Water Infrastructure Financing Legislation: Comparison of S. 2550 and H.R. 1560

CRS Report for Congress
Water Infrastructure Financing Legislation:
Comparison of S. 2550 and H.R. 1560
July 27, 2004
Claudia Copeland and Mary Tiemann
Specialists in Environmental Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Water Infrastructure Financing Legislation:
Comparison of S. 2550 and H.R. 1560
This report provides a side-by-side comparison of two major bills in the 108th
Congress concerning water infrastructure project financing. It compares provisions
of S. 2550, the Water Infrastructure Financing Act, which would amend the Clean
Water Act (CWA) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and H.R. 1560, the
Water Quality Financing Act of 2003, which would amend only the CWA. H.R. 1560
was approved by a House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on July 17,
2003; S. 2550 was approved by the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee on June 23, 2004.
The CWA and SDWA provisions in these two bills principally involve the
portions of those laws that authorize federal financial assistance to State Revolving
Loan Funds (SRFs) for purposes of building and upgrading wastewater treatment and
drinking water treatment facilities. Congress established the CWA SRF program in
1987 and the SDWA SRF program in 1996. Under both, federal capitalization grants
are provided as seed money for state-administered loan programs. Communities
repay loans to the state, providing a source of capital for future loans and other
investments. Both laws contain provisions that specify requirements for states to
establish SRFs and requirements that apply to the SRF’s operation, such as plans and
reporting. Both define categories of projects eligible for assistance, who may receive
assistance, and types of assistance activities.
A key intention of both bills is to extend SRF authorizations. S. 2550 authorizes
$35 billion for FY2005-FY2009 for capitalization grants ($20 billion for the CWA
SRF, $15 billion for the SDWA SRF). H.R. 1560 authorizes $20 billion for CWA
SRF capitalization grants for FY2004-FY2008. In addition, both would conform the
two laws in several respects. For example, the SDWA currently allows states to offer
additional subsidization to disadvantaged communities and longer loan repayment
periods, and both bills would add similar provisions to the CWA.
The bills are not identical, however. In some cases, they take different
approaches to an issue, such as how to revise the formula for state-by-state allotment
of CWA SRF capitalization grants. S. 2550 includes provisions that would apply
prevailing wage requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act to projects that receive SRF
funding, and it includes a new grant program to assist small community drinking
water projects, as well as grant programs to address lead contamination in schools
and in the District of Columbia. H.R. 1560 includes provisions requiring
communities to plan for capital replacement needs and to implement an asset
management plan for the repair and maintenance of infrastructure.
Future prospects for the legislation are uncertain for several reasons, including
controversies over application of the Davis-Bacon Act, Administration opposition
to funding levels in the bills, limited legislative time remaining in the 108th Congress,
and the lack of House consideration of a counterpart to the SDWA provisions of S.

2550. This report will be updated as warranted.

In troduction ......................................................1
Table 1. Comparison of Water Infrastructure Legislation..................5
Definitions ...............................................5
Recipients Eligible for Assistance.............................5
Projects Eligible for Assistance, Types of Assistance..............6
SRF Grants Set-Aside Program...............................7
Fund Management.........................................8
Extension of Loans........................................8
Additional Subsidization....................................9
Financial Assistance to Small Systems from the SRF.............10
Technical Assistance to Small Systems from the SRF............11
Technical Assistance Grants for Rural and Small Treatment Works.11
State Administrative Costs Set-Aside.........................12
Reservation of Funds for Planning...........................13
Cross-Cutting Requirements; Labor Standards..................13
Requirements for Receipt of Funds...........................14
Priority System Requirement................................15
Allotment ...............................................16
SRF Authorization........................................18
Cross-Collateralization between CWA and SDWA SRFs.........18
SRF Set-Aside for Indian Programs...........................19
SRF Review Process — Assistance for Accessing the SRF........19
Reports: Needs Surveys....................................19
Removal of Lead from Drinking Water in Schools...............20
Lead Contamination in Drinking Water in the District of Columbia.21
Small Public Water System Grant Program.....................22
Pilot Program for Alternative Water Source Projects.............25
Sewer Overflow Grants....................................26
Watershed Pilot Projects...................................26
National Estuary Program..................................26
Sewage Control Technology Grant Program....................27
Demonstration Program for Water Quality Enhancement
and Management.....................................27
Southeast Colorado Safe Drinking Water Supply................28
Environmental Finance Centers..............................28
Miscellaneous ...........................................29
Cost of Service Study......................................30
Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination.....................31
Special Water Resources Study..............................31

Water Infrastructure Financing Legislation:
Comparison of S. 2550 and H.R. 1560
This report provides a side-by-side comparison of two major bills in the 108th
Congress concerning water infrastructure project financing. It compares provisions
of S. 2550, the Water Infrastructure Financing Act, which would amend both the
Clean Water Act (CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.), and H.R. 1560, the Water Quality Financing Act
of 2003, which would amend only the CWA. While a number of bills that address
water infrastructure project financing have been introduced, these two measures are
the focus of legislative activity in the 108th Congress. This report also describes
relevant provisions of current law that would be affected or modified by the bills.
The CWA and SDWA provisions that these two bills would amend are
principally the portions of those laws that authorize federal financial assistance to
State Revolving Loan Funds (SRFs) for purposes of building and upgrading
wastewater treatment and drinking water treatment facilities, respectively. At the
federal level, the SRF programs in the laws are administered by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). Under the programs in both laws, federal capitalization
grants are provided as seed money for state-administered loan programs. Recipients
repay loans to the state, enabling the state to build up a source of capital for future
loans and other investments. Thus, monies in the SRF consist of federal
capitalization grants from congressional appropriations, required state matching
funds (20% of a capitalization grant), and loan repayments. Congress established the
CWA SRF program in 1987 (P.L. 100-4), replacing what previously had been a
CWA program of grants to municipalities. Before 1996, the SDWA had not
authorized federal assistance for drinking water treatment facilities, but in that year,
Congress established the SDWA SRF program (P.L. 104-182), modeling it after the
CWA program, while also refining it to reflect experiences gained during the early
implementation of P.L. 100-4. (For background information, see CRS Report
RL31116, Water Infrastructure Funding: Review and Analysis of Current Issues.)
A key intention of both of the current bills is to extend and increase SRF
authorizations, because estimates by states and EPA of funding needed by wastewater
and water utilities to comply with the two acts exceed $330 billion. Needs estimates
by other groups are even higher. In the case of the CWA program, authorizations
under the 1987 law expired at the end of FY1994, while authorizations for the
SDWA SRF program expired at the end of FY2003. However, Congress has
continued to appropriate monies for capitalization grants each year for both since
their authorizations expired.

