Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
104th Congress                                            Rept. 104-632
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                      Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________


 
               SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1996

_______________________________________________________________________


                 June 24, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Bliley, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3604]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 3604) to amend title XIV of the Public Health Service Act 
(the ``Safe Drinking Water Act'') and for other purposes, 
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 
amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
The Amendment....................................................     2
Purpose and Summary..............................................     4
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     6
Hearings.........................................................    18
Committee Consideration..........................................    19
Rollcall Votes...................................................    19
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    20
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.....................    20
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................    20
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    20
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................    20
Inflationary Impact Statement....................................    25
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    25
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    25
Agency Views.....................................................    60
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    62
Additional Views.................................................   128
Appendix.........................................................   133

                               Amendment

  The amendments (stated in terms of the page and line numbers 
of the introduced bill) are as follows:
  Page 10, beginning in line 16, strike section 103 and insert:

SEC. 103. LIMITED ALTERNATIVE TO FILTRATION.

  Section 1412(b)(7)(C) is amended by adding the following 
after clause (iv):
                          ``(v) As an additional alternative to 
                        the regulations promulgated pursuant to 
                        clauses (i) and (iii), including the 
                        criteria for avoiding filtration 
                        contained in CFR 141.71, a State 
                        exercising primary enforcement 
                        responsibility for public water systems 
                        may, on a case-by-case basis, and after 
                        notice and opportunity for public 
                        comment, establish treatment 
                        requirements as an alternative to 
                        filtration in the case of systems 
                        having uninhabited, undeveloped 
                        watersheds in consolidated ownership, 
                        and having control over access to, and 
                        activities in, those watersheds, if the 
                        State determines (and the Administrator 
                        concurs) that the quality of the source 
                        water and the alternative treatment 
                        requirements established by the State 
                        ensure greater removal or inactivation 
                        efficiencies of pathogenic organisms 
                        for which national primary drinking 
                        water regulations have been promulgated 
                        or that are of public health concern 
                        than would be achieved by the 
                        combination of filtration and chlorine 
                        disinfection (in compliance with 
                        paragraph (8)).''.
  Page 20, line 1, strike ``in carrying out this title''.
  Page 27, after line 14, insert the following new clause:
                          ``(vi) There are authorized to be 
                        appropriated $2,000,000 for each of 
                        fiscal years 1997 through 2001 for the 
                        studies required by this paragraph.
  Page 41, line 16, strike ``1997'' and insert ``1998''.
  Page 42, line 10, strike ``1997'' and insert ``1998''.
  Page 43, line 13 strike ``system to'' and all that follows 
down to ``mail'' in line 17 and insert ``system to''.
  Page 44, line 4, strike ``a'' and insert ``an Environmental 
Protection Agency'' before ``toll-free''.
  Page 46, lines 11 and 16, strike ``(ii)''.
  Page 46, strike lines 20 and 21 and insert:
                          ``(iii) publish the report referred 
                        to in subparagraph (A) annually in one 
                        or more local newspapers serving the 
                        area in which customers of the system 
                        are located.
  Page 55, line 9, strike both commas.
  Page 76, line 10, after ``nants'' insert ``selected by the 
State in its discretion''.
  Page 76, lines 11 and 12, strike ``to present a substantial 
threat'' and insert ``may present a threat''.
  Page 79, lines 18, 19, 24, and 25, after ``subsection (l)'' 
each place it appears, insert ``or section 1418(b)''.
  Page 86, after line 21, insert:
          (2) In subsection (b), by striking the period at the 
        end of paragraph (2) and inserting ``; or'' and by 
        adding the following new paragraph after paragraph (2):
          ``(3) under subsection (a)(3) prior to 60 days after 
        the plaintiff has given notice of such action to the 
        Attorney General and to the Federal agency.''.
  Page 86, line 19, strike ``1 year'' and insert ``18 months''.
  Page 86, line 21, strike ``section 1447(d)'' and insert 
``section 1429(b)''.
  Page 89, line 19, strike ``in accordance with section 
1428(c)'' and insert ``within 6 months after receipt of notice 
of disapproval''.
  Page 90, line 18, strike ``In paragraph (7)'' and all that 
follows through ``the purpose'' on line 19, and insert 
``Paragraph (7) is amended to read as follows:
          `(7) Authorization.--For the purpose' ''.
  Page 90, line 22, strike ``1994'' and insert ``1997''.
  Page 95, line 20, strike ``specified in the'' and all that 
follows through ``monitoring framework'' on line 21.
  Page 95, line 22, strike ``and'' and insert ``set forth in''.
  Page 96, line 16, after ``alternative'' insert 
``monitoring''.
  Page 96, line 17, strike ``to the standardized monitoring 
framework'' and insert ``under paragraph (1) of this 
subsection''.
  Page 96, line 19, strike ``framework'' and insert 
``guidelines''.
  Page 98, line 17, strike ``the standard monitoring'' and all 
that follows through ``and under'' on line 18.
  Page 100, line 25, strike ``subparagraph (G)'' and insert 
``subparagraph (H)''.
  Page 101, line 23, strike ``subsection (g)'' and insert 
``subsection (i)''.
  Page 103, line 15, strike ``(1)'' and insert ``(3)''.
  Page 108, line 23, strike ``No portion of funds authorized to 
be'' and all that follows through ``this section or'' in line 
24 and insert ``No funds''.
  Page 111, lines 11 and 15, strike ``unless the State has 
met'' and insert ``if the State has not met''.
  Page 116, line 22, strike ``of the State or of the United 
States''.
  Page 118, line 20, strike ``subsection (a)'' and insert 
``this section''.
  Page 119, line 16, after ``grams'' insert ``which receive 
grants''.
  Page 126, line 7, strike ``by section 1442'' and insert ``by 
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996''.
  Page 133, line 14, after the first period insert ``With the 
exception of Biomedical research, nothing in this Act shall 
affect or modify any authorization for research and development 
under this Act or any other provision of law.''.
  Page 134, line 15, after ``system'' insert ``, including 
projects necessary to comply with the criteria for avoiding 
filtration contained in 40 CFR 141.71''.
  Page 134, line 19, strike ``and shall include'' and all that 
follows through ``organizations'' on page 135, line 7.
  Page 135, line 9, strike ``these''.
  Page 135, lines 22 and 23, strike ``such sums as are 
necessary''.
  Page 135, line 24, strike ``including''.
  Page 136, line 2, strike ``(2)'' and insert ``(1)''.
  Page 143, line 1, strike ``Funding.--The'' insert 
``Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated for each of 
the fiscal years 1997 through 2001, $3,000,000 to carry out 
this section. To the extent funds under this section are not 
fully appropriated, the''.
  Page 143, line 4, strike `this section and'' and insert 
``this section. The Administrator''.
  Page 143, line 6, strike ``There are'' and all that follows 
down through line 8.
  Page 145, strike ``(A) In General.--''.
  Page 145 and 146, strike clauses (i), (iv), (v), and (vi) and 
redesignate the remaining clauses accordingly.
  Page 147, strike lines 3 through 11.
  Page 150, line 21, after ``is'' insert ``not later than''.

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 3604 amends Title XIV of the Public Health Service Act 
(generally known as the ``Safe Drinking Water Act'' and 
hereinafter referred to as ``the Act'') to provide for: (1) 
revisions to the procedures, process, and criteria for 
regulating contaminants in drinking water to protect the public 
health; (2) improvements in existing enforcement provisions; 
(3) provisions to promote cost-effectiveness in new drinking 
water regulations; (4) increased flexibility for water 
suppliers where consistent with public health; (5) special 
programs to help small public water systems meet the 
requirements of the Act; (6) new programs to promote the proper 
operation of public water system; (7) substantial new Federal 
financial and technical assistance to help water suppliers meet 
the requirements of the Act and to help States in carrying out 
programs under the Act; (8) refinements and new programs to 
improve protection of public health from drinking water 
contamination. A brief summary of the major provisions follows:
    Selection of New Contaminants. The bill eliminates the ``25 
every 3 years'' mandate and gives the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) the authority to decide which contaminants to 
regulate based on several criteria, including whether the 
contaminants ``present the greatest public health concern.''
    Standard-Setting. The bill requires EPA to publish an 
analysis of health risk reduction benefits and costs associated 
with new or revised national drinking water standards. The bill 
also provides the Administrator with the authority to use the 
cost-benefit analysis to set a level that maximizes health risk 
reduction benefits at a cost that is justified by the benefits 
based on the best-available, peer-reviewed science.
    Disinfectant By-Products (DBPs). The bill would allow for 
``risk-risk'' analysis to be applied to the DBP rulemaking and 
allow the EPA in Stage II to use the same considerations used 
in the Stage I rulemaking (e.g., risk, cost, affordability, 
feasible technology, and health benefits).
    Other Contaminants. Arsenic. The bill requires EPA to study 
the health risks associated with exposure to low levels of 
arsenic and promulgate a national drinking water standard by 
January 1, 2001. Radon. The bill requires that EPA's current 
radon proposal (which would set a standard of 300 picocuries/
liter) be withdrawn and requires that EPA promulgate a radon 
standard under the new standard setting provisions established 
by the bill, taking into account risks from other sources of 
radon in the environment. Sulfate. The bill would require 
additional study to determine a reliable dose-response level 
for sulfate and allow EPA to promulgate a national standard.
    Public Notification. The bill modifies the public 
notification requirements of current law, reducing from 14 days 
to 24 hours the time that a public water system has to notify 
the public of violations which have the potential to have 
serious adverse effects on human health.
    Consumer Right-To-Know. The bill requires an annual report 
to consumers on the source of water provided, contaminant 
levels, and brief statements on health concerns.
    State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF). The bill creates a State 
revolving loan fund (SRF) for drinking water systems 
(authorized at $1 billion per year through Fiscal Year 2003). 
SRF funds are to be used for providing grants and loans to 
''significantly further the health protection objectives'' of 
the Act.
    Source Water Assessment. The bill creates a new program 
under which States exerting primacy must conduct an assessment 
of source water areas and, to the extent practical, identify 
the origins of any contaminants within each delineated area.
    Monitoring Flexibility. The bill provides for monitoring 
relief where a public water system can show that a contaminant 
is not present in a drinking water supply or, if present, it is 
reliably and consistently below national drinking water 
standards.
    Small System Technology. The bill requires that EPA 
identify feasible technologies that are available for small 
public water systems serving between 25 and 10,000 people. The 
bill separately provides $10,000,000 per year for technical 
assistance.
    Capacity Development. States must ensure that new and 
existing water systems have the technical, financial, and 
managerial capacity to comply with the Act.
    Operator Certification. The bill requires EPA to promulgate 
regulations to specify minimum standards for operator 
certification, but presumes that preexisting State programs are 
substantially equivalent to EPA regulations.
    Variances and Exemptions. The bill provides for a variance 
from a drinking water standard for systems serving under 3,300 
people on the condition that the system install the best 
available affordable technology (BAAT). The bill also requires 
a review of a system's technical, financial, and managerial 
capabilities before issuing an exemption.
    Bottled Water. The bill requires the promulgation of 
bottled water standards no less protective of public health 
than standards applied to public water systems.
    Estrogenic Substances Screening Program. The bill adopts 
the D'Amato amendment with modifications to improve the 
``workability'' of the measure. The bill requires the 
Administrator of EPA (the Administrator), within 2 years, to 
develop a validated screening program to determine whether 
substances may have an effect in humans that is similar to the 
effect produced by naturally occurring estrogen and authorizes 
appropriate action under existing law.
    The Committee stresses that the purpose of the legislation 
is to help make more effective and more cost-effective Federal 
regulation of drinking water and to help small communities pay 
for improvements to their public water systems, while ensuring 
that health protections are maintained or improved. The bill 
does not amend or affect the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act, provide new research and development authorities, or 
change existing research and development authorities.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

                               background

    The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) has developed as a 
partnership between States, localities, and the Federal 
government. The responsibility for providing safe drinking 
water was first and primarily a State and local responsibility. 
The first State board of health was established in 
Massachusetts in 1869, largely in response to serious public 
health risks from drinking water. For example, during the 
decade 1880-1890, the average typhoid mortality for populations 
in 47 American cities was 58 per 100,000. Through the 
development and implementation of various treatment 
technologies, including disinfection, the rate for an expanded 
list of 78 cities had fallen to 20.5 per 100,000 by 1910. In 
1938, the rate had fallen further to 0.67 deaths per 100,000 
population.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ G. William Page, ``Water and Health,'' Public Health and the 
Environment: The United States Experience, at 110 (Michael R. 
Greenberg, PH.D. ed., 1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Federal government first became involved in the 
provision of safe drinking water with the establishment of the 
Public Health Service Hygienic Laboratory in 1901.\2\ The 
purpose of the laboratory was to investigate infectious and 
contagious diseases. In 1914, the U.S. Public Health Service, 
under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act, promulgated 
16 Drinking Water Standards (DWSs) including arsenic, copper, 
lead, selenium, and total dissolved solids. The DWSs applied 
only to water purveyed to customers of interstate carriers. 
Federal enforcement authority was limited only to those systems 
from which interstate carriers obtained potable water 
(approximately 650 of 30,000 systems).\3\ However, States and 
municipalities began to follow the DWSs, and courts began to 
recognize the DWSs as the legal standard for safe drinking 
water. The DWSs were revised in 1925, 1946 and 1962.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Act of March 3, 1901, ch. 31 Stat. 1137 (1901).
    \3\ Thomas J. Douglas, ``Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974--History 
and Critique,'' Environmental Affairs, vol. 5:501, n.28 (1976).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1969, the Public Health Service undertook a 
comprehensive survey of the quality of drinking water provided 
to the American public. The survey, published in 1970 as the 
Community Water Supply Study (CWSS),\4\ found that of the 969 
water systems surveyed, only 59 percent were delivering water 
that satisfied all the DWSs.\5\ The study also found that 56 
percent of the water treatment facilities had a major physical 
deficiency.\6\ The results of the CWSS made it clear that 
States were not able to provide the necessary financial and 
technical assistance to public water systems to ensure safe 
drinking water.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Id. note 3, at 501.
    \5\ Id. note 39, at 507.
    \6\ Id. note 41, at 507.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974

    In 1970, Congress transferred responsibility for 
implementation and enforcement of the DWSs from the Public 
Health Service to the newly created Environmental Protection 
Agency. On December 17, 1974, President Gerald Ford signed into 
law the Safe Drinking Water Act. The purpose of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act was to assure that the water supply systems 
serving the public meet minimum national standards to protect 
consumers from harmful contaminants. The Act directed EPA to 
develop the following: (1) ``national primary drinking water 
regulations'' (NPDWRs) that establish numerical ``maximum 
contaminant levels'' (MCLs) or ``treatment techniques;'' (2) 
underground injection control regulations to protect 
underground sources of drinking water; and (3) groundwater 
protection grant programs for the administration of sole source 
aquifer demonstration projects and wellhead protection area 
programs. The Act permitted these activities to be implemented 
by the States.

Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974

    The Safe Drinking Water Act was amended in 1977, 1979, and 
1980. The 1977 amendments to the Act were adopted to provide 
continuing, increasing assistance to States, and to permit more 
time for States to achieve primary enforcement responsibility. 
Specifically, the amendments extended authorization for two 
additional years, promoted training of drinking water 
personnel, and provided for additional studies.
    The 1979 amendments to the Act authorized appropriations 
for three fiscal years for the following EPA activities: 
abatement and control of contamination of drinking water 
sources; assistance to States in creating and sustaining public 
water systems supervision programs; and creation and 
maintenance of underground water source protection programs.
    In 1980, Congress amended the Act to adjust deadlines, to 
improve Federal-State coordination, or to modify program 
coverage. Specifically, these amendments provided for the 
following: extended for three years the State's power to grant 
temporary case-by-case exemptions from the interim primary 
drinking water regulations; proposed an alternative means for 
States to receive primary enforcement authority to regulate 
underground injection related to oil and gas production and 
recovery; deleted the underground storage of natural gas from 
the underground injection program; authorized EPA to make 
grants to a single public water system for the purpose of 
developing and demonstrating a new or improved means of meeting 
State turbidity standards that are stricter than standards 
under the Federal SDWA; and made various technical changes in 
the Act.

The 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act

    Twelve years after its enactment, the Safe Drinking Water 
Act had not been fully implemented. Members of Congress were 
especially critical of EPA's failure to establish regulations 
for new contaminants. For example, from 1974 to 1986, only 1 of 
22 interim regulations had been revised and no new regulations 
had been promulgated since 1976.
    In 1986, Congress adopted amendments to the Safe Drinking 
Water Act. President Reagan signed these amendments into law on 
June 19, 1986.
    The 1986 amendments made significant changes to the Act. 
The 1986 amendments included the following:
          Required EPA to establish national primary drinking 
        water regulations for a specified list of 83 
        contaminants within three years (by June 1989);
          Directed EPA to issue regulations for at least 25 
        additional contaminants every three years thereafter;
          Required EPA to review every contaminant regulation 
        at least once every three years;
          Directed EPA to mandate filtration and disinfection, 
        or steps equally protective of water supplies, as 
        appropriate treatment techniques for all systems to 
        remove contaminants including contaminants for which 
        national standards had not been set;
          Authorized programs to provide technical and 
        financial assistance to small systems for conducting 
        monitoring and implementing treatment techniques;
        Provided new programs to protect groundwater resources;
          Directed EPA to promulgate rules for monitoring wells 
        that inject wastes below a drinking water source; and
          Strengthened EPA's enforcement authority for 
        violations of both drinking water standards and 
        underground injection control requirements by adding 
        administrative enforcement orders and penalties, 
        increasing civil penalties, and simplifying the process 
        EPA used to take enforcement action where States with 
        primary enforcement responsibility have failed to take 
        appropriate action.
    The 1986 amendments represent the last time that the SDWA 
was substantially amended and reauthorized.

The 1988 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act

    The SDWA was most recently amended in 1988 with the 
enactment of the Lead Contamination Control Act which added a 
new Part F to the SDWA. Part F was intended to reduce exposure 
to lead in drinking water by requiring the recall of lead-lined 
water coolers, and requiring EPA to issue a guidance document 
and testing protocol to assist schools and day care centers in 
identifying and correcting lead contamination in school 
drinking water. However, this Act did not affect the 
establishment of drinking water standards for public water 
systems.

                        need for the legislation

    Over the past several years, the Committee has received 
numerous reports and voluminous testimony supporting the need 
for: a more streamlined and flexible approach to controlling 
drinking water contamination consistent with continued 
protection of the public health; flexibility in monitoring of 
contaminants; new financial assistance to help State and local 
governments comply with the requirements of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act; better training of public water system operators; 
and attention to whether public water systems have the capacity 
to operate in compliance with the Act.
    As required by the 1986 amendments to the Act, EPA has 
promulgated standards for more than 80 contaminants in drinking 
water and is attempting to comply with the requirement to 
regulate 25 additional contaminants every three years. These 
mandates have imposed significant burdens at the State, local 
and Federal level, and have led to questions about whether the 
Act is focused on the most significant risks to public health.
    While increasing flexibility under the Safe Drinking Water 
Act, it is also apparent that the Act must maintain a public 
health focus. In recent years, EPA and others, including EPA's 
Science Advisory Board, have done several studies comparing the 
relative risk to public health from various ``environmental'' 
sources. The risks attributed to drinking water have always 
ranked high in these studies relative to other health threats 
addressed by EPA programs. A number of serious contaminants 
remain unregulated and other contaminants are in serious need 
of review.
    Using a resource-needs model developed by the EPA and the 
Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, the EPA has 
estimated, that the gap between States' Safe Drinking Water Act 
program needs and the available resources was approximately 
$162 million in 1993.\7\ Increasingly, States have indicated 
that they are unable to implement core elements of their 
programs effectively, much less the new and more stringent 
requirements of the 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act. While the 
Safe Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to pay up to 75 percent 
of the costs of administering State programs, the EPA 
contribution has been substantially less. On the basis of EPA 
Fiscal Year 1990 data, the Federal share of State program costs 
averaged 45 percent and accounted for less than 25 percent in 
nine States.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ United States Environmental Protection Agency, Officer of 
Water, ``Technical and Economic Capacity of States and Public Water 
Systems to Implement Drinking Water Regulations: Report to Congress,'' 
EPA, Office of Water (810-R-93-001), at i (1993).
    \8\ United States General Accounting Office; ``Drinking Water: 
Widening Gap Between Needs and Available Resources Threatens Vital EPA 
Program'' (GAO/RCED-92-184), at 6 (1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act also 
have imposed a significant burden on public water systems. In 
1993, EPA estimated annual compliance costs of water systems of 
$1.48 billion. It is estimated that these costs could more than 
triple if proposed rules are passed in their current form.\9\ 
At the Subcommittee's hearing on January 31, 1996, Mr. Ronald 
Dungan, President of the National Association of Water 
Companies, made the following observation:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ ``The Safe Drinking Water Act: A Case Study of an Unfunded 
Mandate'' (CBO 9 1995).

          Customers will pay for safe drinking water * * * 
        [b]ut are not willing to pay for complying with 
        drinking water rules that provide only marginal 
        increases in health protection at significant costs, 
        particularly when there is so much uncertainty 
        concerning both the occurrence and real threat to 
        public health of many contaminants.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ Testimony of Ronald Dungan, President of the National 
Association of Water Companies, before the Subcommittee on Health and 
Environment, House Committee on Commerce, on January 31, 1996.

    Increased compliance costs have the most dramatic effect on 
small public water systems. EPA has found that for systems 
serving 25-100 persons, the average incremental household costs 
for compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act are $145 as 
compared to $12 for systems serving between 100,000 and 500,000 
persons.\11\ EPA has estimated that 68 percent of total 
compliance costs for drinking water regulations being 
implemented between now and the year 2000 will fall on the 90 
percent of systems which serve fewer than 3,300 people.\12\ 
These increased costs make it more difficult for small public 
water systems to comply with the requirements of the Act. EPA 
recently found that 77 percent of ``significant noncompliers'' 
were systems serving fewer than 500 persons.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ EPA 810-R-93-001, supra, at 66.
    \12\ Id. at 5.
    \13\ Id. at 116.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There is a concern among many that the Act is not 
sufficiently focused on protecting the public from contaminants 
in drinking water that pose the most significant risks to human 
health. At a January 31, 1996, hearing conducted by the 
Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, EPA Assistant 
Administrator Robert Perciasepe stated:

          The current requirement to regulate 25 new 
        contaminants every 3 years needs to be replaced with a 
        scientifically defensible, risk-based approach. The 
        current regulatory treadmill dilutes limited resources 
        on lower priority contaminants, and as a consequence 
        may hinder more rapid progress on high priority 
        contaminants.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Testimony of Robert Perciasepe, EPA Assistant Administrator 
Office of Water, before the Subcommittee on Health and Environment, 
House Committee on Commerce, on January 31, 1996.

    Most of the focus of EPA regulation under the 1986 
amendments to the Act has been on chemical substances. 
According to a number of critics, less emphasis has been placed 
on the regulation of microbial contaminants that pose more 
immediate health risks ranging from gastrointestinal disorders 
to cholera and typhoid. Despite the implementation of the 
Surface Water Treatment Rule, a number of serious waterborne 
disease outbreaks have occurred, including an outbreak of 
cryptosporidium contamination in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, which 
killed more than one hundred individuals and caused illness in 
as many as 400,000 others.
    Others are concerned that the Act does not provide 
sufficient flexibility to States and public water systems to 
meet particular geographical and other circumstances. Small 
public water systems in particular have faced increased 
monitoring costs under the 1986 amendments to the Act. 
According to a representative of the National Rural Water 
Association:

          Seasonal monitoring may be necessary in surface 
        water, the dynamics of groundwater is significantly 
        different * * * In small communities 90% of water 
        systems rely on groundwater. Small communities are 
        confused because there is negligible benefit to 
        monitoring quarterly even though the cost is 
        significant.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Testimony of Steve Levy, Executive Director of Maine Rural 
Water Association on behalf of the National Rural Water Association, 
before the Subcommittee on Health and Environment, House Commerce 
Committee, on January 31, 1996.

    A number of commentators have identified the need for the 
establishment of a revolving loan fund program for drinking 
water projects necessary to comply with the mandates imposed by 
the Safe Drinking Water Act. Such a fund, capitalized with 
Federal funds to finance loans and other types of financial 
assistance to public water systems, would assist such systems 
in complying with the increasingly complex and expensive 
requirements of the Act. Under the SRF program, EPA would 
provide grants to capitalize the States' funds while the States 
identify investment priorities and manage the loan program. As 
loans are repaid, the fund is replenished, and loans can be 
made for other eligible Safe Drinking Water Act compliance 
projects. According to EPA Assistant Administrator Robert 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perciasepe:

          The drinking water State Revolving Fund (SRF) may be 
        one of the most important changes in the nation's 
        drinking water program contemplated by Congress since 
        passage of the original Act in 1974. An SRF is critical 
        to helping States assist communities in upgrading 
        treatment facilities to ensure that they can provide 
        safe drinking water to the public.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Testimony of Robert Perciasepe, EPA Assistant Administrator 
Office of Water, before the Subcommitee on Health and Environment, 
House Committee on Commerce, on January 31, 1996.

    This legislation attempts to address these concerns. 
Following are letters from several organizations representing 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the diversity of support for the legislation.

                                                     June 11, 1996.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives, Rayburn 
        House Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: We write to express our appreciation for 
your hard work in developing H.R. 3604, the bipartisan bill to 
reauthorize the Safe Drinking Water Act reported by the Health 
and Environment Subcommittee on June 6. We urge the Commerce 
Committee and the House to approve that bill as expeditiously 
as possible to keep the legislative process moving forward.
    First and foremost, H.R. 3604 improves the protection of 
public health. It represents a signficant advance over current 
law and over the bill approved by the House in 1994. Among 
other significant changes, the measure approved in subcommittee 
eliminates the requirement for the Environmental Protection 
Agency to regulate 25 new contaminants every three years and 
instead forcuses attention on contaminants that actually occur 
or are likely to occur in drinking water. The bill improves the 
current standard setting process by allowing EPA to balance 
risks and to consider costs and benefits in setting more new 
standards. It also addresses the technology needs of small 
water systems, allows some relief from monitoring requirements 
when contaminants do not occur in the drinking water in a given 
comnmunity, and authorizes a new state revolving fund for much 
needed investments in drinking water infrastructure. These 
changes and others are important improvements over the current 
law.
    As you know, the bill also includes several expanded 
federal authorities and new mandates on states, local 
governments, and water suppliers about which we have some 
concerns. We await the Congressional Budget Office analysis of 
the costs of these mandates.
    We will continue to work with you and your colleagues in 
the Senate to assure that the Safe Drinking Water Act 
reauthorization bill is enacted into law this year, providing 
the public with both safe and affordable drinking water.
            Sincerely,
                    Gov. Tommy G. Thompson, Chairman, Natinal 
                            Governor's Association; Gregory S. 
                            Lashutka, President, National League of 
                            Cities; Norman B. Rice, President, The U.S. 
                            Conference of Mayors; Douglas R. Bovin, 
                            President, National Association of 
                            Counties; James J. Lack, President, 
                            National Confernece of State Legislatures; 
                            David L. Tippin, President, Association of 
                            Metropolitan Water Agencies; Karl F. 
                            Kohlhoff, President, American Water Works 
                            Association; Ronald S. Dungan, President, 
                            National Association of Water Companies; 
                            James K. Cleland, President, Association of 
                            State Drinking Water Administrators; Fred 
                            N. Pfeiffer, President, National Water 
                            Resources Association.
                                ------                                

                              Campaign for Safe and
                                 Affordable Drinking Water,
                                                     June 21, 1996.
Hon. Thomas Bliley,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, 
        DC.
    Dear Chairman Bliley: We are writing to thank you for your 
leadership in negotiating and achieving unanimous Committee 
passage of the ``Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996,'' H.R. 3604, 
and to express our appreciation for your attention to our views 
in the legislative process. We do not agree with all of the 
decisions that the Committee reached, but we do believe that 
our concerns received full and fair consideration.
    Although we did not support S. 1316 as it was passed by the 
Senate, we pleased to be able to endorse H.R. 3604. We support 
it on balance because it provides a number of important public 
health protections, including:
          The right-to-know provision, which requires water 
        systems to issue drinking water quality reports to 
        consumers;
          Prevention provisions, including an improved source 
        water assessment, operator certification, and capacity 
        development sections;
          A reasonable radon provision that establishes a 
        rational process for setting a standard for this 
        important cancer-causing contaminant;
          More workable small system provisions. Small system 
        exemptions and variances would be limited to water 
        systems serving less than 3,300 customers. These 
        provisions would encourage and facilitate compliance 
        rather than needlessly waiving public health protection 
        requirements;
          Improved monitoring provisions for unregulated 
        contaminants, tying monitoring relief to source water 
        assessments, and requiring a disease monitoring study.
    We continue to have, of course, objections to some of the 
language included in H.R. 3604, particularly the provisions 
affecting citizen suits, standard setting (although we 
recognize that the House language improves upon the Senate 
proposal), source water program funding, and information 
gathering. Accordingly, our continued support for H.R. 3604 
will be predicted upon maintaining the important improvements 
the Commerce Committee adopted.
            Sincerely,
                    20/20 Vision; Gary Rose, Aids Action Council; Susan 
                            Polan, American Cancer Society; Ted Morton, 
                            American Oceans Campaign; Dr. Fernando 
                            Trevino, American Public Health 
                            Association; Beth Norcross, American 
                            Rivers; Michael Hirshfield, Ph.D., 
                            Chesapeake Bay Foundation; Roberta Hazen-
                            Aranson, Childhood Lead Action Project, RI; 
                            Winonah Hauter, Citizen Action; Mary Clark, 
                            Citizen Action of New York; Paul Schwartz, 
                            Clean Water Action; Ginny Yingling, Clean 
                            Water Action Alliance of Minnesota.
                    Beth Blissman, Lorain Grenado, Steering Committee, 
                            COPEEN, Colorado People's Environmental and 
                            Economic Network; Diana Neidle, Consumer 
                            Federation of America; Donald Clark, 
                            Cornicopia Network of New Jersey, Inc.; 
                            James K. Wyerman, Defenders of Wildlife; 
                            Phil Clapp, Environmental Information 
                            Center; Brian Cohen, Environmental Working 
                            Group; Velma Smith, Friends of the Earth; 
                            Joanne Royce, Government Accountability 
                            Project; Tom FitzGerald, Kentucky Resources 
                            Council; Jan Conley, Lake Superior Greens; 
                            Judy Pannullo, Long Island Progressive 
                            Coalition; Dr. Edward B. Smart, 
                            Metropolitan Ecumenical Ministry; Aisha 
                            Ikramuddin, Mothers & Others; Mary Marra, 
                            National Wildlife Federation.
                    Cleo Manuel, National Consumers League; Erik Olson, 
                            Natural Resources Defense Council; Rev. 
                            Albert G. Cohen, Network for Environmental 
                            & Economic Reponsibility; Amy Goldsmith, 
                            New Jersey Environmental Federation; Bruce 
                            R. Carpenter, New York Rivers United; Todd 
                            Miller, North Carolina Coastal Federation; 
                            Debbie Ortman, Northern Environmental 
                            Network; Alfonso Lopez, Physicians for 
                            Social Responsibility; Rabbi David 
                            Sapperstein, Religious Action Center; 
                            Alison Walsh, Save the Bay, Rhode Island; 
                            Mark Pelavin, Union of American Hebrew 
                            Congregations; Daniel Rosenberg, U.S. PIRG; 
                            Parker Blackmun, WashPIRG; Robert Hudek, 
                            Wisconsin Citizen Action.
                                ------                                

                                       Clean Water Council,
                                       Arlington, VA, May 29, 1996.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman, House Commerce Committee,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The undersigned members of the Clean 
Water Council represent employers and independent professionals 
who finance, design, construct, and maintain drinking water 
delivery and treatment facilities. We urge you to support 
timely action on legislation to reauthorize the Safe Drinking 
Water Act and create a State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) Program 
to help states finance capital investment and improvements in 
drinking water infrastructure.
    The proposed drinking water SRF program would be an 
efficient and cost-effective means of providing capital for the 
construction of drinking water delivery and treatment 
facilities. The need for the program is well documented. 
Growing demands on our aging and sometimes nonexistent 
infrastructure often force cash-strapped communities to patch 
the leaks and stretch the infrastructure to unsafe limits for 
lack of financial resources. Water main breaks, boil water 
orders, and dry fire hydrants are routine occurrences and pose 
unacceptable risks to our families. A 1990 report published by 
the Clean Water Council demonstrated a $2-billion annual 
drinking water infrastructure deficit above and beyond what the 
states themselves are expected to invest.
    Furthermore, clean water infrastructure is essential to 
environmental protection, private sector productive and 
profitability, and job creation. Half of the estimated 57,000 
jobs created for every $1 billion invested are permanent jobs. 
Clean water construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance also 
increase the local tax base. A dependable network of pipes and 
treatment facilities attracts new homes and businesses to a 
community. This is an area where environmental protection and 
economic growth go hand-in-hand.
    Your efforts to move safe drinking water legislation this 
year are an investment in America's clean water future.
            Sincerely,
                    The Clean Water Council:
                    American Consulting Engineers Council, American 
                            Portland Cement Alliance, American Road and 
                            Transportation Builders Association, 
                            American Society of Civil Engineers, 
                            American Subcontractors Association, 
                            Associated Equipment Distributors, 
                            Associated General Contractors of America, 
                            Construction Industry Manufacturers 
                            Association, Council of Infrastructure 
                            Financing Authorities, Equipment 
                            Manufacturers Institute, International 
                            Spiral Rib Pipe Association, National 
                            Aggregates Association, National 
                            Constructors Association, National Precast 
                            Concrete Association, National Ready Mixed 
                            Concrete Association, National Stone 
                            Association, National Utility Contractors 
                            Association, Uni-Bell PVC Pipe Association, 
                            Water and Sewer Distributors of America, 
                            Water and Wastewater Equipment 
                            Manufacturers Association.
    The Committee has received the following correspondence on 
the important issues of the regulation of disinfectants and 
disinfection byproducts.

                              American Medical Association,
                                          Chicago, IL, May 2, 1996.
Hon. Henry A. Waxman,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, 
        DC.
    Dear Congressman Waxman: The American Medical Association 
(AMA) understands that the Health and Environment Subcommittee 
may soon consider the Reauthorization of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act. Specifically, the AMA is concerned about language in 
the draft legislation that would exempt disinfection by-
products (DBPs) of water chlorination from the cost-benefit 
analysis.
    Consistent with our policy, the AMA urges caution in 
changing current drinking water regulations without a through 
evaluation of the risks, costs, and benefits of using chlorine 
or alternative disinfectants in the water purification process. 
Such an evaluation is essential considering that much of the 
increase in the lifespan of Americans, from about 45 years in 
the early 1900s to about 76 at present, and the decrease in 
infant mortality, from about 100 per 1000 in the early 1900s to 
8.2 in 1992, is attributed to public health measures, such as 
the chlorination of drinking water.
    In June 1994, the AMA House of Delegates passed a 
resolution encouraging the EPA to base its evaluation of health 
and environmental risks from exposures to organic compounds, 
industrial compounds, or manufacturing processes that include 
or involve chlorine on reliable data specific to the compounds 
or processes. With potential human health risks and estimated 
price tag of nearly $4 billion a year, the AMA believes that 
any rule revisions affecting our nation's drinking water should 
be based on sound scientific knowledge. Therefore, we would 
urge the Subcommittee to reconsider its position on this 
provision, instead allowing the EPA to use cost/benefit 
analysis when setting standards to control DBPs and other 
contaminants regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
    Thank you for your attention to this important public 
health matter.
            Sincerely,
                                               P. John Seward, M.D.
                                ------                                

                      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
                                      Washington, DC, May 17, 1996.
Hon. Henry Waxman,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Representative Waxman: Thank you for your May 10, 1996 
letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator 
Carol Browner requesting a response to charges made in a May 2, 
1996 letter you received from Dr. P. John Seward, Executive 
Vice President of the American Medical Association (AMA). In 
this letter, Dr. Seward expressed, on behalf of the AMA, 
concern about language in a staff draft of the House Commerce 
Committee's Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) reauthorization bill 
affecting EPA's proposed drinking water standard for 
disinfectants and disinfection byproducts (D/DBPs). We 
appreciate the opportunity to correct the substantial 
misunderstanding reflected in this letter of both EPA's 
proposed rule for D/DBPs and the Agency's policies and actions 
to reduce health risks from waterborne pathogens.
    EPA has for over two decades strongly supported the vital 
role of drinking water disinfection for protecting public 
health from microbial risks. In 1989, EPA issued a rule 
requiring surface water and certain ground water systems to 
disinfect. A high priority of EPA's drinking water program is 
to complete work, in consultation with representatives of 
affected state and local governments and water utilities, on a 
proposal to expand disinfection rules to cover other ground 
water supplies that may pose unacceptable microbial risks.
    The control of microbial contaminants is complicated, 
however, because byproducts of commonly used disinfectants 
(such as chlorine and chloramines) may pose serious health 
risks. Due to the scientific complexity of maintaining or 
strengthening microbial control while simultaneously 
controlling risks from disinfection byproducts, EPA convened in 
1992 a negotiated rulemaking involving public health officials, 
representatives of states, local governments, water utilities, 
and environmental and community groups. The negotiators agreed 
on a fundamental precept of the negotiation: that while new 
safeguards to reduce the risk from D/DBPs were warranted, any 
such safeguards must fully maintain or improve protection 
against waterborne pathogens. The negotiators subsequently 
agreed that any D/DBP rules must be accompanied by affordable 
measures to strengthen protection from Cryptosporidium, which 
is resistant to many conventional disinfectants such as 
chlorine.
    It is important to understand the process, endorsed in the 
negotiated rulemaking, under which these regulations are being 
developed. Consistent with the negotiated agreement, EPA 
proposed in July 1994 that the standards for D/DBPs and 
microbial contamination be addressed in two Stages. In Stage I, 
the standard for Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) has been 
proposed to be reduced from the current level of 100 ppb to 80 
ppb, and a new standard for haloacetic acids proposed to be set 
at 60 ppb.
    Before this Stage I Rule (and an accompanying rule to 
ensure microbial protection) can be finalized, however, many 
water systems and EPA will engage in a massive effort to 
collect and analyze new nationwide data on D/DBP and microbial 
occurrence, human exposure, and potential treatments. This 
effort, included in the terms of the negotiated agreement, was 
formally launched with EPA's promulgation of an Information 
Collection Rule (ICR) this month. In addition, EPA is embarking 
jointly with the American Water Works Research Foundation and 
other organizations on a multi-year, multi-million dollar 
research initiative on D/DBPs and Cryptosporidium, with a 
substantial emphasis on risks and health effects. These efforts 
will greatly improve the scientific basis for future actions 
and thus meet the objective of the AMA's House of Delegates' 
1994 Resolution concerning improved science, as described by 
Dr. Seward.
    Under the negotiated agreement, the levels proposed for 
Stage I may be changed, if appropriate, in the final Stage I 
rule. The Stage I levels do not appear to be contentious; even 
the Chlorine Chemistry Council acknowledged in October 1994 
that ``most utilities will be able to achieve the 80-ppb MCLs 
with moderate modifications to their systems.'' While the 
proposed Stage II numbers of 40 ppb (for TTHMs) and 30 ppb (for 
haloacetic acids) are considerably more stringent, they do not 
represent a final agreement by the stakeholders or EPA. The 
negotiators agreed that the negotiations would recommence after 
the IRC results and complementary research become available. A 
new Stage II proposal will be made, by agreement among the 
negotiators, to reflect those results. Thus, EPA's 
implementation of the terms of the agreement signed two years 
ago assure that Stage II will be founded on the most sound 
scientific base obtainable.
    When considering the Stage II rule, the regulatory 
negotiation will continue to be grounded, as it was in Stage I, 
in the principle that any rule to control D/DBP risks must 
fully maintain protection against microbial risk (if necessary, 
through a simultaneous microbial rule). These negotiated rules 
would be based on technology which is both practically 
available and affordable for large systems. (For small water 
systems, all three SDWA bills approved by the House or the 
Senate in the 103rd and 104th Congress require EPA to list 
approved technologies specifically affordable for small 
systems.) Costs and benefits were extensively analyzed and 
addressed in a manner satisfactory to all signatories of the 
agreement. Thus, there is no basis for concern that this D/DBP-
microbial rulemaking process will fail to maintain or improve 
protection against microbial contaminants, or result in 
unaffordable costs to public water systems.
    Moreover, it is important to understand that the 
negotiators and EPA have agreed to governing principles (for 
developing the D/DBP-microbial rules) which ensure greater 
certainty that protection against waterborne disease will be 
maintained or improved, at an affordable cost, than would a 
cost-benefit framework. Potential weakening of such protection 
is not categorically ruled out within the cost-benefit 
framework advocated by Dr. Seward.
    Congress has repeatedly recognized the great complexity and 
public health implications of the D/DBP-microbial rules, as 
well as the fragility of the balance reached in the negotiated 
rulemaking. In approving SDWA reauthorization bills--S. 2019 
and H.R. 3392 in the 103rd Congress, and S. 1316 in the 104th 
Congress--each chamber of Congress has sought to preserve that 
balance, as well as the strong and affordable protections for 
public health that the balance provides. Any provision 
disturbing the negotiated agreement could lead to delay in 
additional, much-needed public health protections.
    Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the concerns 
expressed in Dr. Seward's letter on this vital issue. If I can 
be of further assistance in this matter, please do not hesitate 
to contact me.
            Sincerely,
                        Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator.

