69–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 110–723 

SEWAGE OVERFLOW COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT 

JUNE 19, 2008.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. OBERSTAR, from the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 2452] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 

was referred the bill (H.R. 2452) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to ensure that sewage treatment plants monitor 

for and report discharges of raw sewage, and for other purposes, 

having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

The amendments are as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1362) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(25) SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOW.—The term ‘sanitary sewer overflow’ means 

an overflow, spill, release, or diversion of wastewater from a sanitary sewer system. Such term does not include municipal combined sewer overflows or other 

discharges from a municipal combined storm and sanitary sewer system and 

does not include wastewater backups into buildings caused by a blockage or 

other malfunction of a building lateral that is privately owned. Such term includes overflows or releases of wastewater that reach waters of the United 

States, overflows or releases of wastewater in the United States that do not 

reach waters of the United States, and wastewater backups into buildings that 

are caused by blockages or flow conditions in a sanitary sewer other than a 

building lateral. 

‘‘(26) TREATMENT WORKS.—The term ‘treatment works’ has the meaning given 

that term in section 212.’’. 

SEC. 3. MONITORING, REPORTING, AND PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF SEWER OVERFLOWS. 

Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(r) SEWER OVERFLOW NOTIFICATIONS.— 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
2 

‘‘(1) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.—Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall take such action as may be 

necessary to ensure that each permit issued under this section before, on, or 

after the date of enactment of this subsection for a publicly owned treatment 

works shall require, at a minimum, that the owner or operator of the treatment 

works—

‘‘(A) institute and utilize a feasible methodology, technology, or management program to alert the owner or operator to the occurrence of a sewer 

overflow in a timely manner; 

‘‘(B) notify the public of a sewer overflow as soon as practicable, but not 

later than 24 hours after the time the owner or operator becomes aware of 

such overflow, if such overflow has the potential to affect human health, except for overflows that are wastewater backups into single-family residences; 

‘‘(C) immediately notify public health authorities and other affected entities, such as public water systems, of any sewer overflow that may imminently and substantially endanger human health, except for overflows that 

are wastewater backups into single-family residences; 

‘‘(D) report each sewer overflow (other than a release of wastewater that 

occurs in the course of maintenance of the treatment works, is managed 

consistently with the treatment works’ best management practices, and is 

intended to prevent overflows) on its monthly discharge monitoring report 

to the Administrator or the State, as the case may be, by describing—

‘‘(i) the magnitude, duration, and suspected cause of the overflow; 

‘‘(ii) the steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, or prevent recurrence of the overflow; and 

‘‘(iii) the steps taken or planned to mitigate the impact of the overflow; and 

‘‘(E) report to the Administrator or the State, as the case may be, the 

total number of sewer overflows (other than a release of wastewater that 

occurs in the course of maintenance of the treatment works, is managed 

consistently with the treatment works’ best management practices, and is 

intended to prevent overflows) in a calendar year, including—

‘‘(i) the details of how much wastewater was released per incident; 

‘‘(ii) the duration of each sewer overflow; 

‘‘(iii) the location of the overflow and any potentially affected receiving waters; 

‘‘(iv) the responses taken to clean up the overflow; and 

‘‘(v) the actions taken to mitigate impacts and avoid further sewer 

overflows at the site. 

‘‘(2) REPORT TO EPA.—If a State receives a report under paragraph (1)(E), the 

State shall report to the Administrator annually, in summary, the details of reported sewer overflows that occurred in that State. 

‘‘(3) RULEMAKING BY EPA.—Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall, after providing notice and the 

opportunity for public comment, issue regulations to—

‘‘(A) establish a set of criteria to guide owners and operators of publicly 

owned treatment works in assessing whether a sewer overflow has the potential to affect human health or may imminently and substantially endanger human health; and 

‘‘(B) define the terms ‘feasible’ and ‘timely’ as such terms apply to paragraph (1)(A). 

‘‘(4) SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.—The definitions under paragraph (3)(B) shall 

include site specific conditions. 

‘‘(5) DEFINITIONS.—

‘‘(A) SEWER OVERFLOW.—In this subsection, the term ‘sewer overflow’

means a sanitary sewer overflow or a municipal combined sewer overflow. 

‘‘(B) SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.—In this subsection, the term ‘single-family residence’ means an individual dwelling unit, including an apartment, 

condominium, house, or dormitory. Such term does not include the common 

areas of a multi-dwelling structure.’’. 

SEC. 4. ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSISTANCE. 

(a) PURPOSE OF STATE REVOLVING FUND.—Section 601(a) of the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1381(a)) is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ the first place it appears; and 

(2) by inserting after ‘‘section 320’’ the following: ‘‘, and (4) for the implementation of requirements to monitor for sewer overflows under section 402’’. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
3 

(b) WATER POLLUTION CONTROL REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS.—Section 603(c) of the 

Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1383(c)) is amended— (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ the first place it appears; and 

(2) by inserting after ‘‘section 320 of this Act’’ the following: ‘‘, and (4) for the 

implementation of requirements to monitor for sewer overflows under section 

402 of this Act’’. 

SEC. 5. LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION. 

Nothing in this Act, including any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed—

(1) to limit the ability of any State from implementing and enforcing more 

stringent monitoring and notification standards than those required by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); or 

(2) to supplant or diminish obligations to comply with all other requirements 

of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 

Amend the title so as to read: 

A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to ensure that sewage 

treatment plants monitor for and report discharges of sewage, and for other purposes. 

PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

H.R. 2452, the ‘‘Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know 

Act’’, as amended, amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 

(‘‘Clean Water Act’’) to provide a uniform, national standard for 

monitoring, reporting, and public notification of municipal combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Municipal wastewater collection systems collect domestic sewage 

and other wastewater from homes and other buildings and convey 

it to wastewater treatment plants for proper treatment and disposal. These collection systems and treatment facilities are an extensive, valuable, and complex part of the nation’s infrastructure. 

