty-four states with full approved water quality standards for interstate navigable water

eighteen states whose standards and plans are pending, but expected to be granted approval, and eight states in which there continues to be dispute between the Federal Government and the affected states over the standards and plans submitted.

The enforcement procedures set forth in the 1965 Act continued the cumbersome and lengthy administrative proceedings of the 1948 law except that two steps were eliminated in connection with standards abatement proceeding. To date only a few enforcement proceedings have been undertaken and only one has reached the final sequence provided for in the Act, namely that of judicial enforcement. In addition to the complexity and cumbersome nature of the procedure, the statute included language in the enforcement provisions which limited effective enforcement by requiring a court finding of feasibility of compliance before abatement could be ordered.

Because of these limitations the Administration and others have used other law for purposes of water pollution abatement. This has lead to the use of the permit requirements of the Refuse Act of 1899 which have been the subject of hearings before the Subcommittee. This program is described later in the briefing paper.

With the passage of the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966, Congress authorized increased Federal assistance to states and municipalities for the construction of waste treatment works. This program authorized $3.4 billion, beginning with $50 million for FY 1965 to $1.25 billion for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1971. However, until FY 1969 the program had been seriously underfunded with the result that many projects were initiated and constructed in the states and municipalities but for which little or no Federal money was provided. This has caused a growing problem of reimbursement to these states and municipalities. In last two fiscal years, Congress has come close to fully funding the grant program by providing $800 million in fiscal 1970 and $1 billion in FY 1971. This program must be reauthorized for FY 1972.

In 1970 Congress in the Water Quality Improvement Act added considerable authority to the 1965 Act to provide for the control of certain specific water pollution problems. These included liability for the discharge of oil; controls over the discharge of hazardous substances; controls over the discharge of sewage from vessels; demonstration projects for the abatement of pollution in the Great Lakes; and acid mine drainage programs. It also added substantial new law to the regulation of direct and indirect (through licensing and permitting) Federal activities affecting water quality and greatly expanded manpower training provisions.

CURRENT ACTIVITY

In the Second Session of the 91st Congress several bills were introduced by the Chairman of the Subcommittee for the Administration to overhaul the 1965 Act with emphasis on Section 8 (Grants) and Section 10 (standards and enforcement). Because of the activity on the Resources Recovery Act and Clean Air Amendments, the Subcommittee did not move beyond holding hearings. (See Water Pollution, 1970, 5 volumes.)

In the 92d Congress, the Chairman of the Subcommittee (S. 523) and Senator Cooper (S. 1012, S. 1013, S. 1014, and S.1015) (on

behalf of the Administration) have introduced bills to overhaul the 1965 Act and to add new provisions to the Act in order to refine and upgrade regulatory provisions. Many of the provisions of these bills are similar to those subject to last year's hearings.

ISSUES

A. Amendments to Sections 5, 6, and 7 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1965.

Sections 5 and 6 provide authority to conduct research, investigations, and training programs; and section 7 provides for Federal assistance to State water pollution control programs. The research authority contained in section 5 expires at the end of fiscal year 1971 and therefore must be reauthorized. S. 523 (Muskie, et al.) would add a special study of agriculture related water pollution and S. 1012 (Cooper, et al.) would extend this authority and increase the amount of funding provided in this section.

Section 6 of the Act provides for grants for research and development, especially of problems related to municipal sewage. This authority also expires at the end of FY 1971. S. 523 would not amend this section. S. 1012 would extend the authorization for an additional year. In addition, the Administration's bill would direct the Administrator to contract or make grants for the conduct of demonstration projects for the prevention and control of industrial wastes.

Section 7 of existing law provides for the establishment of comprehensive State water pollution control programs using conditions attached to Federal assistance in the development and implementation of these programs to provide for quality performance. S. 523 would add new conditions for continuation of Federal assistance by requiring plans (a) to be developed for each river basin or portion thereof in such State, and (b) to require all sources of waste within such basins to receive adequate treatment to enhance water quality (These plans should not be confused with implementation plans under section 10). In addition, S. 523 would require the setting of priorities for treatment works, to implement, maintain, and enforce water quality standards established in that State. A broad general discre tionary authority would be granted the Administrator to set addi tional terms and conditions in order to further the purposes of thi Act. S. 523 continues the basic allocation formula and Federal ap proval and appeal mechanism of existing law and would increas funding levels to $20 million for each of the next three fiscal years fo a total of $60 million for three years.

a

S. 1012 would provide an incentive provision that would increas the amount of Federal monies available to States and interstat agencies if Administrator determines the program submitted is "improved water pollution control program." To qualify, such pro gram must include (1) an effective mandatory permit system coverin all effluent sources and provide for the implementation and enforce ment of efficient limitations for such effluent sources; (2) a sewag treatment facilities program in accordance with efficiency and ecor omy; (3) a manpower program to implement the State program (4) a program of training and development of water control person nel; and (5) a competent planning capability. S. 1012 would increas the level of funding in stages from $15 million in FY 1972 to $3 million in FY 1975 for a total of $90 million for four years.