                                Hearings

    On January 31, 1996, the Subcommittee on Health and the 
Environment held a hearing on the Priorities for the 
Reauthorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Testimony was 
given by twelve witnesses, including: The Honorable Gerald 
Solomon and the Honorable Gerald D. Kleczka, Members of the 
U.S. House of Representatives; the Honorable Robert Perciasepe, 
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency; Mr. Randy Wood, Director of the Nebraska 
Department of Environmental Quality, on behalf of the National 
Governors Association; The Honorable Jeffrey Wennberg, Mayor of 
Rutland, Vermont, on behalf of the National League of Cities; 
The Honorable Larry Mancini, Deputy Mayor of Lake George, New 
York; Dr. David Spath, Chief, Division of Drinking Water and 
Environmental Management for the State of California, on behalf 
of the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators; Mr. 
Karl Kohlhoff, Assistant Utilities Manager for the Utilities 
Department of Mesa, Arizona, on behalf of the American Water 
Works Association; Mr. David Tippin, Director, Tampa Water 
Department, Tampa, Florida, on behalf of the Metropolitan Water 
Agencies; Mr. Ronald Dungan, Senior Vice President of the 
United Water Management and Service Company of Wayne, 
Pennsylvania, on behalf of the National Association of Water 
Companies; Mr. Steve Levy, Executive Director of the State of 
Maine Rural Water Association on behalf of the National Rural 
Water Association; and Mr. Greg Wetstone, Legislative Director, 
Natural Resources Defense Council, Washington, D.C.
    In the 103rd Congress, the Committee considered a 
predecessor bill H.R. 3392. The Subcommittee on Health and the 
Environment held a hearing on drinking water contamination 
problems, resources shortfalls in the effort to carry out the 
Safe Drinking Water Act, and on H.R. 1701 (legislation 
authorizing appropriations for State revolving funds) on April 
19, 1993. Testimony was provided by Martha G. Prothro, Acting 
Assistant Administrator for Water, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency; Paul W. Nannis, Commissioner of Health, City 
of Milwaukee; Peter F. Guerrero, Associate Director, 
Environment Protection Issues, General Accounting Office, 
Washington, D.C.; Dennis D. Juranek, DVM, Chief, Epidemiology 
Activity, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, 
Georgia; David Tippin, Vice President, Association of 
Metropolitan Water Agencies, Director, Tampa Water Department, 
Tampa, Florida; William F. Parrish, Program Administrator, 
Maryland Water Supply Program, on behalf of the Association of 
State Drinking Water Administrators, Dundalk, Maryland; Erik 
Olson, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense Council, 
Washington, D.C.; James S. McInerney, President, Bridgeport 
Hydraulic Company, on behalf of the National Association of 
Water Companies, Washington, D.C.; Kathleen Stanley, Executive 
Director, Rural Community Assistance Program, Leesburg, 
Virginia; John H. Montgomery, Association Representative, 
National Rural Water Association, Washington, D.C.; and Robert 
L. Wubbena, Vice President, American Water Works Association, 
Washington, D.C.
    On May 10, 1991, the Committee's Subcommittee on Health and 
the Environment held a hearing on progress in carrying out the 
Safe Drinking Water Act's provisions for control of drinking 
water contamination. Testimony was provided by the Honorable 
William K. Reilly, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency; Donald E. Elliot, General Counsel, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency; and LaJuana Wilcher, Assistant Administrator 
for Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

                        Committee Consideration

    On June 6, 1996, the Subcommittee on Health and Environment 
met in open markup session and considered a Subcommittee Print 
entitled the ``Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996''. 
The Subcommittee approved the introduction of a clean bill for 
Full Committee consideration, by a rollcall vote of 24 yeas to 
0 nays. H.R. 3604 was introduced in the House as the clean bill 
on June 10, 1996.
    On June 11, 1996, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 3604, the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Amendments of 1996, reported to the House, as amended, by a 
rollcall vote of 42 yeas to 0 nays, a quorum being present.

                             Rollcall Votes

    Clause 2(l)2(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the House 
requires the Committee to list the recorded votes on the motion 
to report legislation and amendments thereto. The following are 
the recorded votes on the motion to report H.R. 3070 and on 
amendments offered to the measure, including the names of those 
Members voting for and against.

                         rollcall vote no. 131

    Bill: H.R. 3604, Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
1996.
    Motion: Motion by Mr. Bliley to order H.R. 3604 reported to 
the House, as amended.
    Disposition: Agreed to, by a rollcall vote of 42 yeas to 0 
nays.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Representative             Aye       Nay     Present     Representative      Aye       Nay     Present 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Bliley.....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Dingell......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Moorhead...................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Waxman.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Tauzin.....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Markey.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Fields.....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Collins......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Oxley......................  ........  ........  .........  Mr. Hall.........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Bilirakis..................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Richardson...        X   ........  .........
Mr. Schaefer...................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Bryant.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Barton.....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Boucher......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Hastert....................  ........  ........  .........  Mr. Manton.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Upton......................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Towns........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Stearns....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Studds.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Paxon......................  ........  ........  .........  Mr. Pallone......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Gillmor....................  ........  ........  .........  Mr. Brown........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Klug.......................        X   ........  .........  Mrs. Lincoln.....  ........  ........  .........
Mr. Franks.....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Gordon.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Greenwood..................        X   ........  .........  Ms. Furse........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Crapo......................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Deutsch......  ........  ........  .........
Mr. Cox........................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Rush.........  ........  ........  .........
Mr. Deal.......................        X   ........  .........  Ms. Eshoo........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Burr.......................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Klink........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Bilbray....................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Stupak.......        X   ........  .........
Mr. Whitfield..................        X   ........  .........  Mr. Engel........        X   ........  .........
Mr. Ganske.....................        X   ........  .........                                                  
Mr. Frisa......................        X   ........  .........                                                  
Mr. Norwood....................        X   ........  .........                                                  
Mr. White......................        X   ........  .........                                                  
Mr. Coburn.....................        X   ........  .........                                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              voice votes

    Bill: H.R. 3604, Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
1996.
    Amendment: Amendment by Mr. White and Mrs. Furse re: 
alternative source water protection strategies for the 
Northwest.
    Disposition: Agreed to by a voice vote.
    Amendment: En bloc amendment by Mr. Bilirakis re: 
miscellaneous provisions of the bill.
    Disposition: Agreed to by a voice vote.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee held an oversight 
hearing and made findings that are reflected in this report.

              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, no oversight findings have been 
submitted to the Committee by the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee states 
that H.R. 3604 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority or tax expenditures or revenues.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the following is the cost 
estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant 
to section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, June 24, 1996.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3604, the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996.
    Enacting H.R. 3604 would affect both direct spending and 
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

               congressional budget office cost estimate

    1. Bill number: H.R. 3604.
    2. Bill title: Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996.
    3. Bill status: As ordered reported by the House Committee 
on Commerce on June 11, 1996.
    4. Bill purpose: The bill would amend the Safe Drinking 
Water Act (SDWA) to authorize the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) to make grants to states for capitalizing state 
revolving loan funds (SRFs). These SRFs would finance the 
construction of facilities for the treatment of drinking water. 
The bill would authorize appropriations of $1 billion annually 
over the 1997-2003 period for these capitalization grants. In 
addition, major provisions of the bill would:
          amend the procedures that EPA uses to identify 
        contaminants for regulation under the SDWA;
          allows states to establish an alternative monitoring 
        program for contaminants in drinking water;
          allow operators of small drinking water systems to 
        obtain variances from drinking water standards under 
        certain conditions;
          direct EPA to define treatment technologies that are 
        feasible for small drinking water systems when the 
        agency issues new contaminant regulations;
          require states to ensure that public water systems 
        have the technical expertise and financial resources to 
        implement the SDWA;
          authorize appropriations of $100 million a year for 
        state public water system supervision (PWSS) programs, 
        $15 million a year for protecting underground drinking 
        water sources, $30 million a year for protecting 
        drinking water wellhead areas, and $15 million a year 
        for assisting small drinking water systems; and
          authorize appropriations of $15 million a year to the 
        state of New York for demonstration projects 
        implemented as part of the program for protecting the 
        source water of the New York City water system.
    5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Assuming 
appropriation of the entire amounts authorized for 
discretionary programs, enacting H.R. 3604 would lead to fiscal 
year 1997 funding for safe drinking water programs about $0.6 
billion above the 1996 appropriation. CBO estimates that the 
bill would authorize appropriations totaling about $7.8 billion 
over the 1997-2002 period.
    The authorization for most of EPA's safe drinking water 
activities expired in 1991, but the program has been continued 
through annual appropriations. In 1996, $184 million was 
appropriated to EPA for safe drinking water program 
implementation, research, and grants. In addition to this 
amount, $500 million was appropriated in 1996, $700 million was 
appropriated in 1995, and $599 million was appropriated in 1994 
for EPA capitalization grants to safe drinking water state 
revolving loan funds (SRFs). Spending of these SRF funds was 
made contingent upon enactment of legislation authorizing safe 
drinking water SRFs. Public Law 104-19 rescinded all but $225 
million of the 1995 and 1994 SRF appropriations.
    Enacting H.R. 3604 would have a small effect on revenues 
from civil and criminal penalties and on direct spending, which 
results from the use of such penalty receipts. Finally, 
enacting the bill could increase direct spending for the 
payments of judgments against the federal government resulting 
from claims made by states under SDWA; however, CBO cannot 
predict the number or amount of any such judgments that might 
result from enacting the bill. The estimated budgetary effects 
of H.R. 3604 are summarized in the following table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           1996    1997    1998    1999    2000    2001    2002 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS                                       
                                                                                                                
Spending under current law:                                                                                     
    Budget authority....................................     684  ......  ......  ......  ......  ......  ......
    Estimated outlays...................................     180      83     204     252     154      70      22
Proposed changes:                                                                                               
    Estimated authorization level.......................  ......   1,304   1,305   1,307   1,309   1,310   1,307
    Estimated outlays...................................  ......     238     595     967   1,181   1,279   1,308
Spending under H.R. 3604:                                                                                       
    Estimated authorization level \1\...................     684   1,304   1,305   1,307   1,309   1,310   1,307
    Estimated outlays...................................     180     321     799   1,219   1,335   1,349   1,330
                                                                                                                
                                     ADDITIONAL REVENUES AND DIRECT SPENDING                                    
                                                                                                                
Revenues:                                                                                                       
    Estimated revenues..................................  ......   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)
Direct spending:                                                                                                
    Estimated budget authority..........................  ......  ......   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)
    Estimated outlays...................................  ......  ......   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)   (\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1996 level is the amount appropriated for that year.                                                    
\2\ Less than $500,000.                                                                                         

    The costs of this bill fall within budget function 300.
    6. Basis of estimate: Spending Subject to Appropriations. 
For purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will 
be enacted before 1997 appropriations for EPA are provided and 
that all funds authorized by H.R. 3604 will be appropriated for 
each year. Over the 1997-2003 period, the bill would authorize 
appropriations totaling $8.8 billion, including $7 billion for 
grants to safe drinking water SRFs. Estimated outlays are based 
on historical spending patterns of ongoing EPA drinking water 
programs and its grant program for waste water treatment SRFs.
    In addition to the bill's specified authorization amounts, 
CBO has estimated that $50 million to $60 million a year would 
be necessary to pay for activities authorized by the bill 
without specific dollar authorizations. These activities 
include EPA's general oversight, administrative costs, 
enforcement and implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 
and mandated studies for the safe drinking water program. 
Estimated costs for these activities are based on information 
provided by EPA.
    Revenues and Direct Spending. Enactment of this bill would 
increase governmental receipts from civil and criminal 
penalties, as well as direct spending from the Crime Victims 
Funds, but CBO expects that the amounts involved would be 
insignificant. Any additional amounts deposited into the Crime 
Victims Fund would be spent in the following year.
    In addition, section 202 of the bill would explicitly waive 
any federal immunity from administrative orders or civil or 
administrative fines or penalties assessed under SDWA, and 
would clarify that federal facilities are subject to reasonable 
service charges assessed in connection with a federal or state 
program. This provision of SDWA may encourage states to seek to 
impose fines and penalties on the federal government under 
SDWA. If federal agencies contest these fines and penalties, it 
is possible that payments would have to be made from the 
government's Claims and Judgments Fund, if not otherwise 
provided from appropriated funds. The Claims and Judgments Fund 
is a permanent, open-ended appropriation, and any amounts paid 
from it would be considered direct spending. CBO cannot predict 
the number of judgments against the government that could 
result from enactment of this bill. Further, we cannot 
determine whether those judgments would be paid from the claims 
and Judgments Fund or from appropriated funds. The exact amount 
of such judgment payments is highly uncertain, but CBO expects 
that payments from the Claims and Judgments Fund are unlikely 
to exceed $500,000 a year.
    7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets 
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct 
spending or receipts through 1998. Enacting H.R. 3604 would 
increase governmental receipts from civil and criminal 
penalties, and the spending of such penalties; hence, pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply. Direct spending could also 
increase because of payments for judgments against the 
government. The following table summarizes CBO's estimate of 
the bill's pay-as-you-go effects.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            1996       1997       1998  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in outlays......................          0          0          0
Change in receipts.....................          0          0          0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal 
governments: H.R. 3064 would impose new mandates on both state 
and local governments, but would also change the federal 
drinking water program in ways that would lower the costs to 
public water systems of complying with existing and future 
federal requirements. CBO estimates that annual costs imposed 
by the bill would not exceed the $50 million threshold 
established in Public Law 104-4.
    CBO projects that publicly owned water systems would incur 
direct costs of $15 million to $25 million per year to comply 
with requirement to mail annual ``consumer confidence reports'' 
to their customers. Publicly owned water systems would also 
incur annual direct costs of $5 million to $10 million to 
comply with the operator-certification requirement, beginning 
in fiscal year 2001. CBO further estimates that state 
governments would incur costs totaling several million dollars 
per year to comply with the requirement to development 
implement capacity development strategies for eater systems.
    These additional costs to state and local governments would 
be at least partially offset by a number of other changes to 
the federal drinking water program that would significantly 
lower the costs of complying with future requirements. 
Specifically, the bill would reduce public water systems' 
likely costs by changing the federal standard-setting process, 
delaying the effective date of new regulations, allowing 
operators to obtain variances, and allowing states to establish 
alternative monitoring requirements.
    CBO will provide a more detailed analysis of the costs of 
this bill to state and local governments under separate cover.
    9. Estimated impact on the private sector: The net direct 
costs of the private-sector mandates identified in this bill 
would not likely exceed the $100 million threshold established 
in Public Law 104-4. CBO estimates that the aggregate direct 
cost of mandates in this bill for which we were able to obtain 
data would range from $40 million to $60 million annual for the 
first five years that mandates are effective. We further 
estimate that the costs of these new mandates on the private 
sector would be at least partially offset by savings from 
changes the bill would make in the standard-setting process and 
in other aspects of the federal drinking water program. These 
changes, which are the same as those resulting in savings to 
publicly owned systems, would significantly lower the costs 
that privately owned systems would incur to comply with future 
regulatory requirements. CBO will provide a more detailed 
estimate of the private-sector mandates under separate cover.
    10. Previous CBO estimate: On November 7, 1995, CBO 
prepared a cost estimate for S. 1316, the Safe Drinking Water 
Act Amendments of 1995, as ordered reported by the Senate 
Committee on environment and Public Works on October 24, 1995. 
The estimated budgetary effects of these bills are very 
similar, though total authorizations in the Senate bill are 
slightly higher. Both bills would authorize $1 billion annually 
for grants to state revolving loan funds, and both bills would 
explicitly waive any federal immunity under the Safe Drinking 
Water Act.
    11. Estimate prepared by: Federal Cost Estimate: Kim Cawley 
and Stephanie Weiner. State and Local Government Cost Estimate: 
Pepper Santalucia. Private-Sector Impact: Patrice Gordon and 
Terry Dinan.
    12. Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine for Paul N. 
Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                     Inflationary Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the bill 
would have no inflationary impact.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

             Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation

Section 1. Short title and table of contents

    This section sets forth the short title of the bill, the 
``Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996,'' and the bill's 
table of contents.

Section 2. References; effective date; disclaimer

    This section provides for references to Title XIV of the 
Public Health Service Act (commonly known as the Safe Drinking 
Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.). It provides that, except as 
otherwise noted, the amendments made by this Act shall take 
effect on the date of enactment of this Act. This section also 
makes the disclaimer that this Act is not intended to affect 
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the duties and 
responsibilities of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
under that Act, or the regulation or control of point or 
nonpoint sources of pollution discharged into waters covered by 
that Act. This section further requires the Administrator to 
identify in the Agency's annual budget all funding and full-
time equivalents for Title XIV of the Public Health Service Act 
separately from funding and staffing for the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act.

                     TITLE I--PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS

Section 101. Selection of additional contaminants

    Section 101(a) repeals the requirement that EPA publish 
regulations for not fewer than 25 contaminants every three 
years and makes other changes to section 1412(b)(3). Not later 
than 18 months after enactment and every 5 years thereafter, 
EPA, after consulting with the scientific community, soliciting 
public comment, and considering the occurrence data base 
established under section 305 of this Act, must publish a list 
of contaminants that may require regulation. The 
Administrator's decision whether or not to select a contaminant 
for listing will not be subject to judicial review.
    Not later than 5 years after enactment and every 5 years 
thereafter, EPA must make a determination, by rule, whether or 
not to regulate at least 5 of the listed contaminants. A 
determination to regulate is to be based on findings that a 
contaminant is known to occur, or there is a substantial 
likelihood that the contaminant will occur, in public water 
systems with a frequency and at a level of public health 
concern, and that regulation presents a meaningful opportunity 
for public health risk reduction. Findings must be based on the 
best available public health information including information 
from the newly-established occurrence data base. Additionally, 
the Administrator may make a determination to regulate a 
contaminant that does not appear on the list so long as the 
Administrator makes the necessary findings under section 
1412(b)(3)(B)(ii). A determination not to regulate is to be 
considered a final agency action and subject to judicial 
review.
    Section 101(a) further provides that in selecting 
unregulated contaminants for regulatory consideration, EPA must 
select contaminants that present the greatest public health 
concern, taking into consideration, among other factors of 
public health concern, the effect of contaminants upon 
sensitive subpopulations that comprise a meaningful portion of 
the population. For each contaminant that the Administrator 
determines to regulate, the Administrator must propose a 
maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) and a national primary 
drinking water regulation within 2 years of making a 
determination to regulate, and must promulgate a final rule 
within 18 months after it is proposed. The Administrator may 
extend the deadline for promulgation of a national primary 
drinking water regulation by up to nine months by publication 
of notice in the Federal Register. Section 101(a) also 
authorizes the Administrator to publish nonregulatory health 
advisories or take other appropriate actions for unregulated 
contaminants.
    Section 101(b) provides that the requirements of 
subparagraphs (C) and (D) of section 1412(b)(3) of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act which are in effect before the date of 
enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, 
including deadlines for promulgation of regulations which are 
not promulgated by the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act Amendments of 1996, are superseded by the amendments 
made by subsection 101(a).

Section 102. Disinfectants and disinfection byproducts

    This section adds a new subparagraph to section 1412(b)(3) 
of the Act establishing deadlines for the Administrator to 
issue regulations for the collection of information and for 
disinfectants and disinfection byproducts and an enhanced 
surface water treatment. It directs the Administrator to 
promulgate an information collection rule (ICR) to obtain 
information to facilitate further revisions to the disinfectant 
and disinfection byproducts regulation, including information 
on cryptosporidium, no later than December 31, 1996. The bill 
establishes the same time intervals between the final ICR, an 
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, a Final Enhanced 
Surface Water Treatment Rule, a Stage I Disinfectants and 
Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and a Stage II Disinfectants and 
Disinfection Byproducts Rule that are established in the 
schedule for the proposed ICR published in the Federal Register 
(59 FR 6361) on February 10, 1994. If any rule is delayed, the 
subsequent rules must be completed as quickly as practicable, 
but no later than the revised date that reflects the relevant 
interval or intervals.

Section 103. Limited alternative to filtration

    This section modifies section 1412(b)(7)(C) to provide an 
additional alternative to the regulations promulgated pursuant 
to clause (i) and (iii) of section 1412(b)(9)(C). On a case-by-
case basis, and after public notice and comment, a State with 
primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems may 
establish treatment requirements as an alternative to 
filtration for systems having undeveloped and uninhabited 
watersheds in consolidated ownership, and having control over 
access to, and activities in, those watersheds, if the State 
determines (and the Administrator concurs) that the alternative 
requirements ensure greater removal or inactivation 
efficiencies of pathogens than would be achieved by filtration 
in combination with chlorination.
    The limited alternative to filtration requirements 
established by this section is intended to provide an 
alternative to, but not supersede, the existing filtration 
requirements that have been promulgated pursuant to subsection 
1412(b)(7)(C), including the filtration avoidance criteria 
contained in 40 C.F.R. Sec. 141.71. Thus this language will not 
alter the status of those entities that currently need not 
filter their water. Instead, the new language merely 
establishes an additional circumstance in which the 
Administrator may permit a utility to select an alternative 
treatment technique in lieu of filtration.
    The bill requires as a condition of using alternative 
treatment measures that the watershed of the affected utility 
be in ``consolidated ownership.'' By this the Committee does 
not mean to imply that there must be only one owner of the 
total watershed. The committee recognizes that the watersheds 
of the cities of San Francisco, California; Portland, Oregon; 
and Seattle and Tacoma, Washington are in consolidated 
ownership. Further, consistent with the current filtration 
alternatives criteria, the utility must be able to demonstrate 
that there are effective controls on human activities that may 
have an adverse effect on the microbiological quality of the 
source water and that the controls apply to all land in the 
watershed, no matter what its ownership status. Such controls 
may be exercised through statute, regulation, or written 
agreements with land owners.
    In establishing this new alternative to filtration 
requirements, the Committee does not necessarily intend to 
imply that systems having uninhabited, undeveloped watersheds 
in consolidated ownership, and having control over access to, 
and activities in, those watersheds have water quality that is 
in any way superior to other systems' source water quality or 
that the ownership or acquisition of watershed land, which is 
one of many tools available to public water systems for the 
protection of source water quality, is necessarily the 
principal or preferred alternative for source water protection.
    The Committee understands that there is some concern with a 
filtration project affecting the Croton Watershed in New York. 
The Committee urges EPA to assist the State to find solutions 
that are acceptable and protect public health.

Section 104. Standard-setting

    This section retains the basic standard setting process, 
including existing provisions for health-based maximum 
contaminant level goals (MCLGs). The maximum contaminant level 
(MCL) are revised to give the Administrator new flexibility to 
consider risk reduction benefits and costs of compliance when 
formulating new and revised drinking water regulations.
    The Committee has determined not to make any changes to the 
maximum contaminant level goal provisions of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act, which provide that the Administrator is required to 
establish a maximum contaminant level goal at a level ``at 
which no known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of 
persons occur and which allows an adequate margin of safety.'' 
(See section 1412(b)(4).) In discussing this provision, the 
1974 Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee Report 
accompanying the original adoption of this language stated that 
the maximum contaminant goal ``must include an adequate margin 
of safety, unless there is no safe threshold for a contaminant. 
In such a case, the recommended maximum contaminant level 
should be set at the zero level.'' \17\ The Administrator has 
interpreted this language to authorize the establishment of 
MCLGs at a level above zero when the scientific evidence 
indicates that a safe level is present. The Committee believes 
that this formulation remains viable and should continue to 
govern EPA's decisions regarding the proper maximum contaminant 
level goal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ (H.R. Rpt. No. 1185, 93d Cong., Sess. (1974)); Senate Comm. on 
Environment and Public Works, 97th Cong., 2d Sess., A Legislative 
History of the Safe Drinking Water Act 552 (Comm. Print 1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Section 104(a) amends section 1412(b) of the Act to require 
the Administrator, when proposing a national primary drinking 
water regulation, to publish a determination as to whether the 
benefits of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) justify, or do 
not justify, the costs, based on a health risk reduction and 
cost analysis prepared under section 107 of this Act. This new 
requirement is set forth in section 1412(b)(4)(C).
    Section 104(a) amends section 1412(b) to authorize the 
Administrator to set the MCL at a level other than the feasible 
level if use of the technology, treatment techniques or other 
means at the feasible level would increase health risks by 
increasing concentrations of other contaminants or by 
interfering with the efficacy of existing treatment techniques. 
This new authority is set forth in new section 1412(b)(5). If 
the Administrator uses this authority, the level or levels or 
treatment technique must minimize the overall health risk.
    Section 104(a) also authorizes EPA to promulgate a national 
primary drinking water regulation that is less stringent than 
the level that would be established under paragraph 1412(b)(4), 
if the Administrator determines that the benefits of a standard 
would not justify its compliance costs. If the Administrator 
uses this authority, he or she must set the standard at the 
level that maximizes health risk reduction benefits at a cost 
that is justified by the benefits. The Administrator is to 
consider not only the costs and benefits that may be 
experienced by all systems, but is also to look at the systems 
that are actually expected to implement the standard to 
determine whether benefits justify the costs for these systems. 
If most small systems are likely, based on information provided 
by the States, to receive a variance from a particular standard 
and the benefits of a standard at the feasible level 
(authorized by section 1412(b)(4)) experienced by consumers 
served by large systems (and other systems that do not receive 
a variance) justify the costs, then the Administrator is not to 
use the authority of section 1412(b)(6) to set a standard. This 
exception to the discretionary authority to set standards under 
section 1412(b)(6) does not apply where the contaminant occurs 
almost exclusively in small systems.
    Section 104(a) also provides that the Administrator may not 
use this authority for setting standards under Stage 1 or Stage 
2 of the Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rules, or 
for establishing a standard or treatment technique for 
cryptosporidium. However, the Administrator may use this 
authority to establish regulations for groundwater disinfection 
as required by section 1412(b)(8).
    Judicial review of the Administrator's determination as to 
whether the benefits of a given maximum contaminant level or 
treatment requirement justify or do not justify the cost of 
complying with the level or treatment requirement shall occur 
only as part of a review of a final national primary drinking 
water regulation that is based on this determination. The 
Administrator's determination may not be set aside unless the 
court finds that the determination is arbitrary or capricious. 
Except as specified for the determination under section 
1412(b)(4)(C), this judicial review provision is not intended 
to change the standard of review otherwise applicable to a 
national primary drinking water regulation, including the 
requirements for the regulation to comply with the procedural 
provisions of this section.
    Section 104(b) addresses the application of amended section 
1412(b)(5) to the Agency's proposed Stage 1 and Stage 2 
regulations for disinfectants and disinfection byproducts. 
Public water systems use disinfectants to kill harmful 
microbial contaminants that can cause serious illness or even 
death. However, disinfectants and their resulting byproducts 
also may pose risks, including potential increases in cancer 
rates and liver and kidney damage. The regulation of both risks 
from microbial contaminants and risks from disinfectants and 
disinfection byproducts presents EPA with a unique challenge. 
Nonetheless, controls for cryptosporidium and disinfection 
byproducts are widely considered to be a pressing and high 
priority for improving drinking water safety.
    In November 1992, EPA convened a negotiated rulemaking to 
examine both the proper strategy for combating cryptosporidium 
and other microbial contaminants and to consider threats to 
human health from the use of disinfectants commonly employed to 
combat microbial contaminants. EPA had determined to use the 
negotiated rulemaking process because the Agency believed that 
``the available occurrence, treatment and health effects data 
were inadequate to address EPA's concern about the tradeoff 
between risks from disinfectants and disinfection byproducts 
and microbial pathogen risk, and wanted all stakeholders to 
participate in the decision-making on setting proposed 
standards.'' (59 Fed. Reg. 38670, July 29, 1994).
    Representatives from EPA, State and local government, water 
suppliers, public health organizations and environmental 
groups, among others, worked for nearly two years to reach 
agreement on a framework for regulating both microbial 
contaminants and disinfection byproducts. The framework will 
result in rules for controlling disinfection byproducts and an 
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule to address risks posed 
from microbial organisms. The package of rules when fully 
implemented is expected to minimize exposures to harmful 
microbial contaminants while reducing exposure to disinfection 
byproducts that present a health risk by optimizing the use of 
disinfectants and other means of water treatment.
    The negotiating committee agreed that a two-step process 
was necessary to address the microbial and disinfection and 
disinfection byproducts issues. The July 29, 1994, Federal 
Register notice thus proposes both Stage 1 and Stage 2 levels 
of control. The Stage I provisions set limits for two principal 
classes of chlorination byproducts, as well as limits for 
specific byproducts resulting from other disinfection 
processes, at levels deemed appropriate as a first step 
standard based on current information. More stringent Stage 2 
controls were also proposed for the two classes of chlorination 
byproducts but a second round of negotiations is envisioned. In 
the meantime, EPA is conducting an agreed-upon regime of health 
effects research and water quality monitoring which will be 
used both to finalize the disinfection byproduct rule and the 
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (as provided for by the 
parties' agreement) and for the second round of negotiations. 
``Based on this information and new data generated through 
research,'' EPA ``will reevaluate the Stage 2 regulations and 
repropose, as appropriate, depending on criteria agreed on in a 
second regulatory negotiation (or similar rule development 
process)'' (59 Fed. Reg. 38743).
    The Committee acknowledges the delicate balance that was 
struck by the parties in structuring the settlement of these 
complicated and difficult issues, and encourages the parties to 
continue according to the negotiated agreement. The negotiated 
agreement contains an over-arching set of principles to guide 
the individual rulemakings which incorporated consideration of 
various factors. The Committee intends that all additional 
negotiations weigh the same factors that guided the development 
of the proposed rule. Specifically, all further negotiations 
for the Stage II regulations for the control of disinfection 
byproducts should follow and be consistent with the 
consideration s that led to an agreement regarding the proposed 
rule for Stage 1.
    In order to preserve the progress made, there has been 
considerable care taken to ensure that the new provisions of 
this bill not conflict with the parties' agreement nor disrupt 
the implementation of the regulatory actions. To do otherwise 
would substantially disrupt, if not destroy, the next round of 
negotiations and lead to unne cessary delays in protecting 
public health. For this reason, the bill precludes the use of 
the new authority in section 1412(b)(6) to establish maximum 
contaminant levels for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 rulemakings for 
disinfectants or disinfection byproducts or to establish a 
national primary drinking water maximum contaminant level or 
treatment technique for cryptosporidium. (See new section 
1412(b)(6)(C).)
    The Committee recognizes, however, that the development of 
this regulatory package has required the negotiators to 
consider complex issues of risk, costs, affordability, feasible 
technology, and health benefits. It is the Committee's view 
that the proposed rule that has been produced is consistent 
with the ``risk-risk'' provision set out in new section 
1412(b)(5). Therefore, Section 104(b) makes clear that the 
Administrator may use the authority of section 1412(b)(5) to 
promulgate Stage 1 and Stage 2 rules. However, it is also the 
Committee's intent that no provision of Section 1412(b)(5) be 
interpreted to force an alteration of the negotiated agreement.
    Finally, Section 104(b) provides that for the purpose of 
promulgating Stage 1 and Stage 2 regulations for disinfection 
and disinfection byproducts, the consideration that the 
Administrator used in the development of the July 29, 1994 
proposal for such regulation are to be considered consistent 
with section 1412(b)(5). These considerations included risk, 
cost, affordability, feasible technology, and health benefits. 
The Committee intends with this language to ensure that the 
negotiators and ultimately the Administrator are authorized to 
consider these factors in the same manner as these 
considerations were used in developing the Stage I proposed 
rule.
    Section 104(c) amends the current requirement that EPA 
review, and if appropriate, revise each regulation every 3 
years (section 1412(b)(9)). The bill extends the review period 
to 6 years, and specifies that revisions are to be done using 
the standard setting procedures under this section and are to 
maintain or provide for greater public health protection. This 
subsection does not alter the Administrator's authority to 
review the scientific basis of national primary drinking water 
regulations and, where appropriate, revise regulations 
accordingly. Thus, the level necessary to maintain public 
health protection may change as new or additional information 
becomes available. Where the Agency makes a determination 
regarding human health effects that are inconsistent with 
determinations on which the Administrator has relied in 
establishing a national primary drinking regulation, the 
Administrator is encouraged to revise the standard to reflect 
the more recent information.

Section 105. Ground Water Disinfection

    Section 105 amends the current requirement under section 
1412(b)(8) that the Administrator promulgate regulations 
requiring disinfection by all public water systems (including, 
as necessary, groundwater systems) by 1989. The bill requires 
the Administrator to promulgate disinfection regulations any 
time in the period beginning 3 years after enactment of these 
amendments and up to the date on which EPA promulgates a Stage 
II D/DBP rule. The Administrator must consult with States and 
promulgate criteria that States must apply to determine for 
each public water system served by ground water whether 
disinfection would be required. Primacy States must use these 
criteria to develop plans for making ground water disinfection 
determinations and submit the plans to the Administrator for 
approval.

Section 106. Effective date for regulations

    This section amends section 1412(b)(10) to make national 
primary drinking water regulations effective 3 years after 
promulgation unless the Administrator determines that an 
earlier date is practicable. The Administrator may establish an 
earlier effective date, or may allow up to 2 additional years 
to comply, if he or she or a State (in the case of individual 
systems) determines that more time is needed for capital 
improvements.

Section 107. Risk assessment, management, and communication

    This section further amends section 1412(b) to address the 
scientific basis of regulatory decisionmaking and risk 
communication in drinking water regulations. The Administrator 
is directed to use the best available, peer-reviewed science 
and supporting studies conducted in accordance with sound and 
objective scientific practices; and data collected by accepted 
methods in carrying out science-based actions under this 
section. The Committee encourages the Administrator to obtain 
and use appropriate peer review for other significant agency 
actions under this title where scientific studies or assessment 
are important for those actions. The Committee also expects the 
Administrator and the States implementing State programs under 
this Title to use sound and objective scientific practices in 
assessing and characterizing scientific information or studies. 
The bill also requires the Administrator to present health 
effects information in a comprehensive, informative, and 
understandable manner. The Administrator is required to make 
publicly available a document that includes information about 
populations addressed by health effects estimates, expected 
risk, upper- or lower-bound risk estimates, significant 
uncertainties and studies that would help resolve them, peer-
reviewed studies that do or do not support the estimates of 
health effects, and the methodology used to reconcile 
inconsistencies in the data.
    Section 107 establishes in new subsection 1412(b)(12)(C) 
the requirement that the Administrator prepare a health risk 
reduction and cost analysis for new regulations. When proposing 
any national primary drinking water regulation that includes a 
maximum contaminant level or a treatment technique, the 
Administrator must publish, seek public comment, and use for 
the purposes of paragraphs 1412(b)(4), 1412(b)(5) and 
1412(b)(6) for an analysis of:
          Quantifiable and nonquantifiable health risk 
        reduction benefits expected to result from 
        implementation of the standard;
          Any benefits likely to occur from reductions in co-
        occurring contaminants attributed to compliance with 
        the MCL;
          Quantifiable and nonquantifiable costs likely to 
        occur with compliance, including monitoring, treatment, 
        and other costs;
          Incremental costs and benefits associated with each 
        alternative MCL considered;
          Effects of the contaminant on the general population 
        and subgroups likely to be at greater risk;
          Any increased risk that may occur as a result of 
        compliance (including risks associated with co-
        occurring contaminants); and
          Quality of information and uncertainties in the 
        analyses and the degree and nature of the risk.
    Section 107 authorizes $35 million per year for Fiscal 
Years 1996 through 2003 for EPA's Office of Ground Water and 
Drinking Water to perform the analyses and assessments required 
to support the development of drinking water regulations.

Section 108. Radon, arsenic, and sulfate

    This section amends section 1412(b) to establish separate 
regulatory provisions and schedules for radon, arsenic, and 
sulfate.
    Radon. New section 1412(b)(13)(A) requires the 
Administrator to withdraw the existing proposed radon 
regulation. Within 3 years of the date of enactment of these 
amendments, the Administrator must repropose and promulgate a 
radon regulation using the new standard setting procedures 
established by these amendments. In performing the required 
risk and benefit cost analyses for the radon rule, the 
Administrator must consider the costs and benefits of control 
programs for radon from other sources.
    Arsenic. New section 1412(b)(13)(B) requires the 
Administrator, within 180 days of enactment, to develop a plan 
for reducing the uncertainty in assessing risks associated with 
exposure to low levels of arsenic. Arsenic in drinking water is 
currently regulated at a level of 50 parts per billion. This 
standard was established in 1942 and does not take into account 
any possible carcinogenic effect from exposures to arsenic. 
While EPA was required to promulgate a new arsenic standard 
under the 1986 Amendments, it failed to do so due to the 
uncertainties surrounding the health effects of arsenic at low 
exposures. Because of this, the bill provides that the 
Administrator must develop a plan to assess the health risks 
associated with exposures to low levels of arsenic. This plan 
must be prepared within 180 days of enactment. The plan must be 
carried out in consultation with the National Academy of 
Science, other Federal agencies, and interested public and 
private parties. The Administrator must propose a national 
primary drinking water regulation for arsenic not later than 
January 1, 2000, and must promulgate a final regulation no 
later than January 1, 2001. The section authorizes $2 million 
per year, for Fiscal Years 1997 through 2001, for studies 
required by the plan concerning the effects of exposure to low 
levels of arsenic to human health.
    Sulfate. New section 1412(b)(13)(C) directs the 
Administrator, and the Director of the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention, to jointly conduct a study to establish 
a reliable dose-response relationship for the adverse health 
effects from exposure to sulfate in drinking water, prior to 
establishing a national primary drinking water standard for 
sulfate. The study must be conducted in consultation with 
interested States and must be based on the best available, 
peer-reviewed science and scientifically sound studies. The 
subparagraph creates no deadline for a sulfate standard. If the 
Administrator promulgates a regulation for sulfate, the 
regulation must include public notification requirements and 
options for provision of alternative water supplies to groups 
at risk as a means of complying in lieu of treatment.

Section 109. Urgent threats to public health

    This section amends Section 1412(b) for the purpose of 
addressing urgent public health threats. The Committee 
contemplates that such threats are those which would require 
immediate or near-immediate action on the part of the 
Administrator in order to protect public health. In these 
exceptional circumstances, the bill authorizes the 
Administrator to promulgate an interim drinking water 
regulation for a contaminant without making a determination as 
to whether or not the benefits justify the costs (under new 
section 1412(b)(4)(C)) and without performing a health risk 
reduction and cost analysis (under new section 1412(b)(12)(C)) 
in order to address an urgent threat to public health. The 
Administrator is required to publish the determination and 
analysis for such a contaminant within 3 years after the 
interim regulation is promulgated, and to repromulgate or 
revise the regulation within 5 years of that date.

Section 110. Recycling of filter backwash

    This section further amends section 1412(b) to require EPA 
to promulgate, within 4 years, a regulation governing the 
recycling of filter backwash water within the treatment process 
of public water systems, unless such recycling has been 
addressed by the enhanced surface water treatment rule.