Sewage treatment operators perform an important job that helps 

protect the public, and are critical in achieving the goals of the 

Clean Water Act. The collection and treatment of domestic sewage 

and other wastewater is vital to the nation’s economic and public 

health and the protection of the environment. 

Two types of public sewer systems predominate in the United 

States—combined sewer systems and separate sanitary sewer systems. Municipal combined sewer systems utilize a joint-conveyance 

for the movement of wastewater (e.g., domestic sewage) and 

stormwater to wastewater treatment facilities. Separate sanitary 

sewer systems have individual (separated) conveyances for the 

movement of domestic sewage and for stormwater. 

COMBINED SEWER SYSTEMS

Combined sewer systems were among the earliest sewer systems 

constructed in the United States, and were built until the first part 

of the 20th century. During wet weather events (e.g., rainfall or 

snowmelt), the combined volume of wastewater and stormwater 

runoff entering a combined sewer system often exceeds its conveyance capacity. To prevent damage to the infrastructure during wet 

weather events, combined sewer systems were intentionally designed to flow directly to surface waters when their capacity is exceeded, often discharging large volumes of untreated or partially 

treated sewage wastes—an estimated 850 billion gallons annuVerDate Aug 31 2005 02:43 Jun 21, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR723.XXX HR723

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
4 

ally—directly into local waters. These discharges are called combined sewer overflows, or CSOs. 

CSOs are point source discharges, and are prohibited under the 

Clean Water Act unless authorized by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (‘‘NPDES’’) permit under section 402 of 

the Clean Water Act. Section 402(q) requires that any permit 

issued for the discharge from a combined sewer system conform to 

the Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy (59 Fed. Reg. 18688), 

dated April 1994, including the implementation of the nine minimum controls outlined in the policy and the development of a longterm CSO control plan (‘‘long-term control plan’’). 

Combined sewers are found in 33 States across the United States 

and the District of Columbia. The majority of combined sewers are 

located in communities in the Northeast or Great Lakes regions— where much of the oldest water infrastructure in the nation is 

found. However, combined sewer overflows have also occurred in 

the western United States, including the States of Washington, Oregon, and California. To eliminate combined sewer overflows, communities often must redesign their sewer systems to separate sewage flows from stormwater flows or provide significant additional 

capacity to eliminate the possibility that combined flows will exceed 

the limits of the infrastructure. 

SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS

Since the first part of the 20th century, municipalities in the 

United States have generally constructed separate sanitary and 

stormwater sewer systems. Sanitary sewer systems are specifically 

designed to carry domestic sewage flows and stormwater runoff 

from precipitation events through different conveyances. 

While sanitary sewer systems are designed to separate sewage 

from stormwater, sewer overflows from separated systems still may 

occur. These untreated or partially treated discharges from sanitary sewer systems are commonly referred to as sanitary sewer 

overflows, or SSOs. 

Unlike CSOs, which are typically designed with a specific outfall 

for overflows, SSOs can occur at any point in a separate sewer system and during dry or wet weather. In its 2004 Report to Congress 

on the Impacts and Control of CSOs and SSOs (‘‘Report to Congress’’), EPA defines SSOs to include those overflows that reach 

waters of the United States, as well as overflows out of manholes 

and onto city streets, sidewalks, and other terrestrial locations. 

EPA estimates that 72 percent of all SSOs reach the waters of the 

United States, but SSOs also include overflows that remain entirely within terrestrial locations, including streets, parks, and sewage backups into buildings and private residences. 

SSOs that reach the waters of the United States are point source 

discharges, and are prohibited under the Clean Water Act unless 

authorized by a NPDES permit under section 402 of the Act. In addition, all SSOs, including those that do not reach the waters of the 

United States, may be indicative of improper operation and maintenance of the sewer system, and thus may violate existing NPDES 

permit conditions (40 CFR § 122.41 (2006)). 

SSOs have a variety of causes including sewer line blockages, 

line breaks, or sewer defects that allow excess stormwater and 

groundwater to infiltrate and overload the system (also called infilVerDate Aug 31 2005 02:43 Jun 21, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR723.XXX HR723

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
5 

tration and inflow), lapses in sewer operation and maintenance, inadequate sewer design and construction, power failures, and vandalism. 

When sewage backups are caused by problems in the publicly 

owned portion of a sanitary sewer system, they are considered 

SSOs. Generally speaking, sewage backups that are caused by 

blockages or other malfunctions of privately-owned building 

laterals do not fall within EPA’s definition of an SSO. 

EPA estimates that between 23,000 and 75,000 SSOs occur per 

year in the United States, discharging a total volume of three to 

10 billion gallons per year. According to EPA, this estimate does 

not account for discharges occurring after the headworks of the 

treatment plant or discharges into buildings caused by problems in 

the publicly owned portion of a sanitary sewer system, both of 

which would increase the annual total volume of SSOs. 

Individual SSOs can range in volume from one gallon to millions 

of gallons. The majority of SSO events are caused by sewer 

blockages that can occur at any time, but the majority of SSO volume appears to be related to events caused by wet weather events 

and excessive inflow and infiltration. 

IMPACTS OF SEWER OVERFLOWS

Sewer overflows, whether from municipal combined sewer systems or sanitary sewer systems, can pose significant environmental 

impacts, as well as cause or contribute to human health impacts. 

According to its 2000 National Water Quality Inventory Report, 

EPA has determined that three pollutants are most often associated with impaired waters in the United States—solids, pathogens, 

and nutrients. Under the Clean Water Act, a waterbody is impaired if it fails to meet water quality standards for a particular 

use for the water (e.g., drinking, fishing, recreation). 