More recently, legislative activity concerning water infrastructure issues has
been undertaken in the 107th and 108th Congresses. House and Senate committees
held oversight hearings on water infrastructure financing issues during the first
session of the 107th Congress, and in the second session, the House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee approved H.R. 3930. No committee report was filed.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved and reported
infrastructure financing legislation (S. 1961, S.Rept. 107-228).1 No further action
occurred on either bill, in large part due to controversies over provisions in both bills
to apply requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act to SRF-funded water infrastructure
projects2 and also over grant allocation formulas in the two measures.
In the 108th Congress, the House Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment approved H.R. 1560, legislation
similar to H.R. 3930 from the 107th Congress, in July 2003. H.R. 1560 would
authorize $20 billion for the clean water SRF program for FY2004-FY2008. It
contains several provisions intended to benefit economically disadvantaged and small
communities, such as allowing extended loan repayments (30 years) and additional
subsidies, including forgiveness of the loan principal and negative interest loans, for
communities that meet a state’s affordability criteria. It includes provisions to
require communities to plan for capital replacement needs and to develop and
implement an asset management plan for the repair and maintenance of infrastructure
that is being financed. The full committee has not acted on the subcommittee-
approved bill.
On June 23, 2004, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
approved S. 2550. It authorizes $41.25 billion over five years for wastewater and
drinking water infrastructure programs, including $20 billion for the clean water SRF
program and $15 billion for the drinking water SRF program. The bill includes a new
formula for state-by-state allocation of clean water SRF grants, expansion of the
types of projects and activities eligible for SRF funding, and renewal of several Clean
Water Act grant programs (for sewer overflow control projects, alternative water
source pilot projects, and the National Estuary Program). It includes several
provisions to conform administrative elements of the two laws’ SRF programs (such
as amounts reserved for state administrative costs). The Senate bill directs states to
reserve a portion of their annual clean water and drinking water SRF capitalization
grants for making grants to eligible communities, and further requires EPA to
establish a small drinking water system grant program to help small water systems

1 For information, see CRS Report RL31344, Water Infrastructure Financing Legislation:
Comparison of S. 1961 and H.R. 3930.
2 The Davis-Bacon Act requires, among other things, that not less than the locally prevailing
wage be paid to workers employed, under contract, on federal construction work “to which
the United States or the District of Columbia is a party.” Critics say that it unnecessarily
increases public construction costs and hampers competition. Supporters say that the law
helps stabilize the local construction industry by preventing competition that could undercut
local wages and working conditions. Congress has added Davis-Bacon prevailing wage
provisions to more than 50 separate program statutes, including the Clean Water Act. For
background, see CRS Report RL31491, Davis-Bacon Act Coverage and the State Revolving
Fund Program Under the Clean Water Act.

comply with drinking water regulations.3 Among other provisions, the bill authorizes
funds to address lead contamination in schools and in the District of Columbia, and
directs the U.S. Geological Survey to assess perchlorate contamination nationwide.
S. 2550 also amends the Water Resources Planning Act to require the Water
Resources Council to conduct a special water resources study.
The House and Senate bills differ in a number of respects. In some cases, they
take different approaches to an issue, such as how to revise the formula for state-by-
state allotment of CWA SRF capitalization grants. They differ in other ways as well.
!S. 2550, but not H.R. 1560, includes provisions modeled on the
current SDWA that would allow private utilities to receive CWA
SRF assistance.
!Both bills would permit states to make longer-term SRF loans. H.R.

1560 generally would permit loans to be made for up to 30 years,

while S. 2550 (adopting the current SDWA approach) extends clean
water SRF loans made to disadvantaged communities from 20 years
to up to 30 years.
!The House bill addresses several issues not included in the Senate
measure. It would, for example, authorize states to use the clean
water SRF to provide technical assistance to small treatment works;
require aid recipients to conduct additional project evaluations,
including of the cost and effectiveness of innovative and alternative
processes and techniques; and reauthorize the existing Sewer
Overflow Grant program in Section 121 of the Clean Water Act.
!The Senate bill also has several provisions not contained in H.R.
1560, including a cost of service study by the National Academy of
Sciences, a nationwide demonstration program for innovations in
water quality management or water supply, and a study of lead in
drinking water by the National Academy of Sciences.
!Unlike the House bill, S. 2550 includes language that would apply
prevailing wage requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act to projects
that receive funding in whole or in part from a CWA or SDWA
Future prospects for H.R. 1560 and S. 2550 are uncertain for several reasons.
First, the Administration opposes the higher SRF funding levels contained in both
bills. Second, strong disagreement exists in both houses of Congress over including
provisions to apply requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act to SRF-funded projects, as
well as over the state-by-state allotment formula in S. 2550 for Clean Water Act
capitalization grants. Similar disagreements were largely responsible for the lack of
final action on water infrastructure legislation in the 107th Congress. Third, only a
limited number of legislative days remain in the 108th Congress. Fourth, the House

3 During markup of S. 2550, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved
two similar amendments to establish a small drinking water system grant program. Although
the programs contain many similarities, they would authorize grant funding at significantly
different levels. See discussion of “Small Public Water System Grant Program” in this

Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Safe Drinking
Water Act, has not yet considered counterpart legislation to the SDWA provisions
in S. 2550.
Several other legislative proposals dealing with water infrastructure financing
programs administered by EPA, not described in this report, also have been
introduced in the 108th Congress. These include:
!H.R. 688/S. 252, to authorize $15 billion in CWA SRF
appropriations and expand the types of projects eligible for CWA
SRF assistance;
!H.R. 768/S. 567, to authorize appropriations for the sewer overflow
grant program in CWA Section 221 (the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee approved an amended version of H.R. 768
on July 21, 2004);
!H.R. 2804, to authorize a supplemental appropriation of $85 million
for the SDWA SRF and to require that state source water assessment
programs address specified pesticides;
!H.R. 3328/S. 1432, to authorize $1.9 billion for each of FY2004-
FY2009 for grants to assist small communities and certain other
communities in complying with drinking water regulations;
!H.R. 3792, to authorize $25 billion in appropriations for CWA SRFs
and expand the types of eligible projects;
!H.R. 4268/S. 2377, to authorize $200 million for each of FY2005-
FY2009 to replace lead service lines in public water systems, and to
strengthen the regulation of lead in drinking water;
!H.R. 568/S. 827, to provide CWA assistance through grants to states
in the Chesapeake Bay watershed for installing nutrient removal
technologies at wastewater treatment plants; and
!S. 1413, to authorize appropriations for the drinking water SRF for
FY2004 at $2 billion, and to authorize feasibility studies for specific
water quality and supply projects.

