Clean Water Act: A Review of Issues in the 109th Congress

Legislative movements to comprehensively revise the Water Pollution Control Law (CWA) have been suspended for a while because the concerned parties are discussing whether to change the law and how to change them. Instead, Congress has concentrated its legislative attention on a narrow bill to expand or modify the selected CWA program, but has not made any comprehensive suggestions. In the 109th Congress, two such bills were enacted: a bill to extend the mission of the Long Island Sound program (HR 3963, PL 109-137) and another bill including the Pontchartrain Lake Basin (HR 6121, PL 109 - 392). The House also noted that HR 1721, a bill to re-approve coastal water quality programs, and several other CWA bills reported by the House and Senate committees (HR 4126 in Chesapeake Bay, and on the safety of sewage treatment facilities S) approved. 2781). Another bill (S. 1848) to promote restoration of the abandoned hard rock mine has also been reported, but it has not been approved yet. This will affect the requirements of such projects of CWA.

After a hurricane occurred in the Gulf Coast of Mexico in 2005, the Senate passed a bill to simplify the provision of funding to restore the sewage treatment plant damaged by the storm (S. 1709). Other legislation aimed at simplifying environmental review of reconstruction and reconstruction projects was also introduced (S. 1711, S 1765 / S 1766). These are not promulgated

Over the years, the most prominent legislative water quality problem involved financial aid for municipal sewage treatment projects. The problem is how to support how the federal government fulfills the needs of the state and the city to rebuild, restore and update the wastewater treatment facility, especially assuming that it will cost $ 390 billion in the next 20 years . In the 109th Congress, the Senate Environment Public Works Commission approved S. 1400 which approves $ 20 billion with federal government subsidies to fund state clean water infrastructure financing programs . The House Committee approved a bill to reauthorize other clean water bills: within 6 years, H. 624 provided a $ 1.5 billion subsidy to the sewage overflow project, 1359 will expand the test program of alternative water project. None of these bills passed

Other "water purification law" problems have attracted the attention of many stakeholders, but the 109th Congress did not consider it. In particular, wetland activities, especially plans to regulate CWA Article 404, have been criticized by landlords by violating the decision to use private lands and placing an excessive economic burden. Environmentalists believe that these programs are essential to maintaining the health of wetland ecosystems. These groups believe that the Supreme Court ruling in 2001, the SWANCC litigation that narrowed the protection under wetland regulations, and the 2006 ruling were related administrative measures, including the 2003 policy guidance litigation to explain SWANCC Also handled. . Legislation reversed SWANCC's decision (HR 1356 / S.912, clean water authority recovery law) and another bill to reduce government regulation (H. R. 2658, federal wetland jurisdiction law) but still issued I have not done it

On behalf of Waters at the 108th meeting of the 109th General Assembly she re-raised her bill, human resources 830. In addition, the same two proposals were introduced at the 109th and 110th meetings. Number of times the country has been reclassified. It is the same decade. In the 109th, the two bills are H. It was 2642 and the accompanying bill, S. It was announced by John S. Tanner and Senator Tim Johnson in 2350 respectively. In the 110 th period, the same bill was reintroduced as H.R. 543 and S. 2342 and H.R. 22248.

Other "water purification law" problems have attracted the attention of many stakeholders, but the 109th Congress did not consider it. In particular, wetland activities, especially plans to regulate CWA Article 404, have been criticized by landlords by violating the decision to use private lands and placing an excessive economic burden. Environmentalists believe that these programs are essential to maintaining the health of wetland ecosystems. These groups believe that the Supreme Court ruling in 2001, the SWANCC litigation that narrowed the protection under wetland regulations, and the 2006 ruling were related administrative measures, including the 2003 policy guidance litigation to explain SWANCC Also handled. . Legislation reverses SWANCC's ruling (HR 1356 / S.912, Water Purification Bureau Recovery Act) and another bill to narrow government regulations