Section 111. Treatment technologies for small systems

    Section 111(a) amends section 1412(b)(4)(E) to require that 
when EPA lists in regulations feasible treatment technologies 
for meeting national primary drinking water regulations, the 
Administrator must include technologies, treatment techniques, 
or other means that are affordable for three specified size 
categories of small public water systems. Listed small system 
technologies must achieve compliance with the maximum 
contaminant level or treatment technique and may include point-
of-entry and point-of-use treatment units. Such units must be 
owned, controlled and maintained by the public water systems or 
a person under contract with the system to ensure proper 
operation and maintenance and compliance.
    Within two years after enactment, the Administrator must 
issue a list of technologies affordable for small public water 
systems for existing regulations. Notwithstanding this 
deadline, the Administrator must list affordable small system 
technologies for the surface water treatment rule within one 
year.
    Section 111(b) adds new subsection 1445(g) to authorize the 
Administrator to request information from manufacturers, States 
and others on commercially available treatment systems and 
technologies for the purpose of developing regulations or 
guidance for the small systems assistance program under 
sections 1412(b)(4)(E) and 1415(e).
    The Committee is aware that the Administrator has recently 
entered into a cooperative agreement with the National 
Sanitation Foundation to develop and implement a package 
drinking water treatment technology performance verification 
program. By providing objective and verifiable performance 
data, this program will help to reduce costly and repetitive 
State pilot testing requirements for package technologies. The 
Committee encourages the Administrator to pursue this and other 
means of facilitating the approval by States of affordable 
drinking water treatment technologies.
    The Committee points to Galena Knolls Water Company, 
located in Chillicothe, Illinois, as an example of the type of 
small water system that section 111 is intended to help. The 
Galena Knolls Water Company serves about 70 customers and 
clearly falls within the population requirements set forth in 
section 111. Because this water system cannot achieve the 
economics of scale that larger systems can, it has been unable 
to afford more expensive treatment systems. However, point-of-
use filters would be affordable for Galena Knolls.

Section 121. State primacy

    Section 121(a) modifies section 1413 to extend, from 18 
months (in current law) to two years after promulgation, the 
deadline for States to submit regulations for approval by the 
Administrator. The bill authorizes the Administrator to extend 
the deadline by up to two years if the Administrator determines 
that the extension is necessary and justified. The bill also 
specifies that States with primacy are to be considered to have 
primary enforcement authority for a new regulation for the 
period during which EPA is making a determination with regard 
to primacy for that new regulation.
    Section 121(b) amends section 1413(a)(5) on emergency 
planning to include reference to specific types of natural 
disasters.

Section 131. Public notification

    This section revises the Safe Drinking Water Act's public 
notification requirements in section 1414(c). New subsection 
1414(c) (1) retains the requirements that a public water system 
notify customers of violations of an MCL and other events 
specified by existing subsections 1414(c) (1) and (2). New 
subsection 1414(c)(2) directs the Administrator, in 
consultation with States, to issue regulations prescribing the 
form, manner, frequency, and content for giving notice. Such 
regulations are to include different notification frequencies 
that reflect the frequencies and seriousness of violations. The 
bill permits States to establish alternative notification 
requirements. For violations with the potential to have serious 
adverse health effects from short-term exposure, a system must 
notify customers and the State or EPA within 24 hours of the 
violation. Notices must provide a clear explanation of the 
violation, potential adverse health effects, steps being taken 
to address the violation, and the necessity of seeking 
alternative water supplies in the interim. For such violations, 
States may vary the form, content and manner (e.g., broadcast 
media, newspaper, or door-to-door) of notice.
    For other violations, the EPA regulations must require 
public water systems to give written notice of violations to 
customers and prescribe the form and manner of the notice. For 
these violations, States may vary only the form and content of 
the notice. EPA also may require a public water system to give 
notice to customers of levels of an unregulated contaminant 
monitored under section 1445.
    New paragraph 1414(c)(3) requires primacy States to make 
available to the public and submit to EPA annual reports for 
the preceding Federal fiscal year on violations by public water 
systems in the States beginning no later than January 1, 1998. 
The Administrator is required to prepare and make available to 
the public annual reports summarizing and evaluating the State 
reports and similar information provided by Indian Tribes, 
beginning no later than July 1, 1998.
    New paragraph 1414(c)(4) requires each community water 
system to issue an annual ``consumer confidence report'' to its 
customers. Under existing law, community water systems are 
required to notify their customers when the system fails to 
comply with an applicable maximum contaminant level or 
treatment technique requirement of, or a monitoring procedure 
prescribed by, a national primary drinking water regulation. 
Also under existing law, community water systems are required 
to provide notification of the availability of the results of 
monitoring for unregulated contaminants required by section 
1445(a)(2). The ``consumer confidence report'' required by this 
paragraph will require community water systems to provide 
customers with information on whether they are, or are not, 
complying with the national primary drinking water regulations. 
Nothing in this new paragraph is intended to modify other 
public notification requirements of section 1414(c).
    New subparagraph 1414(c)(4)(A) requires the Administrator, 
within 24 months after the date of enactment of these 
amendments, in consultation with public water systems, 
environmental groups, public interest groups, risk 
communication experts, the States, and other interested 
parties, to issue regulations implementing the requirements of 
new paragraph 1414(c)(4).
    New subparagraph 1414(c)(4)(B) sets out the requirements 
for the contents of a consumer confidence report. The report 
must contain information on the source of the water purveyed, 
brief and plainly worded definitions of the terms ``maximum 
contaminant level goal'' and ``maximum contaminant level,'' as 
provided by Administrator's regulations, information on levels 
of regulated and certain unregulated contaminants in the water 
purveyed, a brief statement in plain language on the health 
effects of the contaminant for which there has been a violation 
of the maximum contaminant level during the year concerned, 
information on compliance with national primary drinking water 
regulations, information on the levels of unregulated 
contaminants for which monitoring is required under section 
1445(a)(2), and a statement referring consumers to an EPA 
``hot-line'' for more information.
    The Committee expects that the Administrator will 
promulgate regulations that ensure risks from exposure to 
contaminants in drinking water will be communicated in an 
accurate and understandable manner.
    The Committee also expects that the Administrator will 
promulgate regulations that allow community water systems to 
provide the required information in the most cost-effective 
manner possible. The Committee expects that in most cases, the 
reports will be one-page reports which can be included in 
ordinary mailings. Therefore, the statements which the 
Administrator is required to develop, and water systems are 
required to use, concerning the definition of terms and the 
explanation of health effects, should be as simple and 
straightforward as possible.
    New section 1414(c)(4)(B) further provides that a public 
water system may include such additional information as it 
deems appropriate for public education. A number of public 
water systems already provide their customers with an annual 
compliance report. These reports take many forms. A public 
water system may include such additional information as it 
deems appropriate for public education. The Committee 
encourages community water systems to use their expertise and 
experience to present the information required by this 
paragraph in the most accurate and effective manner.
    New paragraph 1414(c)(4)(C) provides that a Governor of a 
State may determine not to apply the mailing requirement of the 
paragraph to community water systems serving fewer than 10,000 
persons. Any such system which is exempt shall inform its 
customers that the system has been exempt from the mailing 
requirements of the paragraph, make information available upon 
request to the public regarding the quality of the water 
supplied by the system, and publish the report required by the 
paragraph in one or more local newspapers serving the area in 
which customers of the system are located.
    Paragraph 1414(c)(4)(D) provides that a State with primary 
enforcement responsibility for public water systems may 
establish, by rule, after notice and public comment, 
alternative requirements with respect to the form and content 
of the reports required by new paragraph 1414(c)(4). The 
Committee expects that States will use this authority, among 
other things, to adapt the annual reports to State requirements 
and to the particular circumstances of individual States.

Section 132. Enforcement

    Section 132(a)(1) amends section 1414(a) to specify that 
enforcement authority under the Act applies to ``any applicable 
requirement.'' An ``applicable requirement'' is defined in 
section 132(a)(4), infra.
    Section 132(a)(1) further amends 1414(a) to require the 
Administrator to notify an appropriate local elected official, 
if any, with jurisdiction over the public water system when 
taking an enforcement action in a nonprimacy State.
    Section 132(a)(2) amends section 1414(b) to authorize EPA 
to bring a civil action to require compliance with ``any 
applicable requirement.''
    Section 132(a)(3) amends section 1414(g) to streamline the 
process for taking administrative enforcement action and to 
apply this authority to violations of ``applicable'' 
requirements. This provision eliminates the requirement that 
the Administrator issue a proposed order and hold a public 
hearing prior to issuing a final compliance order. The revised 
language authorizes the Administrator to issue a compliance 
order after notifying the State and giving the State the 
opportunity to take action.
    Section 132(a)(4) adds new section 1414(h) to provide 
enforcement relief for certain noncomplying systems. Under new 
subsection (h), the new owner or operator of a public water 
system may submit a plan for the consolidation or transfer of 
ownership of the system. If the plan is approved by the State 
or the Administrator, enforcement action may not be taken for a 
violation identified in the approved plan for a period of two 
years or until consolidation is completed, whichever date is 
earlier.
    Section 132(a)(4) defines, in new subsection 1414(i), the 
term ``applicable'' requirement to include requirements of: 
section 1412 (primary drinking water regulations); section 1414 
(public notification); section 1415 (variances); section 1416 
(exemptions); section 1417 (prohibition on use of lead pipe, 
solder, and flux); section 1441 (chemical supplies); or 1445 
(records and inspections). The term ``applicable requirement'' 
is further defined to include: regulations promulgated under 
these sections; schedules or requirements imposed under these 
sections; and a requirement of, or permit issued under, an 
approved, applicable State program.
    Section 132(b) amends section 1413(a) to add a new 
condition for States to receive primary enforcement authority; 
i.e., States must adopt authority for administrative penalties, 
unless prohibited by the State constitution. The authority must 
allow a maximum penalty for systems serving more than 10,000 
people of $1,000 per day per violation, and for smaller 
systems, an amount that is adequate to ensure compliance, as 
determined by the State, except that a State may establish a 
maximum limitation on the total amount of administrative 
penalties that may be imposed on a public water system per 
violation.

Section 133. Judicial review

    This section amends section 1448(a) to specify that 
judicial review is available only for final Agency actions. It 
further provides that a court shall set aside and remand an EPA 
penalty order if the court finds that there is not substantial 
evidence in the record to support the finding of a violation or 
that the assessment of the penalty by the Administrator 
constitutes an abuse of discretion.

Section 141. Exemptions

    Section 141(a) establishes in new section 1416(h) exemption 
conditions and requirements for public water systems serving 
fewer than 3,300 persons. These systems may be granted an 
exemption for a maximum term of four years if the State has 
primacy and determines that the system cannot meet the MCL or 
install Best Available Affordable Technology (BAAT) and cannot 
comply through use of an alternative water source, and the 
system will still provide a drinking water supply that is 
protective of public health given the duration of the 
exemption. Prior to issuing an exemption, the State must 
examine whether the system has the capacity to comply with SDWA 
requirements, and determine if management or restructuring 
changes could result in compliance or improve drinking water 
quality. If the State determines that management or 
restructuring changes can reasonably be made, the State must 
make the adoption of such changes and a schedule for adopting 
such changes a condition of the exemption. State decisions 
regarding management changes or restructuring are not subject 
to review by the Administrator except as part of EPA's normal 
review of State exemptions under subsection (d). Conditions for 
exemptions on subsections 1416(a) (1) and (3) do not apply to 
exemptions under new section 1416(h). Small system exemptions 
may be renewed for additional four year periods. Exemptions are 
not available for microbiological contaminants.
    Section 141(b) further provides in section 1416(h) that the 
State of New York may allow limited additional time for 
compliance with the Surface Water Treatment Rule for certain 
systems in specified counties that meet certain stated 
criteria.
    Section 141(c) amends section 1416(b)(2)(A)(ii) to extend 
the term of an exemption, issued under section 1416(a), from 12 
months (under current law) to four years. The final date of 
compliance may not be extended for more than four years after 
the initial exemption has expired.

Section 142. Variances

    This section adds new section 1415(e) to allow variances 
for systems serving 3,300 persons or fewer provided that the 
system installs the Best Available Affordable Technology (BAAT) 
and other specified conditions are met. BAAT is defined to be 
the most effective technology or other means available and 
affordable to small systems. EPA is required to identify any 
BAAT in regulations where ``best technology or other means'' is 
not listed for small systems under subsection 1412(b)(4)(E). 
The BAAT must come as close to achievement of such maximum 
contaminant level as practical or as close to the level of 
health protection provided by such treatment techniques as the 
case may be. To the extent possible, within 36 months after 
enactment, the Administrator must identify BAAT for existing 
regulations and give priority to evaluating several specified 
contaminants. BAAT must be installed within two years after a 
variance is granted. The term of a variance may not exceed five 
years, but may be renewed for additional five year periods if 
the State determines that the necessary conditions are met. 
Variances are not available for regulations issued before 1986 
or for microbial contaminants.

Section 151. Lead plumbing and pipes

    Section 151 revises section 1417 to expand the lead ban 
provisions to prohibit the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing 
fitting or fixture, solder or flux in the installation or 
repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility 
providing water for human consumption that is not lead free. In 
addition, the provision provides that two years after 
enactment, it shall be unlawful to sell (or otherwise introduce 
into commerce) pipes and pipe or plumbing fittings or fixtures 
that are not lead free, except for pipes that are used in 
manufacturing or industrial processing. The provision also bans 
persons in the business of selling plumbing supplies, except 
manufacturers, from selling solder or flux that is not lead 
free and requires any person selling solder or flux to label 
the product to indicate that it is illegal to use this solder 
or flux in the installation or repair of any plumbing providing 
water for human consumption.
    The focus of these changes is to prevent the contamination 
of the drinking water supply by lead that has leached from 
pipes, faucets and other fixtures incidental to the delivery of 
potable water. It is the intent of the Committee that the terms 
pipe and plumbing fittings and fixtures in the legislation are 
in reference to drinking water applications. The ban on lead 
pipes or plumbing fittings or fixtures does not apply to 
manufacturing or industrial uses which do not involve the 
delivery of potable water, such as sewer systems or 
manufacturing processors or production units.
    New section 1417(e) provides that if voluntary standards 
for lead leaching from new plumbing fittings and fixtures are 
not established within one year after enactment of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, then the Administrator, 
within two years, must issue regulations setting a performance 
standard establishing maximum leaching levels for fixtures 
intended to dispense water for human consumption. 
Alternatively, if regulations are required but not issued 
within five years of enactment, the bill bans the use of such 
plumbing fitting or fixtures that contain more than four 
percent lead.

Section 161. Capacity development

    The Committee recognizes the importance of efforts to 
ensure that public water systems maintain the technical, 
managerial, and financial capacity to comply with the 
requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Currently, some 
public water systems do not have the capacity to comply with 
existing health and safety requirements. Many systems will need 
to further develop their capacity to meet future challenges, 
including both new treatment requirements and repair of 
deteriorating distribution systems.
    The Committee notes that some States have already 
undertaken a broad array of strategies to provide for the 
capacity development of public water systems. As demonstrated 
by these States, there are many options available to address 
the problems experienced by public water systems, including 
operator training, financial planning, changes in the source of 
water supply, and restructuring.
    In general, the bill requires each State to adopt legal 
authority or other means to ensure that new community and non-
transient, non-community water system have the technical, 
financial, and managerial capacity to comply with the Act, to 
maintain a list of the systems that are in significant 
noncompliance with requirements of the Act, and to develop and 
implement a capacity development strategy to assist public 
water systems in acquiring and maintaining the technical, 
managerial, and financial means to comply with the requirements 
of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
    This section adds new section 1419 to assist States in 
ensuring the capacity of community and nontransient, 
noncommunity water systems to comply with the Act. States are 
required to obtain legal authority to ensure that new systems 
commencing operation after October 1, 1999, have the technical, 
managerial, and financial capacity to comply with drinking 
water regulations.
    Beginning one year after enactment, States are required to 
submit to EPA a list of systems that have a history of 
significant noncompliance. Within five years after enactment, 
States must report to EPA on the success of enforcement actions 
and capacity development efforts to improve capacity. Within 
four years after enactment, States must develop and implement a 
strategy to assist systems in developing and maintaining 
compliance capacity. State agencies must submit to their 
Governors, and make available to the public, periodic reports 
on the strategy and progress being made toward improving the 
capacity of systems in the State.
    As set forth in section 1419(c), a State capacity 
development strategy includes criteria to identify systems that 
need assistance, methods to improve capacity and the means to 
measure progress in developing capacity. Under section 
1419(c)(3), the State agency with primary enforcement 
responsibility is to report to the Governor on the 
effectiveness of the strategy two years after it has been 
adopted and every three years thereafter.
    The capacity development strategy required by new section 
1419(c) is intended to encourage States to continue to focus 
resources on proven capacity development initiatives. Under 
section 1419(c)(2), States are required to consider, solicit 
public comment on, and include as deemed appropriate by the 
State, a number of elements and criteria.
    The Committee does not expect that every State will adopt 
the same capacity development strategy and does not expect 
States to include elements in section 1419(c) that the State 
determines are not appropriate. It is not expected that every 
State will give the same consideration to each of the elements 
listed in section 1419(c). Rather, the Committee expects that, 
as suggested by existing State capacity development programs, 
State capacity development strategies developed under this 
section will vary according to the unique needs of the State. 
The Committee encourages this diversity and indicates that EPA 
should give deference to a State's determination as to content 
and manner of implementation of a State plan, so long as the 
State has solicited and considered public comment on the listed 
elements and has adopted a strategy that incorporates 
appropriate provisions.
    To underscore the importance of the capacity development 
tasks included in these provisions and to ensure that SRF funds 
are focused on States where capacity development is being 
addressed, the Committee has linked capacity development to the 
SRF in two ways: First, the Committee has included set aside 
funding to support State capacity programs. This funding will 
augment funds that are already available to States to carry out 
primacy responsibilities. Second, the Committee also is 
including in the SRF title a provision which allows EPA to 
withhold 20 percent of a State's SRF funds unless a State has 
met the requirements of section 1418 relating to capacity 
development. However, to clarify EPA's role in this regard, the 
bill includes specific language providing that the decisions of 
a State regarding whether any particular public water system 
should take certain actions under the State's capacity 
development plan are in the sole discretion of the State and 
are not subject to review by EPA and may not serve as the basis 
for withholding funds under section 1452(a)(1)(H)(i).
    The section also places several burdens on EPA to assist 
States in the development of their capacity development 
programs. This section further directs the Administrator to 
provide informational assistance to support States in 
developing strategies, and to include in drinking water 
regulations an analysis of the likely effect of a new or 
revised national primary drinking water regulation on public 
water systems' compliance capacity. Within two years, the 
Administrator is also required to issue guidance, developed in 
consultation with the States, describing legal authorities and 
other means that States can use to ensure that all new systems 
demonstrate capacity to comply with the Act.

                     title ii--amendments to part c

Section 201. Source water quality assessment

    The Committee recognizes that source water protection can 
be a cost-effective strategy for ensuring safe drinking water 
supplies. Development of a new water supply may be expensive 
and time-consuming. Poor source water supplies also increase 
the costs of treatment for both large and small water systems. 
To address source water protection, the bill creates a new 
program in which States with primacy will conduct an 
assessment, coordinated with existing information and programs, 
to determine the vulnerability of sources of drinking water 
with State boundaries. A separate provision in the SRF section 
provides that SRF funds may be used, subject to the limitations 
contained in section 1452, to administer State source water 
protection programs except for enforcement actions, to provide 
loans for public water systems to acquire land or conservation 
easements from a willing seller or grantor for source water 
protection, and to provide loans to voluntary, incentive-based 
programs designed to protect source water from threats 
identified during the assessment.
    To avoid duplication and encourage efficiency, source water 
assessment programs shall be coordinated with other existing 
programs to the extent practicable, and may make use of 
information in these programs, such as delineations of ground 
water sources under a State wellhead protection program, State 
pesticide management plan, or State watershed initiative.
    Section 201(a) adds a new subsection to section 1428. The 
new subsection provides that within 12 months of enactment, EPA 
is to publish guidance for States that exercise primary 
enforcement responsibility for public water systems to carry 
out a source water assessment program. As part of the program, 
the State shall delineate the boundaries of areas from which 
one or more public water systems in the State receive supplies 
of drinking water and identify, to the extent practical, the 
origin of regulated drinking water contaminants to determine 
the susceptibility of public water systems to contaminants. The 
State may include in its assessment the origin of any 
unregulated contaminant selected by the State in its sole 
discretion and which the State, for purposes of this 
subsection, determines may present a threat to public health.
    Within 18 months after issuance of the EPA guidance, States 
are required to submit a source water assessment program to the 
Administrator for approval. States shall immediately implement 
a source water assessment program following approval. States 
have two years from the date of approval for completion of the 
assessment of delineated source water areas. In setting a 
timetable for a State to complete assessments, EPA shall 
consider the availability of State Revolving Funds and may 
extend the time allowed by an additional 18 months. The State 
shall make the result of source water assessments available to 
the public. Public water systems shall be eligible for 
monitoring relief under section 1418(a) only after assessments 
are completed for areas from which they receive supplies of 
drinking water.
    New subsection 1428(l)(5) requires the Administrator to 
conduct a demonstration program concerning the most effective 
means of assessing and protecting source waters serving large 
metropolitan areas and located on Federal lands.
    Section 201(b) amends section 1428 to provide procedures 
for EPA approval and disapproval of State source water 
assessment programs. A State program shall be approved unless 
the Administrator determines within nine months that the 
program does not meet the applicable requirements of section 
1428(l).

Section 202. Federal facilities

    The Federal Government owns or operates more than 4,200 
public drinking water systems at military bases, National parks 
and other Federal facilities. The number of Federal systems 
cited for violations increased from 830 in FY 1991 to 946 in FY 
1994.
    Federal agencies also own or operate facilities in wellhead 
protection areas. These facilities--both civilian and 
military--routinely generate, manage and dispose of large 
quantities of hazardous waste containing acids, nitrates, 
solvents, radioactive materials and heavy metals which can 
impact the safety of drinking water supplies. The Committee's 
efforts to ensure the compliance of Federal facilities with 
various Federal environmental statutes extends back several 
Congresses.
    Section 202(a) adds a new section 1429 to the Act to 
reaffirm in more explicit language the original intent of 
Congress that each department, agency, and instrumentality of 
the United States be subject to all of the provisions of 
Federal, State, interstate and local laws with respect to 
drinking water and protection of wellhead areas. This broad 
waiver is modeled on the waiver of sovereign immunity for 
Federal agencies under Section 6001 of the Solid Waste Disposal 
Act as adopted in the Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992 
(P.L. 102-386).
    This waiver subjects the Federal government to the full 
range of available enforcement tools, including, but not 
limited to, the mechanisms specifically listed in the language 
of new section 1429, to penalize isolated, intermittent or 
continuing violations as well as to coerce future compliance. 
By subjecting the Federal government to penalties and fines for 
isolated, intermittent, or continuing violations, the waiver 
also makes it clear that the Federal government may be 
penalized for any violation of Federal, State, interstate, or 
local law whether a single or repeated occurrence, 
notwithstanding the holding of the Supreme Court in Gwaltney of 
Smithfield, LTD v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., 484 US 49 
(1987).
    The Committee intends that any penalties or fines assessed 
are to be paid from the Agency's appropriations and not from 
the Judgement Fund. This will assure the proper measure of 
accountability for Federal agencies and assist in deterring 
future violations of drinking water laws and regulation.
    New section 1429 further provides that agents, employees, 
or officers of the United States shall not be personally 
subject to civil penalties but shall not be immune from 
enforcement of injunctive relief or criminal sanctions.
    New section 1429 provides that the President may exempt a 
Federal facility from requirements covered by this Act but may 
not do so due to lack of appropriation.
    The Administrator is given new authority under this section 
to assess administrative penalties, not to exceed $25,000 per 
day per violation, against Federal agencies found to be in 
violation after the effective date of the Act, of the specified 
requirements of the Act. EPA is required to provide the Agency 
with notice and an opportunity for a hearing prior to issuance 
of an administrative penalty. The section authorizes any 
interested person to obtain judicial review of an 
administrative penalty in the U.S. District Court. The District 
Court may impose an additional civil penalty for a violation 
that is subject of the order only if the court finds that the 
assessment constitutes an abuse of discretion by the 
Administrator but the District Court is not authorized to 
reduce any such penalty.
    Fines and penalties collected by a State for enforcement of 
this Act against a Federal facility are to be used only for 
projects to improve or protect the environment or to defray the 
costs of environmental protection or enforcement.
    Section 202(b) amends the citizen enforcement provisions of 
the Act, Section 1449, to permit citizen suits against Federal 
agencies that fail to pay a penalty assessed by EPA under the 
new administrative penalty provisions of the law.

    TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS REGARDING SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

Section 301. Operation certification

    Section 301 adds new subsection 1442(f) setting forth 
operator certification requirements. Under this new subsection, 
the Administrator, in consultation with States, is required to 
issue regulations specifying minimum standards for 
certification of operators of community and nontransient 
noncommunity public water systems, taking into account existing 
State programs, the complexity of the system, reasonable costs, 
system size, and other factors. States are given two years to 
implement EPA regulations following their promulgation. The 
regulations must allow primacy States with substantially 
equivalent programs in effect on the date of enactment of this 
Act to enforce that program in lieu of EPA regulations. 
Existing State programs are presumed to be substantially 
equivalent, notwithstanding differences based on size or the 
quality of source water.
    The Committee recognizes that all of the 50 States 
currently have operator certification programs in place, 
although the specific requirements of programs vary from State 
to State. Such programs have developed out of a recognition by 
States and public water systems that properly trained operators 
are an important and cost-effective part of providing safe 
drinking water to the public. In a similar fashion, the 
Committee recognizes that operator certification programs are 
an important element in the effective implementation of the 
Safe Drinking Water Act.
    The differences in State programs are due to the fact that 
State programs have developed at different rates and in 
response to different needs, including variations in the size 
of systems, the quality of source water available to systems, 
and resources available to develop and maintain such programs. 
New section 1442(f) provides that EPA's regulations for 
operator certification must take into account existing State 
programs, the complexity of the system, and other factors 
designed to provide an effective program at reasonable costs to 
States and public water systems, taking into account the size 
of the system. The Committee anticipates that such regulations 
will provide States with a great deal of flexibility in 
ensuring that operators of community and non-transient 
noncommunity public water systems are properly trained.
    New section 1442(f)(3) provides that EPA shall presume that 
an existing State program is substantially equivalent to the 
minimum requirements developed under new section 1442(f)(1), 
notwithstanding program differences based on the size of 
systems or the quality of source water, providing that State 
programs meet the overall public health objectives of the 
regulations. The Committee intends that EPA should not require 
every State program to meet the same requirements with respect 
to such items as operator training, the qualification of 
operators, continuing education, and operator certification, 
providing State programs meet the overall public health 
objectives of the regulations promulgated under 1442(f)(1). The 
requirements promulgated by EPA under this section are to 
provide a framework with which State operator certification 
programs can, where necessary, be improved to help ensure that 
all systems are operated by appropriately trained individuals. 
In addition, the requirements promulgated by EPA should not be 
construed to require that all community water systems and non-
transient, noncommunity water systems must have a certified 
operator on site at all times. Where it is appropriate, the 
Committee intends that States shall consider other mechanisms 
such as sharing of operator expertise among several systems or 
requiring periodic visits to a system by a certified operator. 
It should also be recognized that for some systems, 
particularly small systems that do not provide treatment, it 
may be sufficient for the State to determine that a person need 
only to be ``qualified'' not ``certified'' to conduct necessary 
sampling or perform other activities.
    To underscore the importance of the operator certification 
requirements included in these provisions, the Committee has 
linked operator certification to the State Revolving Fund in 
two areas. First, section 308 includes set-aside funding to 
support State operator certification and training programs. 
This funding augments funds that are already available to 
States to carry out primacy requirements. Second, section 308 
allows EPA to withhold 20 percent of a State's capitalization 
grant if a State has not met the requirements of subsection (f) 
of section 1442.

Section 302. Technical assistance

    This section amends section 1442(e) to authorize EPA to 
provide technical assistance for small public water systems 
(including circuit-rider programs, training, and preliminary 
engineering evaluations) in the amount of $15 million for 
Fiscal Years 1997 through 2003. Of the appropriated amount, 3 
percent must be used for technical assistance to systems owned 
or operated by Indian tribes. No portion of funds provided 
under this subsection or under section 1452 (relating to SRF 
funds) may be used either directly or indirectly for lobbying 
expenses.

Section 303. Public water system supervision program

    This section amends section 1443(a)(7) to reauthorize State 
public water system supervision (PWSS) program grants in amount 
of $100 million for each of Fiscal Years 1997 through 2003. New 
paragraph (8) provides that EPA may use a State's PWSS funds if 
EPA assumes primary enforcement responsibility for a State 
program. New paragraph (9) authorizes EPA to reserve a portion 
of SRF funds from such a State if the PWSS grant appropriation 
is insufficient for EPA to fully administer a program in such a 
State. This authority to reserve SRF funds does not apply to 
any State not exercising primary enforcement responsibility as 
of the date of enactment of these amendments.

Section 304. Monitoring and information gathering

    This section revises monitoring and information gathering 
requirements under the Act.
    Section 304(a) amends section 1445(a) concerning the 
Administrator's authority to gather information. New 
subparagraph 1445(a)(1)(B) gives the Administrator authority to 
obtain information in a case-by-case basis, to determine 
whether a person who is subject to a national primary drinking 
water regulation under section 1412 has acted or is acting in 
compliance with such requirements. Such person is required to 
provide such information as the Administrator may reasonably 
require, after consultation with the State in which such person 
is located (if such State has primary enforcement 
responsibility for public water systems) to determine, on a 
case-by-case basis, whether such person has acted or is acting 
in compliance with this title.
    New subparagraph 1445(a)(1)(C) requires every person who is 
subject to a national primary drinking water regulation under 
section 1412 to provide such information as the Administrator 
may reasonably require to assist the Administrator in 
establishing regulations under section 1412 of this title. The 
amendments contained in this Act will impose on the 
Administrator new prerequisites for issuing regulations. This 
new authority is intended to allow the Administrator to gather 
some of the necessary information without issuing a regulation. 
To insure that the Administrator's requests for information 
under this authority are appropriate, the bill requires the 
Administrator to consult with the States and suppliers of water 
before exercising this authority and to first seek to obtain 
the information by voluntary submission. In order not to impose 
significant burdens on persons covered by this new authority, 
the Administrator may not require the installation of treatment 
equipment or process changes, the testing of treatment 
technology, or the analysis or processing of monitoring 
samples, except where the Administrator provides funding for 
such activities. The Committee believes that the Agency will 
receive the most useful information in the most timely manner 
if the Administrator and the person work together voluntarily.
    Nothing in the new authority in subparagraph 1445(a)(1)(C) 
is intended to waive any requirement of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act.
    Section 304(a) also amends section 1445(a) to require EPA 
to review monitoring requirements for at least 12 contaminants 
and make any necessary changes within two years.
    Section 304(b) adds a new section 1418 to the Act on 
contaminant monitoring. Subsection 1418(a) authorizes States to 
modify monitoring requirements for systems serving 10,000 or 
fewer persons for contaminants (other than microbial 
contaminants, disinfectants and disinfection byproducts, or 
corrosion byproducts). A State may provide this interim 
monitoring relief if the contaminant is not detected in initial 
monitoring, and the State determines (considering the 
hydrogeology of the area and other relevant factors) that the 
contaminant is not likely to be detected in further monitoring. 
The interim relief is available for 3 years following enactment 
or until the State has adopted permanent relief, whichever is 
sooner.
    New subsection (b) authorizes a primacy State with an 
approved wellhead protection program and a source water 
assessment program to adopt permanent alternative monitoring 
requirements for chemical contaminants. A State alternative 
monitoring program must be consistent with EPA guidelines and 
ensure compliance with drinking water regulations. In order to 
qualify for alternative monitoring, a public water system must 
show a State that a contaminant is not present in a drinking 
water supply or, if present, it is reliably and consistently 
below the MCL.
    The provision defines ``reliably and consistently below the 
maximum contaminant level'' to mean that, even though the State 
has detected a contaminant, the State has sufficient knowledge 
to predict that the MCL will not be exceeded. In making this 
determination, the State must consider: (1) the quality and 
completeness of the data; (2) the length of time covered and 
the volatility or stability of monitoring results during that 
time, and; (3) the proximity of such results to the maximum 
contaminant level. Wide variations in the analytical results, 
or analytical results close to the maximum contaminant level, 
shall not be considered to meet this standard.
    New subsection (c) specifies that all monitoring relief 
granted by a State shall be treated as part of the drinking 
water regulation for that contaminant.
    Section 304(c) further amends section 1445(a) provisions 
governing monitoring for unregulated contaminants. Within 3 
years after enactment and every 5 years thereafter, EPA must 
issue a list of not more than 40 unregulated contaminants to be 
monitored by public water systems and to be included in the 
national drinking water occurrence data base. EPA must include 
on the list any contaminants recommended in a petition signed 
by the Governors of at least 7 States unless the Administrator 
determines the listing of contaminants recommended by the 
Governors would prevent this listing of other contaminants of a 
higher public health concern. States may develop representative 
monitoring plans for systems serving fewer than 10,000 people, 
and EPA shall make funds appropriated under section 
1445(a)(2)(H) to pay for testing and analysis costs under these 
plans. Subparagraph (H) authorizes $10 million for each of 
Fiscal Years 1997 through 2003. Public water systems are 
required to report the results of monitoring for unregulated 
contaminants to the State, and notification of the availability 
of the results must be given to the system's customers and EPA. 
The Administrator shall waive monitoring requirements for an 
unregulated contaminant if the State demonstrates that the 
criteria for listing the contaminant do not apply in that State 
(subparagraph (F)). Subparagraph (G) authorizes States to use 
screening methods approved by the Administrator (under section 
304(d)) in lieu of monitoring for particular unregulated 
contaminants.
    Section 304(d) requires EPA to review new analytical 
methods to screen for regulated contaminants and authorizes EPA 
to approve such methods that are more accurate or cost-
effective than the established reference methods for use for 
compliance monitoring.

Section 305. Occurrence data base

    In recognition of the need to develop comprehensive and 
reliable information regarding the occurrence of contaminants 
in drinking water, the bill establishes a national occurrence 
data base to be developed and operated by EPA. Specifically, 
the section adds new subsection 1445(g) to direct EPA, within 
three years of enactment of these amendments, to assemble and 
maintain a national drinking water occurrence data base that 
includes information derived from public water system 
monitoring of regulated and unregulated contaminants and from 
other sources. The provision provides that EPA shall use the 
data base as a factor in making determinations under section 
1412(b)(3) with respect to the occurrence of a contaminant in 
drinking water at a level of public health concern. In 
establishing the occurrence data base, the Administrator is 
required to solicit recommendations from the Science Advisory 
Board, the States, and other interested parties concerning the 
development and maintenance of a national drinking water 
occurrence data base, including such issues as the structure 
and design of the data base, data input parameters and 
requirements, and the use and interpretation of data. The 
Committee believes that the solicitation of recommendations on 
these and related issues is important to ensure that the 
Administrator develops and maintains an occurrence data base 
which is both useful and manageable.
    New subsection 1445(g) also requires EPA periodically to 
solicit recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences 
and the States for contaminants that should be included in the 
data base. Any person may also submit recommendations. All such 
recommendations shall be accompanied by reasonable 
documentation that the contaminant occurs or is likely to occur 
in drinking water and the contaminant poses a risk to public 
health. The bill also explicitly states that information in the 
data base be made available to the public in a readily 
accessible form.

Section 306. Citizens suits

    This section amends section 1449 to indicate that pending 
State, as well as Federal, court actions to require compliance 
may serve as a bar to civil actions.

Section 307. Whistle blower

    This section amends subsection 1450(i) to extend from 30 
days to 180 days the timeframe for an employee to file a 
discrimination complaint and to make other changes. It provides 
that the Secretary of Labor, upon conclusion of a hearing and 
the issuance of a recommended decision that the complaint has 
merit, shall issue a preliminary order providing relief under 
clause (ii) (e.g., reinstatement, back pay) but may not order 
compensatory damages pending a final order. It further directs 
the Secretary to dismiss a complaint and not conduct an 
investigation unless the complainant has made a prima facie 
showing that the complainant's role in an enforcement action 
was a contributing factor in the alleged unfavorable personnel 
action. The Secretary may determine that a violation has 
occurred only if the complainant has demonstrated that the 
involvement in an enforcement action was a contributing factor 
alleged in the unfavorable personnel action. The bill further 
provides that relief may not be ordered if the employer 
demonstrates that it would have taken the same personnel action 
in the absence of such behavior.
    Section 307(b) establishes that this provision applies to 
complaints filed on or after the date of enactment of these 
amendments.