All three pollutants are contained in CSO and SSO discharges. 

Therefore, according to EPA, at a minimum, CSOs and SSOs contribute to the loadings of these pollutants in the receiving waters 

where they occur. Although EPA was not able to quantify a direct 

relationship in every State, in those States where EPA could identify an assessed segment of a particular waterbody located within 

one mile downstream of a CSO outfall, 75 percent of these 

waterbodies were listed as impaired. 

States have identified CSOs and SSOs as the direct or a contributing cause of documented environmental impacts, including aquatic life impairments, fish kills, shellfish bed closures, and continuing 

discharges of toxic chemicals, such as polychlorinated biphenyls 

(‘‘PCBs’’) and other priority pollutants. 

In addition, CSOs and SSOs often contain microbial pathogens 

(e.g., bacteria, viruses, and parasites) that cause or contribute to 

human health impacts, including gastroenteritis, hepatitis, 

giardiasis, cryptosporidiosis, dysentery, and other gastrointestinal 

and respiratory diseases, and, in rare cases, death. The Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention estimates that there are 7,100,000 

cases of mild to moderate, and 560,000 cases of moderate to severe, 

infectious waterborne disease in the United States each year, 

though exactly how many of these are attributable to sewer overflows remains uncertain. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
6 

Although the potential for human exposure can come in many 

forms, EPA and public drinking water agencies have expressed specific concern about the potential for direct contamination of public 

drinking water sources from sewer overflows. For example, EPA 

has identified 59 CSO outfalls in seven states located within one 

mile upstream of a drinking water intake. However, public health 

authorities are not routinely notified of sewer overflows that 

threaten public health. 

One recent example of the potential for drinking water contamination by a sewer overflow occurred in the spring of 1993, when 

more than 400,000 people in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, were infected 

by a microscopic parasite, Cryptosporidium parvum, which entered 

the public drinking water supply for the city. This outbreak resulted in over 100 deaths. Although the exact source of the parasite 

was not discovered, studies suggest that untreated wastewater 

leaks in the Milwaukee area may have discharged the parasite to 

Lake Michigan, which serves as the primary drinking water source 

for the metropolitan region. Although impacts as large as the Milwaukee Cryptosporidium outbreak are rare, similar parasitic outbreaks have contaminated drinking water sources in other U.S. cities, such as Brushy Creek, Texas (1998), Island Park, Idaho (1995), 

Las Vegas, Nevada (1993), Cabool, Missouri (1990), and Braun Station, Texas (1985). 

Finally, EPA estimates that CSOs and SSOs cause between 

3,448 and 5,576 individual cases of illness annually from direct exposure to pollutants at the nation’s recognized recreational beaches. Yet, in its 2004 Report to Congress on the Impacts and Control 

of CSOs and SSOs, EPA stated that this range underrepresents the 

likely number of annual illnesses (estimated by EPA to be between 

1,800,000 and 3,500,000 individuals annually) attributable to CSO 

and SSO contamination of recreational beaches, and that a significant number of additional illnesses not captured in this range occur 

for exposed swimmers at inland and other coastal beaches. 

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The most reliable way to prevent human illness from waterborne 

diseases and pathogens is to eliminate the potential for human exposure to the discharge of pollutants from CSOs and SSOs. This 

can occur either through the elimination of the discharge, or, in the 

event that a release does occur, to minimize the potential human 

contact to pollutants. Currently, Federal law does not provide a 

uniform, national standard for public notification of combined and 

sanitary sewer overflows. Public notification of sewer overflows is 

governed by a variety of Federal regulations, state laws, and local 

initiatives aimed at limiting human exposure to discharges. 

Potential human exposure to the pollutants found in sewer overflows can occur through several pathways. According to EPA, the 

most common pathways include direct contact with waters receiving CSO or SSO discharges, drinking water contaminated by sewer 

discharges, and consuming or handling contaminated fish or shellfish. However, humans are also at risk of direct exposure to sewer 

overflows, including sewer backups into residential buildings, city 

streets, and sidewalks. 

The cost of eliminating CSOs and SSOs throughout the nation is 

staggering. The wastewater systems of the United States are aging 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
7 

and require significant investment in traditional infrastructure and 

innovative, non-structural infrastructure to prevent the occurrence 

of sewer overflows. In its most recent Clean Water Needs Survey 

(2000), EPA estimated the future capital needs to address existing 

CSOs at $50.6 billion. In addition, EPA estimated that it would require an additional $88.5 billion in capital improvements to reduce 

the frequency of SSOs caused by wet weather and other conditions 

(e.g., blockages, line breaks, and mechanical/power failures). 

In the 110th Congress, the U.S. House of Representatives has approved two bills that originated in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure—H.R. 720, the Water Quality Financing 

Act and H.R. 569, the Water Quality Investment Act—to reauthorize appropriations for the construction, repair, and rehabilitation of 

wastewater infrastructure. H.R. 720 authorizes appropriations of 

$14 billion over four years for the Clean Water State Revolving 

Fund, which is the primary source of Federal funds for wastewater 

infrastructure. H.R. 569 authorizes appropriations of $1.7 billion in 

Federal grants over five years to specifically target combined sewers and sanitary sewers. 

However, in the event that a release does occur, the most effective way to prevent illness is to provide timely and adequate public 

notice to minimize human exposure to pollutants. 

Although public notification of sewer overflows is not uniformly 

required, some Federal statutes do provide specific requirements 

for the timely public notification of potential human health risks 

from waterborne contaminants. 

For example, section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act requires public water systems to notify the persons served by the system of any failure to comply with applicable Federal or state drinking water standards, the existence of any drinking water variance 

to safe drinking water standards, and the presence of any ‘‘unregulated contaminants’’ that pose a public health threat. The Act also 

requires public water systems to implement notification procedures 

to ensure that any violation of a drinking water standard with potential serious adverse effects on human health be made public as 

soon as practicable, but not later than 24 hours after the violation. 