Table 1. Comparison of Water Infrastructure Legislation
Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
Clean Water Act (CWA) generalNo new general definitions.Defines “small treatment works” as
definitions are provided in §502.those serving a population of 20,000 or
fewer. (Section 307 of H.R. 1560)
CWA §212 defines “treatment works”Adds definition of “treatment works” to
and other terms for Title II constructionCWA §502 (references the §212
grants program.definition). (Section 401)
Amends §212 definition of “treatment
works” to include land acquisition and
interest in lands necessary for
iki/CRS-RL32503construction. (Section 202)
g/wSafe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)No new general definitions.No provision.
s.ordefinitions generally are provided in
://wikiRecipients Eligible for Assistance
CWA §603(c) provides that eligibleAmends §603(c) to add private utilitiesNo comparable provision.
assistance recipients include anythat principally treat municipal
municipality, intermunicipal, interstate,wastewater or domestic sewage as
or state agency.eligible recipients for CWA State
Revolving Fund (SRF) assistance.
(Section 102 of S. 2550)
SDWA §1452(a) and (f) provide thatNo additional provisions.No provision.

eligible assistance recipients include
privately or publicly owned community
water systems and nonprofit
noncommunity water systems, other
than systems owned by federal

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
Projects Eligible for Assistance, Types of Assistance
CWA §603(c) describes types ofModifies §603(c) to clarify that costs forNo comparable language for costs of
projects eligible for financial assistanceplanning, design, associatedplanning, design, and preconstruction
(construction of publicly ownedpreconstruction, and necessary sitingactivities.
treatment works, implementation of aactivities are eligible for assistance.
§319 nonpoint pollution management
program, and development andAdds water conservation projects orAdds lake protection projects (CWA
implementation of a §320 estuaryactivities for eligibility.§314), repair and replacement of
conservation and management plan).decentralized wastewater treatment
Also adds water reuse, reclamation orsystems, municipal stormwater runoff
recycling projects; projects to increasemeasures, water conservation, treatment
facility security; and measures to controlworks security measures, watershed
municipal stormwater to list of types ofdevelopment and implementation
eligible projects, but private utilities mayprojects (CWA §121) to list of eligible
projects. (Section 303(a))
iki/CRS-RL32503not use SRF funds for such projects. (Section 102)
s.orCWA §603(d) defines types ofAmends §603(d) to add projects forNo comparable provision.
leakassistance that SRF may be used for,implementation of nonpoint source
://wikie.g., making loans, providing loanguarantees, buying or refinancing debtpollution management or estuarineconservation management and allows
httpobligations of municipalities.loans for such projects to have 30-year
amortization period. (Section 103)
SDWA §1452(a)(2) states that fundsExpands §1452(a)(2) to allow waterNo provision.

may be used only for expenditures thatsystems to use funds for planning,
the Administrator has determined willdesign, and associated preconstruction
facilitate compliance with SDWAexpenditures and recovery of facility
regulations or significantly furthersiting costs, and for projects to replace or
SDWA’s health protection objectives.rehabilitate aging water infrastructure
(including reservoirs). Funds may also
§1452(k) authorizes states to use up tobe used for capital projects to upgrade

15% of the capitalization grant (notthe security of public water systems.

more than 10% for any 1 activity) to(Section 203)
provide loans to public water systems
for acquiring conservation easementsAmends §1452(k)(2) to broaden other
or land for source water protection; toeligible uses of SRF funds to include

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
provide loans to community waterimplementation of source water
systems for voluntary source waterprotection plans.
protection measures; to provide(Section 207)
capacity development assistance; and
to establish and implement wellhead
protection programs.
SDWA §1452(f) prescribes types ofNo additional provision. No provision.
assistance that SRF may be used for,
e.g., making loans, providing loan
guarantees, buying or refinancing debt
obligations of municipalities.
SRF Grants Set-Aside Program
CWA — No existing provision. CWAAdds a new §603(k) providing that inNo comparable provision.
iki/CRS-RL32503Title II previously authorized a federalyears when SRF appropriations do not
g/wconstruction grants program forexceed $3 billion, states shall set aside
s.orwastewater treatment works, with a10% of a federal capitalization grant for
leak55% federal share. Authorizationsgrants to eligible users for not more than
expired in FY1990, and the Title II55% of the total cost of a project for
://wikigrants program was replaced by thewhich a grant is made. State may waive
httpTitle VI SRF program.this requirement if the average time for
processing loan applications is less than
90 days. In years when SRF
appropriations exceed $3 billion, states
shall set aside not more than 10% nor
less than 5% of its SRF. (Section 107)
SDWA — No existing provision. Adds new §1452(s) providing that in
§1452(d) authorizes states to use up toyears when SRF appropriations do not
305 of their capitalization grant toexceed $2.5 billion, states shall set aside
subsidize loans (including forgiveness10% of a capitalization grant for grants
of principal) for communities that areto eligible projects for not more than
disadvantaged or may become55% of the total cost of a project for
disadvantaged as a result of a proposedwhich a grant is made. State may waive
project.this requirement if the average time for
processing loan applications during the

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
preceding 12 months is less than 90
days. If an annual appropriation exceeds
$2.5 billion, states shall set aside not
more than 5% nor less than 2.5% of its
SRF. (Section 206)
Fund Management
CWA §603(c) requires that CWA SRFsNo additional provisions.Requires that CWA SRFs be maintained
be maintained and credited with loanand credited with loan repayments and
repayments and be maintained inbe maintained in perpetuity. Fees shall
perpetuity.be used solely for administering the
fund. (Section 302(b))
CWA §602(b)(9) requires that as partExtends requirement for generally
of capitalization grant agreement, stateaccepted government accounting
iki/CRS-RL32503will use generally accepted governmentstandards to the reporting of
g/waccounting standards.infrastructure assets. (Section 302(a))
leakSDWA §1452(c) requires that SDWANo additional provisions.No provision.
SRFs be maintained and credited with
://wikiloan repayments and interest, and be
httpmaintained in perpetuity. Amounts not
needed for current obligation or
expenditure must be invested in interest
bearing obligations.
Extension of Loans
CWA §603(d) provides that a waterAdds new §603(e) to permit state toModifies §603(d) to permit state to
pollution control revolving fund mayprovide an extended term for a CWAprovide an extended term for a CWA
make loans at terms not to exceed 20SRF loan to a disadvantaged communitySRF loan (up to 30 years, so long as that
years.(up to 30 years, so long as that periodperiod does not exceed the project’s
does not exceed the project’s designdesign life). (Section 303(b))
life). (Section 104)
SDWA §1452(f) provides that aNo additional provisions.No provision.