Section 308. State revolving funds

    This section establishes a new section 1452 of the Act 
creating a State Revolving Fund (SRF) program to provide 
financial assistance to facilitate compliance with national 
primary drinking water standards and for projects to further 
the health protection objectives of the Safe Drinking Water 
Act.
    The Administrator is directed to enter into capitalization 
grant agreements with eligible States. Before receiving a 
grant, States are to establish a drinking water treatment 
revolving loan fund, into which Federal capitalization grants 
will be deposited. States must agree to deposit in the fund an 
amount of State funds equal to 20 percent of the total amount 
of the capitalization grant. State matching funds are to be 
deposited on or before the date of a grant payment, except that 
matching funds for Fiscal Years 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 must 
be deposited the earlier of the date on which a grant payment 
is made or no later than September 30, 1998.
    The bill authorizes $599 million annually for Fiscal Years 
1994 and 1995 and $1 billion annually in Fiscal Years 1996 
through 2003 for capitalization grants under this section.
    Federal capitalization grants shall be available to the 
State for obligation for a period of 2 fiscal years (the year 
of the award and the following fiscal year). Grants made 
available from funds appropriated prior to enactment of this 
bill shall be available for obligation during Fiscal Years 1997 
and 1998.
    Each SRF shall be established, maintained and credited with 
repayments and interest so that the fund balance is available 
in perpetuity. Funds not required for current obligation are to 
be invested in interest-bearing obligations.
    For Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997, capitalization 
grants are to be distributed to States using the same formula 
used to distribute public water system supervision grant funds 
in Fiscal Year 1995. No State shall receive less than 1 percent 
of available funds. For Fiscal Years 1998 and thereafter, 
capitalization grants are to be allocated to States 
proportional to needs identified in the needs survey required 
by this section. Subject to certain conditions, grants not 
obligated within the time period specified in the bill are to 
be reallotted to other States using the same criteria that 
governed allocation of the grants originally.
    In States which do not exercise primary enforcement 
responsibility for public water systems, funds shall be 
allotted by the Administrator. The Administrator shall allot 20 
percent of the State's allotment for purposes of exercising 
primary enforcement responsibility and shall allot the 
remaining funds to other primary enforcement States for deposit 
in those States' SRFs. If the Administrator makes a final 
determination that a State is not meeting the requirements of 
section 1413(a) of the Act, additional grants to that State are 
to be immediately terminated.
    Beginning in Fiscal Year 1999, the Administrator is 
required to withhold 20 percent of capitalization grants to a 
State which has not met the requirements of the Act concerning 
capacity development. The Administrator must withhold an 
additional 20 percent if a State has not met the requirements 
of the Act concerning operator certification. All funds 
withheld are to be reallotted by EPA to other States on the 
basis of the same ratio of funds that governed allocation of 
the grants originally.
    A State may use amounts in the Revolving Fund only to make 
loans, loan guarantees, or as a source of reserve and security 
for leveraged loans, or other authorized assistance to 
community water systems and nonprofit noncommunity water 
systems, other than systems owned by Federal agencies. 
Financial assistance provided by the SRF may be used by a 
public water system to facilitate compliance with applicable 
national primary drinking water regulations or to otherwise 
significantly further the health protection objectives of the 
Act. Loans (including loan guarantees) also may be provided to 
systems which are not public water systems (as defined in new 
section 1401(4)(B) of the Act) in order to provide water for 
residential uses that is equivalent to that provided by the 
applicable national primary drinking water regulation. 
Capitalization grant funds may not be used for monitoring, 
operation, and maintenance expenditures and may be used for 
acquisition of real property only to the extent the property is 
integral to a project and is purchased from a willing seller. 
States are required to reserve 15 percent of available funds to 
provide loan assistance to public water systems which serve 
fewer than 10,000 persons.
    Section 1452(a)(3)(A) provides that financial assistance 
shall not be provided to a public water system under two 
circumstances, without first meeting the requirements of 
section 1452(a)(3)(B). First, funds may not go to a public 
water system which is in significant noncompliance with any 
requirement of a national primary drinking water regulation or 
variance. Second, assistance may not be provided to a public 
water system that does not have the technical, managerial, and 
financial capability to ensure compliance with requirements of 
the Act.
    Section 1452(a)(3)(B) provides that the prohibition on 
funding in section 1452(a)(3)(A) will not apply if two 
conditions can be met. First, the use of the assistance will 
ensure compliance. Second, the owner or operator of the system 
agrees to undertake feasible and appropriate changes to ensure 
that the system has the capability to comply with the 
requirements of the Act over the long term (if the State 
determines that such measures are necessary).
    Each State is required to prepare a plan for the intended 
uses of amounts available in the Revolving Fund. The plan shall 
include a list of projects to be assisted, criteria and methods 
established for distribution of funds, and a description of the 
financial status of the SRF and its short-term and long-term 
goals. To the maximum extent practicable, the plan must give 
priority to projects that address the most serious risk to 
human health, are necessary to ensure compliance with the Act, 
and will assist systems with the greatest financial need. In 
preparing its intended use plan, the State may take into 
account the readiness of projects for financing. The State must 
provide an opportunity for public comment on the use of the 
funds and must publish and periodically update a list of 
projects in the State that are eligible for assistance, their 
priority, and expected funding schedule.
    A State may provide additional subsidization (including 
forgiveness of principal) on loans made to a disadvantaged 
community (according to affordability criteria established by 
the State) or to a community that the State expects to become 
disadvantaged as a result of a proposed project. Loan subsidies 
resulting from this provision may not exceed 30 percent of the 
amount of capitalization grant received by the State for that 
year.
    For administrative convenience and where not prohibited by 
other law, States may combine the financial administration of a 
drinking water Revolving Fund with that of any other revolving 
fund established by the State, so long as grants, loan 
repayments and interest are accounted for separately and 
oversight responsibility is maintained by the State agency 
responsible for public water system supervision under the Act.
    Under section 1452(g)(1), States may reserve annually up to 
4 percent of allotted capitalization grant funds to cover the 
reasonable costs of administering programs under this section 
and to provide technical assistance to public water systems. 
Beginning with Fiscal Year 1995, States with primary 
enforcement responsibility may use up to an additional 10 
percent of allotted funds for public water system supervision 
programs, to administer and provide technical assistance 
through source water protection programs, operator 
certification programs, and to develop and implement a capacity 
development strategy.
    Funds for source water protection under subsection 
1452(g)(1)(B) shall not be used for purposes which do not 
facilitate compliance with drinking water standards or 
otherwise significantly further the health protection 
objectives of the Safe Drinking Water Act. States may not use 
such funds for enforcement actions. Rather, the Committee 
encourages the implementation of voluntary incentive-based 
measures where local communities, farmers, and upstream 
entities can work together.
    To use the additional funds under 1452(g)(1) for the 
described activities, the State is to match such expenditures 
with an equal amount of State funds, and at least one-half of 
the matched funds must be additional to amounts expended by the 
State for public water supervision in Fiscal Year 1993. 
Additionally, States are to reserve annually 1 percent of 
allotted funds to provide technical assistance to public water 
systems.
    The Administrator is directed to publish guidance and 
promulgate regulations as necessary to carry out section 1452. 
Such guidance or regulations must include provisions to ensure 
that each State commits and expends funds as efficiently as 
possible in accordance with this Title and applicable State 
law. The Administrator must publish guidance to prevent waste, 
fraud and abuse. Additionally, due to the limited funding 
available for capitalization grants compared with the need of 
many systems for funds simply to comply with the requirements 
of this Act, the Administrator is required to publish guidance 
to avoid the use of funds to finance the expansion of any 
public water system in anticipation of future population 
growth.
    Under section 1452(k), a State may reserve 15 percent of 
the capitalization grant amounts for certain set-asides. 
However, no more than 10 percent of a State's grant may be used 
for any single activity. Funds can be used to acquire land or 
conservation easements for the purpose of source water 
protection from willing sellers or grantors, to implement 
local, voluntary, incentive-based source water quality 
protection measures, to provide assistance as part of a 
capacity development strategy, to make expenditures to conduct 
a source water assessment in accordance with 1428(l), and to 
make expenditures to establish and implement wellhead 
protection programs.
    As discussed above, the Committee recognizes that source 
water protection can be a cost-effective strategy for ensuring 
safe drinking water supplies. Therefore, subparagraph 
1452(k)(1)(A)(ii) provides that a State may use up to 10 
percent of its annual capitalization grant to provide loans to 
fund local, voluntary, incentive-based mechanisms for source 
water protection.
    Funds provided under subparagraph 1452(k)(1)(A)(ii) may be 
used only for voluntary, incentive-based mechanisms whose 
purpose is to prevent the contamination of drinking water 
supplies. The purpose of this new authority is to encourage 
voluntary partnerships formed for the purposes of minimizing 
the contamination of drinking water supplies. For this reason, 
such funds may not be used to impose new regulatory 
requirements on potential sources of drinking water 
contamination. Likewise, such funds may not be used to enforce 
existing regulatory requirements on potential sources of 
drinking water contamination. Furthermore, nothing in this 
subsection is intended to create or convey any new regulatory 
authority to a State, political subdivision of a State, or a 
public water system, nor limit any authority such State, 
political subdivision or public water system may have under any 
other Federal, State or local authorities.
    For example, major potential resources exist in a number of 
existing water quality-related programs through which 
technical, financial and other non-regulatory forms of 
assistance could be brought to bear in helping local 
partnerships address source water problems. Too often, either 
localities are unaware of these programs; or managers of such 
programs are unaware of local needs that may exist in source 
water areas. States could play an invaluable leadership role in 
facilitating local partnership efforts by (1) compiling and 
disseminating information profiling the various Federal and 
State water quality-related programs which may be potential 
sources of technical, financial and other non-regulatory forms 
of assistance; and (2) helping overcome barriers and coordinate 
such programs so that pressing local source water needs are 
taken into consideration when program managers make critical 
decisions among competing priorities regarding where to 
allocate or redirect scarce resources.
    The Administrator is directed to publish guidance and 
promulgate regulations necessary to carry out this section, 
including with respect to use accounting, audit, and fiscal 
procedures that conform to generally accepted accounting 
standards.
    Each State must make a complete report to the Administrator 
every two years concerning the use of the fund, findings of the 
most recent audit of the fund, and the State allotment. Also, 
the Administrator shall periodically conduct an audit of all 
Revolving Funds established by and amounts allotted to the 
States under this section in accordance with procedures 
established by the Comptroller General.
    Within 180 days of enactment and every four years 
thereafter, the Administrator is to conduct an assessment and 
report to Congress on water system capitalization improvement 
needs of all eligible public water systems.
    The Administrator may reserve one and one-half percent of 
amounts appropriated annually to make grants to Indian Tribes 
and Alaskan Native Village which are not otherwise eligible to 
receive assistance under this section. Not more than one 
percent of all SRF funds are to be reserved by EPA for drinking 
water infrastructure grant assistance to the District of 
Columbia, the Virgin Islands, Commonwealth of the Northern 
Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Republic of 
Palau. EPA also may reserve up to two percent of amounts 
appropriated annually for technical assistance for small 
systems.
    The State of Virginia is authorized to conduct an 
alternative demonstration program by providing loans from an 
SRF to a regional endowment fund to finance new drinking water 
facilities in certain southwestern Virginia communities that 
are experiencing economic hardship subject to approval by the 
Virginia General Assembly and EPA.
    From funds appropriated, the Administrator is to reserve 
$10,000,000 per year for health effects studies, with priority 
given to studies of cryptosporidium, disinfection byproducts, 
arsenic, and studies of subpopulations at greater risk of 
adverse effects from exposure to drinking water contaminants.

Section 309. Water Conservation Plan

    This section establishes a new section 1453 of the Act 
concerning water conservation. Within two years of enactment, 
the Administrator is to publish guidelines for water 
conservation plans for public water systems serving fewer than 
3,300 persons, serving between 3,300 and 10,000 persons, and 
serving more than 10,000 persons. With in one year thereafter, 
a State may require a public water system seeking a loan or 
grant from an SRF to submit a water conservation plan 
consistent with the EPA guidelines.

                        TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS

Section 401. Definitions

    Section 401(a) amends section 1401(1)(D) of the definition 
of `primary drinking water regulation' to authorize EPA, at any 
time after promulgating a regulation, to issue guidance 
allowing the use of other equally effective methods to comply 
with the monitoring requirements of the regulation.
    Section 401(b) modifies the definition of a public water 
system to include the supplying of water for human consumption 
through pipes and ``other constructed conveyances.'' The term 
``constructed conveyance'' refers to transport systems such as 
ditches, canals, culverts, waterways and similar delivery 
systems that are man-made and that transport large quantities 
of water in a utility network. The term does not include water 
delivered by bottle or in other package units, by vending 
machines or coolers and does not include water that is trucked 
or delivered by a similar vehicle.
    Section 401(b) further modifies the definition of a public 
water system by excluding from consideration certain 
connections that might otherwise qualify a system as a public 
water system. Except as noted below, these exclusions only 
apply where the water is delivered by a constructed conveyance 
other than a pipe.
    The first exclusion applies when water delivered by the 
constructed conveyance is used exclusively for purposes other 
than residential uses (consisting of drinking, bathing, and 
cooking) or other similar uses (Section 1401(4)(B)(i)(f)). The 
water supplied, in this case, is not allowed nor intended to be 
used for residential or simi lar uses; and, therefore the water 
system is excluded from this provision.
    The second exclusion applies when water is provided by the 
system for residential or similar uses from another source such 
as bottled water or trucked water (Section 1401(4)(B)(i)(II)). 
To qualify for this exclusion, the alternative source of water 
for these uses must be provided (not merely be available). By 
requiring the altern ative supply of water to be ``provided,'' 
the Committee does not intend the water to be provided for free 
of charge. As with a public water system, the water system may 
charge users for the reasonable costs of the water supplied.
    The third exclusion applies where the water delivered by 
constructed conveyances is used for residential or similar 
uses, but the water is treated prior to use (See new section 
1401(4)(B)(i)(III)). In this instance, the water may be treated 
centrally or at the point-of-entry to a residence or other 
facility where similar uses occur by the system, by a pass-
through entity or by the consumer. As a general principle, the 
Safe Drinking Water Act does not allow a pubic water system to 
place the burden of compliance on the customer. However, the 
Committee recognizes that in several situations it may be 
appropriate to allow customers to assume this obligation. 
First, in some instances, customers who receive water from 
constructed conveyances have already taken it upon themselves 
to install point-of-entry units. In this case, a water system 
should not have to replace the unit or duplicate treatment. 
Second, in many rural areas, a water system that is constructed 
principally for irrigation or other agricultural and industrial 
uses may not desire to be regulated as a public water system 
and would decline to provide water to residential users if the 
system were required to provide the treatment centrally. 
Therefore, the obligation to treat the water to a level of 
public health protection equivalent to the applicable national 
primary drinking water regulation may be assumed by the 
consumer to assure that people living in rural areas are not 
precluded from obtaining the best quality water at an 
affordable cost.
    To qualify for either of the two latter exclusions, the 
State (or the Administrator in the case of a State without 
primacy) must make the factual determination that the 
alternative water or treated water used for residential or 
similar uses actually achieves the equivalent level of public 
health protection provided by the applicable national primary 
drinking water regulation. This determination is distinct from 
the question of who may bear the responsibility for actually 
providing treatment.
    Generally, the bill excludes these two types of connections 
from consideration only where the connection is to a water 
system that conveys water by means other that pipes. Piped 
water systems may not avoid regulation as public water systems 
by providing bottled water or by treating at the point of 
entry. However, an exception is made for some piped water 
delivery systems that were in operation prior to May 18, 1994, 
and that were constructed principally for the purpose of 
agricultural service with only incidental use for human 
consumption. These piped systems are not to be considered 
public water systems if they comply with the requirements 
applicable under one or the other of the exclusions for 
alternative water or point of entry treatment available under 
section 401(b).
    The Committee anticipates that this statutory scheme will 
result in the most economical supply of safe drinking water to 
consumers. The Committee anticipates, however, that the 
adoption of point-of-entry or other treatment, while perhaps 
providing an economical supply of drinking water over the long-
term, may impose significant short-term costs on systems and 
consumers. Thus, section 1452(a)(2) makes providers eligible 
for loans for the purpose of providing the treatment described 
in section 1401(4)(B)(i)(III). With the availability of such 
assistance, providers may be able to obtain technology at lower 
cost and pass those savings on to the customer.
    The amendments to section 1401 concerning the definition of 
a ``public water system'' are not intended to alter the 
criteria for the related section 1411 ``coverage'' provision of 
the Safe Drinking Water Act. However, the Committee recognizes 
that some applications of section 1411 could inadvertently 
cause duplicative or unnecessary compliance activities for some 
systems that purchase finished water that is then submetered to 
encourage consumers to utilize a lesser volume of such water. 
The Committee agrees with the letter received from the 
Environmental Protection Agency, provided in the Appendix, that 
the current statutory language provides States with the 
flexibility to avoid duplication of compliance activities. 
Further, the Committee encourages EPA to review its guidance on 
such matters to prevent duplicative or unnecessary regulations 
that do not further public health protection and which could 
inhibit other goals which would reduce the volume of finished 
water needed.
    Section 401 also requires the General Accounting Office to 
undertake a study to determine the number of individuals and 
households served by systems using the alternatives in new 
section 1401(4)(B), as well as the sources and costs of potable 
water they are provided. In addition, the GAO is to review 
State and water system compliance with the exclusion 
provisions. A report based on this effort is due within three 
years after enactment.

Section 402. Authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes appropriations to carry out the 
Act. Subsection (a) adds a new section 1402 which authorizes 
such sums as necessary to carry out provisions of the Act for 
the first 7 fiscal years following enactment of these 
amendments.
    Subsection (b) authorizes $15,000,000 annually for Fiscal 
Years 1992 through 2003 for sole source aquifer demonstrations 
programs under section 1427. It also deletes the limitation 
that critical aquifer protection areas covered by this 
provision must be approved by EPA within 24 months of enactment 
of the 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments.
    Subsection (c) authorizes $30,000,000 annually for Fiscal 
Years 1992 through 2003 for State wellhead protection programs 
under section 1428, and subsection (d) authorizes $15,000,000 
annually for the same period for underground injection control 
program grants under section 1443(b).
    The 1980 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act 
established section 1425 in response to Congressional concerns 
about EPA proposed regulations regarding Class II injection 
wells, including stripper wells. Stripper wells, such as those 
found throughout Appalachia, are particularly sensitive to 
increased regulatory costs. On March 29, 1996, President 
Clinton signed Public Law 104-121 that, among other things, 
required greater flexibility and scrutiny of regulatory burdens 
respecting small business. The Committee expects that if EPA 
proposes additional injection well requirements, it should 
require a separate evaluation and subcategory for stripper 
wells operated by small businesses.

Section 403. New York City watershed protection program

    This section adds a new subsection 1443(d) to authorize 
$15,000,000 per year annually for Fiscal Years 1997 through 
2003 as financial assistance to the State of New York for 
demonstration projects to implement a watershed protection 
program for the New York City water supply system. Federal 
assistance under this subsection is limited to not more than 35 
percent of total cost for any particular watershed or ground 
water recharge area.
    In providing funds to the State of New York under this 
section, the Administrator is strongly encouraged to give 
priority to projects that demonstrate, assess, or provide for 
comprehensive monitoring, surveillance, and research with 
respect to the efficacy of various source water protection 
activities, or that establish watershed or basin-wide 
coordinating planning or governing organizations.

Section 404. Estrogenic substances screening program

    This section amends Part F by adding a new section 1470 
that mandates development and implementation of a program to 
identify and regulate pesticides that may have effects on 
humans similar to effects produced by naturally occurring 
estrogen or other endocrine effects. The bill also provides 
additional authority to require testing of other substances 
where such substances may be found in sources of drinking water 
and the Administrator determines that a substantial population 
may be exposed to the substance. It requires EPA to develop a 
screening program, using appropriate validated test systems and 
other scientifically relevant information, within two years 
and, after public comment and review by EPA's Scientific 
Advisory Board or the Scientific Advisory Panel, to implement 
the program within three years. Validation ensures that a test 
measures the end-point that it claims to measure and is 
repeatable by other laboratories. Testing for endocrine effects 
would apply to all active and inert ingredients in pesticide 
products that may be found in drinking water sources. EPA may 
exempt a substance from testing by order if it is not 
anticipated to produce an estrogenic effect in humans.
    The Committee understands that scientific screening tests 
are generally used in laboratory evaluations of substances to 
determine if further analyses are warranted. Typically, a 
positive result from a screening test does not by itself 
confirm or deny that a substance will demonstrate the target 
characteristic. Different screening tests have different 
confidence limits and lower confidence limits than more 
complete evaluations. Further evaluations are necessary to 
characterize the significance and likelihood of adverse health 
effects, modes of exposure, biological mechanisms and dose-
response relationships. The Administrator should ensure that 
risk communication involving information from screening tests 
convey the accurate meaning of the results of the screening 
test.
    The bill directs EPA to order registrants, manufacturers, 
or importers to conduct tests under the screening program and 
to submit results to EPA. EPA can fulfill the order requirement 
by entering into enforceable consent agreements. EPA is to 
minimize duplicative testing to the extent practicable; 
develop, as appropriate, procedures for fairly and equitably 
sharing test costs; and develop, as necessary, procedures for 
handling confidential business information.
    The bill provides for suspension of the sale or 
distribution of a substance by any registrant who fails to 
comply with a test order under this section concerning that 
substance. Unless the registrant complied fully with the order 
or requested a hearing, a suspension would become final in 30 
days. Any hearing must be conducted in accordance with the 
formal adjudicatory hearing process of the Administrative 
Procedure Act (5 USC 554). Its only purpose would be to 
determine whether the person failed to comply with an EPA test 
order. Suspension must be terminated if the registrant fully 
complies with the test order.
    Any other person subject to a test order who fails to 
comply with that test order is liable for penalties and 
sanctions as provided in the Toxic Substances Control Act 
(TSCA) section 16 (15 USC 2615). These penalties may include up 
to $25,000 per day in fines and, if the person knowingly or 
willfully violates an order, imprisonment for up to one year. A 
person assessed a fine may request a hearing and, if ordered to 
pay the fine after the hearing, may file a petition for 
judicial review of EPA's order.
    If a substance is found to have an endocrine effect as a 
result of validated tests and evaluations, and as necessary to 
ensure protection of public health, Section 1470(f) requires 
EPA to take, as appropriate, action under existing statutory 
authority. This provision is not intended in any way to provide 
additional regulatory autho rity. Nor does the provision 
replace, modify, or expand any other provision of existing 
authorities. Hence no standard of protection under existing 
authority is changed in any way by this provision. Appropriate 
action may be, or include, further testing or study.
    EPA must report to Congress within 4 years on its findings 
from the screening program and any recommendations for further 
testing and actions. Finally, the bill states that the section 
does not amend or modify TSCA or the Federal Insecticide, 
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, 7 USC 136 et seq.).

Section 405. Reports on programs administered directly by Environmental 
        Protection Agency

    This section requires EPA to report every two years to 
Congress on the implementation of this Act for States and 
Indian Tribes where EPA has revoked primary enforcement 
responsibility.

Section 406. Return flows

    This section clarifies that water supplies from a public 
water system regulated under this Act shall not be used in 
connection with operation of residential and commercial 
geothermal heat pumps.

Section 407. Emergency powers

    This section amends section 1431(b) of the Act to increase 
the existing penalty for violating an emergency order issued 
under this section from $5,000 per day to $15,000 per day.

Section 408. Waterborne disease occurrence study

    This section requires EPA and the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention (CDC) to establish pilot waterborne 
disease occurrence studies for at least five major U.S. 
communities or public water systems and report on findings. EPA 
and CDC also are required to establish a training and public 
education campaign for professional hea lth care providers 
about waterborne diseases that may be caused by infectious 
agents.
    Funds totaling $3,000,000 annually for Fiscal Years 1997 
through 2003 are authorized to carry out these studies, and EPA 
is authorized to use not more than $2,000,000 annually out of 
funds reserved under new section 1452(n) (the SRF provisions of 
the Act), to the extent funds under this section are not fully 
appropriated. EPA may transfer a portion of funds to the CDC.

Section 409. Drinking water studies

    This section authorizes several specific health effects 
studies.
    Subsection (a) directs EPA to conduct a continuing program 
of studies to identify groups within the general population at 
greater risk of adverse health effects from exposure to 
contaminants in drinking water.
    Subsection (b) directs EPA to study the biomedical 
mechanisms by which chemical contaminants cause adverse effects 
among humans, especially subpopulations at greater risk. These 
studies also are to develop new approaches for studying complex 
mixtures, synergistic and antagonistic interactions, and 
noncancer endpoints and infectious diseases.
    Subsection (c) directs EPA to conduct studies which the 
parties to the negotiated rulemaking agreed are necessary to 
support the development and implementation of the enhanced 
surface water treatment rule, disinfectant and disinfection 
byproduct rule, and ground water disinfection rule.
    Funds totaling $12,500,000 annually for Fiscal Years 1997 
through 2003 are authorized in this section to carry out the 
required drinking water studies. In addition, funds for the 
studies are authorized in new section 1452, State Revolving 
Funds for drinking water infrastructure.

Section 410. Bottled drinking water standards

    This section modifies section 410 of the Federal Food, Drug 
and Cosmetic Act to add a new subsection (b) to require the 
Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (the 
Secretary) to establish standard of quality regulations for 
bottled water for each contaminant for which a national primary 
drinking water regulation is issued by the Administrator, 
unless the Secretary determines that such a standard of quality 
regulation is not necessary because the contaminant is 
contained in water in public water systems but not in water 
used for bottled drinking water.
    New subsection (b) provides that not later than 180 days 
before the effective date of a national primary drinking water 
regulation (not including extensions under section 
1412(b)(10)), the Secretary shall either promulgate a standard 
of quality regulation for that contaminant or contaminants, 
including monitoring requirements, or make a determination that 
such a regulation is not necessary.
    The effective date for any standard of quality regulation 
promulgated under this subsection shall be the same as the 
effective date for the national primary drinking water 
regulation for the contaminant, except for any standard of 
quality regulation promulgated by the Secretary before the date 
of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 
for which (as of such date of enactment) an effective date had 
not been established. In March 1996, the Secretary promulgated 
standard of quality regulations for 22 contaminants. However, 
the Secretary stayed the effective date for nine of these 
contaminants in order to gather additional information on the 
appropriate monitoring requirements. Under new subsection (b), 
the Secretary is required to promulgate monitoring requirements 
for the contaminants covered by such regulations not later than 
two years after the date of enactment of these amendments. 
These monitoring requirements would become effective not later 
than 130 days after the date on which the monitoring 
requirements are promulgated.
    New subsection (b) requires the Secretary to establish a 
level for the contaminant in bottled water which is no less 
stringent than the maximum contaminant level provided in the 
national primary drinking water regulations for the same 
contaminant or requirements which are no less protective of 
public health than those applicable to water provided by public 
water systems using the treatment technique required by the 
national primary drinking water regulation.
    Finally, if the Secretary does not promulgate a standard of 
quality regulations within the time period described above, the 
national primary drinking water regulation for such contaminant 
shall be considered as the regulation applicable under this 
subsection to bottled water. In the case of a national primary 
drinking water regulation that is considered to be a standard 
of quality regulation pursuant to new subsection 410(b)(4)(A), 
the Secretary is required to publish a Federal Register notice 
specifying the contents of such regulations, including 
monitoring requirements, and providing that the effective date 
for such regulation shall be the effective date of the national 
primary drinking water regulation (except for standard of 
quality regulations promulgated before the date of enactment of 
these amendments but for which the effective date was stayed, 
in which case the effective date shall be not later than two 
years and 180 days after the date of enactment of these 
amendments).

Section 411. Clerical amendments

    This section provides miscellaneous clerical amendments to 
the Act.

                              Agency Views

                      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
                                     Washington, DC, June 11, 1996.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I applaud your work and the efforts of 
other key members of the Committee on Commerce to reach 
bipartisan agreement on a strengthened Safe Drinking Water Act 
(SDWA). As you prepare for Full Committee mark-up and future 
steps in the legislative process, I would like to provide you 
with the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) initial views 
on the bill reported by the Subcommittee on Health and 
Environment, as well as an assessment of EPA's ability to 
implement provisions of the bill.
    Ensuring the safety of the water we drink every day is one 
of the most fundamental responsibilities of government, and one 
of President Clinton's top environmental priorities. In 
September 1993, the Administration sent to Congress ten 
recommendations for SDWA reauthorization. We seek a 
reauthorized Act that provides responsible regulatory 
improvements coupled with stronger ``preventive'' approaches 
and public information along with increased State and local 
funding--all of which will improve public health protection.
    The Committee's bill achieves these goals by drawing on 
many of the strongest elements of the Senate bill, S. 1316, 
while making essential improvements in several key areas. The 
Committee's improvements in the area of ``prevention'' are 
perhaps the most significant. The bill reflects the 
Administration's recommendations to fundamentally improve the 
ability of water systems and States to prevent drinking water 
safety problems and avoid public health endangerment in the 
future. Preventing pollution of drinking water sources in the 
first place can reduce the cost of treating water ``after the 
fact.'' The bill provides for the delineation and assessment of 
source water areas, as in the Senate bill, but provides States 
with extensive flexibility to develop and fund their own source 
water protection programs and local protection projects. We 
strongly support this flexibility; State and local initiatives 
should not be stifled by overly prescriptive statutory 
requirements. In addition, the bill strengthens small system 
assistance, operator training and certification, and State 
programs to encourage greater technical, financial, and 
managerial capacity among the nation's water systems.
    We applaud the Committee for including provisions to 
improve consumer awareness. Public access to information on 
drinking water safety is long overdue. We are also pleased to 
see the Committee has included an estrogen screening program 
that will advance our understanding of endocrine disruptors and 
their potential health effects. These provisions and the 
stronger prevention focus in the bill, if passed into law, 
would signal a revitalized national commitment to meet the 
challenge of safe and affordable drinking water long into the 
future.
    The Committee's bill, like the Senate bill, includes 
several provisions that address current implementation problems 
faced by water systems, States, and EPA--most notably, 
monitoring flexibility, workable exemptions, small system 
assistance, small system technology variances, and more funding 
for States. The bill also establishes the Drinking Water State 
Revolving Fund (SRF) proposed by President Clinton, which will 
provide funding to communities to improve drinking water 
safety. I am concerned, however, that the total level of 
``taps'' from the SRF to fund specific activities will limit 
the availability of dollars needed for building a permanent 
source of revolving funds.
    Finally, the Committee's bill builds upon the Senate's 
balanced framework for selecting contaminants and setting 
standards, but eliminates duplicative procedural hurdles that 
could cause unnecessary delays in future safety standards. The 
bill also has a special provision to preserve the balanced 
framework that was agreed upon as part of a negotiated 
rulemaking for setting future standards for disinfection 
byproducts and Cryptosporidium.
    The Administration has steadfastly supported improvements 
to SDWA along the lines of the bill reported by the 
Subcommittee, and EPA has taken a number of steps to prepare 
for these improvements. Over the last year we have worked hard 
with stakeholders to realign our resources to reflect priority 
drinking water concerns. We believe our extensive outreach 
effort will bolster future partnerships for implementing SDWA. 
In addition, our planned reorganization of the drinking water 
program should improve the Agency's ability to strengthen its 
scientific work in drinking water while maintaining other 
priority activities.
    EPA's responsibilities in the bill will present 
implementation challenges. Important new efforts to boost 
stakeholder involvement and strengthen science will undoubtedly 
make some time frames difficult and strain current Agency 
resources. Timely implementation is achievable, however, 
depending on adequate levels of future funding. We look forward 
to working together to assure there are resources necessary to 
allow implementation of the important public health protections 
in this bill.
    I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the 
bill. We may have additional comments as we conduct a more 
detailed review of individual provisions. I look forward to 
working with the Committee to secure final passage of SDWA 
reauthorization that provides balanced regulatory improvements, 
new funding strong prevention, and public information.
            Sincerely,
                                                  Carol M. Browner.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

               TITLE XIV OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT

            (Commonly known as the Safe Drinking Water Act)

               TITLE XIV--SAFETY OF PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS

SEC. 1400. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

  (a) Short Title.--This title may be cited as the ``Safe 
Drinking Water Act''.
  (b) Table of Contents.--

                TITLE XIV--SAFETY OF PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS

Sec. 1400. Short title and table of contents.

                           Part A--Definitions

Sec. 1401. Definitions.
Sec. 1402. Authorization of appropriations.

                      Part B--Public Water Systems

Sec. 1411. Coverage.
Sec. 1412. National drinking water regulations.
Sec. 1413. State primary enforcement responsibility.
Sec. 1414. Enforcement of drinking water regulations.
Sec. 1415. Variances.
Sec. 1416. Exemptions.
Sec. 1417. Prohibition on use of lead pipes, solder, and flux.
Sec. 1418. Monitoring of contaminants.
Sec. 1419. Capacity development.

       Part C--Protection of Underground Sources of Drinking Water

Sec. 1421. Regulations for State programs.
Sec. 1422. State primary enforcement responsibility.
Sec. 1423. Enforcement of program.
Sec. 1424. Interim regulation of underground injections.
Sec. 1425. Optional demonstration by States relating to oil or natural 
          gas.
Sec. 1426. Regulation of State programs.
Sec. 1427. Sole source aquifer demonstration program.
Sec. 1428. State programs to establish wellhead and source water 
          protection areas.
Sec. 1429. Federal facilities.

                        Part D--Emergency Powers

Sec. 1431. Emergency powers.
Sec. 1432. Tampering========================================================
                      __________________________________________________

                       Part E--General Provisions

Sec. 1441. Assurance of availability of adequate supplies of chemicals 
          necessary for treatment of water.
Sec. 1442. Research, technical assistance, information, training of 
          personnel.
Sec. 1443. Grants for State programs.
Sec. 1444. Special study and demonstration project grants; guaranteed 
          loans.
Sec. 1445. Records and inspections.
Sec. 1446. National Drinking Water Advisory Council.
Sec. 1447. Federal agencies.
Sec. 1448. Judicial review.
Sec. 1449. Citizen's civil action.
Sec. 1450. General provisions.
Sec. 1451. Indian tribes.
Sec. 1452. State revolving funds.
Sec. 1453. Water conservation plan.

Part F--Additional Requirements To Regulate the Safety of Drinking Water

Sec. 1461. Definitions.
Sec. 1462. Recall of drinking water coolers with lead-lined tanks.
Sec. 1463. Drinking water coolers containing lead.
Sec. 1464. Lead contamination in school drinking water.
Sec. 1465. Federal assistance for State programs regarding lead 
          contamination in school drinking water.
Sec. 1466. Estrogenic substances screening program.

                          Part A--Definitions

                              definitions

  Sec. 1401. For purposes of this title:
          (1) The term ``primary drinking water regulation'' 
        means a regulation which--
                  (A) * * *
          * * * * * * *
                  (D) contains criteria and procedures to 
                assure a supply of drinking water which 
                dependably complies with such maximum 
                contaminant levels; including quality control 
                and testing procedures to insure compliance 
                with such levels and to insure proper operation 
                and maintenance of the system, and requirements 
                as to (i) the minimum quality of water which 
                may be taken into the system and (ii) siting 
                for new facilities for public water systems. At 
                any time after promulgation of a regulation 
                referred to in this paragraph, the 
                Administrator may add equally effective quality 
                control and testing procedures by guidance 
                published in the Federal Register. Such 
                procedures shall be treated as an alternative 
                for public water systems to the quality control 
                and testing procedures listed in the 
                regulation.
          * * * * * * *
          [(4) The]
          (4) Public water system.--
                  (A) In general.--The term ``public water 
                system'' means a system for the provision to 
                the public of [piped water for human 
                consumption] water for human consumption 
                through pipes or other constructed conveyances, 
                if such system has at least fifteen service 
                connections or regularly serves at least 
                twenty-five individuals. Such term includes 
                [(A)] (i) any collection, treatment, storage, 
                and distribution facilities under control of 
                the operator of such system and used primarily 
                in connection with such system, and [(B)] (ii) 
                any collection or pretreatment storage 
                facilities not under such control which are 
                used primarily in connection with such system.
                  (B) Connections.--
                          (i) In general.--For purposes of 
                        subparagraph (A), a connection to a 
                        system that delivers water by a 
                        constructed conveyance other than a 
                        pipe shall not be considered a 
                        connection, if--
                                  (I) the water is used 
                                exclusively for purposes other 
                                than residential uses 
                                (consisting of drinking, 
                                bathing, and cooking, or other 
                                similar uses);
                                  (II) the Administrator or the 
                                State (in the case of a State 
                                exercising primary enforcement 
                                responsibility for public water 
                                systems) determines that 
                                alternative water to achieve 
                                the equivalent level of public 
                                health protection provided by 
                                the applicable national primary 
                                drinking water regulation is 
                                provided for residential or 
                                similar uses for drinking, 
                                cooking, and bathing; or
                                  (III) the Administrator or 
                                the State (in the case of a 
                                State exercising primary 
                                enforcement responsibility for 
                                public water systems) 
                                determines that the water 
                                provided for residential or 
                                similar uses for drinking, 
                                cooking, and bathing is 
                                centrally treated or treated at 
                                the point of entry by the 
                                provider, a pass-through 
                                entity, or the user to achieve 
                                the equivalent level of 
                                protection provided by the 
                                applicable national primary 
                                drinking water regulations.
                          (ii) Irrigation districts.--An 
                        irrigation district in existence prior 
                        to May 18, 1994, that provides 
                        primarily agricultural service through 
                        a piped water system with only 
                        incidental residential or similar use 
                        shall not be considered to be a public 
                        water system if the system or the 
                        residential or similar users of the 
                        system comply with subclause (II) or 
                        (III) of clause (i).
                  (C) Transition period.--A water supplier that 
                would be a public water system only as a result 
                of modifications made to this paragraph by the 
                Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 
                shall not be considered a public water system 
                for purposes of the Act until the date that is 
                two years after the date of enactment of this 
                subparagraph. If a water supplier does not 
                serve 15 service connections (as defined in 
                subparagraphs (A) and (B)) or 25 people at any 
                time after the conclusion of the two-year 
                period, the water supplier shall not be 
                considered a public water system.
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 1402. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
necessary to carry out the provisions of this title for the 
first 7 fiscal years following the enactment of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996. With the exception of 
biomedical research, nothing in this Act shall affect or modify 
any authorization for research and development under this Act 
or any other provision of law.