Finally, the Act requires public water systems to provide written 

notice and annual reports to Federal and State agencies, as well as 

to the public. 

Similarly, section 406 of the Clean Water Act authorizes funding 

for state and local governments to implement coastal recreational 

water quality monitoring and notification programs. This authority, 

enacted as part of the Beaches Environmental Assessment and 

Coastal Health (BEACH) Act of 2000, requires as a Federal grant 

condition that state and local governments identify measures for 

the prompt communication of contamination of coastal water quality, as well as measures for the posting of appropriate public notice 

(e.g., beach signs) that the coastal waters fail to meet water quality 

standards. 

Typically, the presence of waterborne contaminants in drinking 

water and surface waters utilized for recreation is detected through 

direct water quality sampling or national reports of waterborne illness outbreaks, coordinated through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Infectious Diseases. The 

likelihood for detection of potential waterborne contaminants in 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
8 

drinking water and recreational waters would dramatically increase if local governmental officials and the public were provided 

with direct notification in the event of a sewer overflow, rather 

than waiting for the results of local water sampling or epidemiological studies. 

Over the past decade, EPA has taken several administrative 

steps to encourage local governmental agencies, including sewerage 

agencies, to report sewer overflows to Federal and State agencies 

and the public. 

In April 1994, EPA issued the Combined Sewer Overflow Control 

Policy (59 Fed. Reg. 18688), which established a national framework for control of CSOs through the Clean Water Act’s permitting 

program. This policy requires owners and operators of combined 

sewer systems to implement minimum technology-based controls 

(the ‘‘nine minimum controls’’) that can reduce the prevalence and 

impacts of CSOs without significant engineering studies or major 

construction. These controls include a requirement for the public 

disclosure of CSOs. The policy does not require any particular 

methodology for notification, but identifies potential methods, including posting appropriate notices in affected use areas or public 

places, newspaper, radio, or television news programs, and direct 

mail contact for affected residents. The requirements of the control 

policy are limited to CSOs. 

In 2001, the Clean Water Act was amended to require that permits for combined sewer systems conform to the Combined Sewer 

Overflow Control Policy. Section 402(q) of the Clean Water Act requires that each permit issued for a discharge from a municipal 

combined sewer system conform to the Combined Sewer Overflow 

Control Policy. This amendment to the Clean Water Act was enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 

106–554). 

For SSOs, there is no consistent Federal requirement for public 

notification of sewer overflows. Under existing EPA regulations (40 

CFR 122.41(l)(6)), NPDES permits should establish a process for 

requiring a permittee to report any noncompliance with the permit 

that may endanger health or the environment. However, EPA regulations do not specifically require notification of the public in the 

event of a sanitary sewer overflows. 

To address this lack of a consistent Federal requirement for public notification, in January 2001, EPA issued a draft SSO rule that, 

among other issues, would have implemented a formal program for 

reporting, public notification, and recordkeeping for sanitary sewer 

systems and SSOs. 

This draft rule would have required owners and operators of sanitary sewer systems to develop an overflow emergency plan describing how the owner or operator would immediately notify the public, 

public health agencies, and other similar entities (e.g., drinking 

water suppliers and beach monitoring authorities), of overflows 

that may imminently and substantially endanger human health. In 

addition, the draft SSO rule would have required owners or operators of publicly owned treatment works to provide the appropriate 

Federal or state agencies with information on the magnitude, duration, and suspected cause of the overflow, as well as actions necessary to avoid future overflows. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
9 

EPA’s draft SSO rule was never finalized, and was later withdrawn. No additional regulatory proposals for public notification of 

SSOs have been issued. 

SUMMARY OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title 

This section designates the title of the bill as the ‘‘Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act’’. 

Section 2. Definitions 

This section amends the definitions section of the Clean Water 

Act (section 502) to include definitions for the terms ‘‘sanitary 

sewer overflows’’ and ‘‘treatment works’’. 

The definition for ‘‘sanitary sewer overflows’’ is modeled after the 

definition for such term in EPA’s proposed rule for ‘‘National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Requirements for Municipal Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems, Municipal 

Satellite Collection Systems, and Sanitary Sewer Overflows,’’

signed by the Administrator on January 4, 2001. 

The definition for ‘‘treatment works’’ makes the existing Clean 

Water Act definition for the term, found in section 212 of the Act, 

applicable to the entire Act. 

Section 3. Monitoring, reporting, and public notification of sewer 

overflows 

This section amends section 402 of the Clean Water Act by adding a new subsection (r) to provide a uniform, national standard for 

monitoring, reporting, and public notification of combined sewer 

overflows and sanitary sewer overflows. The monitoring, notification, and reporting requirements of this section are important steps 

to protect human health and the environment by ensuring that 

public health authorities (and other affected entities) and the public are aware of sewer overflows, may take steps to avoid contact 

with overflows, and that sewer overflows are addressed in an expedited manner. In addition, the availability of comprehensive information on the number, frequency, and location of sewer overflows 

may provide additional support for increased investment in the nation’s water related infrastructure to reduce sewer overflows. 

New subsection (r)(1) requires that, not later than one year after 

the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall 

take such action as may be necessary to ensure that each permit 

issued under this subsection for a publicly owned treatment works 

shall require, at a minimum, that the owner or operator of the 

treatment works implement the monitoring, notification, and reporting requirements described in this subsection. 