SDWA SRF may make loans at terms
not to exceed 20 years. Exception: a

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
state may extend the term of a loan to
as much as 30 years for disadvantaged
communities, provided the term does
not exceed the project’s design life.
Additional Subsidization
CWA §603(d) permits states to makeAdds new §603(e) authorizing states toAdds new §603(i) authorizing states to
loans at or below market interest rates,provide additional subsidization,provide additional subsidization from a
including interest-free loans. CWAincluding forgiveness of principal, forCWA SRF, including forgiveness of
has no existing provisions forprojects in disadvantaged communitiesprincipal and negative interest loans, to
additional subsidization or forgivenessor communities expected to becomeprojects to benefit a municipality that
of loans.disadvantaged. meets the state’s affordability criteria.
Also may provide subsidization to
implement alternative processes or
techniques that may result in cost
iki/CRS-RL32503savings or increased environmental
g/w benefits.
leakAdditional subsidization under thisTotal amount of subsidization provided
provision may not exceed 30% of theby a state may not exceed 30% of its
://wikistate’s capitalization grant in that year. capitalization grant.
http(Section 104(a))
State also may provide additional
subsidization to municipalities that do
not meet affordability criteria if the
municipality seeks to benefit individual
ratepayers in the residential user rate
class and ensures that this subsidization
will be directed through a user charge
rate system to such ratepayers.
New §603(e) defines “disadvantagedDirects states to establish affordability
community” to mean the service area, orcriteria by Sept. 30, 2004. EPA may
portion of a service area, of a treatmentprovide information to assist states in
works that meets affordability criteriaestablishing criteria. (Section 303(f))

established by the state. (Section 104(a))

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
No set-aside provision.Set-aside: In any year when CWA SRF
appropriations exceed $1.4 billion, a
state shall set aside 25% of the
difference between its capitalization
grant and its proportionate share of $1.4
billion to provide additional
subsidization for projects that meet
affordability criteria. (Section 303(f))
SDWA §1452(d) authorizes states toNo additional provisions.No provision.
provide additional loan subsidization,
including forgiveness of principal, for
projects in disadvantaged communities.
The total amount of loan subsidies may
not exceed 30% of the state’s
iki/CRS-RL32503capitalization grant for that year.
g/w§1452(d)(3) defines ‘disadvantagedAmends definition of ‘disadvantagedNo provision.
s.orcommunity’ as the service area of acommunity’ in §1452(d)(3) to include
leaksystem that meets affordability criteriathe service area, or portion of a service
://wikiset by the state. EPA may publishinformation to assist states inarea, of a water system that meetsaffordability criteria.
httpestablishing these criteria.(Section 204)
Financial Assistance to Small Systems from the SRF
CWA — No existing provision.No provision.Directs states, beginning in FY2005, to
use at least 15% of CWA capitalization
grants to assist municipalities with
population less than 20,000, if there are
sufficient applications for assistance.
(Section 122(c))
SDWA §1452(a)(2) requires that 15%No additional provision. (For relatedNo provision.

of the amount credited to a stateprovisions see SRF grants set-aside
SDWA SRF in any fiscal year must beprogram and small public water system
available for providing loan assistancegrant program)
to systems serving fewer than 10,000

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
persons, to the extent such funds can be
obligated for eligible projects.
Technical Assistance to Small Systems from the SRF
CWA — No existing provision.No provision.Authorizes states to provide CWA SRF
assistance to small treatment works for
technical and planning assistance and
assistance with financial management,
user fee analysis, capital improvement
planning, facility operation and
maintenance, repair schedules to
improve treatment plant management
and operations. Amounts shall not
exceed 2% of capitalization grant
awards to the fund. (Section 303(e))
g/wSDWA §1452(g)(2) authorizes states toNo additional provision.No provision.
s.oruse 2% of their SRF grant to provide
leaktechnical assistance to water systems
serving 10,000 or fewer persons.
httpSDWA §1452(q) authorizes EPA to
reserve up to 2% of the SRF
appropriation to provide technical
assistance to small systems (not to
exceed the amount authorized under
§1442(e) (regarding small systems
technical assistance).
Technical Assistance Grants for Rural and Small Treatment Works
CWA — No existing provision, butAdds new Section 222 to authorize EPASimilar provision. Modifies CWA
§104(b) generally authorizes EPA toto make grants to qualified nonprofit§104(b) to authorize EPA to make
support or conduct various types ofproviders for technical assistance togrants to nonprofit organizations
research, investigations, and training.treatment works located in rural areasconcerning assistance to rural and small
and serving fewer than 10,000 users inmunicipalities, publicly owned
planning, developing, and obtainingtreatment works and decentralized

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
financing for eligible projects.wastewater treatment systems
Authorizes grants to nonprofits toconcerning planning, design, financing,
capitalize revolving loan funds forconstruction and operation of
predevelopment costs of wastewaterwastewater treatment works.
projects or certain equipmentAuthorizes grants to nonprofits to
replacement costs. Loans to smallcapitalize revolving loan funds for
systems may not exceed $100,000 andpredevelopment costs of wastewater
the loan term may not exceed 10 years.projects or certain equipment
Defines “qualified nonprofit technicalreplacement costs. Authorizes not to
assistance provider.” To the maximumexceed $75 million per year for
extent possible, all states should get aFY2004-2008. Grants to nonprofits
grant under this provision. Requiresshall be awarded competitively to the
grantees to consult with states, to submitextent practicable. (Section 101)
annual reports. Authorizes $25 million
per year for FY2005-2009. (Section 101)
iki/CRS-RL32503SDWA §1442(e) authorizes EPA toAmends §1442(e) to authorize EPA toNo provision.
g/wprovide technical assistance to smallmake grants to private, nonprofit entities
s.orsystems through circuit-rider andto capitalize revolving funds to provide
leakregional technical assistance programs.financing to systems serving 10,000 or
://wikiAssistance may go to nonprofitfewer persons for predevelopment costs,
httporganizations. Authorizes $15 millionshort-term costs incurred for
for each of FY1997-FY2003.replacement equipment, and small
capital projects. Loans to small systems
may not exceed $100,000 and the loan
term may not exceed 10 years. Grant
recipients must submit annual activity
reports to EPA Authorizes $25 million
for each of FY2005-FY2009 for this
program. (Section 208)
State Administrative Costs Set-Aside
CWA §603(d) allows a state to reserveIncreases allowed CWA reservation forIncreases allowed reservation for
up to 4% of a federal capitalizationadministrative costs to 6%. (Section 108)administrative costs to $400,000, or 1/5
grant to cover the reasonable costs ofpercent per year of the current valuation
administering the SRF.of the state’s SRF, whichever is greater.
(Section 303(d))

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
SDWA §1452(g)(2) allows a state toIncreases allowed SDWA reservation forNo provision.
use up to 4% of a federal capitalizationadministrative costs to 6%. (Section
grant to cover the reasonable costs of205(a))
administering programs under §1452
and to provide technical assistance to
public water systems.
§1452(g)(2) also authorizes states toRepeals requirement that states match
use up to another 10% of a federalfunds reserved for these purposes.
capitalization grant to administer public(Section 205(a))
water system supervision programs, to
administer or provide technical
assistance through source water
protection programs, to develop and
implement capacity development
iki/CRS-RL32503strategies, and for operator certificationprograms. For these purposes, states
g/wmust provide a dollar-for-dollar match
s.orof funds.
://wikiReservation of Funds for Planning
httpCWA §604(b) directs states to reserveIncreases reservation of funds forIncreases reservation of funds for
1% of sums allotted under Title VI, orplanning to 2% of allotted sums orplanning to 2% of allotted sums, or
$100,000, whichever is greater, to carry$100,000. (Section 109(3))$100,000, whichever is greater. (Section
out specified planning activities.304(b))
SDWA — No provision.No provision.No provision.
Cross-Cutting Requirements; Labor Standards
CWA §602(b)(6) attaches 16 specificDavis-Bacon prevailing wageTreatment works constructed in whole
statutory requirements to projectsrequirements (CWA §513) shall apply toor in part with funds directly made
funded with a capitalization grant (butprojects that receive funding, in whole oravailable by Title VI capitalization
not to SRF activity made from loanin part, from a state water pollutiongrants and CWA §205(m) shall comply
repayments or other state monies). Allcontrol revolving fund. (Section 102)with the following CWA provisions:
but two are CWA-specific carryoverimplementing a user charge system and
(“equivalency”) requirements from thehaving adequate legal and financial
previous CWA Title II constructioncapability to construct, operate and