                      Part B--Public Water Systems

          * * * * * * *

                  national drinking water regulations

  Sec. 1412. (a) * * *
  (b)(1) * * *
  (2)(A) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (C) Any contaminant referred to in paragraph (1) for which a 
substitution is made, pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this 
paragraph shall be included on the priority list to be 
published by the Administrator not later than January 1, 1988, 
pursuant to paragraph [(3)(a)] (3)(A).
  (D) The Administrator's decision to regulate a contaminant 
identified pursuant to this paragraph in lieu of a contaminant 
referred to in paragraph (1) shall not be subject to judicial 
review.
  [(3)(A) The Administrator shall publish maximum contaminant 
level goals and promulgate national primary drinking water 
regulations for each contaminant (other than a contaminant 
referred to in paragraph (1) or (2) for which a national 
primary drinking water regulation was promulgated) which, in 
the judgment of the Administrator, may have any adverse effect 
on the health of persons and which is known or anticipated to 
occur in public water systems. Not later than January 1, 1988, 
and at 3-year intervals thereafter, the Administrator shall 
publish a list of contaminants which are known or anticipated 
to occur in public water systems and which may require 
regulation under this Act.
  [(B) For the purpose of establishing the list under 
subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall form an advisory 
working group including members from the National Toxicology 
Program and the Environmental Protection Agency's Offices of 
Drinking Water, Pesticides, Toxic Substances, Ground Water, 
Solid Waste and Emergency Response and any others the 
Administrator deems appropriate. The Administrator's 
consideration of priorities shall include, but not be limited 
to, substances referred to in section 101(14) of the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980, and substances registered as pesticides 
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
  [(C) Not later than 24 months after the listing of 
contaminants under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall 
publish proposed maximum contaminant level goals and national 
primary drinking water regulations for not less than 25 
contaminants for the list established under subparagraph (A).
  [(D) Not later than 36 months after the listing of 
contaminants under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall 
publish a maximum contaminant goal and promulgate a national 
primary drinking water regulation for those contaminants for 
which proposed maximum contaminant level goals and proposed 
national primary drinking water regulations were published 
under subparagraph (C).]
          (3) Regulation of unregulated contaminants.--
          (A) Listing of contaminants for consideration.--(i) 
        Not later than 18 months after the date of the 
        enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
        1996 and every 5 years thereafter, the Administrator, 
        after consultation with the scientific community, 
        including the Science Advisory Board, after notice and 
        opportunity for public comment, and after considering 
        the occurrence data base established under section 
        1445(g), shall publish a list of contaminants which, at 
        the time of publication, are not subject to any 
        proposed or promulgated national primary drinking water 
        regulation, which are known or anticipated to occur in 
        public water systems, and which may require regulation 
        under this title.
          (ii) The unregulated contaminants considered under 
        clause (i) shall include, but not be limited to, 
        substances referred to in section 101(14) of the 
        Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
        Liability Act of 1980, and substances registered as 
        pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 
        and Rodenticide Act.
          (iii) The Administrator's decision whether or not to 
        select an unregulated contaminant for a list under this 
        subparagraph shall not be subject to judicial review.
          (B) Determination to regulate.--(i) Not later than 5 
        years after the date of the enactment of the Safe 
        Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, and every 5 
        years thereafter, the Administrator shall, by rule, for 
        not fewer than 5 contaminants included on the list 
        published under subparagraph (A), make determinations 
        of whether or not to regulate such contaminants.
          (ii) A determination to regulate a contaminant shall 
        be based on findings that--
                  (I) the contaminant is known to occur or 
                there is a substantial likelihood that the 
                contaminant will occur in public water systems 
                with a frequency and at a level of public 
                health concern; and
                  (II) regulation of such contaminant presents 
                a meaningful opportunity for public health risk 
                reduction for persons served by public water 
                systems.
        Such findings shall be based on the best available 
        public health information, including the occurrence 
        data base established under section 1445(g).
          (iii) The Administrator may make a determination to 
        regulate a contaminant that does not appear on a list 
        under subparagraph (A) if the determination to regulate 
        is made pursuant to clause (ii).
          (iv) A determination under this subparagraph not to 
        regulate a contaminant shall be considered final agency 
        action and subject to judicial review.
          (C) Priorities.--In selecting unregulated 
        contaminants for consideration under subparagraph (B), 
        the Administrator shall select contaminants that 
        present the greatest public health concern. The 
        Administrator, in making such selection, shall take 
        into consideration, among other factors of public 
        health concern, the effect of such contaminants upon 
        subgroups that comprise a meaningful portion of the 
        general population (such as infants, children, pregnant 
        women, the elderly, individuals with a history of 
        serious illness, or other subpopulations) that are 
        identifiable as being at greater risk of adverse health 
        effects due to exposure to contaminants in drinking 
        water than the general population.
          (D) Regulation.--For each contaminant that the 
        Administrator determines to regulate under subparagraph 
        (B), the Administrator shall promulgate, by rule, 
        maximum contaminant level goals and national primary 
        drinking water regulations under this subsection. The 
        Administrator shall propose the maximum contaminant 
        level goal and national primary drinking water 
        regulation not later than 24 months after the 
        determination to regulate under subparagraph (B), and 
        may publish such proposed regulation concurrent with 
        the determination to regulate. The Administrator shall 
        promulgate a maximum contaminant level goal and 
        national primary drinking water regulation within 18 
        months after the proposal thereof. The Administrator, 
        by notice in the Federal Register, may extend the 
        deadline for such promulgation for up to 9 months.
          (E) Health advisories and other actions.--The 
        Administrator may publish health advisories (which are 
        not regulations) or take other appropriate actions for 
        contaminants not subject to any national primary 
        drinking water regulation.
          (F) Disinfectants and disinfection byproducts.--
                  (i) Information collection rule.--Not later 
                than December 31, 1996, the Administrator 
                shall, after notice and opportunity for public 
                comment, promulgate an information collection 
                rule to obtain information that will facilitate 
                further revisions to the national primary 
                drinking water regulation for disinfectants and 
                disinfection byproducts, including information 
                on microbial contaminants such as 
                cryptosporidium. The Administrator may extend 
                the December 31, 1996, deadline under this 
                clause for up to 180 days if the Administrator 
                determines that progress toward approval of an 
                appropriate analytical method to screen for 
                cryptosporidium is sufficiently advanced and 
                approval is likely to be completed within the 
                additional time period.
                  (ii) Additional deadlines.--The time 
                intervals between promulgation of a final 
                information collection rule, an Interim 
                Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, a Final 
                Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, a Stage 
                I Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts 
                Rule, and a Stage II Disinfectants and 
                Disinfection Byproducts Rule shall be in 
                accordance with the schedule published in 
                volume 59, Federal Register, page 6361 
                (February 10, 1994), in table III.13 of the 
                proposed Information Collection Rule. If a 
                delay occurs with respect to the promulgation 
                of any rule in the timetable established by 
                this subparagraph, all subsequent rules shall 
                be completed as expeditiously as practicable 
                but no later than a revised date that reflects 
                the interval or intervals for the rules in the 
                timetable.
  [(4) Each]
    (4) Goals and standards.--
          (A) Maximum contaminant level goals.--Each maximum 
        contaminant level goal established under this 
        subsection shall be set at the level at which no known 
        or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons 
        occur and which allows an adequate margin of safety. 
        [Each national]
          (B) Maximum contaminant levels.--Except as provided 
        in paragraphs (5) and (6), each national primary 
        drinking water regulation for a contaminant for which a 
        maximum contaminant level goal is established under 
        this subsection shall specify a [maximum level] maximum 
        contaminant level for such contaminant which is as 
        close to the maximum contaminant level goal as is 
        feasible.
          (C) Determination.--At the time the Administrator 
        proposes a national primary drinking water regulation 
        under this paragraph, the Administrator shall publish a 
        determination as to whether the benefits of the maximum 
        contaminant level justify, or do not justify, the costs 
        based on the analysis conducted under paragraph 
        (12)(C).
  [(5) For the]
          (D) Definition of feasible.--For the purposes of this 
        subsection, the term ``feasible'' means feasible with 
        the use of the best technology, treatment techniques 
        and other means which the Administrator finds, after 
        examination for efficacy under field conditions and not 
        solely under laboratory conditions, are available 
        (taking cost into consideration). For the purpose of 
        [paragraph (4)] this paragraph, granular activated 
        carbon is feasible for the control of synthetic organic 
        chemicals, and any technology, treatment technique, or 
        other means found to be the best available for the 
        control of synthetic organic chemicals must be at least 
        as effective in controlling synthetic organic chemicals 
        as granular activated carbon.
  [(6) Each national]
          (E) Feasible technologies.--
                  (i) Each national primary drinking water 
                regulation which establishes a maximum 
                contaminant level shall list the technology, 
                treatment techniques, and other means which the 
                Administrator finds to be feasible for purposes 
                of meeting such maximum contaminant level, but 
                a regulation under this paragraph shall not 
                require that any specified technology, 
                treatment technique, or other means be used for 
                purposes of meeting such maximum contaminant 
                level.
                  (ii) The Administrator shall include in the 
                list any technology, treatment technique, or 
                other means that is affordable for small public 
                water systems serving--
                          (I) a population of 10,000 or fewer 
                        but more than 3,300;
                          (II) a population of 3,300 or fewer 
                        but more than 500; and
                          (III) a population of 500 or fewer 
                        but more than 25;
                        and that achieves compliance with the 
                        maximum contaminant level or treatment 
                        technique, including packaged or 
                        modular systems and point-of-entry or 
                        point-of-use treatment units. Point-of-
                        entry and point-of-use treatment units 
                        shall be owned, controlled and 
                        maintained by the public water system 
                        or by a person under contract with the 
                        public water system to ensure proper 
                        operation and maintenance and 
                        compliance with the maximum contaminant 
                        level or treatment technique and 
                        equipped with mechanical warnings to 
                        ensure that customers are automatically 
                        notified of operational problems. If 
                        the American National Standards 
                        Institute has issued product standards 
                        applicable to a specific type of point-
                        of-entry or point-of-use treatment 
                        unit, individual units of that type 
                        shall not be accepted for compliance 
                        with a maximum contaminant level or 
                        treatment technique requirement unless 
                        they are independently certified in 
                        accordance with such standards.
                  (iii) Except as provided in clause (v), not 
                later than 2 years after the date of the 
                enactment of this clause and after consultation 
                with the States, the Administrator shall issue 
                a list of technologies that achieve compliance 
                with the maximum contaminant level or treatment 
                technique for each category of public water 
                systems described in subclauses (I), (II), and 
                (III) of clause (ii) for each national primary 
                drinking water regulation promulgated prior to 
                the date of the enactment of this paragraph.
                  (iv) The Administrator may, at any time after 
                a national primary drinking water regulation 
                has been promulgated, supplement the list of 
                technologies describing additional or new or 
                innovative treatment technologies that meet the 
                requirements of this paragraph for categories 
                of small public water systems described in 
                subclauses (I), (II) and (III) of clause (ii) 
                that are subject to the regulation.
                  (v) Within one year after the enactment of 
                this clause, the Administrator shall list 
                technologies that meet the surface water 
                treatment rules for each category of public 
                water systems described in subclauses (I), 
                (II), and (III) of clause (ii).
    (5) Additional health risk considerations.--
          (A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (4), the 
        Administrator may establish a maximum contaminant level 
        for a contaminant at a level other than the feasible 
        level, if the technology, treatment techniques, and 
        other means used to determine the feasible level would 
        result in an increase in the health risk from drinking 
        water by--
                  (i) increasing the concentration of other 
                contaminants in drinking water; or
                  (ii) interfering with the efficacy of 
                drinking water treatment techniques or 
                processes that are used to comply with other 
                national primary drinking water regulations.
          (B) Establishment of level.--If the Administrator 
        establishes a maximum contaminant level or levels or 
        requires the use of treatment techniques for any 
        contaminant or contaminants pursuant to the authority 
        of this paragraph--
                  (i) the level or levels or treatment 
                techniques shall minimize the overall risk of 
                adverse health effects by balancing the risk 
                from the contaminant and the risk from other 
                contaminants the concentrations of which may be 
                affected by the use of a treatment technique or 
                process that would be employed to attain the 
                maximum contaminant level or levels; and
                  (ii) the combination of technology, treatment 
                techniques, or other means required to meet the 
                level or levels shall not be more stringent 
                than is feasible (as defined in paragraph 
                (4)(D)).
    (6) Additional health risk reduction and cost 
considerations.--
          (A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (4), if 
        the Administrator determines based on an analysis 
        conducted under paragraph (12)(C) that the benefits of 
        a maximum contaminant level promulgated in accordance 
        with paragraph (4) would not justify the costs of 
        complying with the level, the Administrator may, after 
        notice and opportunity for public comment, promulgate a 
        maximum contaminant level for the contaminant that 
        maximizes health risk reduction benefits at a cost that 
        is justified by the benefits.
          (B) Exception.--The Administrator shall not use the 
        authority of this paragraph to promulgate a maximum 
        contaminant level for a contaminant, if the benefits of 
        compliance with a national primary drinking water 
        regulation for the contaminant that would be 
        promulgated in accordance with paragraph (4) 
        experienced by--
                  (i) persons served by large public water 
                systems; and
                  (ii) persons served by such other systems as 
                are unlikely, based on information provided by 
                the States, to receive a variance under section 
                1415(e) (relating to small system assistance 
                program);
        would justify the costs to the systems of complying 
        with the regulation. This subparagraph shall not apply 
        if the contaminant is found almost exclusively in small 
        systems (as defined in section 1415(e), relating to 
        small system assistance program).
          (C) Disinfectants and disinfection byproducts.--The 
        Administrator may not use the authority of this 
        paragraph to establish a maximum contaminant level in a 
        Stage I or Stage II national primary drinking water 
        regulation for contaminants that are disinfectants or 
        disinfection byproducts (as described in paragraph 
        (3)(F)), or to establish a maximum contaminant level or 
        treatment technique requirement for the control of 
        cryptosporidium. The authority of this paragraph may be 
        used to establish regulations for the use of 
        disinfection by systems relying on ground water sources 
        as required by paragraph (8).
          (D) Judicial review.--A determination by the 
        Administrator that the benefits of a maximum 
        contaminant level or treatment requirement justify or 
        do not justify the costs of complying with the level 
        shall be reviewed by the court pursuant to section 1448 
        only as part of a review of a final national primary 
        drinking water regulation that has been promulgated 
        based on the determination and shall not be set aside 
        by the court under that section unless the court finds 
        that the determination is arbitrary and capricious.
  (7)(A) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (C)(i) * * *
          * * * * * * *
                  (v) As an additional alternative to the 
                regulations promulgated pursuant to clauses (i) 
                and (iii), including the criteria for avoiding 
                filtration contained in CFR 141.71, a State 
                exercising primary enforcement responsibility 
                for public water systems may, on a case-by-case 
                basis, and after notice and opportunity for 
                public comment, establish treatment 
                requirements as an alternative to filtration in 
                the case of systems having uninhabited, 
                undeveloped watersheds in consolidated 
                ownership, and having control over access to, 
                and activities in, those watersheds, if the 
                State determines (and the Administrator 
                concurs) that the quality of the source water 
                and the alternative treatment requirements 
                established by the State ensure greater removal 
                or inactivation efficiencies of pathogenic 
                organisms for which national primary drinking 
                water regulations have been promulgated or that 
                are of public health concern than would be 
                achieved by the combination of filtration and 
                chlorine disinfection (in compliance with 
                paragraph (8)).
  (8) [Not later than 36 months after the enactment of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall 
propose and promulgate national primary drinking water 
regulations requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for 
all public water systems.] At any time after the end of the 3-
year period that begins on the date of enactment of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, but not later than the 
date on which the Administrator promulgates a Stage II 
rulemaking for disinfectants and disinfection byproducts (as 
described in paragraph (3)(F)(ii)), the Administrator shall 
also promulgate national primary drinking water regulations 
requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for all public 
water systems, including surface water systems and, as 
necessary, ground water systems. After consultation with the 
States, the Administrator shall (as part of the regulations) 
promulgate criteria that the Administrator, or a State that has 
primary enforcement responsibility under section 1413, shall 
apply to determine whether disinfection shall be required as a 
treatment technique for any public water system served by 
ground water. A State that has primary enforcement authority 
shall develop a plan through which ground water disinfection 
determinations are made. The plan shall be based on the 
Administrator's criteria and shall be submitted to the 
Administrator for approval. The Administrator shall 
simultaneously promulgate a rule specifying criteria that will 
be used by the Administrator (or delegated State authorities) 
to grant variances from this requirement according to the 
provisions of sections 1415(a)(1)(B) and 1415(a)(3). In 
implementing section [1442(g)] 1442(e) the Administrator or the 
delegated State authority shall, where appropriate, give 
special consideration to providing technical assistance to 
small public water systems in complying with the regulations 
promulgated under this paragraph.
    [(9) National primary drinking water regulations shall be 
amended whenever changes in technology, treatment techniques, 
and other means permit greater protection of the health of 
persons, but in any event such regulations shall be reviewed at 
least once every 3 years. Such review shall include an analysis 
of innovations or changes in technology, treatment techniques 
or other activities that have occurred over the previous 3-year 
period and that may provide for greater protection of the 
health of persons. The findings of such review shall be 
published in the Federal Register. If, after opportunity for 
public comment, the Administrator concludes that the 
technology, treatment techniques, or other means resulting from 
such innovations or changes are not feasible within the meaning 
of paragraph (5), an explanation of such conclusion shall be 
published in the Federal Register.
    [(10) National primary drinking water regulations 
promulgated under this subsection (and amendments thereto) 
shall take effect eighteen months after the date of their 
promulgation. Regulations under subsection (a) shall be 
superseded by regulations under this subsection to the extent 
provided by the regulations under this subsection.]
    (9) Review and revision.--The Administrator shall, not less 
often than every 6 years, review and revise, as appropriate, 
each national primary drinking water regulation promulgated 
under this title. Any revision of a national primary drinking 
water regulation shall be promulgated in accordance with this 
section, except that each revision shall maintain, or provide 
for greater, protection of the health of persons.
    (10) Effective date.--A national primary drinking water 
regulation promulgated under this section (and any amendment 
thereto) shall take effect on the date that is 3 years after 
the date on which the regulation is promulgated unless the 
Administrator determines that an earlier date is practicable, 
except that the Administrator, or a State (in the case of an 
individual system), may allow up to 2 additional years to 
comply with a maximum contaminant level or treatment technique 
if the Administrator or State (in the case of an individual 
system) determines that additional time is necessary for 
capital improvements.
    (11) No national primary drinking water regulation may 
require the addition of any substance for preventive health 
care purposes unrelated to contamination of drinking water.
    (12) Risk assessment, management and communication.--
          (A) Use of science in decisionmaking.--In carrying 
        out this section, and, to the degree that an Agency 
        action is based on science, the Administrator shall 
        use--
                  (i) the best available, peer-reviewed science 
                and supporting studies conducted in accordance 
                with sound and objective scientific practices; 
                and
                  (ii) data collected by accepted methods or 
                best available methods (if the reliability of 
                the method and the nature of the decision 
                justifies use of the data).
          (B) Public information.--In carrying out this 
        section, the Administrator shall ensure that the 
        presentation of information on public health effects is 
        comprehensive, informative and understandable. The 
        Administrator shall, in a document made available to 
        the public in support of a regulation promulgated under 
        this section, specify, to the extent practicable--
                  (i) each population addressed by any estimate 
                of public health effects;
                  (ii) the expected risk or central estimate of 
                risk for the specific populations;
                  (iii) each appropriate upper-bound or lower-
                bound estimate of risk;
                  (iv) each significant uncertainty identified 
                in the process of the assessment of public 
                health effects and studies that would assist in 
                resolving the uncertainty; and
                  (v) peer-reviewed studies known to the 
                Administrator that support, are directly 
                relevant to, or fail to support any estimate of 
                public health effects and the methodology used 
                to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific 
                data.
          (C) Health risk reduction and cost analysis.--
                  (i) Maximum contaminant levels.--When 
                proposing any national primary drinking water 
                regulation that includes a maximum contaminant 
                level, the Administrator shall, with respect to 
                a maximum contaminant level that is being 
                considered in accordance with paragraph (4) and 
                each alternative maximum contaminant level that 
                is being considered pursuant to paragraph (5) 
                or (6)(A), publish, seek public comment on, and 
                use for the purposes of paragraphs (4), (5), 
                and (6) an analysis of:
                          (I) Quantifiable and nonquantifiable 
                        health risk reduction benefits for 
                        which there is a factual basis in the 
                        rulemaking record to conclude that such 
                        benefits are likely to occur as the 
                        result of treatment to comply with each 
                        level.
                          (II) Quantifiable and nonquantifiable 
                        health risk reduction benefits for 
                        which there is a factual basis in the 
                        rulemaking record to conclude that such 
                        benefits are likely to occur from 
                        reductions in co-occurring contaminants 
                        that may be attributed solely to 
                        compliance with the maximum contaminant 
                        level, excluding benefits resulting 
                        from compliance with other proposed or 
                        promulgated regulations.
                          (III) Quantifiable and 
                        nonquantifiable costs for which there 
                        is a factual basis in the rulemaking 
                        record to conclude that such costs are 
                        likely to occur solely as a result of 
                        compliance with the maximum contaminant 
                        level, including monitoring, treatment, 
                        and other costs and excluding costs 
                        resulting from compliance with other 
                        proposed or promulgated regulations.
                          (IV) The incremental costs and 
                        benefits associated with each 
                        alternative maximum contaminant level 
                        considered.
                          (V) The effects of the contaminant on 
                        the general population and on groups 
                        within the general population such as 
                        infants, children, pregnant women, the 
                        elderly, individuals with a history of 
                        serious illness, or other 
                        subpopulations that are identified as 
                        likely to be at greater risk of adverse 
                        health effects due to exposure to 
                        contaminants in drinking water than the 
                        general population.
                          (VI) Any increased health risk that 
                        may occur as the result of compliance, 
                        including risks associated with co-
                        occurring contaminants.
                          (VII) Other relevant factors, 
                        including the quality and extent of the 
                        information, the uncertainties in the 
                        analysis supporting subclauses (I) 
                        through (VI), and factors with respect 
                        to the degree and nature of the risk.
                  (ii) Treatment techniques.--When proposing a 
                national primary drinking water regulation that 
                includes a treatment technique in accordance 
                with paragraph (7)(A), the Administrator shall 
                publish and seek public comment on an analysis 
                of the health risk reduction benefits and costs 
                likely to be experienced as the result of 
                compliance with the treatment technique and 
                alternative treatment techniques that are being 
                considered, taking into account, as 
                appropriate, the factors described in clause 
                (i).
                  (iii) Approaches to measure and value 
                benefits.--The Administrator may identify valid 
                approaches for the measurement and valuation of 
                benefits under this subparagraph, including 
                approaches to identify consumer willingness to 
                pay for reductions in health risks from 
                drinking water contaminants.
                  (iv) Authorization.--There are authorized to 
                be appropriated to the Administrator, acting 
                through the Office of Ground Water and Drinking 
                Water, to conduct studies, assessments, and 
                analyses in support of regulations or the 
                development of methods, $35,000,000 for each of 
                fiscal years 1996 through 2003.
    (13) Certain contaminants.--
          (A) Radon.--Any proposal published by the 
        Administrator before the enactment of the Safe Drinking 
        Water Act Amendments of 1996 to establish a national 
        primary drinking water standard for radon shall be 
        withdrawn by the Administrator. Notwithstanding any 
        provision of any law enacted prior to the enactment of 
        the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, within 
        3 years of such date of enactment, the Administrator 
        shall propose and promulgate a national primary 
        drinking water regulation for radon under this section, 
        as amended by the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
        1996. In undertaking any risk analysis and benefit cost 
        analysis in connection with the promulgation of such 
        standard, the Administrator shall take into account the 
        costs and benefits of control programs for radon from 
        other sources.
          (B) Arsenic.--(i) Notwithstanding the deadlines set 
        forth in paragraph (1), the Administrator shall 
        promulgate a national primary drinking water regulation 
        for arsenic pursuant to this subsection, in accordance 
        with the schedule established by this paragraph.
          (ii) Not later than 180 days after the date of 
        enactment of this paragraph, the Administrator shall 
        develop a comprehensive plan for study in support of 
        drinking water rulemaking to reduce the uncertainty in 
        assessing health risks associated with exposure to low 
        levels of arsenic. In conducting such study, the 
        Administrator shall consult with the National Academy 
        of Sciences, other Federal agencies, and interested 
        public and private entities.
          (iii) In carrying out the study plan, the 
        Administrator may enter into cooperative agreements 
        with other Federal agencies, State and local 
        governments, and other interested public and private 
        entities.
          (iv) The Administrator shall propose a national 
        primary drinking water regulation for arsenic not later 
        than January 1, 2000.
          (v) Not later than January 1, 2001, after notice and 
        opportunity for public comment, the Administrator shall 
        promulgate a national primary drinking water regulation 
        for arsenic.
          (vi) There are authorized to be appropriated 
        $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1997 through 2001 
        for the studies required by this paragraph.
          (C) Sulfate.--
                  (i) Additional study.--Prior to promulgating 
                a national primary drinking water regulation 
                for sulfate, the Administrator and the Director 
                of the Centers for Disease Control and 
                Prevention shall jointly conduct an additional 
                study to establish a reliable dose-response 
                relationship for the adverse human health 
                effects that may result from exposure to 
                sulfate in drinking water, including the health 
                effects that may be experienced by groups 
                within the general population (including 
                infants and travelers) that are potentially at 
                greater risk of adverse health effects as the 
                result of such exposure. The study shall be 
                conducted in consultation with interested 
                States, shall be based on the best available, 
                peer-reviewed science and supporting studies 
                conducted in accordance with sound and 
                objective scientific practices.
                  (ii) Proposed and final rule.--
                Notwithstanding the deadlines set forth in 
                paragraph (1), the Administrator may, pursuant 
                to the authorities of this subsection and after 
                notice and opportunity for public comment, 
                promulgate a final national primary drinking 
                water regulation for sulfate. Any such 
                regulation shall include requirements for 
                public notification and options for the 
                provision of alternative water supplies to 
                populations at risk as a means of complying 
                with the regulation in lieu of a best available 
                treatment technology or other means.
    (14) Urgent threats to public health.--The Administrator 
may promulgate an interim national primary drinking water 
regulation for a contaminant without making a determination for 
the contaminant under paragraph (4)(C) or completing the 
analysis under paragraph (12)(C) to address an urgent threat to 
public health as determined by the Administrator after 
consultation with and written response to any comments provided 
by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through 
the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
or the director of the National Institutes of Health. A 
determination for any contaminant in accordance with paragraph 
(4)(C) subject to an interim regulation under this subparagraph 
shall be issued, and a completed analysis meeting the 
requirements of paragraph (12)(C) shall be published, not later 
than 3 years after the date on which the regulation is 
promulgated and the regulation shall be repromulgated, or 
revised if appropriate, not later than 5 years after that date.
    (15) Recycling of filter backwash.--The Administrator shall 
promulgate a regulation to govern the recycling of filter 
backwash water within the treatment process of a public water 
system. The Administrator shall promulgate such regulation not 
later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 unless such recycling has 
been addressed by the Administrator's ``enhanced surface water 
treatment rule'' prior to such date.
          * * * * * * *

                state primary enforcement responsibility

  Sec. 1413. (a) For purposes of this title, a State has 
primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems 
during any period for which the Administrator determines 
(pursuant to regulations prescribed under subsection (b)) that 
such State--
          [(1) has adopted drinking water regulations which are 
        no less stringent than the national primary drinking 
        water regulations in effect under such sections 1412(a) 
        and 1412(b);]
          (1) has adopted drinking water regulations that are 
        no less stringent than the national primary drinking 
        water regulations promulgated by the Administrator 
        under subsections (a) and (b) of section 1412 not later 
        than 2 years after the date on which the regulations 
        are promulgated by the Administrator, except that the 
        Administrator may provide for an extension of not more 
        than 2 years if, after submission and review of 
        appropriate, adequate documentation from the State, the 
        Administrator determines that the extension is 
        necessary and justified;
          * * * * * * *
          (4) if it permits variances or exemptions, or both, 
        from the requirements of its drinking water regulations 
        which meet the requirements of paragraph (1), permits 
        such variances and exemptions under conditions and in a 
        manner which is not less stringent than the conditions 
        under, and the manner in, which variances and 
        exemptions may be granted under sections 1415 and 1416; 
        [and]
          (5) has adopted and can implement an adequate plan 
        for the provision of safe drinking water under 
        emergency circumstances[.] including earthquakes, 
        floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters, as 
        appropriate; and
          (6) has adopted authority for administrative 
        penalties (unless the constitution of the State 
        prohibits the adoption of the authority) in a maximum 
        amount--
                  (A) in the case of a system serving a 
                population of more than 10,000, that is not 
                less than $1,000 per day per violation; and
                  (B) in the case of any other system, that is 
                adequate to ensure compliance (as determined by 
                the State);
        except that a State may establish a maximum limitation 
        on the total amount of administrative penalties that 
        may be imposed on a public water system per violation.
          * * * * * * *
  (c) Interim Primary Enforcement Authority.--A State that has 
primary enforcement authority under this section with respect 
to each existing national primary drinking water regulation 
shall be considered to have primary enforcement authority with 
respect to each new or revised national primary drinking water 
regulation during the period beginning on the effective date of 
a regulation adopted and submitted by the State with respect to 
the new or revised national primary drinking water regulation 
in accordance with subsection (b)(1) and ending at such time as 
the Administrator makes a determination under subsection 
(b)(2)(B) with respect to the regulation.

               enforcement of drinking water regulations

  Sec. 1414. (a)(1)(A) Whenever the Administrator finds during 
a period during which a State has primary enforcement 
responsibility for public water systems (within the meaning of 
section 1413(a)) that any public water system--
          (i) for which a variance under section 1415 or an 
        exemption under section 1416 is not in effect, does not 
        comply with [any national primary drinking water 
        regulation in effect under section 1412] any applicable 
        requirement, or
          (ii) for which a variance under section 1415 or an 
        exemption under section 1416 is in effect, does not 
        comply with any schedule or other requirement imposed 
        pursuant thereto,
he shall so notify the State and such public water system and 
provide such advice and technical assistance to such State and 
public water system as may be appropriate to bring the system 
into compliance [with such regulation or requirement] with the 
requirement by the earliest feasible time.
  (B) If, beyond the thirtieth day after the Administrator's 
notification under subparagraph (A), the State has not 
commenced appropriate enforcement action, the Administrator 
shall issue an order under subsection (g) requiring the public 
water system to comply with such [regulation or] applicable 
requirement or the Administrator shall commence a civil action 
under subsection (b).
  [(2) Whenever, on the basis of information available to him, 
the Administrator finds during a period during which a State 
does not have primary enforcement responsibility for public 
water systems that a public water system in such State--
          [(A) for which a variance under section 1415(a)(2) or 
        an exemption under section 1416(f) is not in effect, 
        does not comply with any national primary drinking 
        water regulation in effect under section 1412, or
          [(B) for which a variance under section 1415(a)(2) or 
        an exemption under section 1416(f) is in effect, does 
        not comply with any schedule or other requirement 
        imposed pursuant thereto, the Administrator shall issue 
        an order under subsection (g) requiring the public 
        water system to comply with such regulation or 
        requirement or the Administrator shall commence a civil 
        action under subsection (b).]
          (2) Enforcement in nonprimacy states.--
                  (A) In general.--If, on the basis of 
                information available to the Administrator, the 
                Administrator finds, with respect to a period 
                in which a State does not have primary 
                enforcement responsibility for public water 
                systems, that a public water system in the 
                State--
                          (i) for which a variance under 
                        section 1415 or an exemption under 
                        section 1416 is not in effect, does not 
                        comply with any applicable requirement; 
                        or
                          (ii) for which a variance under 
                        section 1415 or an exemption under 
                        section 1416 is in effect, does not 
                        comply with any schedule or other 
                        requirement imposed pursuant to the 
                        variance or exemption;
                the Administrator shall issue an order under 
                subsection (g) requiring the public water 
                system to comply with the requirement, or 
                commence a civil action under subsection (b).
                  (B) Notice.--If the Administrator takes any 
                action pursuant to this paragraph, the 
                Administrator shall notify an appropriate local 
                elected official, if any, with jurisdiction 
                over the public water system of the action 
                prior to the time that the action is taken.
  (b) The Administrator may bring a civil action in the 
appropriate United States district court to require compliance 
with [a national primary drinking water regulation] any 
applicable requirement, with an order issued under subsection 
(g), or with any schedule or other requirement imposed pursuant 
to a variance or exemption granted under section 1415 or 1416 
if--
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  [(c) Each owner or operator of a public water system shall 
give notice to the persons served by it--
          [(1) of any failure on the part of the public water 
        system to--
                  [(A) comply with an applicable maximum 
                contaminant level or treatment technique 
                requirement of, or a testing procedure 
                prescribed by, a national primary drinking 
                water regulation, or
                  [(B) perform monitoring required by section 
                1445(a), and
          [(2) if the public water system is subject to a 
        variance granted under section 1415(a)(1)(A) or 
        1415(a)(2) for an inability to meet a maximum 
        contaminant level requirement or is subject to an 
        exemption granted under section 1416, of--
                  [(A) the existence of such variance or 
                exemption, and
                  [(B) any failure to comply with the 
                requirements of any schedule prescribed 
                pursuant to the variance or exemption.
The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe the form, 
manner, and frequency for giving notice under this subsection. 
Within 15 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water 
Act Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall amend such 
regulations to provide for different types and frequencies of 
notice based on the differences between violations which are 
intermittent or infrequent and violations which are continuous 
or frequent. Such regulations shall also take into account the 
seriousness of any potential adverse health effects which may 
be involved. Notice of any violation of a maximum contaminant 
level or any other violation designated by the Administrator as 
posing a serious potential adverse health effect shall be given 
as soon as possible, but in no case later than 14 days after 
the violation. Notice of a continuous violation of a regulation 
other than a maximum contaminant level shall be given no less 
frequently than every 3 months. Notice of violations judged to 
be less serious shall be given no less frequently than 
annually. The Administrator shall specify the types of notice 
to be used to provide information as promptly and effectively 
as possible taking into account both the seriousness of any 
potential adverse health effects and the likelihood of reaching 
all affected persons. Notification of violations shall include 
notice by general circulation newspaper serving the area and, 
whenever appropriate, shall also include a press release to 
electronic media and individual mailings. Notice under this 
subsection shall provide a clear and readily understandable 
explanation of the violation, any potential adverse health 
effects, the steps that the system is taking to correct such 
violation, and the necessity for seeking alternative water 
supplies, if any, until the violation is corrected. Until such 
amended regulations are promulgated, the regulations in effect 
on the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Amendments of 1986 shall remain in effect. The Administrator 
may also require the owner or operator of a public water system 
to give notice to the persons served by it of contaminant 
levels of any unregulated contaminant required to be monitored 
under section 1445(a). Any person who violates this subsection 
or regulations issued under this subsection shall be subject to 
a civil penalty of not to exceed $25,000.]
  (c) Notice to Persons Served.--
          (1) In general.--Each owner or operator of a public 
        water system shall give notice of each of the following 
        to the persons served by the system:
                  (A) Notice of any failure on the part of the 
                public water system to--
                          (i) comply with an applicable maximum 
                        contaminant level or treatment 
                        technique requirement of, or a testing 
                        procedure prescribed by, a national 
                        primary drinking water regulation; or
                          (ii) perform monitoring required by 
                        section 1445(a).
                  (B) If the public water system is subject to 
                a variance granted under subsection (a)(1)(A), 
                (a)(2), or (e) of section 1415 for an inability 
                to meet a maximum contaminant level requirement 
                or is subject to an exemption granted under 
                section 1416, notice of--
                          (i) the existence of the variance or 
                        exemption; and
                          (ii) any failure to comply with the 
                        requirements of any schedule prescribed 
                        pursuant to the variance or exemption.
                  (C) Notice of the concentration level of any 
                unregulated contaminant for which the 
                Administrator has required public notice 
                pursuant to paragraph (2)(E).
          (2) Form, manner, and frequency of notice.--
                  (A) In general.--The Administrator shall, by 
                regulation, and after consultation with the 
                States, prescribe the manner, frequency, form, 
                and content for giving notice under this 
                subsection. The regulations shall--
                          (i) provide for different frequencies 
                        of notice based on the differences 
                        between violations that are 
                        intermittent or infrequent and 
                        violations that are continuous or 
                        frequent; and
                          (ii) take into account the 
                        seriousness of any potential adverse 
                        health effects that may be involved.
                  (B) State requirements.--
                          (i) In general.--A State may, by 
                        rule, establish alternative 
                        notification requirements--
                                  (I) with respect to the form 
                                and content of notice given 
                                under and in a manner in 
                                accordance with subparagraph 
                                (C); and
                                  (II) with respect to the form 
                                and content of notice given 
                                under subparagraph (D).
                          (ii) Contents.--The alternative 
                        requirements shall provide the same 
                        type and amount of information as 
                        required pursuant to this subsection 
                        and regulations issued under 
                        subparagraph (A).
                          (iii) Relationship to section 1413.--
                        Nothing in this subparagraph shall be 
                        construed or applied to modify the 
                        requirements of section 1413.
                  (C) Violations with potential to have serious 
                adverse effects on human health.--Regulations 
                issued under subparagraph (A) shall specify 
                notification procedures for each violation by a 
                public water system that has the potential to 
                have serious adverse effects on human health as 
                a result of short-term exposure. Each notice of 
                violation provided under this subparagraph 
                shall--
                          (i) be distributed as soon as 
                        practicable after the occurrence of the 
                        violation, but not later than 24 hours 
                        after the occurrence of the violation;
                          (ii) provide a clear and readily 
                        understandable explanation of--
                                  (I) the violation;
                                  (II) the potential adverse 
                                effects on human health;
                                  (III) the steps that the 
                                public water system is taking 
                                to correct the violation; and
                                  (IV) the necessity of seeking 
                                alternative water supplies 
                                until the violation is 
                                corrected;
                          (iii) be provided to the 
                        Administrator or the head of the State 
                        agency that has primary enforcement 
                        responsibility under section 1413 as 
                        soon as practicable, but not later than 
                        24 hours after the occurrence of the 
                        violation; and
                          (iv) as required by the State agency 
                        in general regulations of the State 
                        agency, or on a case-by-case basis 
                        after the consultation referred to in 
                        clause (iii), considering the health 
                        risks involved--
                                  (I) be provided to 
                                appropriate broadcast media;
                                  (II) be prominently published 
                                in a newspaper of general 
                                circulation serving the area 
                                not later than 1 day after 
                                distribution of a notice 
                                pursuant to clause (i) or the 
                                date of publication of the next 
                                issue of the newspaper; or
                                  (III) be provided by posting 
                                or door-to-door notification in 
                                lieu of notification by means 
                                of broadcast media or 
                                newspaper.
                  (D) Written notice.--
                          (i) In general.--Regulations issued 
                        under subparagraph (A) shall specify 
                        notification procedures for violations 
                        other than the violations covered by 
                        subparagraph (C). The procedures shall 
                        specify that a public water system 
                        shall provide written notice to each 
                        person served by the system by notice 
                        (I) in the first bill (if any) prepared 
                        after the date of occurrence of the 
                        violation, (II) in an annual report 
                        issued not later than 1 year after the 
                        date of occurrence of the violation, or 
                        (III) by mail or direct delivery as 
                        soon as practicable, but not later than 
                        1 year after the date of occurrence of 
                        the violation.
                          (ii) Form and manner of notice.--The 
                        Administrator shall prescribe the form 
                        and manner of the notice to provide a 
                        clear and readily understandable 
                        explanation of the violation, any 
                        potential adverse health effects, and 
                        the steps that the system is taking to 
                        seek alternative water supplies, if 
                        any, until the violation is corrected.
                  (E) Unregulated contaminants.--The 
                Administrator may require the owner or operator 
                of a public water system to give notice to the 
                persons served by the system of the 
                concentration levels of an unregulated 
                contaminant required to be monitored under 
                section 1445(a).
          (3) Reports.--
                  (A) Annual report by state.--
                          (i) In general.--Not later than 
                        January 1, 1998, and annually 
                        thereafter, each State that has primary 
                        enforcement responsibility under 
                        section 1413 shall prepare, make 
                        readily available to the public, and 
                        submit to the Administrator an annual 
                        report on violations of national 
                        primary drinking water regulations by 
                        public water systems in the State, 
                        including violations with respect to 
                        (I) maximum contaminant levels, (II) 
                        treatment requirements, (III) variances 
                        and exemptions, and (IV) monitoring 
                        requirements determined to be 
                        significant by the Administrator after 
                        consultation with the States.
                          (ii) Distribution.--The State shall 
                        publish and distribute summaries of the 
                        report and indicate where the full 
                        report is available for review.
                  (B) Annual report by administrator.--Not 
                later than July 1, 1998, and annually 
                thereafter, the Administrator shall prepare and 
                make available to the public an annual report 
                summarizing and evaluating reports submitted by 
                States pursuant to subparagraph (A) and notices 
                submitted by public water systems serving 
                Indian Tribes provided to the Administrator 
                pursuant to subparagraph (C) or (D) of 
                paragraph (2) and making recommendations 
                concerning the resources needed to improve 
                compliance with this title. The report shall 
                include information about public water system 
                compliance on Indian reservations and about 
                enforcement activities undertaken and financial 
                assistance provided by the Administrator on 
                Indian reservations, and shall make specific 
                recommendations concerning the resources needed 
                to improve compliance with this title on Indian 
                reservations.
          (4) Consumer confidence reports by community water 
        systems.--
                  (A) Annual reports to consumers.--The 
                Administrator, in consultation with public 
                water systems, environmental groups, public 
                interest groups, risk communication experts, 
                and the States, and other interested parties, 
                shall issue regulations within 24 months after 
                the date of the enactment of this paragraph to 
                require each community water system to mail to 
                each customer of the system at least once 
                annually a report on the level of contaminants 
                in the drinking water purveyed by that system 
                (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as a 
                ``consumer confidence report''). Such 
                regulations shall provide a brief and plainly 
                worded definition of the terms ``maximum 
                contaminant level goal'' and ``maximum 
                contaminant level'' and brief statements in 
                plain language regarding the health concerns 
                that resulted in regulation of each regulated 
                contaminant. The regulations shall also provide 
                for an Environmental Protection Agency toll-
                free hot-line that consumers can call for more 
                information and explanation.
                  (B) Contents of report.--The consumer 
                confidence reports under this paragraph shall 
                include, but not be limited to, each of the 
                following:
                          (i) Information on the source of the 
                        water purveyed.
                          (ii) A brief and plainly worded 
                        definition of the terms ``maximum 
                        contaminant level goal'' and ``maximum 
                        contaminant level'', as provided in the 
                        regulations of the Administrator.
                          (iii) If any regulated contaminant is 
                        detected in the water purveyed by the 
                        public water system, a statement 
                        setting forth (I) the maximum 
                        contaminant level goal, (II) the 
                        maximum contaminant level, (III) the 
                        level of such contaminant in such water 
                        system, and (IV) for any regulated 
                        contaminant for which there has been a 
                        violation of the maximum contaminant 
                        level during the year concerned, the 
                        brief statement in plain language 
                        regarding the health concerns that 
                        resulted in regulation of such 
                        contaminant, as provided by the 
                        Administrator in regulations under 
                        subparagraph (A).
                          (iv) Information on compliance with 
                        national primary drinking water 
                        regulations.
                          (v) Information on the levels of 
                        unregulated contaminants for which 
                        monitoring is required under section 
                        1445(a)(2) (including levels of 
                        cryptosporidium and radon where States 
                        determine they may be found).
                          (vi) A statement that more 
                        information about contaminants and 
                        potential health effects can be 
                        obtained by calling the Environmental 
                        Protection Agency hot line.
                A public water system may include such 
                additional information as it deems appropriate 
                for public education. The Administrator may, 
                for not more than 3 regulated contaminants 
                other than those referred to in subclause (IV) 
                of clause (iii), require a consumer confidence 
                report under this paragraph to include the 
                brief statement in plain language regarding the 
                health concerns that resulted in regulation of 
                the contaminant or contaminants concerned, as 
                provided by the Administrator in regulations 
                under subparagraph (A).
                  (C) Coverage.--The Governor of a State may 
                determine not to apply the mailing requirement 
                of subparagraph (A) to a community water system 
                serving fewer than 10,000 persons. Any such 
                system shall--
                          (i) inform its customers that the 
                        system will not be complying with 
                        subparagraph (A),
                          (ii) make information available upon 
                        request to the public regarding the 
                        quality of the water supplied by such 
                        system, and
                          (iii) publish the report referred to 
                        in subparagraph (A) annually in one or 
                        more local newspapers serving the area 
                        in which customers of the system are 
                        located.
                  (D) Alternative form and content.--A State 
                exercising primary enforcement responsibility 
                may establish, by rule, after notice and public 
                comment, alternative requirements with respect 
                to the form and content of consumer confidence 
                reports under this paragraph.
          * * * * * * *
  (g)(1) In any case in which the Administrator is authorized 
to bring a civil action under this section or under section 
1445 with respect to any [regulation, schedule, or other] 
applicable requirement, the Administrator also may issue an 
order to require compliance with such [regulation, schedule, or 
other] applicable requirement.
  (2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take 
[effect until after notice and opportunity for public hearing 
and,] effect, in the case of a State having primary enforcement 
responsibility for public water systems in that State, until 
after the Administrator has provided the State with an 
opportunity to confer with the Administrator regarding the 
[proposed] order. A copy of any order [proposed to be] issued 
under this subsection shall be sent to the appropriate State 
agency of the State involved if the State has primary 
enforcement responsibility for public water systems in that 
State. Any order issued under this subsection shall state with 
reasonable specificity the nature of the violation. In any case 
in which an order under this subsection is issued to a 
corporation, a copy of such order shall be issued to 
appropriate corporate officers.
  (3)(A) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to comply 
with, an order under this subsection shall be liable to the 
United States for a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 per 
day of violation.
  [(B) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator 
under this paragraph does not exceed a total of $5,000, the 
penalty shall be assessed by the Administrator after notice and 
opportunity for a hearing on the record in accordance with 
section 554 of title 5 of the United States Code.]
  (B) In a case in which a civil penalty sought by the 
Administrator under this paragraph does not exceed $5,000, the 
penalty shall be assessed by the Administrator after notice and 
opportunity for a public hearing (unless the person against 
whom the penalty is assessed requests a hearing on the record 
in accordance with section 554 of title 5, United States Code). 
In a case in which a civil penalty sought by the Administrator 
under this paragraph exceeds $5,000, but does not exceed 
$25,000, the penalty shall be assessed by the Administrator 
after notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record in 
accordance with section 554 of title 5, United States Code.
  (C) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator 
under this [paragraph exceeds $5,000] subsection for a 
violation of an applicable requirement exceeds $25,000, the 
penalty shall be assessed by a civil action brought by the 
Administrator in the appropriate United States district court 
(as determined under the provisions of title 28 of the United 
States Code).
          * * * * * * *
  (h) Relief.--
          (1) In general.--An owner or operator of a public 
        water system may submit to the State in which the 
        system is located (if the State has primary enforcement 
        responsibility under section 1413) or to the 
        Administrator (if the State does not have primary 
        enforcement responsibility) a plan (including specific 
        measures and schedules) for--
                  (A) the physical consolidation of the system 
                with 1 or more other systems;
                  (B) the consolidation of significant 
                management and administrative functions of the 
                system with 1 or more other systems; or
                  (C) the transfer of ownership of the system 
                that may reasonably be expected to improve 
                drinking water quality.
          (2) Consequences of approval.--If the State or the 
        Administrator approves a plan pursuant to paragraph 
        (1), no enforcement action shall be taken pursuant to 
        this part with respect to a specific violation 
        identified in the approved plan prior to the date that 
        is the earlier of the date on which consolidation is 
        completed according to the plan or the date that is 2 
        years after the plan is approved.
  (i) Definition of Applicable Requirement.--In this section, 
the term ``applicable requirement'' means--
          (1) a requirement of section 1412, 1414, 1415, 1416, 
        1417, 1441, or 1445;
          (2) a regulation promulgated pursuant to a section 
        referred to in paragraph (1);
          (3) a schedule or requirement imposed pursuant to a 
        section referred to in paragraph (1); and
          (4) a requirement of, or permit issued under, an 
        applicable State program for which the Administrator 
        has made a determination that the requirements of 
        section 1413 have been satisfied, or an applicable 
        State program approved pursuant to this part.