The Committee intends the term ‘‘publicly owned treatment 

works’’ to include those devices and systems included within the 

term ‘‘treatment works’’, as defined by section 212 of the Act, that 

are under the ownership or operational control of the Federal Government, or a state or a municipality as such terms are defined in 

section 502 of the Act. New subsection (r)(1) does not include treatment works that are not owned or under the operational control of 

the Federal Government, a state, or a municipality. New subsection 

(r)(1) also does not require a publicly owned treatment works to asVerDate Aug 31 2005 02:43 Jun 21, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR723.XXX HR723

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
10 

sume monitoring, notification, and reporting responsibility for satellite collection systems (portions of a sanitary sewer system) that 

may be connected to, but are not owned or operated by the publicly 

owned treatment works. The Committee notes that EPA’s draft 

SSO rule (January 2001) would have included satellite collection 

systems within the scope of its authority. Satellite collection systems account for a majority of sanitary sewer overflows that occur 

throughout the nation. Although H.R. 2452 does not require a publicly owned treatment works to assume monitoring, notification, 

and reporting responsibility for a satellite collection system which 

is not owned or operated by the treatment works, the Committee 

believes that implementation of a monitoring, notification, and reporting program for satellite collection systems would further the 

goals of the Clean Water Act and the Sewage Overflow Community 

Right-to-Know Act. 

New subsection (r)(1)(A) requires the owner or operator of a publicly owned treatment works to institute and utilize a feasible 

methodology, technology, or management program to alert the 

owner or operator of the publicly owned treatment works to the occurrence of a sewer overflow in a timely manner. 

The Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act does not 

define the terms ‘‘feasible’’ and ‘‘timely’’, but directs the Administrator to conduct a formal rulemaking to define such terms under 

new subsection (r)(3). The Committee expects that the implementation monitoring methodologies, technologies, or management programs that meet the ‘‘feasible’’ and ‘‘timely’’ requirements will be 

reasonably sufficient to provide the owner or operator with actual 

or constructive knowledge of the presence of a sewer overflow. 

The Committee does not intend new subsection (r)(1)(A) to require the implementation of a technology-based system at every 

treatment works to monitor for potential sewer overflows, but allows individual publicly owned treatment works to utilize appropriate methodologies, technologies, or management programs that 

will alert the owner or operator of sewer overflows, consistent with 

the Agency’s regulations under new subsection (r)(3). The Committee does intend that whatever approved methodology, technology, or management program is utilized for monitoring, that 

such methodology, technology, or management program is fully-implemented and adequately maintained, funded, or staffed, to ensure 

that the owner or operator is alerted to the occurrence of a sewer 

overflow. 

New subsection (r)(1)(B) and (C) require the owner or operator of 

a publicly owned treatment works to provide notice in the event of 

a sewer overflow. New subsection (r)(1)(B) requires owners and operators to notify the public of a sewer overflow that has the ‘‘potential to affect human health’’ as soon as practicable, but not later 

than 24 hours after the time the owner or operator knows of the 

overflow. New subsection (r)(1)(C) requires owners or operators to 

immediately notify public health authorities and other affected entities, such as public water systems, of a sewer overflow that may 

imminently and substantially endanger human health. 

The Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act does not 

define the terms ‘‘potential to affect human health’’ or ‘‘imminently 

and substantially endanger human health’’, but directs the Administrator to conduct a formal rulemaking to define such terms under 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
11 

new subsection (r)(3). The Committee intends that the regulations 

promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency with respect 

to notification not preclude States, municipalities, or individual 

publicly owned treatment works from adopting more stringent notification requirements than called for in H.R. 2452. The Committee 

intends to provide States, municipalities, and individual publicly 

owned treatment works with the maximum amount of flexibility for 

the adoption of individually tailored notification programs, provided that such programs meet the minimum standards called for 

in H.R. 2452, including any regulations promulgated pursuant to 

the Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act. 

Both subsections (r)(1)(B) and (r)(1)(C) provide a limited exemption from the notice requirement for a sewer overflow that is limited to a wastewater backup into a single-family residence (as this 

term is defined in new subsection (r)(5)(B)). The Committee has 

provided this limited exemption because, in practice, it is likely 

that residents of the single-family residence will already know of 

the backup into the residence, and in many cases, will likely have 

provided notice to the owner or operator of the publicly owned 

treatment works. The Committee felt that a limited exemption 

from the notice was warranted to avoid the likelihood that the residents of the single-family residence will notify the publicly owned 

treatment works, only to be later notified by the same treatment 

works as to the presence of the sewer overflow. This exemption, 

however, does not apply to a sanitary sewer overflow or municipal 

combined sewer overflow that is released outside of a single-family 

residence, or to such overflows in a residence that does not meet 

the definition of a single-family residence found in new subsection 

(r)(5(B). For example, if a sewer overflow occurs in a multi-family 

structure, such as an apartment building, condominium, or dormitory, and the overflow reaches the common areas of such structure (e.g., a common hallway, laundry facility, foyer, or entryway), 

the owner or operator of the treatment works is required to provide 

notice to appropriate persons under subsections (r)(1)(B) and 

(r)(1)(C). 

New subsections (r)(1)(D) and (r)(1)(E) require the owner or operator of a publicly owned treatment works to report sewer overflows 

to the Administrator or the State. New subsection (r)(1)(D) requires 

an owner or operator to report each sewer overflow on its discharge 

monitoring report, including information on the magnitude, duration, and suspected cause of the overflow, the steps taken or 

planned to reduce, eliminate, or prevent the recurrence of the overflow, and the steps taken or planned to mitigate the impact of the 

overflow. New subsection (r)(1)(E) requires the owner or operator 

to report the total number of sewer overflows that occur in a calendar year, including specific details on the volume of wastewater 

released per incident, the duration of each sewer overflow, the location of the overflow and any potentially affected receiving waters, 

the responses taken to clean up the overflow, and any actions 

taken to mitigate the impacts of the overflow and to avoid further 

future overflows at the site. 

