EPA Defends Bush Budget Plan on Capitol Hill

By Maureen Lorenzetti
Washington Correspondent

The Environmental Protection Agency's budget proposal to Congress was in line with a budget blueprint offered by the Bush Administration a month earlier (WW 4/01).

The agency's overall budget proposal for the 2002 fiscal year is $7.3 billion, an increase of $56 million higher than what the Clinton Administration proposed the previous year. But under the agency's new proposal, drinking water and wastewater program spending would drop about $470 million from what the agency now has in place.

Specifically, water spending would be a total of $3.2 billion, compared to $3.7 billion this fiscal year (ending September 30). Of that $3.2 billion, about $2.1 billion is earmarked for state grants that can be used for infrastructure. Some groups such as the Water Infrastructure Network, a broad coalition of local governments, industry and enviro groups, argue those amounts fall far short of what's required. They want the federal government to provide $57 billion over a five year period for loans, grants and other subsidies for water infrastructure needs. Other drinking water and wastewater industry are also miffed about the budget cuts targeted for this year.

The American Water Works Association has taken issue with the 10 percent cut in research under the budget. EPA's proposal would cut $4.5 million out of the Safe Drinking Water Research Fund. Additionally, about $50 million would be lost from various federally funded grant money, an action criticized by most industry groups including AWWA and other industry trade associations such as the Water and Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers Association.

EPA has proposed taking $500 million from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) to fund the agency's new Sewer Overflow Control Grants program, mandated by the Wet Weather Quality Act passed last year. That would leave CWSRF with about $850 million, not enough money to protect state water systems against the ravages of age, industry says.

The debate is now expected to shift to Congress, which has said in the past that the CWSRF must be funded at $1.4 billion, the budget now in place for this fiscal year. EPA would maintain drinking water state funds at the present $823 million level. Industry is cautiously optimistic House and Senate spending panels will add to the CWSRF account but it is early in the appropriations process. A final decision on those programs will not likely happen until mid-summer.

Democrats Propose Arsenic Legislation

Senate Democrats have proposed various legislation designed to reduce the impact of the Bush administration's decision to delay a final standard for arsenic in drinking water.

Senate bill S. 796 would expand the public's right to know about arsenic levels in drinking water. Sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the proposal would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to require that communities be informed if the level of arsenic in their water exceeds five parts per billion.

"If President Bush is not going to give people clean, healthy water to drink, then at the minimum, families should have the right to know if poison is in the water flowing from their taps," Boxer said when introducing the legislation April 26. A related bill, S. 635 sponsored by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), would reinstate the arsenic standard. No hearings have been held on either proposal; both were referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Water Infrastructure to be Top Issue on Capitol Hill

What role the federal government will play in overhauling the nation's drinking and wastewater infrastructure will be a key issue for the Senate this year, said a congressional staff spokesman for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

"I'd say it's one of five top issues our committee is looking at," the spokesman told a panel discussion hosted by the Women's Council on Energy and the Environment.

Both the House and Senate held extensive hearings in March on water and wastewater infrastructure needs. EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman, industry groups, local government and environmentalists testified before the Senate EPW's Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water. Two House panels also held hearings: the House Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment and the House Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.

In April, lawmakers from the Senate Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water conducted a field hearing on wastewater infrastructure in Columbus, OH. There they listened to local officials detail the challenges of replacing an aging wastewater system that meets federal guidelines. Members of the panel also discussed S. 252, a proposal by Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) to give $3 billion per year for five years of grants under the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund.

"I think it is appropriate that we are here in Ohio today for our first field hearing on the issue, because Ohio is a good microcosm of infrastructure issues in this country, with its mixture of urban and rural communities, industrial sectors and agricultural regions, and older and new treatment systems," said Subcommittee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho).

Voinovich introduced S. 252, in February but the measure currently only has the endorsement of colleague Sen. Mike DeWine (R) also of Ohio. Yet fixing local water works are a problem more and more lawmakers are going to wrestle with, Voinovich warned colleagues.

"In my hometown of Cleveland, there have been two big water main breaks in the last year that caused a lot of flooding and disrupted people's lives. Let me tell you, those breaks got a lot of attention.

"Unfortunately, for many communities across our nation, anything but routine maintenance for such problems is prohibitively expensive. For those communities that want to conduct a wholesale overhaul of their aging infrastructure, many face the realization that they will have to obtain revenues locally," Voinovich said.

"Of course, the general public considers rate increases as they do taxes. And with the reaction to the dramatic rise in heating costs this winter, possible increases in electricity costs, high gas prices, and other necessities like health care, it's easy to understand why the public does not want to pay more for something they take as a "given." It's a wonder how the average person can make it.

"However, with an attitude among the public of not wanting to pay for these infrastructure upgrades, more often than not, these upgrades go on the back-burner, adding to the nationwide cost of repairs," he said.

The Ohio senator has asked the non-partisan General Accounting Office to conduct a study on unmet infrastructure needs. The study will look at such items as: highways, mass transit, airports, drinking water supply and wastewater treatment, public buildings, water resources (flood control and navigation) and hydropower generating facilities.

For each infrastructure area, the GAO will look at how agencies develop their needs estimates and determine whether they used leading practices and guidelines.

"I believe the GAO's final report will give us a better sense of exactly how reliable the needs estimates are," Voinovich said.