                               variances

  Sec. 1415. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
part, variances from national primary drinking water 
regulations may be granted as follows:
          (1)(A) A State which has primary enforcement 
        responsibility for public water systems may grant one 
        or more variances from an applicable national primary 
        drinking water regulation to one or more public water 
        systems within its jurisdiction which, because of 
        characteristics of the raw water sources which are 
        reasonably available to the systems, cannot meet the 
        requirements respecting the maximum contaminant levels 
        of such drinking water regulation. A variance may only 
        be issued to a system after the system's application of 
        the best technology[, treatment techniques,] or other 
        means, which the Administrator finds are available 
        (taking costs into consideration). [The Administrator 
        shall propose and promulgate his finding of the best 
        available technology, treatment techniques or other 
        means available for each contaminant for purposes of 
        this subsection at the time he proposes and promulgates 
        a maximum contaminant level for each such contaminant.] 
        The Administrator's finding of [best available 
        technology, treatment techniques or other means] best 
        technology or other means for purposes of this 
        subsection may vary depending on the number of persons 
        served by the system or for other physical conditions 
        related to engineering feasibility and costs of 
        compliance with maximum contaminant levels as 
        considered approprate by an Administrator. Before a 
        State may grant a variance under this subparagraph, the 
        State must find that the variance will not result in an 
        unreasonable risk to health. If a State grants a public 
        water system a variance under this subparagraph, the 
        State shall prescribe at time the variance is granted, 
        a schedule for--
                  (i) compliance (including increments of 
                progress) by the public water system with each 
                contaminant level requirement with respect to 
                which the variance was granted, and
                  (ii) implementation by the public water 
                system of such additional control measures as 
                the State may require for each contaminant, 
                subject to such contaminant level requirement, 
                during the period ending on the date compliance 
                with such requirement is required.
        [Before a schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to 
        this subparagraph may take effect, the State shall 
        provide notice and opportunity for a public hearing on 
        the schedule. A notice given pursuant to the preceding 
        sentence may cover the prescribing of more than one 
        such schedule and a hearing held pursuant to such 
        notice shall include each of the schedules covered by 
        the notice.] A schedule prescribed pursuant to this 
        subparagraph for a public water system granted a 
        variance shall require compliance by the system with 
        each contaminant level requirement with respect to 
        which the variance was granted as expeditiously as 
        practicable (as the State may reasonably determine).
          * * * * * * *
          (C) [Before a variance proposed to be granted by a 
        State under subparagraph (A) or (B) may take effect, 
        such State shall provide notice and opportunity for 
        public hearing on the proposed variance.] Before a 
        variance is issued and a schedule is prescribed 
        pursuant to this subsection or subsection (e) by a 
        State, the State shall provide notice and an 
        opportunity for a public hearing on the proposed 
        variance and schedule. A notice given pursuant to the 
        preceding sentence may cover the granting of more than 
        one variance and a hearing held pursuant to such notice 
        shall include each of the variances covered by the 
        notice. The State shall promptly notify the 
        Administrator of all variances granted by it under this 
        section. Such notification shall contain the reason for 
        the variance (and in the case of a variance under 
        subparagraph (A), the basis for the finding required by 
        that subparagraph before the granting of the variance) 
        and documentation of the need for the variance.
          (D) Each public water system's variance granted by a 
        State [under subparagraph (A)] under this section shall 
        be conditioned by the State upon compliance by the 
        public water system with the schedule prescribed by the 
        State pursuant to [that subparagraph] this section. The 
        requirements of each schedule prescribed by a State 
        pursuant to [that subparagraph] this section shall be 
        enforceable by the State under its laws. [Any 
        requirement of a schedule on which a variance granted 
        under that subparagraph is conditioned may be enforced 
        under section 1414 as if such requirement was part of a 
        national primary drinking water regulation.]
          (E) Each schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to 
        subparagraph (A) shall be deemed approved by the 
        Administrator unless the variance for which it was 
        prescribed is revoked by the Administrator under such 
        subparagraph.
          (F) [Not later than 18 months after the effective 
        date of the interim national primary drinking water 
        regulations the Administrator shall complete a 
        comprehensive review of the variances granted under 
        subparagraph (A) (and schedules prescribed pursuant 
        thereto) and under subparagraph (B) by the States 
        during the one-year period beginning on such effective 
        date.] Not later than 5 years after the enactment of 
        the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, the 
        Administrator shall complete a review of the variances 
        granted under this section (and the schedules 
        prescribed in connection with such variances). The 
        Administrator shall conduct such subsequent reviews of 
        variances and schedules as he deems necessary to carry 
        out the purposes of this title, but each subsequent 
        review shall be completed within each [3-year] 5-year 
        period following the completion of the first review 
        under this subparagraph. Before conducting any review 
        under this subparagraph, the Administrator shall 
        publish notice of the proposed review in the Federal 
        Register. Such notice shall (i) provide information 
        respecting the location of data and other information 
        respecting the variances to be reviewed (including data 
        and other information concerning new scientific matters 
        bearing on such variances), and (ii) advise of the 
        opportunity to submit comments on the variances 
        reviewed and on the need for continuing them. Upon 
        completion of any such review, the Administrator shall 
        publish in the Federal Register the results of his 
        review together with findings responsive to comments 
        submitted in connection with such review.
          (G)(i) If the Administrator finds that a State has, 
        in a substantial number of instances, abused its 
        discretion in granting variances under [subparagraph 
        (A) or (B)] this section or that in a substantial 
        number of cases the State has failed to prescribe 
        schedules in accordance with subparagraph (A), the 
        Administrator shall notify the State of his findings. 
        In determining if a State has abused its discretion in 
        granting variances in a substantial number of 
        instances, the Administrator shall consider the number 
        of persons who are affected by the variances and if the 
        requirements applicable to the granting of the 
        variances were complied with. A notice under this 
        clause shall--
                  (I) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (b) Any schedule or other requirement on which a variance 
granted under [paragraph (1)(B) or (2) of subsection (a)] this 
section is conditioned may be enforced under section 1414 as if 
such schedule or other requirement was part of a national 
primary drinking water regulation.
  (c) If an application for a variance under [subsection (a)] 
this section is made, the State receiving the application or 
the Administrator, as the case may be, shall act upon such 
application within a reasonable period (as determined under 
regulations prescribed by the Administrator) after the date of 
its submission.
  [(d) For purposes of this section, the term ``treatment 
technique requirement'' means a requirement in a national 
primary drinking water regulation which specifies for a 
contaminant (in accordance with section 1401(1)(C)(ii)) each 
treatment technique known to the Administrator which leads to a 
reduction in the level of such contaminant sufficient to 
satisfy the requirements of section 1412(b)(3).]
  (e) Small System Assistance Program.--
          (1) BAAT variances.--In the case of public water 
        systems serving 3,300 persons or fewer, a variance 
        under this section shall be granted by a State which 
        has primary enforcement responsibility for public water 
        systems allowing the use of Best Available Affordable 
        Technology in lieu of best technology or other means 
        where--
                  (A) no best technology or other means is 
                listed under section 1412(b)(4)(E) for the 
                applicable category of public water systems;
                  (B) the Administrator has identified BAAT for 
                that contaminant pursuant to paragraph (3); and
                  (C) the State finds that the conditions in 
                paragraph (4) are met.
          (2) Definition of baat.--The term ``Best Available 
        Affordable Technology'' or ``BAAT'' means the most 
        effective technology or other means for the control of 
        a drinking water contaminant or contaminants that is 
        available and affordable to systems serving fewer than 
        3,300 persons.
          (3) Identification of baat.--(A) As part of each 
        national primary drinking water regulation proposed and 
        promulgated after the enactment of the Safe Drinking 
        Water Act Amendments of 1996, the Administrator shall 
        identify BAAT in any case where no ``best technology or 
        other means'' is listed for a category of public water 
        systems listed under section 1412(b)(4)(E). No such 
        identified BAAT shall require a technology from a 
        specific manufacturer or brand. BAAT need not be 
        adequate to achieve the applicable maximum contaminant 
        level or treatment technique, but shall bring the 
        public water system as close to achievement of such 
        maximum contaminant level as practical or as close to 
        the level of health protection provided by such 
        treatment technique as practical, as the case may be. 
        Any technology or other means identified as BAAT must 
        be determined by the Administrator to be protective of 
        public health. Simultaneously with identification of 
        BAAT, the Administrator shall list any assumptions 
        underlying the public health determination referred to 
        in the preceding sentence, where such assumptions 
        concern the public water system to which the technology 
        may be applied, or its source waters. The Administrator 
        shall provide the assumptions used in determining 
        affordability, taking into consideration the number of 
        persons served by such systems. Such listing shall 
        provide as much reliable information as practicable on 
        performance, effectiveness, limitations, costs, and 
        other relevant factors in support of such listing, 
        including the applicability of BAAT to surface and 
        underground waters or both.
          (B) To the greatest extent possible, within 36 months 
        after the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking 
        Water Act Amendments of 1996, the Administrator shall 
        identify BAAT for all national primary drinking water 
        regulations promulgated prior to such date of enactment 
        where no best technology or other means is listed for a 
        category of public water systems under section 
        1412(b)(4)(E), and where compliance by such small 
        systems is not practical. In identifying BAAT for such 
        national primary drinking water regulations, the 
        Administrator shall give priority to evaluation of 
        atrazine, asbestos, selenium, pentachlorophenol, 
        antimony, and nickel.
          (4) Conditions for baat variance.--To grant a 
        variance under this subsection, the State must 
        determine that--
                  (A) the public water system cannot install 
                ``best technology or other means'' because of 
                the system's small size;
                  (B) the public water system could not comply 
                with the maximum contaminant level through use 
                of alternate water supplies or through 
                management changes or restructuring;
                  (C) the public water system has the capacity 
                to operate and maintain BAAT; and
                  (D) the circumstances of the public water 
                system are consistent with the public health 
                assumptions identified by the Administrator 
                under paragraph (3).
          (5) Schedules.--Any variance granted by a State under 
        this subsection shall establish a schedule for the 
        installation and operation of BAAT within a period not 
        to exceed 2 years after the issuance of the variance, 
        except that the State may grant an extension of 1 
        additional year upon application by the system. The 
        application shall include a showing of financial or 
        technical need. Variances under this subsection shall 
        be for a term not to exceed 5 years (including the 
        period allowed for installation and operation of BAAT), 
        but may be renewed for such additional 5-year periods 
        by the State upon a finding that the criteria in 
        paragraph (1) continue to be met.
          (6) Review.--Any review by the Administrator under 
        paragraphs (4) and (5) shall be pursuant to subsection 
        (a)(1)(G)(i).
          (7) Ineligibility for variances.--A variance shall 
        not be available under this subsection for--
                  (A) any maximum contaminant level or 
                treatment technique for a contaminant with 
                respect to which a national primary drinking 
                water regulation was promulgated prior to 
                January 1, 1986; or
                  (B) a national primary drinking water 
                regulation for a microbial contaminant 
                (including a bacterium, virus, or other 
                organism) or an indicator or treatment 
                technique for a microbial contaminant.

                               exemptions

  Sec. 1416. (a) * * *
  (b)(1) If a State grants a public water system an exemption 
under subsection (a), the State shall prescribe, at the time 
the exemption is granted, a schedule for--
          (A) compliance (including increments of progress) by 
        the public water system with each contaminant level 
        requirement and treatment technique requirement with 
        respect to which the exemption was granted, and
          (B) implementation by the public water system of such 
        control measures as the State may require for each 
        contaminant, subject to such contaminant level 
        requirement or treatment technique requirement, during 
        the period ending on the date compliance with such 
        requirement is required.
Before a schedule [prescribed by a State pursuant to this 
subsection] prescribed by a State pursuant to this subsection 
or subsection (h) may take effect, the State shall provide 
notice and opportunity for a public hearing on the schedule. A 
notice given pursuant to the preceding sentence may cover the 
prescribing of more than one such schedule and a hearing held 
pursuant to such notice shall include each of the schedules 
covered by the notice.
  (2)(A) A schedule prescribed pursuant to this subsection for 
a public water system granted an exemption under subsection (a) 
shall require compliance by the system with each contaminant 
level and treatment technique requirement with respect to which 
the exemption was granted as expeditiously as practicable (as 
the State may reasonably determine) but (except as provided in 
subparagraph (B))--
          (i) in the case of an exemption granted with respect 
        to a contaminant level or treatment technique 
        requirement prescribed by the national primary drinking 
        water regulations promulgated under section 1412(a), 
        not later than 12 months after enactment of the Safe 
        Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986; and
          (ii) in the case of an exemption granted with respect 
        to a contaminant level or treatment technique 
        requirement prescribed by national primary drinking 
        water regulations, other than a regulation referred to 
        in section 1412(a), [12 months] 4 years after the date 
        of issuance of the exemption.
  (B) The final date for compliance provided in any schedule in 
the case of any exemption may be extended by the State (in the 
case of a State which has primary enforcement responsibility) 
or by the Administrator (in any other case) for a period not to 
exceed [3 years after the date of the issuance of the 
exemption] 4 years after the expiration of the initial 
exemption if the public water system establishes that--
          (i) the system cannot meet the standard without 
        capital improvements which cannot be completed within 
        the period of such exemption;
          (ii) in the case of a system which needs financial 
        assistance for the necessary improvement, the system 
        has entered into an agreement to obtain such financial 
        assistance; or
          (iii) the system has entered into an enforceable 
        agreement to become a part of a regional public water 
        system; and
the system is taking all practicable steps to meet the 
standard.
  [(C) In the case of a system which does not serve more than 
500 service connections and which needs financial assistance 
for the necessary improvements, an exemption granted under 
clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph (B) may be renewed for one 
or more additional 2-year periods if the system establishes 
that it is taking all practicable steps to meet the 
requirements of subparagraph (B).]
          * * * * * * *
  (c) Each State which grants an exemption [under subsection 
(a)] under this section shall promptly notify the Administrator 
of the granting of such exemption. Such notification shall 
contain the reasons for the exemption (including the basis for 
the finding required by subsection (a)(3) or the determination 
under subsection (h)(1)(C) before the exemption may be granted) 
and document the need for the exemption.
  (d)(1) [Not later than 18 months after the effective date of 
the interim national primary drinking water regulations the 
Administrator shall complete a comprehensive review of the 
exemptions granted (and schedules prescribed pursuant thereto) 
by the States during the one-year period beginning on such 
effective date.] Not later than 4 years after the date of 
enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, 
the Administrator shall complete a comprehensive review of the 
exemptions granted (and schedules prescribed pursuant thereto) 
by the States during the 4-year period beginning on such date. 
The Administrator shall conduct such subsequent reviews of 
exemptions and schedules as he deems necessary to carry out the 
purposes of this title, but each subsequent review shall be 
completed within each [3-year] 4-year period following the 
completion of the first review under this subparagraph. Before 
conducting any review under this subparagraph, the 
Administrator shall publish notice of the proposed review in 
the Federal Register. Such notice shall (A) provide information 
respecting the location of data and other information 
respecting the exemptions to be reviewed (including data and 
other information concerning new scientific matters bearing on 
such exemptions), and (B) advise of the opportunity to submit 
comments on the exemptions reviewed and on the need for 
continuing them. Upon completion of any such review, the 
Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register the results 
of his review together with findings responsive to comments 
submitted in connection with such review.
          * * * * * * *
  (h) Small Systems.--(1) For public water systems serving 
fewer than 3,300 persons, the maximum exemption period shall be 
4 years if the State is exercising primary enforcement 
responsibility for public water systems and determines that--
          (A) the public water system cannot meet the maximum 
        contaminant level or install Best Available Affordable 
        Technology (``BAAT'') due in either case to compelling 
        economic circumstances (taking into consideration the 
        availability of financial assistance under section 
        1452, relating to State Revolving Funds) or other 
        compelling circumstances;
          (B) the public water system could not comply with the 
        maximum contaminant level through the use of alternate 
        water supplies;
          (C) the granting of the exemption will provide a 
        drinking water supply that protects public health given 
        the duration of exemption; and
          (D) the State has met the requirements of paragraph 
        (2).
  (2)(A) Before issuing an exemption under this section or an 
extension thereof for a small public water system described in 
paragraph (1), the State shall--
          (i) examine the public water system's technical, 
        financial, and managerial capability (taking into 
        consideration any available financial assistance) to 
        operate in and maintain compliance with this title, and
          (ii) determine if management or restructuring changes 
        (or both) can reasonably be made that will result in 
        compliance with this title or, if compliance cannot be 
        achieved, improve the quality of the drinking water.
  (B) Management changes referred to in subparagraph (A) may 
include rate increases, accounting changes, the hiring of 
consultants, the appointment of a technician with expertise in 
operating such systems, contractual arrangements for a more 
efficient and capable system for joint operation, or other 
reasonable strategies to improve capacity.
  (C) Restructuring changes referred to in subparagraph (A) may 
include ownership change, physical consolidation with another 
system, or other measures to otherwise improve customer base 
and gain economies of scale.
  (D) If the State determines that management or restructuring 
changes referred to in subparagraph (A) can reasonably be made, 
it shall require such changes and a schedule therefore as a 
condition of the exemption. If the State determines to the 
contrary, the State may still grant the exemption. The decision 
of the State under this subparagraph shall not be subject to 
review by the Administrator, except as provided in subsection 
(d).
  (3) Paragraphs (1) and (3) of subsection (a) shall not apply 
to an exemption issued under this subsection. Subparagraph (B) 
of subsection (b)(2) shall not apply to an exemption issued 
under this subsection, but any exemption granted to such a 
system may be renewed for additional 4-year periods upon 
application of the public water system and after a 
determination that the criteria of paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
this subsection continue to be met.
  (4) No exemption may be issued under this section for 
microbiological contaminants.
  (5)(A) Notwithstanding this subsection, the State of New 
York, on a case-by-case basis and after notice and an 
opportunity of at least 60 days for public comment, may allow 
an additional period for compliance with the Surface Water 
Treatment Rule established pursuant to section 1412(b)(7)(C) in 
the case of unfiltered systems in Essex, Columbia, Greene, 
Dutchess, Rennsselaer, Schoharie, Saratoga, Washington, and 
Warren Counties serving a population of less than 5,000, which 
meet appropriate disinfection requirements and have adequate 
watershed protections, so long as the State determines that the 
public health will be protected during the duration of the 
additional compliance period and the system agrees to implement 
appropriate control measures as determined by the State.
  (B) The additional compliance period referred to in 
subparagraph (A) shall expire on the earlier of the date 3 
years after the date on which the Administrator identifies 
appropriate control technology for the Surface Water Treatment 
Rule for public water systems in the category that includes 
such system pursuant to section 1412(b)(4)(E) or 5 years after 
the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
1996.

SEC. 1417. PROHIBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES, SOLDER, AND FLUX.

  (a) In General.--
          [(1) Prohibition.--Any pipe, solder, or flux, which 
        is used after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water 
        Act Amendments of 1986, in the installation or repair 
        of--
                  [(A) any public water system, or
                  [(B) any plumbing in a residential or 
                nonresidential facility providing water for 
                human consumption which is connected to a 
                public water system,
        shall be lead free (within the meaning of subsection 
        (d)). This paragraph shall not apply to leaded joints 
        necessary for the repair of cast iron pipes.]
          (1) Prohibitions.--
                  (A) In general.--No person may use any pipe, 
                any pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, any 
                solder, or any flux, after June 19, 1986, in 
                the installation or repair of--
                          (i) any public water system; or
                          (ii) any plumbing in a residential or 
                        nonresidential facility providing water 
                        for human consumption,
                that is not lead free (within the meaning of 
                subsection (d)).
                  (B) Leaded joints.--Subparagraph (A) shall 
                not apply to leaded joints necessary for the 
                repair of cast iron pipes.
          (2) Public notice requirements.--
                  (A) In general.--Each owner or operator of a 
                public water system shall identify and provide 
                notice to persons that may be affected by lead 
                contamination of their drinking water where 
                such contamination results from either or both 
                of the following:
                          (i) * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (3) Unlawful acts.--Effective 2 years after the date 
        of enactment of this paragraph, it shall be unlawful--
                  (A) for any person to introduce into commerce 
                any pipe, or any pipe or plumbing fitting or 
                fixture, that is not lead free, except for a 
                pipe that is used in manufacturing or 
                industrial processing;
                  (B) for any person engaged in the business of 
                selling plumbing supplies, except 
                manufacturers, to sell solder or flux that is 
                not lead free; or
                  (C) for any person to introduce into commerce 
                any solder or flux that is not lead free unless 
                the solder or flux bears a prominent label 
                stating that it is illegal to use the solder or 
                flux in the installation or repair of any 
                plumbing providing water for human consumption.
          * * * * * * *
  (d) Definition of Lead Free.--For purposes of this section, 
the term ``lead free''--
          (1) when used with respect to solders and flux refers 
        to solders and flux containing not more than 0.2 
        percent [lead, and] lead;
          (2) when used with respect to pipes and pipe fittings 
        refers to pipes and pipe fittings containing not more 
        than 8.0 percent lead[.]; and
          (3) when used with respect to plumbing fittings and 
        fixtures, refers to plumbing fittings and fixtures in 
        compliance with standards established in accordance 
        with subsection (e).
  (e) Plumbing Fittings and Fixtures.--
          (1) In general.--The Administrator shall provide 
        accurate and timely technical information and 
        assistance to qualified third-party certifiers in the 
        development of voluntary standards and testing 
        protocols for the leaching of lead from new plumbing 
        fittings and fixtures that are intended by the 
        manufacturer to dispense water for human ingestion.
          (2) Standards.--
                  (A) In general.--If a voluntary standard for 
                the leaching of lead is not established by the 
                date that is 1 year after the date of enactment 
                of this subsection, the Administrator shall, 
                not later than 2 years after the date of 
                enactment of this subsection, promulgate 
                regulations setting a health-effects-based 
                performance standard establishing maximum 
                leaching levels from new plumbing fittings and 
                fixtures that are intended by the manufacturer 
                to dispense water for human ingestion. The 
                standard shall become effective on the date 
                that is 5 years after the date of promulgation 
                of the standard.
                  (B) Alternative requirement.--If regulations 
                are required to be promulgated under 
                subparagraph (A) and have not been promulgated 
                by the date that is 5 years after the date of 
                enactment of this subsection, no person may 
                import, manufacture, process, or distribute in 
                commerce a new plumbing fitting or fixture, 
                intended by the manufacturer to dispense water 
                for human ingestion, that contains more than 4 
                percent lead by dry weight.

SEC. 1418. MONITORING OF CONTAMINANTS.

  (a) Interim Monitoring Relief Authority.--(1) A State 
exercising primary enforcement responsibility for public water 
systems may modify the monitoring requirements for any 
regulated or unregulated contaminants for which monitoring is 
required other than microbial contaminants (or indicators 
thereof), disinfectants and disinfection byproducts or 
corrosion byproducts for an interim period to provide that any 
public water system serving 10,000 persons or fewer shall not 
be required to conduct additional quarterly monitoring during 
an interim relief period for such contaminants if--
          (A) monitoring, conducted at the beginning of the 
        period for the contaminant concerned and certified to 
        the State by the public water system, fails to detect 
        the presence of the contaminant in the ground or 
        surface water supplying the public water system, and
          (B) the State, (considering the hydrogeology of the 
        area and other relevant factors), determines in writing 
        that the contaminant is unlikely to be detected by 
        further monitoring during such period.
  (2) The interim relief period referred to in paragraph (1) 
shall terminate when permanent monitoring relief is adopted and 
approved for such State, or at the end of 36 months after the 
enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, 
whichever comes first. In order to serve as a basis for interim 
relief, the monitoring conducted at the beginning of the period 
must occur at the time determined by the State to be the time 
of the public water system's greatest vulnerability to the 
contaminant concerned in the relevant ground or surface water, 
taking into account in the case of pesticides the time of 
application of the pesticide for the source water area and the 
travel time for the pesticide to reach such waters and taking 
into account, in the case of other contaminants, seasonality of 
precipitation and contaminant travel time.
  (b) Permanent Monitoring Relief Authority.--(1) Each State 
exercising primary enforcement responsibility for public water 
systems under this title and having an approved wellhead 
protection program and a source water assessment program may 
adopt, in accordance with guidance published by the 
Administrator, and submit to the Administrator as provided in 
section 1428(c), tailored alternative monitoring requirements 
for public water systems in such State (as an alternative to 
the monitoring requirements for chemical contaminants set forth 
in the applicable national primary drinking water regulations) 
where the State concludes that (based on data available at the 
time of adoption concerning susceptibility, use, occurrence, 
wellhead protection, or from the State's drinking water source 
water assessment program) such alternative monitoring would 
provide assurance that it complies with the Administrator's 
guidelines. The State program must be adequate to assure 
compliance with, and enforcement of, applicable national 
primary drinking water regulations. Alternative monitoring 
shall not apply to regulated microbiological contaminants (or 
indicators thereof), disinfectants and disinfection by-
products, or corrosion by-products. The preceding sentence is 
not intended to limit other authority of the Administrator 
under other provisions of this title to grant monitoring 
flexibility.
  (2)(A) The Administrator shall issue, after notice and 
comment and at the same time as guidelines are issued for 
source water assessment under section 1428(l), guidelines for 
States to follow in proposing alternative monitoring 
requirements under paragraph (1) of this subsection for 
chemical contaminants. The Administrator shall publish such 
guidelines in the Federal Register. The guidelines shall assure 
that the public health will be protected from drinking water 
contamination. The guidelines shall require that a State 
alternative monitoring program apply on a contaminant-by-
contaminant basis and that, to be eligible for such alternative 
monitoring program, a public water system must show the State 
that the contaminant is not present in the drinking water 
supply or, if present, it is reliably and consistently below 
the maximum contaminant level.
  (B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the phrase ``reliably 
and consistently below the maximum contaminant level'' means 
that, although contaminants have been detected in a water 
supply, the State has sufficient knowledge of the contamination 
source and extent of contamination to predict that the maximum 
contaminant level will not be exceeded. In determining that a 
contaminant is reliably and consistently below the maximum 
contaminant level, States shall consider the quality and 
completeness of data, the length of time covered and the 
volatility or stability of monitoring results during that time, 
and the proximity of such results to the maximum contaminant 
level. Wide variations in the analytical results, or analytical 
results close to the maximum contaminant level, shall not be 
considered to be reliably and consistently below the maximum 
contaminant level.
  (3) The guidelines issued by the Administrator under 
paragraph (2) shall require that if, after the monitoring 
program is in effect and operating, a contaminant covered by 
the alternative monitoring program is detected at levels at or 
above the maximum contaminant level or is no longer reliably or 
consistently below the maximum contaminant level, the public 
water system must either--
          (A) demonstrate that the contamination source has 
        been removed or that other action has been taken to 
        eliminate the contamination problem, or
          (B) test for the detected contaminant pursuant to the 
        applicable national primary drinking water regulation.
  (c) Treatment as NPDWR.--All monitoring relief granted by a 
State to a public water system for a regulated contaminant 
under subsection (a) or (b) shall be treated as part of the 
national primary drinking water regulation for that 
contaminant.
  (d) Other Monitoring Relief.--Nothing in this section shall 
be construed to affect the authority of the States under 
applicable national primary drinking water regulations to alter 
monitoring requirements through waivers or other existing 
authorities. The Administrator shall periodically review and, 
as appropriate, revise such authorities.

SEC. 1419. CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT.

  (a) State Authority for New Systems.--Each State shall obtain 
the legal authority or other means to ensure that all new 
community water systems and new nontransient, noncommunity 
water systems commencing operation after October 1, 1999, 
demonstrate technical, managerial, and financial capacity with 
respect to each national primary drinking water regulation in 
effect, or likely to be in effect, on the date of commencement 
of operations.
  (b) Systems in Significant Noncompliance.--
          (1) List.--Beginning not later than 1 year after the 
        date of enactment of this section, each State shall 
        prepare, periodically update, and submit to the 
        Administrator a list of community water systems and 
        nontransient, noncommunity water systems that have a 
        history of significant noncompliance with this title 
        (as defined in guidelines issued prior to the date of 
        enactment of this section or any revisions of the 
        guidelines that have been made in consultation with the 
        States) and, to the extent practicable, the reasons for 
        noncompliance.
          (2) Report.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
        enactment of this section and as part of the capacity 
        development strategy of the State, each State shall 
        report to the Administrator on the success of 
        enforcement mechanisms and initial capacity development 
        efforts in assisting the public water systems listed 
        under paragraph (1) to improve technical, managerial, 
        and financial capacity.
  (c) Capacity Development Strategy.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the 
        date of enactment of this section, each State shall 
        develop and implement a strategy to assist public water 
        systems in acquiring and maintaining technical, 
        managerial, and financial capacity.
          (2) Content.--In preparing the capacity development 
        strategy, the State shall consider, solicit public 
        comment on, and include as appropriate--
                  (A) the methods or criteria that the State 
                will use to identify and prioritize the public 
                water systems most in need of improving 
                technical, managerial, and financial capacity;
                  (B) a description of the institutional, 
                regulatory, financial, tax, or legal factors at 
                the Federal, State, or local level that 
                encourage or impair capacity development;
                  (C) a description of how the State will use 
                the authorities and resources of this title or 
                other means to--
                          (i) assist public water systems in 
                        complying with national primary 
                        drinking water regulations;
                          (ii) encourage the development of 
                        partnerships between public water 
                        systems to enhance the technical, 
                        managerial, and financial capacity of 
                        the systems; and
                          (iii) assist public water systems in 
                        the training and certification of 
                        operators;
                  (D) a description of how the State will 
                establish a baseline and measure improvements 
                in capacity with respect to national primary 
                drinking water regulations and State drinking 
                water law; and
                  (E) an identification of the persons that 
                have an interest in and are involved in the 
                development and implementation of the capacity 
                development strategy (including all appropriate 
                agencies of Federal, State, and local 
                governments, private and nonprofit public water 
                systems, and public water system customers).
          (3) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
        which a State first adopts a capacity development 
        strategy under this subsection, and every 3 years 
        thereafter, the head of the State agency that has 
        primary responsibility to carry out this title in the 
        State shall submit to the Governor a report that shall 
        also be available to the public on the efficacy of the 
        strategy and progress made toward improving the 
        technical, managerial, and financial capacity of public 
        water systems in the State.
          (4) Review.--The decisions of the State under this 
        section regarding any particular public water system 
        are not subject to review by the Administrator and may 
        not serve as the basis for withholding funds under 
        section 1452(a)(1)(H)(i).
  (d) Federal Assistance.--
          (1) In general.--The Administrator shall support the 
        States in developing capacity development strategies.
          (2) Informational assistance.--
                  (A) In general.--Not later than 180 days 
                after the date of enactment of this section, 
                the Administrator shall--
                          (i) conduct a review of State 
                        capacity development efforts in 
                        existence on the date of enactment of 
                        this section and publish information to 
                        assist States and public water systems 
                        in capacity development efforts; and
                          (ii) initiate a partnership with 
                        States, public water systems, and the 
                        public to develop information for 
                        States on recommended operator 
                        certification requirements.
                  (B) Publication of information.--The 
                Administrator shall publish the information 
                developed through the partnership under 
                subparagraph (A)(ii) not later than 18 months 
                after the date of enactment of this section.
          (3) Promulgation of drinking water regulations.--In 
        promulgating a national primary drinking water 
        regulation, the Administrator shall include an analysis 
        of the likely effect of compliance with the regulation 
        on the technical, financial, and managerial capacity of 
        public water systems.
          (4) Guidance for new systems.--Not later than 2 years 
        after the date of enactment of this section, the 
        Administrator shall publish guidance developed in 
        consultation with the States describing legal 
        authorities and other means to ensure that all new 
        community water systems and new nontransient, 
        noncommunity water systems demonstrate technical, 
        managerial, and financial capacity with respect to 
        national primary drinking water regulations.

      Part C--Protection of Underground Sources of Drinking Water

                     regulations for state programs

  Sec. 1421. (a) * * *
  (b)(1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (3)(A) The regulations of the Administrator under this 
section shall permit or provide for consideration of varying 
geologic, hydrological, or historical conditions in different 
States and in different areas within a State.
  (B)(i) In prescribing regulations under this section the 
Administrator shall, to the extent feasible, avoid promulgation 
of requirements which would unnecessarily disrupt State 
underground injection control programs which are in effect and 
being enforced in a substantial [number or] number of States.
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 1427. SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

  (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish 
procedures for development, implementation, and assessment of 
demonstration programs designed to protect critical aquifer 
protection areas located within areas designated as sole or 
principal source aquifers under section 1424(e) of this Act.
  (b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
``critical aquifer protection area'' means either of the 
following:
          (1) All or part of an area located within an area for 
        which an application or designation as a sole or 
        principal source aquifer pursuant to section 1424(e), 
        has been submitted and approved by the Administrator 
        [not later than 24 months after the enactment of the 
        Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986] and which 
        satisfies the criteria established by the Administrator 
        under subsection (d).
          * * * * * * *
  (k) Activities Funded Under Other Law.--No funds authorized 
under this [subsection] section may be used to fund activities 
funded under other sections of this Act or the Clean Water Act, 
the Solid Waste Disposal Act, the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 or other 
environmental laws.
  (l) Savings Provision.--Nothing under this section shall be 
construed to amend, supersede or abrogate rights to quantities 
of water which have been established by interstate water 
compacts, Supreme Court decrees, or State water laws, or any 
requirement imposed or right provided under any Federal or 
State environmental or public health statute.
  (m) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
to carry out this section not more than the following amounts:

Fiscal year:                                                      Amount
    1987................................................     $10,000,000
    1988................................................      15,000,000
    1989................................................      17,500,000
    1990................................................      17,500,000
    1991................................................      17,500,000
    1992-2003...........................................     15,000,000.

Matching grants under this section may also be used to 
implement or update any water quality management plan for a 
sole or principal source aquifer approved (before the date of 
the enactment of this section) by the Administrator under 
section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

SEC. 1428. STATE PROGRAMS TO ESTABLISH WELLHEAD AND SOURCE WATER 
                    PROTECTION AREAS.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Public Participation.--To the maximum extent possible, 
each State shall establish procedures, including but not 
limited to the establishment of technical and citizens' 
advisory committees, to encourage the public to participate in 
developing the protection program for wellhead areas and source 
water assessment programs under subsection (l). Such procedures 
shall include notice and opportunity for public hearing on the 
State program before it is submitted to the Administrator.
  (c) Disapproval.--
          (1) In general.--[If, in the judgment of the 
        Administrator a State program (or portion, thereof, 
        including the definition of a wellhead protection 
        area), is not adequate to protect public water systems 
        as required by this section, the Administrator shall 
        disapprove such program (or portion thereof).] If, in 
        the judgment of the Administrator, a State program or 
        portion thereof under subsection (a) is not adequate to 
        protect public water systems as required by subsection 
        (a) or a State program under subsection (l) or section 
        1418(b) does not meet the applicable requirements of 
        subsection (l) or section 1418(b), the Administrator 
        shall disapprove such program or portion thereof. A 
        State program developed pursuant to subsection (a) 
        shall be deemed to be adequate unless the Administrator 
        determines, within 9 months of the receipt of a State 
        program, that such program (or portion thereof) is 
        inadequate for the purpose of protecting public water 
        systems as required by this section from contaminants 
        that may have any adverse effect on the health of 
        persons. A State program developed pursuant to 
        subsection (l) or section 1418(b) shall be deemed to 
        meet the applicable requirements of subsection (l) or 
        section 1418(b) unless the Administrator determines 
        within 9 months of the receipt of the program that such 
        program (or portion thereof) does not meet such 
        requirements. If the Administrator determines that a 
        proposed State program (or any portion thereof) is 
        [inadequate] disapproved, the Administrator shall 
        submit a written statement of the reasons for such 
        determination to the Governor of the State.
          (2) Modification and resubmission.--Within 6 months 
        after receipt of the Administrator's written notice 
        under paragraph (1) that any proposed State program (or 
        portion thereof) is [inadequate] disapproved, the 
        Governor or Governor's designee, shall modify the 
        program based upon the recommendations of the 
        Administrator and resubmit the modified program to the 
        Administrator.
          * * * * * * *
  (g) Implementation.--Each State shall make every reasonable 
effort to implement the State wellhead area protection program 
under this section and the State source water assessment 
programs under subsection (l) for which the State uses grants 
under section 1452 (relating to State Revolving Funds) within 2 
years of submitting the program to the Administrator. Each 
State shall submit to the Administrator a biennial status 
report describing the State's progress in implementing the 
program. [Such] In the case of wellhead protection programs, 
such report shall include amendments to the State program for 
water wells sited during the biennial period.
          * * * * * * *
  (k) Authorization of Appropriations.--Unless the State 
program is disapproved under this section, the Administrator 
shall make grants to the State for not less than 50 or more 
than 90 percent of the costs incurred by a State (as determined 
by the Administrator) in developing and implementing each State 
program under this section. For purposes of making such grants 
there is authorized to be appropriated not more than the 
following amounts:

Fiscal year:                                                      Amount
    1987................................................     $20,000,000
    1988................................................      20,000,000
    1989................................................      35,000,000
    1990................................................      35,000,000
    1991................................................      35,000,000
    1992-2003...........................................     30,000,000.

  (l) Source Water Assessment.--
          (1) Guidance.--Within 12 months after enactment of 
        the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, after 
        notice and comment, the Administrator shall publish 
        guidance for States exercising primary enforcement 
        responsibility for public water systems to carry out 
        directly or through delegation (for the protection and 
        benefit of public water systems and for the support of 
        monitoring flexibility) a source water assessment 
        program within the State's boundaries.
          (2) Program requirements.--A source water assessment 
        program under this subsection shall--
                  (A) delineate the boundaries of the 
                assessment areas in such State from which one 
                or more public water systems in the State 
                receive supplies of drinking water, using all 
                reasonably available hydrogeologic information 
                on the sources of the supply of drinking water 
                in the State and the water flow, recharge, and 
                discharge and any other reliable information as 
                the State deems necessary to adequately 
                determine such areas; and
                  (B) identify for contaminants regulated under 
                this title for which monitoring is required 
                under this title (or any unregulated 
                contaminants selected by the State in its 
                discretion which the State, for the purposes of 
                this subsection, has determined may present a 
                threat to public health), to the extent 
                practical, the origins within each delineated 
                area of such contaminants to determine the 
                susceptibility of the public water systems in 
                the delineated area to such contaminants.
          (3) Approval, implementation, and monitoring 
        relief.--A State source water assessment program under 
        this subsection shall be submitted to the Administrator 
        within 18 months after the Administrator's guidance is 
        issued under this subsection and shall be deemed 
        approved 9 months after the date of such submittal 
        unless the Administrator disapproves the program as 
        provided in subsection (c). States shall begin 
        implementation of the program immediately after its 
        approval. The Administrator's approval of a State 
        program under this subsection shall include a 
        timetable, established in consultation with the State, 
        allowing not more than 2 years for completion after 
        approval of the program. Public water systems seeking 
        monitoring relief in addition to the interim relief 
        provided under section 1418(a) shall be eligible for 
        monitoring relief, consistent with section 1418(b), 
        upon completion of the assessment in the delineated 
        source water assessment area or areas concerned.
          (4) Timetable.--The timetable referred to in 
        paragraph (3) shall take into consideration the 
        availability to the State of funds under section 1452 
        (relating to State Revolving Funds) for assessments and 
        other relevant factors. The Administrator may extend 
        any timetable included in a State program approved 
        under paragraph (3) to extend the period for completion 
        by an additional 18 months. Compliance with subsection 
        (g) shall not affect any State permanent monitoring 
        flexibility program approved under section 1418(b).
          (5) Demonstration project.--The Administrator shall, 
        as soon as practicable, conduct a demonstration 
        project, in consultation with other Federal agencies, 
        to demonstrate the most effective and protective means 
        of assessing and protecting source waters serving large 
        metropolitan areas and located on Federal lands.
          (6) Use of other programs.--To avoid duplication and 
        to encourage efficiency, the program under this section 
        shall, to the extent practicable, be coordinated with 
        other existing programs and mechanisms, and may make 
        use of any of the following:
                  (A) Vulnerability assessments, sanitary 
                surveys, and monitoring programs.
                  (B) Delineations or assessments of ground 
                water sources under a State wellhead protection 
                program developed pursuant to this section.
                  (C) Delineations or assessments of surface or 
                ground water sources under a State pesticide 
                management plan developed pursuant to the 
                Pesticide and Ground Water State Management 
                Plan Regulation (subparts I and J of part 152 
                of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations), 
                promulgated under section 3(d) of the Federal 
                Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 
                U.S.C. 136a(d)).
                  (D) Delineations or assessments of surface 
                water sources under a State watershed 
                initiative or to satisfy the watershed 
                criterion for determining if filtration is 
                required under the Surface Water Treatment Rule 
                (section 141.70 of title 40, Code of Federal 
                Regulations).
          (7) Public availability.--The State shall make the 
        results of the source water assessments conducted under 
        this subsection available to the public.

SEC. 1429. FEDERAL FACILITIES.

  (a) In General.--Each department, agency, and instrumentality 
of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the 
Federal Government--
          (1) owning or operating any facility in a wellhead 
        protection area,
          (2) engaged in any activity at such facility 
        resulting, or which may result, in the contamination of 
        water supplies in any such area, or
          (3) owning or operating any public water system,
shall be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State, 
interstate, and local requirements, both substantive and 
procedural (including any requirement for permits or reporting 
or any provisions for injunctive relief and such sanctions as 
may be imposed by a court to enforce such relief), respecting 
the protection of such wellhead areas and respecting such 
public water systems in the same manner and to the same extent 
as any person is subject to such requirements, including the 
payment of reasonable service charges. The Federal, State, 
interstate, and local substantive and procedural requirements 
referred to in this subsection include, but are not limited to, 
all administrative orders and all civil and administrative 
penalties and fines, regardless of whether such penalties or 
fines are punitive or coercive in nature or are imposed for 
isolated, intermittent, or continuing violations. The United 
States hereby expressly waives any immunity otherwise 
applicable to the United States with respect to any such 
substantive or procedural requirement (including, but not 
limited to, any injunctive relief, administrative order or 
civil or administrative penalty or fine referred to in the 
preceding sentence, or reasonable service charge). The 
reasonable service charges referred to in this subsection 
include, but are not limited to, fees or charges assessed in 
connection with the processing and issuance of permits, renewal 
of permits, amendments to permits, review of plans, studies, 
and other documents, and inspection and monitoring of 
facilities, as well as any other nondiscriminatory charges that 
are assessed in connection with a Federal, State, interstate, 
or local regulatory program respecting the protection of 
wellhead areas or public water systems. Neither the United 
States, nor any agent, employee, or officer thereof, shall be 
immune or exempt from any process or sanction of any State or 
Federal Court with respect to the enforcement of any such 
injunctive relief. No agent, employee, or officer of the United 
States shall be personally liable for any civil penalty under 
any Federal, State, interstate, or local law concerning the 
protection of wellhead areas or public water systems with 
respect to any act or omission within the scope of the official 
duties of the agent, employee, or officer. An agent, employee, 
or officer of the United States shall be subject to any 
criminal sanction (including, but not limited to, any fine or 
imprisonment) under any Federal or State requirement adopted 
pursuant to this title, but no department, agency, or 
instrumentality of the executive, legislative, or judicial 
branch of the Federal Government shall be subject to any such 
sanction. The President may exempt any facility of any 
department, agency, or instrumentality in the executive branch 
from compliance with such a requirement if he determines it to 
be in the paramount interest of the United States to do so. No 
such exemption shall be granted due to lack of appropriation 
unless the President shall have specifically requested such 
appropriation as a part of the budgetary process and the 
Congress shall have failed to make available such requested 
appropriation. Any exemption shall be for a period not in 
excess of 1 year, but additional exemptions may be granted for 
periods not to exceed 1 year upon the President's making a new 
determination. The President shall report each January to the 
Congress all exemptions from the requirements of this section 
granted during the preceding calendar year, together with his 
reason for granting each such exemption.
  (b) Administrative Penalty Orders.--
          (1) In general.--If the Administrator finds that a 
        Federal agency has violated an applicable requirement 
        under this title, the Administrator may issue a penalty 
        order assessing a penalty against the Federal agency.
          (2) Penalties.--The Administrator may, after notice 
        to the agency, assess a civil penalty against the 
        agency in an amount not to exceed $25,000 per day per 
        violation.
          (3) Procedure.--Before an administrative penalty 
        order issued under this subsection becomes final, the 
        Administrator shall provide the agency an opportunity 
        to confer with the Administrator and shall provide the 
        agency notice and an opportunity for a hearing on the 
        record in accordance with chapters 5 and 7 of title 5, 
        United States Code.
          (4) Public review.--
                  (A) In general.--Any interested person may 
                obtain review of an administrative penalty 
                order issued under this subsection. The review 
                may be obtained in the United States District 
                Court for the District of Columbia or in the 
                United States District Court for the district 
                in which the violation is alleged to have 
                occurred by the filing of a complaint with the 
                court within the 30-day period beginning on the 
                date the penalty order becomes final. The 
                person filing the complaint shall 
                simultaneously send a copy of the complaint by 
                certified mail to the Administrator and the 
                Attorney General.
                  (B) Record.--The Administrator shall promptly 
                file in the court a certified copy of the 
                record on which the order was issued.
                  (C) Standard of review.--The court shall not 
                set aside or remand the order unless the court 
                finds that there is not substantial evidence in 
                the record, taken as a whole, to support the 
                finding of a violation or that the assessment 
                of the penalty by the Administrator constitutes 
                an abuse of discretion.
                  (D) Prohibition on additional penalties.--The 
                court may not impose an additional civil 
                penalty for a violation that is subject to the 
                order unless the court finds that the 
                assessment constitutes an abuse of discretion 
                by the Administrator.
  (c) Limitation on State Use of Funds Collected From Federal 
Government.--Unless a State law in effect on the date of the 
enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 or 
a State constitution requires the funds to be used in a 
different manner, all funds collected by a State from the 
Federal Government from penalties and fines imposed for 
violation of any substantive or procedural requirement referred 
to in subsection (a) shall be used by the State only for 
projects designed to improve or protect the environment or to 
defray the costs of environmental protection or enforcement.

                        Part D--Emergency Powers

                            emergency powers

  Sec. 1431. (a) * * *
  (b) Any person who violates or fails or refuses to comply 
with any order issued by the Administrator under subsection 
(a)(1) may, in an action brought in the appropriate United 
States district court to enforce such order, be subject to a 
civil penalty of not to exceed [$5,000] $15,000 for each day in 
which such violation occurs or failure to comply continues.
          * * * * * * *

                       Part E--General Provisions

 assurance of availability of adequate supplies of chemicals necessary 
                         for treatment of water

  Sec. 1441. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (f) No certification of need or order issued under this 
section may remain in effect for more than one year.

   research, technical assistance, information, training of personnel

  Sec. 1442. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  [(e) The Administrator is authorized to provide technical 
assistance to small public water systems to enable such systems 
to achieve and maintain compliance with national drinking water 
regulations. Such assistance may include ``circuit-rider'' 
programs, training, and preliminary engineering studies. There 
are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
$10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1987 through 1991. Not 
less than the greater of--
          [(1) 3 percent of the amounts appropriated under this 
        subsection, or
          [(2) $280,000
shall be utilized for technical assistance to public water 
systems owned or operated by Indian tribes.]
  (e) Technical Assistance.--The Administrator may provide 
technical assistance to small public water systems to enable 
such systems to achieve and maintain compliance with applicable 
national primary drinking water regulations. Such assistance 
may include circuit-rider programs, training, and preliminary 
engineering evaluations. There is authorized to be appropriated 
to the Administrator to be used for such technical assistance 
$15,000,000 for fiscal years 1997 through 2003. No portion of 
any State revolving fund established under section 1452 
(relating to State revolving funds) and no portion of any funds 
made available under this subsection may be used either 
directly or indirectly for lobbying expenses. Of the total 
amount appropriated under this subsection, 3 percent shall be 
used for technical assistance to public water systems owned or 
operated by Indian tribes.
  (f) Minimum Standards.--(1) Not later than 30 months after 
the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments 
of 1996 and after consultation with States exercising primary 
enforcement responsibility for public water systems, the 
Administrator shall promulgate regulations specifying minimum 
standards for certification (and recertification) of the 
operators of community and nontransient noncommunity public 
water systems. Such regulations shall take into account 
existing State programs, the complexity of the system and other 
factors aimed at providing an effective program at reasonable 
cost to States and public water systems, taking into account 
the size of the system.
  (2) Any State exercising primary enforcement responsibility 
for public water systems shall adopt and implement, within 2 
years after the promulgation of regulations pursuant to 
paragraph (1), requirements for the certification of operators 
of community and nontransient noncommunity public water 
systems.
  (3) For any State exercising primary enforcement 
responsibility for public water systems which has an operator 
certification program in effect on the date of the enactment of 
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, the regulations 
under paragraph (1) shall allow the State to enforce such 
program in lieu of the regulations under paragraph (1) if the 
State submits the program to the Administrator within 18 months 
after the promulgation of such regulations unless the 
Administrator determines (within 9 months after the State 
submits the program to the Administrator) that such program is 
not substantially equivalent to such regulations. In making 
this determination, such existing State programs shall be 
presumed to be substantially equivalent to the regulations, 
notwithstanding program differences, based on the size of 
systems or the quality of source water, providing State 
programs meet overall public health objectives of the 
regulations. If disapproved the program may be resubmitted 
within 6 months after receipt of notice of disapproval.

                       grants for state programs

  Sec. 1443. (a)(1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  [(7) For the purposes of making grants under paragraph (1) 
there are authorized to be appropriated $15,000,000 for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1976, $25,000,000 for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1977, $35,000,000 for fiscal year 1978, 
$45,000,000 for fiscal year 1979, $29,450,000 for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1980, $32,000,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1981, and $34,000,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1982. For the purposes of making grants 
under paragraph (1) there are authorized to be appropriated not 
more than the following amounts:

[Fiscal year:                                                     Amount
    1987................................................     $37,200,000
    1988................................................      37,200,000
    1989................................................      40,150,000
    1990................................................      40,150,000
    1991................................................     40,150,000]

          (7) Authorization.--For the purpose of making grants 
        under paragraph (1), there are authorized to be 
        appropriated $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1997 
        through 2003.
          (8) Reservation of funds by the administrator.--If 
        the Administrator assumes the primary enforcement 
        responsibility of a State public water system 
        supervision program, the Administrator may reserve from 
        funds made available pursuant to this subsection, an 
        amount equal to the amount that would otherwise have 
        been provided to the State pursuant to this subsection. 
        The Administrator shall use the funds reserved pursuant 
        to this paragraph to ensure the full and effective 
        administration of a public water system supervision 
        program in the State.
          (9) State loan funds.--For any fiscal year for which 
        the amount made available to the Administrator by 
        appropriations to carry out this subsection is less 
        than the amount that the Administrator determines is 
        necessary to supplement funds made available pursuant 
        to paragraph (8) to ensure the full and effective 
        administration of a public water system supervision 
        program in a State, the Administrator may reserve from 
        the funds made available to the State under section 
        1452 (relating to State revolving funds) an amount that 
        is equal to the amount of the shortfall. This paragraph 
        shall not apply to any State not exercising primary 
        enforcement responsibility for public water systems as 
        of the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water 
        Amendments of 1996.
  (b)(1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (5) For purposes of making grants under paragraph (1) there 
are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1976, $7,500,000 for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1977, $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
1978 and 1979, $7,795,000 for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 1980, $18,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1981, and $21,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1982. For the purpose of making grants under paragraph (1) 
there are authorized to be appropriated not more than the 
following amounts:

Fiscal year:                                                      Amount
    1987................................................     $19,700,000
    1988................................................      19,700,000
    1989................................................      20,850,000
    1990................................................      20,850,000
    1991................................................      20,850,000
    1992-2003...........................................     15,000,000.

     * * * * * * *
  (d) New York City Watershed Protection Program.--
          (1) In general.--The Administrator is authorized to 
        provide financial assistance to the State of New York 
        for demonstration projects implemented as part of the 
        watershed program for the protection and enhancement of 
        the quality of source waters of the New York City water 
        supply system, including projects necessary to comply 
        with the criteria for avoiding filtration contained in 
        40 CFR 141.71. Demonstration projects which shall be 
        eligible for financial assistance shall be certified to 
        the Administrator by the State of New York as 
        satisfying the purposes of this subsection. In 
        certifying projects to the Administrator, the State of 
        New York shall give priority to monitoring projects 
        that have undergone peer review.
          (2) Report.--Not later than 5 years after the date on 
        which the Administrator first provides assistance 
        pursuant to this paragraph, the Governor of the State 
        of New York shall submit a report to the Administrator 
        on the results of projects assisted.
          (3) Matching requirements.--Federal assistance 
        provided under this subsection shall not exceed 35 
        percent of the total cost of the protection program 
        being carried out for any particular watershed or 
        ground water recharge area.
          (4) Authorization.--There are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Administrator to carry out this 
        subsection for each of fiscal years 1997 through 2003 
        $15,000,000 for each of such fiscal years for the 
        purpose of providing assistance to the State of New 
        York to carry out paragraph (1).
          * * * * * * *

                        records and inspections

  Sec. 1445. (a)[(1) Every person who is a supplier of water, 
who is or may be otherwise subject to a primary drinking water 
regulation prescribed under section 1412 or to an applicable 
underground injection control program (as defined in section 
1422(c)), who is or may be subject to the permit requirement of 
section 1424 or to an order issued under section 1441, or who 
is a grantee, shall establish and maintain such records, make 
such reports, conduct such monitoring, and provide such 
information as the Administrator may reasonably require by 
regulation to assist him in establishing regulations under this 
title, in determining whether such person has acted or is 
acting in compliance with this title, in administering any 
program of financial assistance under this title, in evaluating 
the health risks of unregulated contaminants, or in advising 
the public of such risks. In requiring a public water system to 
monitor under this subsection, the Administrator may take into 
consideration the system size and the contaminants likely to be 
found in the system's drinking water.] (1)(A) Every person who 
is subject to any requirement of this title or who is a 
grantee, shall establish and maintain such records, make such 
reports, conduct such monitoring, and provide such information 
as the Administrator may reasonably require by regulation to 
assist the Administrator in establishing regulations under this 
title, in determining whether such person has acted or is 
acting in compliance with this title, in administering any 
program of financial assistance under this title, in evaluating 
the health risks of unregulated contaminants, or in advising 
the public of such risks. In requiring a public water system to 
monitor under this subsection, the Administrator may take into 
consideration the system size and the contaminants likely to be 
found in the system's drinking water.
  (B) Every person who is subject to a national primary 
drinking water regulation under section 1412 shall provide such 
information as the Administrator may reasonably require, after 
consultation with the State in which such person is located if 
such State has primary enforcement responsibility for public 
water systems, on a case-by-case basis, to determine whether 
such person has acted or is acting in compliance with this 
title.
  (C) Every person who is subject to a national primary 
drinking water regulation under section 1412 shall provide such 
information as the Administrator may reasonably require to 
assist the Administrator in establishing regulations under 
section 1412 of this title, after consultation with States and 
suppliers of water. The Administrator may not require under 
this subparagraph the installation of treatment equipment or 
process changes, the testing of treatment technology, or the 
analysis or processing of monitoring samples, except where the 
Administrator provides the funding for such activities. Before 
exercising this authority, the Administrator shall first seek 
to obtain the information by voluntary submission.
  (D) The Administrator shall not later than 2 years after the 
date of enactment of this sentence, after consultation with 
public health experts, representatives of the general public, 
and officials of State and local governments, review the 
monitoring requirements for not fewer than 12 contaminants 
identified by the Administrator, and promulgate any necessary 
modifications.
  [(2) Not later than 18 months after enactment of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall 
promulgate regulations requiring every public water system to 
conduct a monitoring program for unregulated contaminants. The 
regulations shall require monitoring of drinking water supplied 
by the system and shall vary the frequency and schedule of 
monitoring requirements for systems based on the number of 
persons served by the system, the source of supply, and the 
contaminants likely to be found. Each system shall be required 
to monitor at least once every 5 years after the effective date 
of the Administrator's regulations unless the Administrator 
requires more frequent monitoring.
  [(3) Regulations under paragraph (2) shall list unregulated 
contaminants for which systems may be required to monitor, and 
shall include criteria by which the primary enforcement 
authority in each State could show cause for addition or 
deletion of contaminants from the designated list. The primary 
State enforcement authority may delete contaminants for an 
individual system, in accordance with these criteria, after 
obtaining approval of assessment of the contaminants 
potentially to be found in the system. The Administrator shall 
approve or disapprove such an assessment submitted by a State 
within 60 days. A State may add contaminants, in accordance 
with these criteria, without making an assessment, but in no 
event shall such additions increase Federal expenditures 
authorized by this section.
  [(4) Public water systems conducting monitoring of 
unregulated contaminants pursuant to this section shall provide 
the results of such monitoring to the primary enforcement 
authority.
  [(5) Notification of the availability of the results of the 
monitoring programs required under paragraph (2), and 
notification of the availability of the results of the 
monitoring program referred to in paragraph (6), shall be given 
to the persons served by the system and the Administrator.
  [(6) The Administrator may waive the monitoring requirement 
under paragraph (2) for a system which has conducted a 
monitoring program after January 1, 1983, if the Administrator 
determines the program to have been consistent with the 
regulations promulgated under this section.
  [(7) Any system supplying less than 150 service connections 
shall be treated as complying with this subsection if such 
system provides water samples or the opportunity for sampling 
according to rules established by the Administrator.
  [(8) There are authorized to be appropriated $30,000,000 in 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1987 to remain available 
until expended to carry out the provisions of this subsection.]
          (2) Monitoring program for unregulated 
        contaminants.--
                  (A) Establishment.--The Administrator shall 
                promulgate regulations establishing the 
                criteria for a monitoring program for 
                unregulated contaminants. The regulations shall 
                require monitoring of drinking water supplied 
                by public water systems and shall vary the 
                frequency and schedule for monitoring 
                requirements for systems based on the number of 
                persons served by the system, the source of 
                supply, and the contaminants likely to be 
                found.
                  (B) Monitoring program for certain 
                unregulated contaminants.--
                          (i) Initial list.--Not later than 3 
                        years after the date of enactment of 
                        the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of 
                        1996 and every 5 years thereafter, the 
                        Administrator shall issue a list 
                        pursuant to subparagraph (A) of not 
                        more than 40 unregulated contaminants 
                        to be monitored by public water systems 
                        and to be included in the national 
                        drinking water occurrence data base 
                        maintained pursuant to subsection (g).
                          (ii) Governors' petition.--The 
                        Administrator shall include among the 
                        list of contaminants for which 
                        monitoring is required under this 
                        paragraph each contaminant recommended 
                        in a petition signed by the Governor of 
                        each of 7 or more States, unless the 
                        Administrator determines that the 
                        action would prevent the listing of 
                        other contaminants of a higher public 
                        health concern.
                  (C) Monitoring plan for small and medium 
                systems.--
                          (i) In general.--Based on the 
                        regulations promulgated by the 
                        Administrator, each State shall develop 
                        a representative monitoring plan to 
                        assess the occurrence of unregulated 
                        contaminants in public water systems 
                        that serve a population of 10,000 or 
                        fewer. The plan shall require 
                        monitoring for systems representative 
                        of different sizes, types, and 
                        geographic locations in the State.
                          (ii) Grants for small system costs.--
                        From funds appropriated under 
                        subparagraph (H), the Administrator 
                        shall pay the reasonable cost of such 
                        testing and laboratory analysis as are 
                        necessary to carry out monitoring under 
                        the plan.
                  (D) Monitoring results.--Each public water 
                system that conducts monitoring of unregulated 
                contaminants pursuant to this paragraph shall 
                provide the results of the monitoring to the 
                primary enforcement authority for the system.
                  (E) Notification.--Notification of the 
                availability of the results of monitoring 
                programs required under paragraph (2)(A) shall 
                be given to the persons served by the system 
                and the Administrator.
                  (F) Waiver of monitoring requirement.--The 
                Administrator shall waive the requirement for 
                monitoring for a contaminant under this 
                paragraph in a State, if the State demonstrates 
                that the criteria for listing the contaminant 
                do not apply in that State.
                  (G) Analytical methods.--The State may use 
                screening methods approved by the Administrator 
                under subsection (i) in lieu of monitoring for 
                particular contaminants under this paragraph.
                  (H) Authorization of appropriations.--There 
                are authorized to be appropriated to carry out 
                this paragraph $10,000,000 for each of the 
                fiscal years 1997 through 2003.
          * * * * * * *
  (g) National Drinking Water Occurrence Data Base.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the 
        date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
        Amendments of 1996, the Administrator shall assemble 
        and maintain a national drinking water occurrence data 
        base, using information on the occurrence of both 
        regulated and unregulated contaminants in public water 
        systems obtained under subsection (a)(1)(A) or 
        subsection (a)(2) and reliable information from other 
        public and private sources.
          (2) Public input.--In establishing the occurrence 
        data base, the Administrator shall solicit 
        recommendations from the Science Advisory Board, the 
        States, and other interested parties concerning the 
        development and maintenance of a national drinking 
        water occurrence data base, including such issues as 
        the structure and design of the data base, data input 
        parameters and requirements, and the use and 
        interpretation of data.
          (3) Use.--The data shall be used by the Administrator 
        in making determinations under section 1412(b)(3) with 
        respect to the occurrence of a contaminant in drinking 
        water at a level of public health concern.
          (4) Public recommendations.--The Administrator shall 
        periodically solicit recommendations from the 
        appropriate officials of the National Academy of 
        Sciences and the States, and any person may submit 
        recommendations to the Administrator, with respect to 
        contaminants that should be included in the national 
        drinking water occurrence data base, including 
        recommendations with respect to additional unregulated 
        contaminants that should be listed under subsection 
        (a)(2). Any recommendation submitted under this clause 
        shall be accompanied by reasonable documentation that--
                  (A) the contaminant occurs or is likely to 
                occur in drinking water; and
                  (B) the contaminant poses a risk to public 
                health.
          (5) Public availability.--The information from the 
        data base shall be available to the public in readily 
        accessible form.
          (6) Regulated contaminants.--With respect to each 
        contaminant for which a national primary drinking water 
        regulation has been established, the data base shall 
        include information on the detection of the contaminant 
        at a quantifiable level in public water systems 
        (including detection of the contaminant at levels not 
        constituting a violation of the maximum contaminant 
        level for the contaminant).
          (7) Unregulated contaminants.--With respect to 
        contaminants for which a national primary drinking 
        water regulation has not been established, the data 
        base shall include--
                  (A) monitoring information collected by 
                public water systems that serve a population of 
                more than 3,300, as required by the 
                Administrator under subsection (a);
                  (B) monitoring information collected by the 
                States from a representative sampling of public 
                water systems that serve a population of 3,300 
                or fewer; and
                  (C) other reliable and appropriate monitoring 
                information on the occurrence of the 
                contaminants in public water systems that is 
                available to the Administrator.
  (h) Availability of Information on Small System 
Technologies.--For purposes of sections 1412(b)(4)(E) and 
1415(e) (relating to small system assistance program), the 
Administrator may request information on the characteristics of 
commercially available treatment systems and technologies, 
including the effectiveness and performance of the systems and 
technologies under various operating conditions. The 
Administrator may specify the form, content, and submission 
date of information to be submitted by manufacturers, States, 
and other interested persons for the purpose of considering the 
systems and technologies in the development of regulations or 
guidance under sections 1412(b)(4)(E) and 1415(e).
  (i) Screening Methods.--The Administrator shall review new 
analytical methods to screen for regulated contaminants and may 
approve such methods as are more accurate or cost-effective 
than established reference methods for use in compliance 
monitoring.
          * * * * * * *

                            federal agencies

  Sec. 1447. (a) Each Federal agency [(1) having jurisdiction 
over any federally owned or maintained public water system or 
(2)] engaged in any activity resulting, or which may result in, 
underground injection which endangers drinking water (within 
the meaning of section 1421(d)(2)) shall be subject to, and 
comply with, all Federal, State, and local requirements, 
administrative authorities, and process and sanctions 
[respecting the provision of safe drinking water and] 
respecting any underground injection program in the same 
manner, and to the same extent, as any nongovernmental entity. 
The preceding sentence shall apply [(A)] (1) to any requirement 
whether substantive or procedural (including any recordkeeping 
or reporting requirement, any requirement respecting permits, 
and any other requirement whatsoever), [(B)] (2) to the 
exercise of any Federal, State, or local administrative 
authority, and [(C)] (3) to any process or sanction, whether 
enforced in Federal, State, or local courts or in any other 
manner. This subsection shall apply, notwithstanding any 
immunity of such agencies, under any law or rule of law. No 
officer, agent, or employee of the United States shall be 
personally liable for any civil penalty under this title with 
respect to any act or omission within the scope of his official 
duties.
  (b) The Administrator shall waive compliance with subsection 
(a) upon request of the Secretary of Defense and upon a 
determination by the President that the requested waiver is 
necessary in the interest of national security. The 
Administrator shall maintain a written record of the basis upon 
which such waiver was granted and make such record available 
for in camera examination when relevant in a judicial 
proceeding under this title. Upon the issuance of such a 
waiver, the Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register 
a notice that the waiver was granted for national security 
purposes, unless, upon the request of the Secretary of Defense, 
the Administrator determines to omit such publication because 
the publication itself would be contrary to the interests of 
national security, in which event the Administrator shall 
submit notice to the Armed Services Committee of the Senate and 
House of Representatives.
  (c)(1) Nothing in [the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of 
1977] this title shall be construed to alter or affect the 
status of American Indian lands or water rights nor to waive 
any sovereignty over Indian lands guaranteed by treaty or 
statute.
  (2) For the purposes of [this Act] this title, the term 
``Federal agency'' shall not be construed to refer to or 
include any American Indian tribe, nor to the Secretary of the 
Interior in his capacity as trustee of Indian lands.

                            judicial review

  Sec. 1448. (a) A petition for review of--
          (1) * * *
          (2) any other final action of the Administrator under 
        this Act may be filed in the circuit in which the 
        petitioner resides or transacts business which is 
        directly affected by the action.
Any such petition shall be filed within the 45-day period 
beginning on the date of the promulgation of the regulation [or 
issuance of the order] or any other final Agency action with 
respect to which review is sought or on the date of the 
determination with respect to which review is sought, and may 
be filed after the expiration of such 45-day period if the 
petition is based solely on grounds arising after the 
expiration of such period. Action of the Administrator with 
respect to which review could have been obtained under this 
subsection shall not be subject to judicial review in any civil 
or criminal proceeding for enforcement or in any civil action 
to enjoin enforcement. In any petition concerning the 
assessment of a civil penalty pursuant to section 
1414(g)(3)(B), the petitioner shall simultaneously send a copy 
of the complaint by certified mail to the Administrator and the 
Attorney General. The court shall set aside and remand the 
penalty order if the court finds that there is not substantial 
evidence in the record to support the finding of a violation or 
that the assessment of the penalty by the Administrator 
constitutes an abuse of discretion.
          * * * * * * *

                         citizen's civil action

  Sec. 1449. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this 
section, any person may commence a civil action on his own 
behalf--
          (1) against any person (including (A) the United 
        States, and (B) any other governmental instrumentality 
        or agency to the extent permitted by the eleventh 
        amendment to the Constitution) who is alleged to be in 
        violation of any requirement prescribed by or under 
        this title[, or];
          (2) against the Administrator where there is alleged 
        a failure of the Administrator to perform any act or 
        duty under this title which is not discretionary with 
        the Administrator[.]; or
          (3) for the collection of a penalty by the United 
        States Government (and associated costs and interest) 
        against any Federal agency that fails, by the date that 
        is 18 months after the effective date of a final order 
        to pay a penalty assessed by the Administrator under 
        section 1429(b), to pay the penalty.
No action may be brought under paragraph (1) against a public 
water system for a violation of a requirement prescribed by or 
under this title which occurred within the 27-month period 
beginning on the first day of the month in which this title is 
enacted. The United States district courts shall have 
jurisdiction, without regard to the amount in controversy or 
the citizenship of the parties, to enforce in an action brought 
under this subsection any requirement prescribed by or under 
this title or to order the Administrator to perform an act, or 
duty described in paragraph (2), as the case may be.
  (b) No civil action may be commenced--
          (1) under subsection (a)(1) of this section 
        respecting violation of a requirement prescribed by or 
        under this title--
                  (A) prior to sixty days after the plaintiff 
                has given notice of such violation (i) to the 
                Administrator, (ii) to any alleged violator of 
                such requirement and (iii) to the State in 
                which the violation occurs, or
                  (B) if the Administrator, the Attorney 
                General, or the State has commenced and is 
                diligently prosecuting a civil action in a 
                court of the United States, or a State to 
                require compliance with such requirement, but 
                in any such action in a court of the United 
                States any person may intervene as a matter of 
                right; or
          (2) under subsection (a)(2) of this section prior to 
        sixty days after the plaintiff has given notice of such 
        action to the Administrator[.]; or
          (3) under subsection (a)(3) prior to 60 days after 
        the plaintiff has given notice of such action to the 
        Attorney General and to the Federal agency.
Notice required by this subsection shall be given in such 
manner as the Administrator shall prescribe by regulation. No 
person may commence a civil action under subsection (a) to 
require a State to prescribe a schedule under section 1415 or 
1416 for a variance or exemption, unless such person shows to 
the satisfaction of the court that the State has in a 
substantial number of cases failed to prescribe such schedules.
          * * * * * * *

                           general provisions

  Sec. 1450. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (i)(1) * * *
  (2)(A) Any employee who believes that he has been discharged 
or otherwise discriminated against by any person in violation 
of paragraph (1) may, within [30] 180 days after such violation 
occurs, file (or have any person file on his behalf) a 
complaint with the Secretary of Labor (hereinafter in this 
subsection referred to as the ``Secretary'') alleging such 
discharge or discrimination. Upon receipt of such a complaint, 
the Secretary shall notify the person named in the complaint of 
the filing of the complaint and the Environmental Protection 
Agency.
  (B)(i) Upon receipt of a complaint filed under subparagraph 
(A), the Secretary shall conduct an investigation of the 
violation alleged in the complaint. Within 30 days of the 
receipt of such complaint, the Secretary shall complete such 
investigation and shall notify in writing the complainant (and 
any person acting in his behalf) and the person alleged to have 
committed such violation of the results of the investigation 
conducted pursuant to this subparagraph. Within 90 days of the 
receipt of such complaint the Secretary shall, unless the 
proceeding on the complaint is terminated by the Secretary on 
the basis of a settlement entered into by the Secretary and the 
person alleged to have committed such violation, issue an order 
either providing the relief prescribed by clause (ii) or 
denying the complaint. An order of the Secretary shall be made 
on the record after notice and opportunity for agency hearing. 
Upon conclusion of such hearing and the issuance of a 
recommended decision that the complaint has merit, the 
Secretary shall issue a preliminary order providing the relief 
prescribed in clause (ii), but may not order compensatory 
damages pending a final order. The Secretary may not enter into 
a settlement terminating a proceeding on a complaint without 
the participation and consent of the complainant.
  (ii) If in response to a complaint filed under subparagraph 
(A) the Secretary determines that a violation of paragraph (1) 
has occurred, the Secretary shall order (I) the person who 
committed such violation to take affirmative action to abate 
the violation, (II) such person to reinstate the complainant to 
his former position together with the compensation (including 
back pay), terms, conditions, and privileges of his employment, 
and (III) [compensatory damages, and (IV) where appropriate, 
exemplary damages] and the Secretary may order such person to 
provide compensatory damages to the complainant. If such an 
order is issued, the Secretary, at the request of the 
complainant, shall assess against the person against whom the 
order is issued a sum equal to the aggregate amount of all 
costs and expenses (including attorneys' fees) reasonably 
incurred, as determined by the Secretary, by the complainant 
for, or in connection with, the bringing of the complaint upon 
which the order was issued.
  (3)(A) The Secretary shall dismiss a complaint filed under 
paragraph (1), and shall not conduct the investigation required 
under paragraph (2), unless the complainant has made a prima 
facie showing that any behavior described in subparagraphs (A) 
through (C) of paragraph (1) was a contributing factor in the 
unfavorable personnel action alleged in the complaint.
  (B) Notwithstanding a finding by the Secretary that the 
complaint has made the showing required by paragraph (1)(A), no 
investigation required under paragraph (2) shall be conducted 
if the employer demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, 
that it would have taken the same unfavorable personnel action 
in the absence of such behavior.
  (C) The Secretary may determine that a violation of paragraph 
(1) has occurred only if the complainant has demonstrated that 
any behavior described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 
paragraph (1) was a contributing factor in the unfavorable 
personnel action alleged in the complaint.
  (D) Relief may not be ordered under paragraph (2) if the 
employer demonstrates clear and convincing evidence that it 
would have taken the same unfavorable personnel action in the 
absence of such behavior.
  [(3)] (4)(A) Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by an 
order issued under paragraph (2) may obtain review of the order 
in the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which 
the violation, with respect to which the order was issued, 
allegedly occurred. The petition for review must be filed 
within sixty days from the issuance of the Secretary's order. 
Review shall conform to chapter 7 of title 5 of the United 
States Code. The commencement of proceedings under this 
subparagraph shall not, unless ordered by the court, operate as 
a stay of the Secretary's order.
  (B) An order of the Secretary with respect to which review 
could have been obtained under subparagraph (A) shall not be 
subject to judicial review in any criminal or other civil 
proceeding.
  [(4)] (5) Whenever a person has failed to comply with an 
order issued under paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary shall file a 
civil action in the United States District Court for the 
district in which the violation was found to occur to enforce 
such order. In actions brought under this paragraph, the 
district courts shall have jurisdiction to grant all 
appropriate relief including, but not limited to, injunctive 
relief, compensatory, and exemplary damages.
  [(5)] (6) Any nondiscretionary duty imposed by this section 
is enforceable in mandamus proceeding brought under section 
1361 of title 28 of the United States Code.
  [(6)] (7) Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to any 
employee who, acting without direction from his employer (or 
the employer's agent), deliberately causes a violation of any 
requirement of this title.
  (8) This subsection may not be construed to expand, diminish, 
or otherwise affect any right otherwise available to an 
employee under Federal or State law to reduce the employee's 
discharge or other discriminatory action taken by the employer 
against the employee. The provisions of this subsection shall 
be prominently posted in any place of employment to which this 
subsection applies.

SEC. 1452. STATE REVOLVING FUNDS.