Both subsections (r)(1)(D) and (r)(1)(E) provide a limited exemption from the reporting requirements for the release of wastewater 

that: (1) occurs in the course of maintenance of the treatment 

works; (2) is managed consistently with the treatment works’ best 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
12 

management practices; and (3) is intended to prevent overflows. 

The Committee has provided this limited exemption to address routine maintenance of sewer systems, such as activities to clear our 

sewer lines. The Committee intends this exemption to be read narrowly, that it be limited to releases that are both de minimus in 

terms of both duration and volume, and meet all of the requirements listed in the exemption. The reporting requirement exemption in both subsections (r)(1)(D) and (r)(1)(E) does not include releases in connection with a ‘‘bypass’’ or ‘‘upset’’, as those terms are 

defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR § 122.41(m) 

and (n) (2006)). 

New subsection (r)(2) requires individual States to provide an annual summary report to the Administrator on sewer overflows that 

occurred within the State. 

New subsection (r)(3) directs the Administrator, within one year 

of the date of enactment of the Sewage Overflow Community Rightto-Know Act, to finalize and issue regulations to implement new 

subsection (r), including regulations to provide additional clarity on 

the terms ‘‘feasible’’, ‘‘timely’’, ‘‘potential to affect human health’’, 

and ‘‘imminently and substantially endanger human health’’. 

In defining the term ‘‘feasible’’, the Committee expects the Administrator to consider: (1) the availability of a monitoring technology, methodology, or management program; (2) the ability of a 

technology, methodology, or management program to reasonably 

detect the occurrence of a sewer overflow; (3) the cost of implementing the technology, methodology, or management program; (4) 

the designated use of potential receiving waters; (5) the proximity 

of an overflow to a source of drinking water or a recreation water; 

(6) the potential public health implications of an overflow to the 

public, with particular emphasis on susceptible populations; (7) the 

size of the publicly owned treatment works (in terms of population 

served and the treatment capacity of the treatment works); (8) the 

nature or quality of pollutants contained in the raw waste load of 

the treatment works wastewater; (9) the frequency, volume, and 

duration of past sewer overflows by a particular publicly owned 

treatment works; and (10) other factors that the Administrator considers appropriate. 

In defining the term ‘‘timely’’, the Committee expects the Administrator to ensure that the owner or operator of the publicly owned 

treatment work has knowledge of the sewer overflow as quickly as 

practicable, depending upon the monitoring technology, methodology, or management program implemented by the owner or operator, and consistent with the public health goals of the Sewage 

Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act and goals of the Clean 

Water Act ‘‘to restore and maintain the chemical, and physical, and 

biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.’’

New subsection (r)(4) directs the Administrator to include site 

specific conditions within its regulatory definition for the terms 

‘‘feasible’’ and ‘‘timely’’. 

New subsection (r)(5) defines the terms ‘‘sewer overflow’’ and 

‘‘single family residence’’ as such terms are utilized in new subsection (r). The term ‘‘sewer overflow’’ is defined to include both 

sanitary sewer overflows (as such term is defined in new section 

502(25) of the Act), and municipal combined sewer overflows. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
13 

The term ‘‘single-family residence’’ is defined as an individual 

dwelling unit, including an apartment, condominium, house, or dormitory, but specifically excludes common areas from multi-dwelling 

structures. The definition for ‘‘single-family residence’’ is utilized to 

define the scope of the limited exemption for notice of sewer overflows found in subsections (r)(1)(B) and (r)(1)(C). 

Section 4. Eligibility for assistance 

This section amends sections 601(a) and 606(c) of the Clean 

Water Act to authorize funding from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund to be utilized for carrying out the monitoring, notification, 

and reporting requirements of the Sewage Overflow Community 

Right-to-Know Act. 

Section 5. Limitation on statutory construction 

This section provides that nothing in this Act, including any 

amendments made by this Act, shall be construed (1) to limit the 

ability of any State from implementing and enforcing more stringent monitoring and notification standards than those required by 

the Clean Water Act; or (2) to supplant or diminish obligations to 

comply with all other requirements of the Act. 

ADDITIONAL MATTERS

The monitoring, notification, and reporting requirements of the 

Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act are not intended 

to preclude or deny any right of a State, municipality, or individual 

publicly owned treatment works from implementing monitoring, 

notification, or reporting requirements that are more stringent or 

comprehensive than those contained in H.R. 2452 or the regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency to implement this Act. Accordingly, States, municipalities, and individual publicly owned treatment works may adopt or enforce any 

regulation, requirement, or permit condition with respect to the 

monitoring, notification, and reporting that is more stringent than 

a regulation, requirement, or permit condition issued under the 

Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act. 

In addition, the additional monitoring, notification, and reporting 

requirements made by H.R. 2452 do not explicitly or implicitly authorize sanitary sewer overflows or municipal combined sewer overflows outside of the existing statutory requirements of the Clean 

Water Act. 

Finally, the Committee intends that the amendments to the 

Clean Water Act made by the Sewage Overflow Community Rightto-Know Act will continue to allow for the utilization of the Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy (under § 402(q) of the Clean 

Water Act) to the extent that the monitoring, notification, and reporting requirements contained in the nine minimum controls and 

long term control plan of an individual publicly owned treatment 

works are not inconsistent with the monitoring, notification, and 

reporting requirements of H.R. 2452. To the extent that an individual publicly owned treatment works’ nine minimum controls or 

long-term control plan either does not include monitoring, notification, or reporting requirements, or such monitoring, notification, or 

reporting requirements are inconsistent with the requirements of 

H.R. 2452, the monitoring, notification, or reporting requirements 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
14 

contained in H.R. 2452, and the implementing regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency shall apply. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On May 23, 2007, Representative Timothy H. Bishop introduced 

H.R. 2452, the ‘‘Raw Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know 

Act’’. In the 109th Congress, a similar bill (H.R. 1720) was introduced, but no action was taken on that legislation. 