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
grant program. Other cross-cuttingmaintain the treatment works (CWA
federal requirements are: applicability§204(b)(1)); restrictions on funding
of the National Environmental Policysewer collector systems (CWA §211);
Act and Davis-Bacon prevailing wagecost-effectiveness and value
provisions for treatment worksengineering review (CWA §218); and
construction. The requirements appliedapplicability of NEPA (CWA §511(c))
to funds provided through FY1994.(Section 302(b)) (Does not extend
Davis-Bacon requirements.)
SDWA SRF provisions (§1452) do notRevises SDWA §1450(e) to expresslyNo provision.
specify federal cross-cuttingapply Davis-Bacon to all construction
requirements, but, as with CWAprojects financed in whole or in part, and
assistance, a number of federal laws,by any form of assistance provided
executive orders, and government-wideunder SDWA (including assistance
policies apply by their own terms toprovided from state drinking water
iki/CRS-RL32503projects and activities receiving federalfinancial assistance, regardless ofSRFs). (Section 202)
g/wwhether a statute authorizing assistance
s.orspecifies that they apply. Several apply
leakonly to the state as a grant recipient.
://wikiAll projects for which the state
httpprovides SDWA SRF assistance in
amounts up to the amount of the
capitalization grant must comply with
cross-cutting laws and requirements;
amounts greater than this are not
subject to cross-cutting requirements.
§1450(e) directs EPA to take such
action as may be needed to assure
compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act.
Requirements for Receipt of Funds
CWA §602(b) specifies a number ofNo additional provision.Amends §602(b) to add a requirement
conditions for receipt of SRFthat, beginning in FY2005, states shall
assistance. (See discussion above onrequire as a condition of receiving
cross-cutting requirements.)CWA SRF assistance that recipients
evaluate the cost and effectiveness of

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
innovative and alternative processes and
techniques and select projects
accordingly; and consider the cost and
effectiveness of alternative management
and financing approaches (including
rate structures, consolidation, public-
private partnerships). Requires use of a
qualification-based selection method in
the awarding of contracts and
subcontracts for funds directly made
available from Title VI capitalization
grants. (Section 302(b))
Adds new §603(d)(1)(E) to require that
recipient of loan assistance develop and
iki/CRS-RL32503implement a fiscal sustainability plan
g/wthat includes an inventory and
s.orevaluation of critical assets of the
leakportion of the treatment works and plan
for maintenance and repair of the
://wikiportion of the facility funded by the
httpSRF. (Section 303(c))
SDWA §1452, like the CWANo additional provision.No provision.
provisions, imposes various
requirements on recipients of SRF
assistance. §1452(f) further requires
that a loan recipient establish a
dedicated source of revenue (or for
privately owned system, demonstrate
adequate security) to repay loan.
Priority System Requirement
CWA §216 authorizes states toAdds new §603(h) to update the priorityRevises §603(g) to update the CWA
determine the priority of specificlist requirement. Requires each state topriority list requirement. Requires
projects to be funded. Identifiesestablish a system for providingstates to establish or update a list of
categories of eligible treatment worksfinancial assistance from the SRF. In it,projects and activities for which SRF

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
projects that states may include onstate shall give more weight toassistance is sought, using a listing
priority list.applications that include inventory ofmethodology each state shall establish.
assets, financing plan, review of optionsThe list may include categories of
for restructuring the treatment works,nonpoint source activities. States shall
review of options other than traditionalseek to achieve the greatest degree of
wastewater approach for the facility, andwater quality improvement and consider
other appropriate information. Defineswhether improvements would be
“restructuring” and “traditionalrealized without SRF assistance.
approach.” State shall biennially publish(Section 305(a))
a summary of projects eligible for
assistance (i.e., treatment works andIf the state does not fund projects and
other projects), including a project’sactivities in the order on the priority list,
priority and anticipated fundingit must provide an explanation of the
schedule. (Section 105)change. (Section 305(b))
iki/CRS-RL32503SDWA §1452(b)(3) requires states todevelop Intended Use Plans for SRFExpands §1452(b)(3) to direct states togive more weight to applications byNo provision.
g/wfunds, giving priority to using funds forcommunity water systems that include
s.orprojects that: address the most seriousan inventory of assets, a schedule for
leakrisks; are needed to ensure compliance,asset replacement, a financing plan, a
://wikiand assist systems most in need on areview of options for restructuring the
httpper household basis. Requires states towater system, a review of options other
publish periodically their list ofthan traditional approach, and other
projects eligible for assistance.information the state may require.
Defines “restructuring” and “traditional
approach.” Requires states to publish at
least biennially a list of projects eligible
for assistance. (Section 205(b))
CWA §205(c)(3) provides a state-by-Revises CWA allotment for SRFCurrent CWA allotment formula shall
state formula for annual allotment ofcapitalization grants for FY2005-2009 apply to SRF capitalization grant
available funds. This formula, in effectMoves towards a target allotment baseddistribution in FY2003 and FY2004.
since 1987, combines population andon needs (meaning, allotment inBeginning in FY2005, appropriated
need factors. No state currentlyaccordance with each state’samounts up to $1.35 billion shall be
receives less than 0.4971% of availableproportional share of total needs) and noallotted under the current allotment
funds (except for territories, whichstate receiving less than 1.0% of totalformula. Amounts that exceed $1.35

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
generally receive smaller shares).funds. Includes complex factors tobillion shall be allotted according to a
moderate potential for substantial loss orneeds-based formula to be developed by
gain of funds under the target, comparedEPA; no minimum state share specified.
with current allotment formula. The(Section 304(a))
result, in general, is that small states
would receive somewhat largerEPA is directed to publish an allotment
percentages under the revised formulaformula based on water quality needs by
than under the current formula, while, inSept. 30, 2004. (Section 304(c))
general, most (but not all) of the states
with large needs would have the same
percentage allotment under the revised
formula as under current law. Also
includes language that would adjust the
states’ percentage allotments if the
appropriated amounts were to increase
iki/CRS-RL32503above current $1.35 billion annual
g/wappropriations. At higher appropriated
s.orlevels (above $3.15 billion), adjustments
leakwould enable the small states to reach
the 1% target minimum, while dollar
://wikiamounts received by the larger states
httpwould still be larger than amounts that
they receive today under the current
Allocates a total of 0.25% of available
funds among Guam, Virgin Islands,
American Samoa, Commonwealth of
Northern Mariana Islands, Micronesia,
Marshall Islands, Palau to be allotted by
EPA. (Section 109)
SDWA §1452(a)(D) requires that fundsNo additional provisions.No provision.

are allotted to the states based on a
formula that reflects the proportional
share of each state’s needs identified in
the most recent needs survey

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
(conducted every four years). The
minimum share for each state and
District of Columbia is 1% of available
funds; territories receive up to 0.33%.
SRF Authorization
CWA §607 authorizes $8.4 billion inAuthorizes CWA SRF capitalizationAuthorizes CWA SRF capitalization
capitalization grants for state revolvinggrants as follows: $3.2 billion in each ofgrants as follows: $2 billion in FY2004,
funds for FY1989-94. (Congress hasFY2005 and FY2006, $3.6 billion in$3 billion in FY2005, $4 billion in
continued to appropriate SRFFY2007, $4 billion in FY2008; and $6FY2006, $5 billion in FY2007, and $6
capitalization grants since FY1994. billion in FY2009, totaling $20 billion. billion in FY2008, totaling $20 billion.
Appropriations for the last five yearsReserves $1 million per year for EPA to(Section 308)
have been $1.35 billion per year.)pay the costs of conducting needs
surveys. (Section 110)
iki/CRS-RL32503SDWA §1452(m) authorizes SRFAuthorizes SDWA SRF capitalizationNo provision.
g/wcapitalization grants: $599 million forgrants as follows: $1.5 billion in
s.orFY1994, and $1 billion for each ofFY2005; $2 billion in each of FY2006
leakFY1995-FY2003, totaling $9.59and FY2007; $3.5 billion in FY2008;
billion.and $6 billion in FY2009, totaling $15
://wikibillion. Reserves $1 million per year to
httppay the costs of conducting needs
surveys. (Section 209)
Cross-Collateralization between CWA and SDWA SRFs
CWA — No existing provision, butAdds new §603(j) to permit a state toNo comparable provision.
FY1998 and FY1999 EPAtransfer up to 33% of a CWA
appropriation laws allow states tocapitalization grant to its SDWA SRF
combine assets of CWA and SDWAand vice versa. (Section 106)
SRFs as security for bond issues to
enhance the lending capacity of one or
both SRFs.
§302 of the SDWA Amendments ofIncorporates this authority into SDWANo provision.

1996 (P.L. 104-182) authorized a state,under new §1452(g)(5).

prior to FY2002, to transfer as much as(Section 205(a))
33% of the SDWA SRF capitalization

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
grant to the CWA SRF or an equivalent
amount from the CWA SRF to the
SRF Set-Aside for Indian Programs
CWA §518 authorizes the EPAIncreases CWA funds reserved forIncreases CWA funds reserved for
Administrator to reserve 0.5% of fundsIndian Tribes to 1.5% of funds availableIndian Tribes to not less than 0.5% or
appropriated under §207 for developingunder Title VI. (Section 108)more than 1.5% of funds available
waste treatment management plans andunder §207. Funds are to be used for
construction of sewage treatment worksprojects to assist Indian tribes, former
to serve Indian tribes. AppropriationsIndian reservations in Oklahoma, and
laws since FY2001 have reserved 1.5%Alaska Native villages. (Section 402)
of CWA SRF appropriated funds for
Indian tribes.
iki/CRS-RL32503SDWA §1452(i) authorizes EPA toNo additional provisions.No provision.
g/wreserve 1.5% of the SRF appropriation
s.orfor grants to Indian Tribes and Alaska
leakNative villages.
://wikiSRF Review Process — Assistance for Accessing the SRF
CWA — No existing provision.Directs the EPA Administrator toAdds new §607 that directs EPA to
SDWA — No existing provision.identify ways to streamline and improveassist states in establishing simplified
the application and review process forprocedures for treatment works to
CWA SRF and SDWA SRF assistanceobtain CWA SRF assistance and shall
and to submit a report to Congress. publish a manual to assist systems in
(Section 304)obtaining assistance. (Section 307)
Reports: Needs Surveys
CWA §516(b)(1) directs EPA toModifies needs survey to every fourNo comparable provision.
conduct a survey of needed publiclyyears. (Section 111)
owned treatment works every two
SDWA §1452(h) directs EPA toNo additional provisions.No provision.

conduct a survey of water system

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
capital improvement needs survey and
report to Congress every four years. On
the same schedule, §1452(i) directs
EPA to conduct needs surveys of
drinking water facilities to serve Indian
Removal of Lead from Drinking Water in Schools
SDWA §1464(d) directs states toInserts new §1464(d) requiring theNo comparable provision, but see H.R.
establish programs to assist localAdministrator to establish a program to4268.
educational agencies to test for andprovide grants to states to assist in
remedy lead contamination in drinkingpaying, or to provide reimbursement for,
water at schools, and requires schoolsthe costs incurred by local educational
to make test results available and toagencies in testing for, remediating , and
notify parents, teachers and others ofinforming students, parents, teachers,
iki/CRS-RL32503the availability of test results. and employees about lead contamination
g/win drinking water at schools within their
s.or(In 1996, the U.S. Court of Appeals forjurisdiction.
leakthe Fifth Circuit ruled that the
://wikirequirements in §1464(d) that statesestablish programs violate the 10th
httpAmendment and are unconstitutional.
ACORN v. Edwards, 81 F .3d 1387 (5th
Cir. 1996).)
§1465(a) directs EPA to make grants to
states to carry out §1464 and §1465(b)
requires states to use grants to test for,
and remediate, lead contamination in
school drinking water.
§1465(a) authorizes EPA to use up toNew §1464(d) authorizes EPA to use up

5% to pay administrative expenses.to 5% to pay administrative expenses.

§1465(c) authorized $30 million forNew §1464(d) authorizes $40 million for
each of FY1989-FY1991 for grants toeach of FY2005-FY2008;
states.(Section 210(a))

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
Lead Contamination in Drinking Water in the District of Columbia
SDWA — §1465(a) directs theNew §1465(a) authorizes theNo comparable provision.
Administrator to make grants to statesAdministrator to provide a $20 million
to carry out §1464 (see above).grant to the District of Columbia to
address lead contamination in the local
water supply. Funds may be used to
assess infrastructure, test water supplies
distribute filters, evaluate chemical
additive, replace pipes, and evaluate and
improve public communication.
Authorizes to be appropriated to carry
out this section $20 million.
§1465(b) requires that grants be usedNew §1465(b) directs the Administrator
by states to test for, and remediate, leadto contract with the National Academy
iki/CRS-RL32503contamination in school drinking water.of Sciences (NAS) to conduct a study
g/wAuthorized EPA to use up to 5% to paythat (1) evaluates compliance by the
s.oradministrative expenses.District of Columbia Water and Sewer
leakAuthority with lead in drinking waster
://wikiregulations, and the potential causes oflead in the local water supply; and (2)
httpassess, from a cross-section of cities
with lead service lines, the extent to
which those cities exceeded the lead
action level, and the potential causes of
the exceedences. Not later than one year
after enactment, the NAS must submit a
report to the House Energy and
Commerce Committee and the Senate
Environment and Public Works
Committee. Authorizes $2 million for
the study. (Section 210(b))

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
Small Public Water System Grant Program

1. Establishment of Small System Grant(Sections 211 and 212 of S. 2550 eachNo comparable provision.

Programadd new SDWA Part G and contain
nearly identical provisions)
CWA — Not applicable.Amends SDWA to establish within EPA
SDWA — No provision.a small public water system assistance
program for eligible entities within states
and areas governed by Indian Tribes.
(Section 211 and Section 212)

2. DefinitionsNew SDWA §1471 defines for Part G:No comparable provision.

“eligible activity” to mean an activity
needed to ensure compliance with
drinking water regulations, including
source water protection and excluding
iki/CRS-RL32503any activity to increase the population
g/wserved by a system (unless needed for
s.orcompliance or to serve a population not
leakserved by a safe public water system);
://wiki“eligible entity” means a small publicwater system that, based on affordability
httpcriteria, serves a disadvantaged
community or a community that would
otherwise become disadvantaged as a
result of carrying out an eligible activity,
and a system that would incur more than
$3 million in costs in complying with
regulations and is, or would become, a
disadvantaged community; “small public
water system” includes community and
non-community water systems that serve
populations of 15,000 or fewer persons.
(Section 211 and Section 212)

3. Program establishment§1472(a) directs EPA to establish aNo comparable provision.

small system grant program by July 1,

2006. (Section 211 and Section 212)

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560

4. Program priorities§1472(b) directs EPA to provide grantsNo comparable provision.

to eligible systems for activities that:
address the most serious health risk from
lack of compliance; are needed to ensure
compliance; and assist communities
most in need, based on median
household income, under affordability
criteria established by the state (or EPA
for entities in Tribal areas). EPA must
also consider giving priority to activities
carried out by communities that form
management cooperatives.
For entities in Tribal areas, §1472(e)(2)
requires EPA and the Indian Health
Service to develop an annual list of
iki/CRS-RL32503eligible activities based on the above
g/wpriorities. (Section 211 and Section 212)
s.or5. Technical assistance§1472(d) requires EPA to use at leastNo comparable provision.
leak1.5% of the available funds to provide
://wikigrants to nonprofit technical assistance
httporganizations to be used to assist eligible
entities in: assessing needs; identifying
additional funding sources to meet cost-
sharing requirements; and planning,
implementing and maintaining activities
that receive funding. Entities may use no
more than 5% of their grant for such
technical assistance; §1472(e)(4)
imposes a similar 5% limit for entities
governed by Indian Tribes.
(Section 211 and Section 212)

6. Grants for Indian Tribes§1472(e) Requires EPA to use at leastNo comparable provision.

3% of funds available each year to
provide grants to eligible entities located
in areas governed by Indian Tribes.
(Section 211 and Section 212)

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560

7. Limitations on receipt of funds(Sections 211 and 212 of S. 2550 No comparable provision.

contain different provisions.)
As provided in Section 211:
§1472(f) provides that eligible entities
may receive grants only: 1) if EPA
determines that the grant will aid
compliance; 2) to restructure or
consolidate to achieve compliance; or if
restructuring is not feasible, EPA
determines that the entity has made a
good faith effort to comply and is
adhering to an enforceable compliance
schedule; and 3) if EPA determines that
an entity lacks the technical, managerial,
operations, maintenance, or financial
iki/CRS-RL32503capacity to ensure compliance, and the
g/wentity agrees to make changes in
s.oroperations, and EPA determines that the
leakmeasures are needed to ensure
compliance capacity over the long term.
httpAs provided in Section 212:
§1472(f) generally provides that grant
may not be provided to entities that lack
the technical, managerial, operations,
maintenance, or financial capacity to
ensure compliance, or are in significant
noncompliance with a drinking water
regulation. The exception to this
prohibition allows such entities to
receive a grant if the conditions above
are met. Before providing assistance to
an entity that is in significant
noncompliance, EPA must assess
whether the entity has the capacity to
comply with SDWA regulations.

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560

8. Cost share§1472(g) provides that the share of theNo comparable provision.

total cost of an activity funded by a grant
generally may not exceed 80%; EPA
may waive this requirement, partially or
completely, as needed.
(Section 211 and Section 212)

9. Reports§1473 requires EPA to report annually,No comparable provision.

for FY2006-2010, to the Senate
Committee on Environment and Public
Works and the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce. The reports must
list the activities receiving funds,
identify the number and amounts of
grants awarded and the grant recipients.
iki/CRS-RL32503(Section 211 and Section 212)
g/w10. Authorization of Appropriations (Sections 211 and 212 of S. 2550No comparable provision.
s.orcontain different provisions.)
leak§1474 authorizes for this program $200
://wikimillion for each of FY2005-FY2009.(Section 211)
§1474 authorizes for this program $1
billion for each of FY2008-2011.
(Section 212)
Pilot Program for Alternative Water Source Projects
CWA §220 authorizes EPA to establishExtends authorization at $25 million perExtends authorization without other
a pilot program of grants for alternativeyear for FY2005-2007. (Section 112)modification through FY2008. (Section
water source projects to meet critical204)

water supply needs. Authorizes
appropriations of $75 million annually
for FY2002-2004.

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
Sewer Overflow Grants
CWA §221 authorizes $750 millionRevises §221, adding stormwater runoffAuthorizes $250 million per year for
annually in FY2002-2003 for grants forprojects. Authorizes to be appropriatedsewer overflow grants for FY2005-2008
municipal combined sewer overflow$250 million per year for FY2005-2009.and such sums as necessary for FY2004.
and sanitary sewer overflow projects. (Section 113)Specifies allocation criteria for FY2004
Financially distressed communities are(same as for FY2002 in current
to have priority. Grants are onlyprovision) and FY2005 and beyond
available in years in which Title VI(based on each state’s proportional need
(SRF) funds are at least $1.35 billion.for overflow control projects). Funded
projects shall generally conform to
requirements applicable to SRF-funded
projects. (Section 205) (Also see H.R.
784, similar legislation approved by
House Transportation and Infrastructure
iki/CRS-RL32503Committee July 21, 2004.)
g/wWatershed Pilot Projects
leakCWA §121, Wet Weather WatershedMakes a technical correction toReauthorizes existing grants program at
Pilot Projects, authorized $45 millionredesignate this provision as CWA §122. $20 million per year for FY2004-2008.
://wikifor FY2002-2004 for technical(Section 114)Grants may be used for watershed
httpassistance and grants to municipalitiespartnerships to address nonpoint sources
for pilot projects to manage wetof pollution to reduce adverse impacts
weather discharges and to demonstrateon water quality. Changes reporting
stormwater management technologies.requirement from five years after
(When enacted in P.L. 106-554, thisenactment to seven years. Makes a
provision was one of two that weretechnical correction to redesignate this
designated as §121.) provision as CWA §122. (Section 103)
National Estuary Program
CWA §320 authorizes the NationalReauthorizes grants at $35 million perNo comparable provision, but see H.R.
Estuary Program. Governors mayyear (no change) for FY2006-FY2010.4731, similar legislation approved by
nominate estuaries and request a(Section 307)House Transportation and Infrastructure
management conference to develop aCommittee July 21, 2004.

comprehensive conservation and
management plan (CCMP) for the

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
estuary. Authorizes grants for
development and implementation of
Sewage Control Technology Grant Program
CWA — No existing provision.Adds new §701 to the CWA. DirectsNo comparable provision.
EPA to establish a competitive program
of grants to states and municipalities to
upgrade nutrient removal technologies of
wastewater treatment works with
permitted design capacity to treat
500,000 gallons or more of wastewater
per day and are located in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. Federal
share of project costs shall not exceed
iki/CRS-RL3250355%. Authorizes $100 million annually
g/wfor FY2005-2009. (Section 308) (Also
s.orsee S. 827/H.R. 568, similar legislation.)
Demonstration Program for Water Quality Enhancement and Management
httpCWA — No existing provision.Directs EPA to establish a nationwideNo comparable provision.

SDWA — No existing provision.demonstration program of 10 projects
per year to promote innovations in
technology and alternative approaches to
water quality management or water
supply and reduce municipalities’ costs
to comply with the CWA and SDWA.
Specifies criteria for selection of
municipalities to carry out projects and
types of projects relating to excessive
nutrient growth, lack of alternative water
supply, nonpoint source pollution, sewer
overflows, problems with naturally
occurring constituents, or new
approaches to water treatment,
distribution and collection systems, and

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
others. Municipalities applying for
grants shall submit a plan that meet
specified criteria. Non-federal share of
project costs shall be at least 20%.
Authorizes $20 million per year for
Also directs EPA to carry out a grant
program for research and development
on innovative and alternative
technologies for water quality or
drinking water supply; authorizes $20
million per year for FY2005-2009.
(Section 302)
iki/CRS-RL32503Southeast Colorado Safe Drinking Water Supply
g/wSDWA — No existing provision.Directs the EPA Administrator to make aNo provision.
s.orgrant to the Southeast Colorado Water
leakActivity Enterprise to construct a water
://wikitransmission line from the PuebloReservoir to the city of Lamar, CO.
httpAuthorizes for this purpose $85 million
for the period of FY2005-FY2010.
(Section 305)
Environmental Finance Centers
CWA — No existing provision.No provision.No provision.
SDWA §1420(g) requires EPA toAuthorizes $2 million for each ofNo provision.

provide initial funding for university-FY2005-FY2009 to implement this
based environmental finance centers toprogram.
provide technical assistance to state(Section 201)
and local officials in developing the
financial and managerial capacity of
public water systems. Directs EPA to
establish a national public water system

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
capacity development clearinghouse.
Authorizes $1.5 million for each of
FY1997-FY2003 for this program.
1. State management assistanceNo additional provision.Authorizes $250 million per year for
FY2003-2008 for CWA §106. (Section
CWA §106 authorizes grants to states102)
to assist management of state water
pollution control programs.
SDWA §1443 authorizes $100 millionNo additional provision.No provision.
for each of FY1997-FY2003 for grants
to states to administer public water
iki/CRS-RL32503system supervision programs.
s.or2. Annual report and federal oversightNo additional provision.Requires that the annual report include
leakidentification of the eligible purpose for
CWA §606(d) requires states towhich SRF assistance was provided.
://wikiprovide an annual report on achieving(Section 306(a))
httpthe goals and objectives of its Intended
Use Plan.
CWA §606(e) requires EPA to conductAuthorizes EPA to allow a state to
annual oversight review of a state’scertify its compliance with CWA Title
Intended Use Plan.VI for purposes of this review. (Section


SDWA §1452(g) requires states toNo additional provision.No provision.

submit a report every two years to EPA
on its SRF activities and related audits;
requires EPA to periodically audit all
state loan funds.
SDWA §1452(r) directs EPA to assess
the effectiveness of SRFs through
FY2001 and report to Congress.

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
3. Sewage collection systemsNo additional provision.Amends §211. Updates limits on sewer
collector systems to those in systems or
CWA §211 limits Title II assistance forcommunities in existence as of Jan. 1,
replacement or major rehabilitation of2003. Projects are to address adverse
existing sewage collection systems orenvironmental conditions existing on
for new collector systems in an existingthe date of enactment of this provision.
community.(Section 201)
4. Cost-effectivenessNo provision.Modifies §218 to delete specification of
devices and systems selected for an
CWA §218 expresses the policy ofoverall treatment system. (Section 203)
Congress regarding financial assistance
for waste treatment and management
systems that are the most economical
and cost-effective combination of
iki/CRS-RL32503treatment works to meet requirementsof the act, including water conservation
leak5. Regulatory authority not providedNo provision.Nothing in this act may be construed as
://wikiCWA — No existing provision.providing EPA with authority to issueregulations. (Section 403)
httpSDWA — No existing provision.
Cost of Service Study
CWA — No existing provision.Directs the National Academy ofNo comparable provision.

SDWA — No existing provision.Sciences to prepare a study of the means
by which public water systems and
treatment works meet costs associated
with operation, maintenance, capital
replacement, and regulatory
requirements. The study shall address
issues including affordability and
identification and characterization of
disadvantaged communities. The study
shall be completed within two years.
(Section 303)

Current LawS. 2550H.R. 1560
Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination
CWA — No existing provision.Requires the U.S. Geological Survey, noNo comparable provision.
SDWA — No existing provision.later than one year after enactment, to
conduct a nationwide assessment of sites
contaminated with perchlorate and the
geological conditions at those sites, and
to report the results to Congress.
(Section 306)
Special Water Resources Study
Water Resources Planning Act of 1965Amends §101 of the Water ResourcesNo comparable provision.

established a Cabinet-level WaterPlanning Act to add the Secretary of
Resources Council and also establishedHomeland Security to the Water
River Basin Commissions. TheResources Council. Directs the Council
iki/CRS-RL32503Council was empowered to maintain ato carry out a Special Water Resources
g/wcontinuing assessment of the adequacyStudy to project future water supply and
s.orof water supplies in each region of thedemand, to develop recommendations
leakU.S. In addition, the Council wasfor a comprehensive water strategy, to
mandated to establish principles andevaluate federal water programs and
://wikistandards for federal participants in thesubmit recommendations to eliminate
httppreparation of river basin plans and indiscrepancies and duplication among
evaluating federal water projects. programs, and develop and make
Authorization for the Council stillavailable water planning models to
exists (42 U.S.C. §1962a), butreduce water resource conflicts. Calls
President Reagan disbanded thefor interim reports and a final report not
Council in 1983, and there have beenlater than three years after the first
no appropriations since then. meeting of the Council following
enactment. Authorizes $9 million for
CWA — No existing provision.FY2005 to carry out this study. (Section
SDWA — No existing provision.309)