  (a) General Authority.--
          (1) Grants to states to establish revolving funds.--
        (A) The Administrator shall enter into agreements with 
        eligible States to make capitalization grants, 
        including letters of credit, to the States under this 
        subsection solely to further the health protection 
        objectives of this title, promote the efficient use of 
        fund resources, and for such other purposes as are 
        specified in this title.
          (B) To be eligible to receive a capitalization grant 
        under this section, a State shall establish a drinking 
        water treatment revolving loan fund and comply with the 
        other requirements of this section.
          (C) Such a grant to a State shall be deposited in the 
        drinking water treatment revolving fund established by 
        the State, except as otherwise provided in this section 
        and in other provisions of this title. No funds 
        authorized by other provisions of this title to be used 
        for other purposes specified in this title shall be 
        deposited in any State revolving fund.
          (D) Such a grant to a State shall be available to the 
        State for obligation during the fiscal year for which 
        the funds are authorized and during the following 
        fiscal year, except that grants made available from 
        funds provided in Public Law 103-327, Public Law 103-
        124, and Public Law 104-134 shall be available for 
        obligation during each of the fiscal years 1997 and 
        1998.
          (E) Except as otherwise provided in this section, 
        funds made available to carry out this part shall be 
        allotted to States that have entered into an agreement 
        pursuant to this section in accordance with--
                  (i) for each of fiscal years 1995 through 
                1997, a formula that is the same as the formula 
                used to distribute public water system 
                supervision grant funds under section 1443 in 
                fiscal year 1995, except that the minimum 
                proportionate share established in the formula 
                shall be 1 percent of available funds and the 
                formula shall be adjusted to include a minimum 
                proportionate share for the State of Wyoming; 
                and
                  (ii) for fiscal year 1998 and each subsequent 
                fiscal year, a formula that allocates to each 
                State the proportional share of the State needs 
                identified in the most recent survey conducted 
                pursuant to section 1452(h), except that the 
                minimum proportionate share provided to each 
                State shall be the same as the minimum 
                proportionate share provided under clause (i).
          (F) Such grants not obligated by the last day of the 
        period for which the grants are available shall be 
        reallotted according to the appropriate criteria set 
        forth in subparagraph (E).
          (G) The State allotment for a State not exercising 
        primary enforcement responsibility for public water 
        systems shall not be deposited in any such fund but 
        shall be allotted by the Administrator as follows: 20 
        percent of such allotment shall be available to the 
        Administrator as needed to exercise primary enforcement 
        responsibility under this title in such State and the 
        remainder shall be reallotted to States exercising 
        primary enforcement responsibility for public water 
        systems for deposit in such funds. Whenever the 
        Administrator makes a final determination pursuant to 
        section 1413(b) that the requirements of section 
        1413(a) are no longer being met by a State, additional 
        grants for such State under this title shall be 
        immediately terminated by the Administrator. This 
        subparagraph shall not apply to any State not 
        exercising primary enforcement responsibility for 
        public water systems as of the date of enactment of the 
        Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996.
          (H)(i) Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the 
        Administrator shall withhold 20 percent of each 
        capitalization grant made pursuant to this section to a 
        State if the State has not met the requirements of 
        section 1419 (relating to capacity development).
          (ii) The Administrator shall withhold 20 percent of 
        each capitalization grant made pursuant to this section 
        if the State has not met the requirements of subsection 
        (f) of section 1442 (relating to operator 
        certification).
          (iii) All funds withheld by the Administrator 
        pursuant to clause (i) shall be reallotted by the 
        Administrator on the basis of the same ratio as is 
        applicable to funds allotted under subparagraph (E). 
        None of the funds reallotted by the Administrator 
        pursuant to this paragraph shall be allotted to a State 
        unless the State has met the requirements of section 
        1419 (relating to capacity development).
          (iv) All funds withheld by the Administrator pursuant 
        to clause (ii) shall be reallotted by the Administrator 
        on the basis of the same ratio as applicable to funds 
        allotted under subparagraph (E). None of the funds 
        reallotted by the Administrator pursuant to this 
        paragraph shall be allotted to a State unless the State 
        has met the requirements of subsection (f) of section 
        1442 (relating to operator certification).
          (2) Use of funds.--Except as otherwise authorized by 
        this title, amounts deposited in such revolving funds, 
        including loan repayments and interest earned on such 
        amounts, shall be used only for providing loans, loan 
        guarantees, or as a source of reserve and security for 
        leveraged loans, the proceeds of which are deposited in 
        a State revolving fund established under paragraph (1), 
        or other financial assistance authorized under this 
        section to community water systems and nonprofit 
        noncommunity water systems, other than systems owned by 
        Federal agencies. Such financial assistance may be used 
        by a public water system only for expenditures (not 
        including monitoring, operation, and maintenance 
        expenditures) of a type or category which the 
        Administrator has determined, through guidance, will 
        facilitate compliance with national primary drinking 
        water regulations applicable to such system under 
        section 1412 or otherwise significantly further the 
        health protection objectives of this title. Such funds 
        may also be used to provide loans to a system referred 
        to in section 1401(4)(B) for the purpose of providing 
        the treatment described in section 1401(4)(B)(i)(III). 
        Such funds shall not be used for the acquisition of 
        real property or interests therein, unless such 
        acquisition is integral to a project authorized by this 
        paragraph and the purchase is from a willing seller. Of 
        the amount credited to any revolving fund established 
        under this section in any fiscal year, 15 percent shall 
        be available solely for providing loan assistance to 
        public water systems which regularly serve fewer than 
        10,000 persons.
          (3) Limitation.--
                  (A) In general.--Except as provided in 
                subparagraph (B), no assistance under this part 
                shall be provided to a public water system 
                that--
                          (i) does not have the technical, 
                        managerial, and financial capability to 
                        ensure compliance with the requirements 
                        of this title; or
                          (ii) is in significant noncompliance 
                        with any requirement of a national 
                        primary drinking water regulation or 
                        variance.
                  (B) Restructuring.--A public water system 
                described in subparagraph (A) may receive 
                assistance under this part if--
                          (i) the owner or operator of the 
                        system agrees to undertake feasible and 
                        appropriate changes in operations 
                        (including ownership, management, 
                        accounting, rates, maintenance, 
                        consolidation, alternative water 
                        supply, or other procedures) if the 
                        State determines that such measures are 
                        necessary to ensure that the system has 
                        the technical, managerial, and 
                        financial capability to comply with the 
                        requirements of this title over the 
                        long term; and
                          (ii) the use of the assistance will 
                        ensure compliance.
  (b) Intended Use Plans.--
          (1) In general.--After providing for public review 
        and comment, each State that has entered into a 
        capitalization agreement pursuant to this part shall 
        annually prepare a plan that identifies the intended 
        uses of the amounts available to the State loan fund of 
        the State.
          (2) Contents.--An intended use plan shall include--
                  (A) a list of the projects to be assisted in 
                the first fiscal year that begins after the 
                date of the plan, including a description of 
                the project, the expected terms of financial 
                assistance, and the size of the community 
                served;
                  (B) the criteria and methods established for 
                the distribution of funds; and
                  (C) a description of the financial status of 
                the State loan fund and the short-term and 
                long-term goals of the State loan fund.
          (3) Use of funds.--
                  (A) In general.--An intended use plan shall 
                provide, to the maximum extent practicable, 
                that priority for the use of funds be given to 
                projects that--
                          (i) address the most serious risk to 
                        human health;
                          (ii) are necessary to ensure 
                        compliance with the requirements of 
                        this title (including requirements for 
                        filtration); and
                          (iii) assist systems most in need on 
                        a per household basis according to 
                        State affordability criteria.
                  (B) List of projects.--Each State shall, 
                after notice and opportunity for public 
                comment, publish and periodically update a list 
                of projects in the State that are eligible for 
                assistance under this part, including the 
                priority assigned to each project and, to the 
                extent known, the expected funding schedule for 
                each project.
  (c) Fund Management.--Each State revolving fund under this 
section shall be established, maintained, and credited with 
repayments and interest. The fund corpus shall be available in 
perpetuity for providing financial assistance under this 
section. To the extent amounts in each such fund are not 
required for current obligation or expenditure, such amounts 
shall be invested in interest bearing obligations.
  (d) Assistance for Disadvantaged Communities.--
          (1) Loan subsidy.--Notwithstanding any other 
        provision of this section, in any case in which the 
        State makes a loan pursuant to subsection (a)(2) to a 
        disadvantaged community or to a community that the 
        State expects to become a disadvantaged community as 
        the result of a proposed project, the State may provide 
        additional subsidization (including forgiveness of 
        principal).
          (2) Total amount of subsidies.--For each fiscal year, 
        the total amount of loan subsidies made by a State 
        pursuant to paragraph (1) may not exceed 30 percent of 
        the amount of the capitalization grant received by the 
        State for the year.
          (3) Definition of disadvantaged community.--In this 
        subsection, the term ``disadvantaged community'' means 
        the service area of a public water system that meets 
        affordability criteria established after public review 
        and comment by the State in which the public water 
        system is located. The Administrator may publish 
        information to assist States in establishing 
        affordability criteria.
  (e) State Contribution.--Each agreement under subsection (a) 
shall require that the State deposit in the State revolving 
fund from State moneys an amount equal to at least 20 percent 
of the total amount of the grant to be made to the State on or 
before the date on which the grant payment is made to the 
State, except that a State shall not be required to deposit 
such amount into the fund prior to the date on which each grant 
payment is made for fiscal years 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 if 
such State deposits the State contribution amount into the 
State fund prior to September 30, 1998.
  (f) Combined Financial Administration.--Notwithstanding 
subsection (c), a State may (as a convenience and to avoid 
unnecessary administrative costs) combine, in accordance with 
State law, the financial administration of a revolving fund 
established under this section with the financial 
administration of any other revolving fund established by the 
State if otherwise not prohibited by the law under which such 
revolving fund was established and if the Administrator 
determines that--
          (1) the grants under this section, together with loan 
        repayments and interest, will be separately accounted 
        for and used solely for the purposes specified in this 
        section; and
          (2) the authority to establish assistance priorities 
        and carry out oversight and related activities (other 
        than financial administration) with respect to such 
        assistance remains with the State agency having primary 
        responsibility for administration of the State program 
        under section 1413.
  (g) Administration.--(1) Each State may annually use up to 4 
percent of the funds allotted to the State under this section 
to cover the reasonable costs of administration of the programs 
under this section, including the recovery of reasonable costs 
expended to establish such a fund which are incurred after the 
date of enactment of this section, and to provide technical 
assistance to public water systems within the State. For fiscal 
year 1995 and each fiscal year thereafter, each State with 
primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems 
within that State may use up to an additional 10 percent of the 
funds allotted to the State under this section--
          (A) for public water system supervision programs 
        which receive grants under section 1443(a);
          (B) to administer or provide technical assistance 
        through source water protection programs;
          (C) to develop and implement a capacity development 
        strategy under section 1419(c); and
          (D) for an operator certification program for 
        purposes of meeting the requirements of section 
        1442(f),
if the State matches such expenditures with at least an equal 
amount of State funds. At least half of such match must be 
additional to the amount expended by the State for public water 
supervision in fiscal year 1993. An additional 1 percent of the 
funds annually allotted to the State under this section shall 
be used by each State to provide technical assistance to public 
water systems in such State. Funds utilized under section 
1452(g)(1)(B) shall not be used for enforcement actions or for 
purposes which do not facilitate compliance with national 
primary drinking water regulations or otherwise significantly 
further the health protection objectives of this title.
  (2) The Administrator shall publish such guidance and 
promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out 
the provisions of this section, including--
          (A) provisions to ensure that each State commits and 
        expends funds allotted to the State under this section 
        as efficiently as possible in accordance with this 
        title and applicable State laws,
          (B) guidance to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse, and
          (C) guidance to avoid the use of funds made available 
        under this section to finance the expansion of any 
        public water system in anticipation of future 
        population growth.
Such guidance and regulations shall also insure that the 
States, and public water systems receiving assistance under 
this section, use accounting, audit, and fiscal procedures that 
conform to generally accepted accounting standards.
  (3) Each State administering a revolving fund and assistance 
program under this subsection shall publish and submit to the 
Administrator a report every 2 years on its activities under 
this subsection, including the findings of the most recent 
audit of the fund and the entire State allotment. The 
Administrator shall periodically audit all revolving funds 
established by, and all other amounts allotted to, the States 
pursuant to this subsection in accordance with procedures 
established by the Comptroller General.
  (h) Needs Survey.--The Administrator shall conduct an 
assessment of water system capital improvements needs of all 
eligible public water systems in the United States and submit a 
report to the Congress containing the results of such 
assessment within 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 and every 4 
years thereafter.
  (i) Indian Tribes.--1\1/2\ percent of the amounts 
appropriated annually to carry out this section may be used by 
the Administrator to make grants to Indian Tribes and Alaskan 
Native Villages which are not otherwise eligible to receive 
either grants from the Administrator under this section or 
assistance from State revolving funds established under this 
section. Such grants may only be used for expenditures by such 
tribes and villages for public water system expenditures 
referred to in subsection (a)(2).
  (j) Other Areas.--Of the funds annually available under this 
section for grants to States, the Administrator shall make 
allotments in accordance with section 1443(a)(4) for the 
District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of 
the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the 
Republic of Palau. The grants allotted as provided in this 
subsection may be provided by the Administrator to the 
governments of such areas, to public water systems in such 
areas, or to both, to be used for the public water system 
expenditures referred to in subsection (a)(2). Such grants 
shall not be deposited in revolving funds. The total allotment 
of grants under this section for all areas described in this 
paragraph in any fiscal year shall not exceed 1 percent of the 
aggregate amount made available to carry out this section in 
that fiscal year.
  (k) Set-Asides.--
          (1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2), a 
        State may take each of the following actions:
                  (A) Provide assistance, only in the form of a 
                loan to one or both of the following:
                          (i) Any public water system described 
                        in subsection (a)(2) to acquire land or 
                        a conservation easement from a willing 
                        seller or grantor, if the purpose of 
                        the acquisition is to protect the 
                        source water of the system from 
                        contamination and to ensure compliance 
                        with national primary drinking water 
                        regulations.
                          (ii) Any community water system to 
                        implement local, voluntary source water 
                        protection measures to protect source 
                        water in areas delineated pursuant to 
                        section 1428(l), in order to facilitate 
                        compliance with national primary 
                        drinking water regulations applicable 
                        to such system under section 1412 or 
                        otherwise significantly further the 
                        health protection objectives of this 
                        title. Funds authorized under this 
                        clause may be used to fund only 
                        voluntary, incentive-based mechanisms.
                  (B) Provide assistance, including technical 
                and financial assistance, to any public water 
                system as part of a capacity development 
                strategy developed and implemented in 
                accordance with section 1419(c).
                  (C) Make expenditures from the capitalization 
                grant of the State for fiscal years 1996 and 
                1997 to delineate and assess source water 
                protection areas in accordance with section 
                1428(l), except that funds set aside for such 
                expenditure shall be obligated within 4 fiscal 
                years.
                  (D) Make expenditures from the fund for the 
                establishment and implementation of wellhead 
                protection programs under section 1428.
          (2) Limitation.--For each fiscal year, the total 
        amount of assistance provided and expenditures made by 
        a State under this subsection may not exceed 15 percent 
        of the amount of the capitalization grant received by 
        the State for that year and may not exceed 10 percent 
        of that amount for any one of the following activities:
                  (A) To acquire land or conservation easements 
                pursuant to paragraph (1)(A)(i).
                  (B) To provide funding to implement 
                voluntary, incentive-based source water quality 
                protection measures pursuant to paragraph 
                (1)(A)(ii).
                  (C) To provide assistance through a capacity 
                development strategy pursuant to paragraph 
                (1)(B).
                  (D) To make expenditures to delineate or 
                assess source water protection areas pursuant 
                to paragraph (1)(C).
                  (E) To make expenditures to establish and 
                implement wellhead protection programs pursuant 
                to paragraph (1)(D).
          (3) Statutory construction.--Nothing in this section 
        creates or conveys any new authority to a State, 
        political subdivision of a State, or community water 
        system for any new regulatory measure, or limits any 
        authority of a State, political subdivision of a State 
        or community water system.
  (l) Savings.--The failure or inability of any public water 
system to receive funds under this section or any other loan or 
grant program, or any delay in obtaining the funds, shall not 
alter the obligation of the system to comply in a timely manner 
with all applicable drinking water standards and requirements 
of this title.
  (m) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to 
be appropriated to carry out the purposes of this section 
$599,000,000 for the fiscal year 1994 and $1,000,000,000 for 
each of the fiscal years 1995 through 2003. Sums shall remain 
available until expended.
  (n) Health Effects Studies.--From funds appropriated pursuant 
to this section for each fiscal year, the Administrator shall 
reserve $10,000,000 for health effects studies on drinking 
water contaminants authorized by the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Amendments of 1996. In allocating funds made available under 
this subsection, the Administrator shall give priority to 
studies concerning the health effects of cryptosporidium, 
disinfection byproducts, and arsenic, and the implementation of 
a plan for studies of subpopulations at greater risk of adverse 
effects.
  (o) Demonstration Project for State of Virginia.--
Notwithstanding the other provisions of this subsection 
limiting the use of funds deposited in a State revolving fund 
from any State allotment, the State of Virginia may, as a 
single demonstration and with the approval of the Virginia 
General Assembly and the Administrator, conduct a program to 
demonstrate alternative approaches to intergovernmental 
coordination to assist in the financing of new drinking water 
facilities in the following rural communities in southwestern 
Virginia where none exists on the date of the enactment of the 
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 and where such 
communities are experiencing economic hardship: Lee County, 
Wise County, Scott County, Dickenson County, Russell County, 
Buchanan County, Tazewell County, and the city of Norton, 
Virginia. The funds allotted to that State and deposited in the 
State revolving fund may be loaned to a regional endowment fund 
for the purpose set forth in this paragraph under a plan to be 
approved by the Administrator. The plan may include an advisory 
group that includes representatives of such counties.
  (p) Small System Technical Assistance.--The Administrator may 
reserve up to 2 percent of the total funds appropriated 
pursuant to subsection (m) for each of the fiscal years 1997 
through 2003 to carry out the provisions of section 1442(e), 
relating to technical assistance for small systems.

SEC. 1453. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN.

  (a) Guidelines.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the 
enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, 
the Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register 
guidelines for water conservation plans for public water 
systems serving fewer than 3,300 persons, public water systems 
serving between 3,300 and 10,000 persons, and public water 
systems serving more than 10,000 persons, taking into 
consideration such factors as water availability and climate.
  (b) SRF Loans or Grants.--Within 1 year after publication of 
the guidelines under subsection (a), a State exercising primary 
enforcement responsibility for public water systems may require 
a public water system, as a condition of receiving a loan or 
grant from a State revolving fund under section 1452, to submit 
with its application for such loan or grant a water 
conservation plan consistent with such guidelines.

  Part F--Additional Requirements To Regulate the Safety of Drinking 
                                 Water

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 1465. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR STATE PROGRAMS REGARDING LEAD 
                    CONTAMINATION IN SCHOOL DRINKING WATER.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Limits.--Each grant under this section shall be used [as] 
by the State for testing water coolers in accordance with 
section 1464, for testing for lead contamination in other 
drinking water supplies under section 1464, or for remedial 
action under State programs under section 1464. Not more than 5 
percent of the grant may be used for program administration.
  (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to 
be appropriated to carry out this section not more than 
$30,000,000 for fiscal year 1989, $30,000,000 for fiscal year 
1990, and $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1991.

SEC. 1466. ESTROGENIC SUBSTANCES SCREENING PROGRAM.

  (a)  Development.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
enactment of this section, the Administrator shall develop a 
screening program, using appropriate validated test systems and 
other scientifically relevant information, to determine whether 
certain substances may have an effect in humans that is similar 
to an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or 
such other endocrine effect as the Administrator may designate.
  (b) Implementation.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
enactment of this section, after obtaining public comment and 
review of the screening program described in subsection (a) by 
the scientific advisory panel established under section 25(d) 
of the Act of June 25, 1947 (chapter 125) or the Science 
Advisory Board established by section 8 of the Environmental 
Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 
4365), the Administrator shall implement the program.
  (c) Substances.--In carrying out the screening program 
described in subsection (a), the Administrator--
          (1) shall provide for the testing of all active and 
        inert ingredients used in products described in section 
        103(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
        Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
        9603(e)) that may be found in sources of drinking 
        water, and
          (2) may provide for the testing of any other 
        substance that may be found in sources of drinking 
        water if the Administrator determines that a 
        substantial population may be exposed to such 
        substance.
  (d) Exemption.--Notwithstanding subsection (c), the 
Administrator may, by order, exempt from the requirements of 
this section a biologic substance or other substance if the 
Administrator determines that the substance is anticipated not 
to produce any effect in humans similar to an effect produced 
by a naturally occurring estrogen.
  (e) Collection of Information.--
          (1) In general.--The Administrator shall issue an 
        order to a person that registers, manufactures, or 
        imports a substance for which testing is required under 
        this subsection to conduct testing in accordance with 
        the screening program described in subsection (a), and 
        submit information obtained from the testing to the 
        Administrator, within a reasonable time period that the 
        Administrator determines is sufficient for the 
        generation of the information.
          (2) Procedures.--To the extent practicable the 
        Administrator shall minimize duplicative testing of the 
        same substance for the same endocrine effect, develop, 
        as appropriate, procedures for fair and equitable 
        sharing of test costs, and develop, as necessary, 
        procedures for handling of confidential business 
        information.
          (3) Failure of registrants to submit information.--
                  (A) Suspension.--If a person required to 
                register a substance referred to in subsection 
                (c)(1) fails to comply with an order under 
                paragraph (1) of this subsection, the 
                Administrator shall issue a notice of intent to 
                suspend the sale or distribution of the 
                substance by the person. Any suspension 
                proposed under this paragraph shall become 
                final at the end of the 30-day period beginning 
                on the date that the person receives the notice 
                of intent to suspend, unless during that period 
                a person adversely affected by the notice 
                requests a hearing or the Administrator 
                determines that the person referred to in 
                paragraph (1) has complied fully with this 
                subsection.
                  (B) Hearing.--If a person requests a hearing 
                under subparagraph (A), the hearing shall be 
                conducted in accordance with section 554 of 
                title 5, United States Code. The only matter 
                for resolution at the hearing shall be whether 
                the person has failed to comply with an order 
                under paragraph (1) of this subsection. A 
                decision by the Administrator after completion 
                of a hearing shall be considered to be a final 
                agency action.
                  (C) Termination of suspensions.--The 
                Administrator shall terminate a suspension 
                under this paragraph issued with respect to a 
                person if the Administrator determines that the 
                person has complied fully with this subsection.
          (4) Noncompliance by other persons.--Any person 
        (other than a person referred to in paragraph (3)) who 
        fails to comply with an order under paragraph (1) shall 
        be liable for the same penalties and sanctions as are 
        provided under section 16 of the Toxic Substances 
        Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 and following) in the case 
        of a violation referred to in that section. Such 
        penalties and sanctions shall be assessed and imposed 
        in the same manner as provided in such section 16.
  (f) Agency Action.--In the case of any substance that is 
found, as a result of testing and evaluation under this 
section, to have an endocrine effect on humans, the 
Administrator shall, as appropriate, take action under such 
statutory authority as is available to the Administrator, 
including consideration under other sections of this Act, as is 
necessary to ensure the protection of public health.
  (g) Report to Congress.--Not later than 4 years after the 
date of enactment of this section, the Administrator shall 
prepare and submit to Congress a report containing--
          (1) the findings of the Administrator resulting from 
        the screening program described in subsection (a);
          (2) recommendations for further testing needed to 
        evaluate the impact on human health of the substances 
        tested under the screening program; and
          (3) recommendations for any further actions 
        (including any action described in subsection (f)) that 
        the Administrator determines are appropriate based on 
        the findings.
  (h) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section shall be 
construed to amend or modify the provisions of the Toxic 
Substances Control Act or the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 
and Rodenticide Act.
                              ----------                              


        SECTION 410 OF THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT

                    bottled drinking water standards

  Sec. 410. [Whenever] (a) Except as provided in subsection 
(b), whenever the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency prescribes interim or revised national primary drinking 
water regulations under section 1412 of the Public Health 
Service Act, the Secretary shall consult with the Administrator 
and within 180 days after the promulgation of such drinking 
water regulations either promulgate amendments to regulations 
under this chapter applicable to bottled drinking water or 
publish in the Federal Register his reasons for not making such 
amendments.
  (b)(1) Not later than 180 days before the effective date of a 
national primary drinking water regulation promulgated by the 
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for a 
contaminant under section 1412 of the Public Health Service Act 
(42 U.S.C. 300g-1), the Secretary shall promulgate a standard 
of quality regulation under this subsection for that 
contaminant in bottled water or make a finding that such a 
regulation is not necessary to protect the public health 
because the contaminant is contained in water in public water 
systems (as defined under section 1401(4) of such Act (42 
U.S.C. 300f(4))) but not in water used for bottled drinking 
water. The effective date for any such standard of quality 
regulation shall be the same as the effective date for such 
national primary drinking water regulation, except for any 
standard of quality of regulation promulgated by the Secretary 
before the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Amendments of 1996 for which (as of such date of enactment) an 
effective date had not been established. In the case of a 
standard of quality regulation to which such exception applies, 
the Secretary shall promulgate monitoring requirements for the 
contaminants covered by the regulation not later than 2 years 
after such date of enactment. Such monitoring requirements 
shall become effective not later than 180 days after the date 
on which the monitoring requirements are promulgated.
  (2) A regulation issued by the Secretary as provided in this 
subsection shall include any monitoring requirements that the 
Secretary determines appropriate for bottled water.
  (3) A regulation issued by the Secretary as provided in this 
subsection shall require the following:
          (A) In the case of contaminants for which a maximum 
        contaminant level is established in a national primary 
        drinking water regulation under section 1412 of the 
        Public Health Service Act, the regulation under this 
        subsection shall establish a maximum contaminant level 
        for the contaminant in bottled water which is no less 
        stringent than the maximum contaminant level provided 
        in the national primary drinking water regulation.
          (B) In the case of contaminants for which a treatment 
        technique is established in a national primary drinking 
        water regulation under section 1412 of the Public 
        Health Service Act, the regulation under this 
        subsection shall require that bottled water be subject 
        to requirements no less protective of the public health 
        than those applicable to water provided by public water 
        systems using the treatment technique required by the 
        national primary drinking water regulation.
  (4)(A) If the Secretary does not promulgate a regulation 
under this subsection within the period described in paragraph 
(1), the national primary drinking water regulation referred to 
in paragraph (1) shall be considered, as of the date on which 
the Secretary is required to establish a regulation under 
paragraph (1), as the regulation applicable under this 
subsection to bottled water.
  (B) In the case of a national primary drinking water 
regulation that pursuant to subparagraph (A) is considered to 
be a standard of quality regulation, the Secretary shall, not 
later than the applicable date referred to in such 
subparagraph, publish in the Federal Register a notice--
          (i) specifying the contents of such regulation, 
        including monitoring requirements, and
          (ii) providing that for purposes of this paragraph 
        the effective date for such regulation is the same as 
        the effective date for the regulation for purposes of 
        title XIV of the Public Health Service Act (or, if the 
        exception under paragraph (1) applies to the 
        regulation, that the effective date for the regulation 
        is not later than 2 years and 180 days after the date 
        of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
        Amendments of 1996).
                              ----------                              


                SECTION 1 OF THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

                             (P.L. 93-523)

                              short title

  Section 1. This Act may be cited as the ``Safe Driking Water 
Act of 1974''.
             ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE GREG GANSKE

    The Safe Drinking Water Act Reauthorization bill, H.R. 
3604, represents a strong bipartisan compromise. I believe it 
is time to restore common sense to environmental laws and this 
bill does that. I also believe we need to work from certain 
underlying principles: first, businesses and farmers need rules 
that are environmentally sound, fair, clear, and predictable; 
second, we must respect science; and third, when in doubt, err 
on the side of ``safe.'' This legislation does that.
    This bill represents the commitment of this Congress to 
move forward with legislation that not only protects the 
environment and human health, but does so in way that makes 
government work smarter and better.
    Despite my support for this legislation, two issues remain 
which concern me, source water protection and the ``Consumer 
Confidence Report.''
    Over the past 20 years, the Safe Drinking Water Act has 
governed the quality of drinking water ``out of the tap'' 
primarily through standard setting, monitoring, treatment, and 
enforcement of water quality in order to protect the public 
health. Source water protection offers a means for water 
systems to address problems of contamination other than ``after 
the fact'' responses. By addressing sources of potential 
drinking water contamination before it can occur, costs and 
risks to the population are reduced.
    The Senate's version of the Safe Drinking Water 
Reauthorization Act, S. 1316, includes a new component which 
addresses this important issue. The bill includes language 
creating an extensive source water protection program which 
attempts to ensure that a new pool of federal dollars would go 
to address legitimate source water problems. The measure 
contains an extensive and thorough petition process developed 
in conjunction with the agriculture community. Unfortunately, 
in an effort to reach a bipartisan compromise, the Senate 
language, which clearly spells out the expectations and 
responsibilities of individuals to protect source water, was 
deleted from the House Commerce Committee version, H.R. 3604.
    As a result, I met with a variety of agricultural groups in 
an effort to see if there weren't some area for mutual 
compromise. In a spirit of cooperation, the agricultural 
community made several concessions in order to move this 
legislation forward. Instead of the Senate's approach, the 
House bill contains a voluntary incentive based program.
    As the principle author of the source water measure 
contained within the bill, I want to clarify the intent and 
purpose of the language in Sec. 1452(k)(1)(A). Up to 10% of a 
state's SRF may be used by water systems to enter into 
voluntary incentive-based source water protection programs with 
willing upstream neighbors, regardless of their occupation. The 
program is intended to build new partnerships in protecting 
source water and as such is not intended to be a compulsory 
weapon against upstream parties. I believe that this proactive 
incentive based approach which builds upon shared mutual 
interests will do far more to protect source water than the 
traditional ``Big Stick'' approach which emphasizes and 
punitive actions--after the fact.
    Furthermore, the language in Sec. 1452(k)(1)(A)(ii) is 
silent on the details of source water agreements because it is 
the intention of authors to give complete and total freedom to 
water systems and upstream entities in developing source water 
protection agreements. The only overriding factor of concern is 
that the agreements be voluntary in nature and contain 
financial incentives (not penalties) for the parties involved. 
This is the only approach which will build cooperation between 
water systems and upstream entities.
    The second issue of concern revolves around the ``Consumer 
Confidence Reports'' provision Subtitle C, Sec. 131(4)(A and B) 
contained in the bill. A number of systems in Iowa, including 
the Des Moines Water Works, Cedar Rapids Water Department, 
Marshalltown Water Works, the Central Iowa Water Association, 
and the Iowa Rural Water Association have expressed concern 
with the scope of the provision. They strongly question the 
requirements to both publish a report and mail the same data to 
each water system customer. In addition, they are concerned 
with the requirements to report both the Maximum Contaminant 
Level (MCL) and Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for 
regulated contaminants as well as information on monitored but 
unregulated contaminants. The systems have voiced the belief 
that such information will be difficult to understand, 
confusing and potentially counter-productive. This is 
especially true in the numerous cases where the MCLG is zero 
and the MCL represents a higher threshold.
    I am pleased that the ``Consumer Confidence Reports'' 
provision was amended in the full Committee to eliminate the so 
called ``dual reporting'' requirement which called for an 
annual report to be published in the local paper and to be 
mailed to each customer. I believe the flexibility contained in 
the Manager's amendment will help to ensure the public is 
informed while lowering the costs of reporting. However, I 
remain concerned that the report required under Sec. 131(4)(B) 
if not carefully and thoughtfully developed and written could 
be misconstrued by the public at large. It is crucial that the 
report accurately convey the differences between the MCL and 
MCLG and reflect the real risks faced by water system 
consumers. As such it is important that clear plainly worded 
risk communication language be developed by the Administrator 
of the EPA with the maximum input of health professionals. It 
is vital that we do not repeat the same mistakes the Congress 
made in communicating the risks of Alar.

                                                       Greg Ganske.
            ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE TOM A. COBURN

    H.R. 3604, the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of 1996 is a 
significant improvement over current law. The revisions this 
committee has made will provide much needed regulatory relief 
and to small systems and will also establish a State Revolving 
Fund to help these systems comply with the laws made in 
Washington. Above all, I am pleased to note the addition of 
using sound, peer-reviewed science to the rule making process. 
These changes are a solid first step towards basing legislative 
decisions on common sense and proven evidence instead of 
emotion, incomplete information, or partisan rhetoric.
    However, it is vital that the committee recognize that the 
decisions we make today will impact public health for years to 
come. While I commend the improvements I mentioned above, I 
strongly feel the bill fails to adequately address a vital 
concern to public health. Furthermore, while the legislation 
will help solve some problems, I believe it will create new 
ones as well.
    Specifically, I am concerned about the section of the bill 
regarding the proposed disinfectant/disinfectant-by products 
(D/DBP) rule. During the Subcommittee on Health and 
Environment's markup, I offered an amendment to clarify the 
language relative to cost benefit analysis in Stage II of the 
D/DBP rule. This amendment would have frozen the current levels 
for disinfection by-products at 80/parts per billion until 
sound scientific evidence proved that a lower D/DBP level would 
significantly improve public health. If the Administrator chose 
to lower the DBP levels without such proof, the change in 
regulation would have been subject to the same cost benefit 
analysis that applies to the rest of the 1996 amendments. 
Finally, if a State can offer evidence that a lower DBP level 
is beneficial to public health, it may choose to set more 
stringent standards, as is current practice today.
    As you know, S. 1316 and H.R. 3604 both expressly exempt 
the DBP rule from the cost-benefit analysis that EPA 
Administrator has discretionary authority to apply to all other 
new drinking water rules. At the same time, we know that fully 
implementing this rule will be extremely costly for public 
water systems, especially those small systems serving rural 
areas. For instance, each household in northeastern Oklahoma 
would have to pay nearly $200 more a year if we fail to use 
common sense and move forward with the proposed rule. Worse 
yet, we don't know for certain what public health benefits, if 
any, will result. In fact the opposite could be true.
    The proposed DBP rule is intended to force water suppliers 
to reduce the formation of disinfection by-products associated 
with the chlorination of drinking water. While there are a 
variety of water treatment techniques that can achieve this 
goal, most efficient approach is simply to reduce the 
application of chlorine or move away from it altogether in 
favor of other disinfectants. Therein lies the problem, which I 
as a medical professional, find troubling.
    For nearly a century, chlorination of drinking water has 
been widespread in the United States, virtually eliminating 
deadly waterborne diseases such as typhoid, cholera, dysentery, 
and hepatitis A. Chlorination is the standard treatment for 98% 
of our public water supplies because it is effective, 
efficient, and economical. However, if the D/DBP rule forces 
water suppliers to make major changes in water treatment 
methods, we could see increased microbial contamination of 
drinking water leading to higher rates of waterborne disease. 
This poses an obvious threat to public health, especially to 
vulnerable groups--infants, the elderly and those with 
compromised immune systems, such as cancer and AIDS patients.
    Let me add that, of course, we need to address any 
potential long-term health risks associated with chemical 
disinfectants. However, in 1990, the International Agency for 
Research on Cancer (IARC), the research arm of the World Health 
Organization, evaluated the carcinogenicity of chlorinated 
drinking water, the IARC concluded that chlorinated drinking 
water is not a classifiable human carcinogen.
    But we require a great deal more scientific research that 
moves beyond the hypothetical health risks identified in 
laboratory animals in order to clearly establish human health 
risks based. There is also a critical need for development of 
improved detection and measurements techniques to better 
quantify the occurrence and infection rates of waterborne 
parasites. Both this legislation and the EPA endorse funding 
additional research so that we can better understand the 
relative risks of chemical and microbial contamination.
    Nevertheless, we already know that the public health risks 
from the various pathogens--bacteria, viruses, and protozoa--in 
drinking water far outweigh the hypothetical cancer risks 
associated with DBPs. Even EPA's own water experts warn that 
the ``potential health risks associated with disinfection by-
products pale in comparison with microbial risks.''
    Recent outbreaks of cryptosporidiosis in Milwaukee, Georgia 
and Nevada, along with boil-water advisories in a number of 
cities, including Washington, DC, highlight my strong belief 
that preventing waterborne disease must be a primary public 
health goal. And even though chlorination alone does not kill 
the ``cryptosporidium'' parasite, its effectiveness in other 
aspects of the water disinfection process cannot be overlooked.
    This view also has been endorsed by the American Medical 
Association in a letter to this committee, which urged caution 
in changing current drinking water regulations without a 
thorough evaluation of the risks, costs, and benefits of using 
chlorine or alternative disinfectants in the water purification 
process. The AMA further noted that with potential human health 
risks and an estimated price tag of $4 billion, any rule 
revisions affecting our nation's drinking water should be based 
on sound scientific knowledge.
    Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office, in its 
assessment of the proposed D/DBP rule, pointed out its high 
cost and uncertain public health benefits. CBO estimated that 
full implementation of the new rule will be more expensive than 
all prior drinking regulations combined. Of particularly 
concern, the CBO reports that highly yearly household costs 
will fall disproportionately on customers of small water 
systems, with increased annual water bills ranging up to $223 
for those in systems serving populations of less than 100 to 
$186 for populations of 3,300 to 10,000. This will have an 
enormous impact on states like mine with large rural 
populations.
    As for the health benefits, CBO states that ``the degree to 
which the D/DBP rule would reduce risk of cancer is extremely 
uncertain.'' And, even as the EPA has moved forward to 
promulgate the D/DBP rule, some of its own water and public 
health experts have expressed reservations about its impact:

          Changes in water treatment to reduce disinfection by-
        products must be carefully evaluated in order that 
        microbial risks are not increased. . . Economic 
        analysis strongly supports control of microbial 
        contaminants as a major public health contribution. By 
        contrast, investment in expensive technology to reduce 
        disinfection by-products would not appear to result in 
        a commensurate contribution in reducing overall cancer 
        risk.

    Furthermore, I question the value of the ``Right to Know'' 
section contained in H.R. 3604. I believe the intention, to 
provide consumers with information regarding their drinking 
water, is thoughtful. However, I am convinced that such tactics 
will only destroy consumers' confidence in their drinking water 
supply. I also have severe reservations about estrogen 
screening. Again, I firmly believe these provisions were 
founded on good intention, but were based on emotion, not on 
sound scientific evidence. These examples reconfirm my thoughts 
that the Safe Drinking Water Acts of 1996 will indeed create 
new problems.
    Congress must reauthorize the Safe Drinking Water Act. This 
legislation contains many worthwhile provisions such as 
allowing states and individual facilities to solve their own 
problems. The State Resolving Fund will also help address 
critical infrastructure needs.
    Having said that, I do believe that we must take into 
account the very real concerns many share about the costs, 
risks, benefits, and scientific evidence of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act Amendments. As we can see, there are bound to be 
unintended consequences from the rule as presently written that 
could seriously compromise public health.

                                                     Tom A. Coburn.
                            A P P E N D I X

                              ----------                              

                     U.S. House of Representatives,
                                     Committee on Commerce,
                                     Washington, DC, June 24, 1996.
Administrator Carol M. Browner,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
    Dear Administrator Browner: As you know, the Committee on 
Commerce recently reported bipartisan legislation to strengthen 
and improve the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). In the 
development of this legislation, it has come to our attention 
that many people in small communities consisting primarily of 
manufactured housing are provided drinking water through a 
water system that purchases finished water from a public water 
system.
    There is some concern that the local distribution system in 
these communities may be subject to the requirements of the 
SDWA under section 1411 if the purchased water is submetered 
for the purpose of billing water to individual water 
customers--even if these systems are otherwise exempt from the 
SDWA. In these situations, it appears that many requirements of 
the SDWA could be duplicative, since the water is purchased 
directly from a regulated public water system.
    Strong public health protection for all communities, both 
large and small, is the most important priority under the SDWA. 
However, provided that public health protection is maintained, 
another worthy goal--water conservation--is advanced through 
the installation of water meters on individual housing units. 
We are interested in ensuring that water conservation efforts 
are not impeded by duplicative or unnecessary SDWA 
requirements.
    We would therefore like to solicit your opinion on whether 
EPA can provide flexibility within current regulations to avoid 
unnecessary or duplicative federal requirements that might stem 
from submetering by water systems. We are also interested as to 
whether EPA believes that States have enough flexiblility under 
current law to avoid duplicative and unnecessary compliance 
activities at the local level that may arise from water 
conservation practices such as submetering.
    Thank you for your kind assistance to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                   Michael Bilirakis,
                                           Health and Environment.
                                   John Bryant,
                                           Member, Subcommittee on 
                                               Health and Environment.



                        United States Environmental
                                         Protection Agency,
                                     Washington, DC, June 24, 1996.
Hon. Michael Bilirakis,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Hon. John Bryant,
Member, Subcommittee on Health and Environment, Washington, DC.
    Dear Congressmen: Thank you for your letter of June 24, 
1996, to Administrator Browner concerning drinking water safety 
related to small water systems that purchase water from public 
water systems regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act 
(SDWA). We appreciate having this issue brought to our 
attention. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees 
that submetering may be an appropriate means of encouraging 
water conservation, provided public health protection is 
maintained, and we support State flexibility to avoid 
duplicative or unnecessary compliance activities.
    Generally, water systems that simply submeter finished 
water that is purchased from another public water system (which 
is covered by SDWA), and do not treat the water, are considered 
``consecutive'' water systems under federal SDWA regulations. 
Under these regulations (specifically, at 40 CFR 141.29), 
States have the flexibility to adjust the monitoring and 
reporting requirements to avoid duplication of compliance 
activities. More broadly, we believe there is room within EPA 
regulations generally and within State determinations under 
Section 1411 to avoid duplicative or unnecessary compliance 
activities in the situations described in your letter 
concerning submetering, consistent with the public health 
objectives of the Act. Indeed, we expect that such discretion 
has been exercised in States over the last two decades.
    We do not recommend changes to the ``coverage'' provisions 
of SDWA, since any changes are unlikely to accurately reflect 
the variety of circumstances that currently exist, or to 
anticipate all future arrangements. However, because of the 
issues you have raised, and because we have not recently 
reviewed State implementation approaches related to these 
issues, we do believe it would be useful for EPA to review 
existing guidance that the Agency has offered over the years to 
determine if that guidance needs to be updated.
    Thank you for your interest in maintaining public health 
protection while advancing water conservation goals. I would be 
pleased to arrange a meeting between parties interested in this 
issue and EPA for the purposes of identifying possible 
improvements of EPA's guidance. If you have any further 
questions you may contact me, or your staff may contact Cynthia 
Dougherty, Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water 
(202/260-5512).
            Sincerely,
                                         Robert Perciasepe,
                                           Assistant Administrator.