On October 16, 2007, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and 

Environment held a hearing on the ‘‘Raw Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act’’ in which representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, state and local government officials, 

public health officials, and other stakeholders testified on the issue 

of public notification of sewer overflow. 

On May 7, 2008, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment met to consider H.R. 2452. The Subcommittee adopted, 

by voice vote, an amendment in the nature of a substitute that 

made several technical and clarifying changes to the bill. First, the 

amendment modified the short title of the bill to be the ‘‘Sewage 

Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act’’. Second, the amendment 

deleted section 2 of the introduced bill that included legislative 

findings. Third, the amendment made technical changes to the definitions for ‘‘sanitary sewer overflow’’ and ‘‘sewer overflow’’, struck 

the definition of ‘‘combined sewer overflow’’, and added a definition 

of ‘‘treatment works’’. Finally, the amendment modified the requirements for monitoring, reporting, and public notification of 

sewer overflows by: (1) adding ‘‘feasible’’ and ‘‘timely’’ considerations for implementation of approved monitoring methodologies, 

technologies, and management programs; (2) consolidating the notification requirements for sewer overflows; (3) creating a narrow exemption for public notification of sewer basement backups; and (4) 

creating a new section directing the Environmental Protection 

Agency to conduct a formal rulemaking to define the terms ‘‘feasible’’, ‘‘timely’’, ‘‘potential to affect public health’’, and ‘‘imminently 

and substantially endanger public health’’. 

The Subcommittee approved H.R. 2452, as amended, and favorably recommended it to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure by voice vote. 

On May 15, 2008, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session, and ordered H.R. 2452, as amended, 

reported to the House by voice vote with a quorum present. 

RECORD VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives requires 

each committee report to include the total number of votes cast for 

and against on each record vote on a motion to report and on any 

amendment offered to the measure or matter, and the names of 

those members voting for and against. There were no recorded 

votes taken in connection with consideration of H.R. 2452 or ordering it reported. A motion to order H.R. 2452, as amended, reported 

favorably to the House was agreed to by voice vote with a quorum 

present. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
15 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT AND FINDINGS

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in this report. 

COST OF LEGISLATION

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely 

submitted prior to the filing of the report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is included in this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII 

1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and 308(a) of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee references the 

report of the Congressional Budget Office included in the report. 

2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the performance goals 

and objectives of this legislation are to provide a uniform, national 

standard for monitoring, reporting, and public notification of combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows. 

3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the 

enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2452 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office. 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington. DC, June 11, 2008. 

Hon. JAMES L. OBERSTAR, 

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House 

of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2452, a bill to amend the 

Federal Water Pollution Control Act to ensure that sewage treatment plants monitor for and report discharges of sewage, and for 

other purposes. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Susanne S. Mehlman 

(for federal costs) and Neil Hood (for the state and local impact). 

Sincerely, 

ROBERT A. SUNSHINE

(For Peter R. Orszag, Director). 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 2452—A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 

to ensure that sewage treatment plants monitor for and report 

discharges of sewage, and for other purposes 

H.R. 2452 would require owners and operators of publicly owned 

sewage treatment plants to notify federal and state agencies and 

the public in a timely manner of any sewer overflows. Under this 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
16 

legislation, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would be 

required to develop regulations establishing guidelines for the notifications. The legislation also would expand the types of activities 

that are eligible to receive funds from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. 

Based on information from EPA, CBO estimates that implementing this legislation would cost about $1 million in 2009 and 

less than $500,000 in subsequent years, subject to the availability 

of appropriations. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending 

or receipts. 

H.R. 2452 contains several intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). Specifically, 

the bill would direct EPA to implement new permit requirements 

that would mandate treatment plants to: 

• Institute and utilize a monitoring program for sewer overflows, including combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer 

overflows; 

• Notify the public of a sewer overflow within 24 hours if 

there are potential effects on human health; 

• Notify public health authorities and other affected entities, 

such as public water systems, if there is a potential risk to 

human health due to a sewer overflow; 

• Submit an annual report to EPA or the state on the number of overflows in a calendar year, including the details of 

magnitude, duration, location, potentially affected receiving 

waters, and mitigation efforts. If a state receives a report 

under this requirement, that state must submit to EPA a summary of the report. 

Without knowing the precise nature of the regulations that EPA 

would issue as a result of this bill, CBO cannot make a precise estimate of the costs of the mandates. Based on information from affected entities, however, we estimate that the costs of the mandates 

could exceed the threshold established in UMRA. The bill’s new requirements would involve additional personnel costs and could necessitate new infrastructure and engineering expertise. According 

to EPA and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies 

(NACWA), over 16,000 treatment plants operate in the United 

States, and each of those entities could be affected by the permitting requirements in H.R. 2452. Infrastructure changes, if required 

by the regulations, could be particularly expensive. Given the large 

number of affected entities, even a small increase in additional 

costs (less than $4,500 per entity annually) would result in costs 

that exceed the threshold for intergovernmental mandates ($68 

million in 2008, adjusted annually for inflation). The bill also would 

expand the types of activities eligible to receive funds from the 

Clean Water State Revolving Fund to include the monitoring requirements discussed above. 

The bill contains no new private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Susanne S. 

Mehlman (for federal costs) and Neil Hood (for the state and local 

impact). This estimate was approved by Theresa Grillo, Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
17 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XXI 

Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, H.R. 2452, the Sewage Overflow Community 

Right-to-Know Act, does not contain any congressional earmarks, 

limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 

9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or joint resolution 

of a public character shall include a statement citing the specific 

powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact the 

measure. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

finds that Congress has the authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted under article I, section 8 of the Constitution. 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(Public Law 104–4). 

PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION

Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires the 

report of any Committee on a bill or joint resolution to include a 

statement on the extent to which the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local, or tribal law. The Committee states 

that H.R. 2452 does not preempt any state, local, or tribal law. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this legislation. 

APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATION BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1). 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) 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): 

FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT 

* * * * * * * 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
18 

TITLE IV—PERMITS AND LICENSES 

* * * * * * * 

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

SEC. 402. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(r) SEWER OVERFLOW NOTIFICATIONS.— (1) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.—Not later than one year after 

the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall 

take such action as may be necessary to ensure that each permit 

issued under this section before, on, or after the date of enactment of this subsection for a publicly owned treatment works 

shall require, at a minimum, that the owner or operator of the 

treatment works— (A) institute and utilize a feasible methodology, technology, or management program to alert the owner or operator to the occurrence of a sewer overflow in a timely manner; 

(B) notify the public of a sewer overflow as soon as practicable, but not later than 24 hours after the time the owner 

or operator becomes aware of such overflow, if such overflow has the potential to affect human health, except for 

overflows that are wastewater backups into single-family 

residences; 

(C) immediately notify public health authorities and 

other affected entities, such as public water systems, of any 

sewer overflow that may imminently and substantially endanger human health, except for overflows that are wastewater backups into single-family residences; 

(D) report each sewer overflow (other than a release of 

wastewater that occurs in the course of maintenance of the 

treatment works, is managed consistently with the treatment works’ best management practices, and is intended to 

prevent overflows) on its monthly discharge monitoring report to the Administrator or the State, as the case may be, 

by describing— (i) the magnitude, duration, and suspected cause of 

the overflow; 

(ii) the steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, 

or prevent recurrence of the overflow; and 

(iii) the steps taken or planned to mitigate the impact 

of the overflow; and 

(E) report to the Administrator or the State, as the case 

may be, the total number of sewer overflows (other than a 

release of wastewater that occurs in the course of maintenance of the treatment works, is managed consistently with 

the treatment works’ best management practices, and is intended to prevent overflows) in a calendar year, including—

(i) the details of how much wastewater was released 

per incident; 

(ii) the duration of each sewer overflow; 

(iii) the location of the overflow and any potentially 

affected receiving waters; 

(iv) the responses taken to clean up the overflow; and 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
19 

(v) the actions taken to mitigate impacts and avoid 

further sewer overflows at the site. 

(2) REPORT TO EPA.—If a State receives a report under paragraph (1)(E), the State shall report to the Administrator annually, in summary, the details of reported sewer overflows that 

occurred in that State. 

(3) RULEMAKING BY EPA.—Not later than one year after the 

date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall, 

after providing notice and the opportunity for public comment, 

issue regulations to—

(A) establish a set of criteria to guide owners and operators of publicly owned treatment works in assessing whether a sewer overflow has the potential to affect human 

health or may imminently and substantially endanger 

human health; and 

(B) define the terms ‘‘feasible’’ and ‘‘timely’’ as such terms 

apply to paragraph (1)(A). 

(4) SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.—The definitions under paragraph (3)(B) shall include site specific conditions. 

(5) DEFINITIONS.—

(A) SEWER OVERFLOW.—In this subsection, the term 

‘‘sewer overflow’’ means a sanitary sewer overflow or a municipal combined sewer overflow. 

(B) SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.—In this subsection, the 

term ‘‘single-family residence’’ means an individual dwelling unit, including an apartment, condominium, house, or 

dormitory. Such term does not include the common areas 

of a multi-dwelling structure. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

* * * * * * * 

GENERAL DEFINITIONS

SEC. 502. Except as otherwise specifically provided, when used in 

this Act: 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(25) SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOW.—The term ‘‘sanitary sewer 

overflow’’ means an overflow, spill, release, or diversion of 

wastewater from a sanitary sewer system. Such term does not 

include municipal combined sewer overflows or other discharges from a municipal combined storm and sanitary sewer 

system and does not include wastewater backups into buildings 

caused by a blockage or other malfunction of a building lateral 

that is privately owned. Such term includes overflows or releases of wastewater that reach waters of the United States, 

overflows or releases of wastewater in the United States that do 

not reach waters of the United States, and wastewater backups 

into buildings that are caused by blockages or flow conditions 

in a sanitary sewer other than a building lateral. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
20 

(26) TREATMENT WORKS.—The term ‘‘treatment works’’ has 

the meaning given that term in section 212. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VI—STATE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 

REVOLVING FUNDS 

SEC. 601. GRANTS TO STATES FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF REVOLVING 

FUNDS. 

(a) GENERAL AUTHORITY.—Subject to the provisions of this title, 

the Administrator shall make capitalization grants to each State 

for the purpose of establishing a water pollution control revolving 

fund for providing assistance (1) for construction of treatment 

works (as defined in section 212 of this Act) which are publicly 

owned, (2) for implementing a management program under section 

319, øand¿ (3) for developing and implementing a conservation and 

management plan under section 320, and (4) for the implementation of requirements to monitor for sewer overflows under section 

402. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 603. WATER POLLUTION CONTROL REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE.—The amounts of funds 

available to each State water pollution control revolving fund shall 

be used only for providing financial assistance (1) to any municipality, intermunicipal, interstate, or State agency for construction 

of publicly owned treatment works (as defined in section 212 of this 

Act), (2) for the implementation of a management program established under section 319 of this Act, øand¿ (3) for development and 

implementation of a conservation and management plan under section 320 of this Act, and (4) for the implementation of requirements 

to monitor for sewer overflows under section 402 of this Act. The 

fund shall be established, maintained, and credited with repayments, and the fund balance shall be available in perpetuity for 

providing such financial assistance. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS