Members of the House and Senate opened the New Year by reintroducing dozens of bills that failed to attain passage during the last session of Congress. Several of these proposals that affect the water sector are detailed below, along with a prediction of each bill’s likelihood of passage during the 114th Congress:
- H.R. 54, the “Frank Lautenberg Memorial Secure Chemical Facilities Act.” Sponsored by Rep. Shelia Jackson-Lee (D-Tex.), the bill would overhaul chemical security regulations by allowing DHS officials to require the use of “inherently safer technologies” (IST) at covered facilities. The bill would continue the exemption of drinking water and wastewater facilities from the CFATS program, but would direct DHS to “consult” with EPA in the course of new chemical security rulemaking on “security at drinking water facilities and wastewater treatment works.” The bill is named in memory of former New Jersey Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg, an “IST” proponent who died in 2013.
Chance of passage: Low. President Obama signed a four-year CFATS reauthorization into law in December, which should settle the issue for the foreseeable future. Republican leaders remain firmly opposed to any sort of “IST” mandate, so H.R. 54 has no path forward as long as the GOP controls Congress.
- S. 88, the “General Duty Clarification Act.” Sponsored by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the measure would prohibit EPA from using the General Duty Clause of the Clean Air Act to require implementation of “particular designs, approaches, or technologies” related to chemical handing or storage. Lawmakers previously introduced versions of the bill in response to calls by some environmental groups for EPA to use the General Duty Clause to impose “IST” mandates on facilities subject to the Clean Air Act’s Risk Management Program (RMP), including some water treatment plants.
Chance of passage: Moderate. The Obama Administration recently directed federal agencies to explore options to increase chemical security using their existing regulatory authority, which led EPA to solicit comments from stakeholders about whether, and how, the agency could use the General Duty Clause to require “IST” reviews and substitutions at covered facilities. A subsequent decision by EPA to apply new “IST” rules through the RMP could prompt Congress to pass this legislation (a version of which also saw introduction in the House of Representatives last year) in response, though President Obama would likely veto the measure if it reached his desk.
- H.R. 212, the “Drinking Water Protection Act.” Introduced by Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio), H.R. 212 is the first of two bills introduced this year aiming to address cyanotoxins and microcystins in water supplies following last year’s Lake Erie algal bloom that disrupted water service in Toledo, Ohio. The bill mirrors legislation Rep. Latta offered last year that would require EPA to develop a strategic plan to address the threat of cyanotoxins in drinking water sources. EPA would evaluate human health risks posed by drinking water contaminated with cyanotoxins, publish data about those cyanotoxins, recommend feasible water treatment options, and decide whether to publish health advisories for cyanotoxins found to represent a human health risk when present in drinking water.
Chance of passage: Moderate. Last year’s version of the bill won backing from House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), though it did not advance out of committee. This could be the bill House GOP leaders turn to if they feel pressure to pass cyanotoxins legislation in 2015.
- H.R. 243, the “Safe and Secure Drinking Water Act.” Sponsored by Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), this year’s other Toledo-inspired bill would set a 90-day deadline for EPA to publish a health advisory on microcystins that includes recommendations on safe levels in drinking water supplies, feasible treatment techniques to achieve safe levels, and standardized testing procedures. EPA would have to make periodic reports to Congress on the status of its efforts determining whether to regulate microcystins in drinking water.
Chance of passage: Moderate. The U.S. Senate unanimously passed a similar bill in the closing days of the 113th Congress, so it has a built in base of support in the upper chamber. But House Republican leaders may prefer the other microcystins bill offered by a member of their own party.
- H.R. 291, the “Water in the 21st Century Act.” Sponsored by Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.), the bill would create a host of new programs to increase the sustainability of water supplies. Features of the bill include permanently authorizing EPA’s WaterSense program to promote the use of water-efficient products; offering “water system mitigation and adaptation grants” to help water systems adapt to climate change (based on separate legislation supported by AMWA); establishing an innovative financing program (based on EPA’s newly enacted WIFIA program) aimed at funding projects in Bureau of Reclamation states that address water recycling, reuse, desalination, and infrastructure renewal needs; investing in research into water-saving technologies and desalination; creating an open water data system; and helping local communities take steps to become better prepared for drought.
Chance of passage: Low. While the bill would address a wide range of water sector needs, the bill carries a large price tag and Republican congressional leaders have little interest in creating a series of new government programs framed as a response to climate change.
- Forthcoming version of the “Chemical Safety and Drinking Water Protection Act.” Reports from Capitol Hill say Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W. Va.) are working together to draft a new version of legislation they each introduced last year in response to the chemical spill that contaminated the drinking water supplies of Charleston, West Virginia. Few details on the upcoming draft have emerged, but last year’s legislation would have created new state-based oversight programs targeting chemical storage facilities that could pollute nearby drinking water supplies. Last year’s version also would have avoided new regulations or mandates specifically targeting drinking water systems.
Chance of passage: Moderate. Though difficult to predict in advance of the release of a new draft bill, last year’s bill from Sen. Manchin won approval of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. GOP concerns about creating new layers of bureaucracy prevented the measure from getting a vote on the Senate floor, but advancement is possible this year if Manchin and Capito can refine the proposal to address these objections.