I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4922
To ensure that certain controversial changes to the Environmental Protection
Agency’s total maximum daily load program and permit program be
subjected to adequate public and congressional analysis and review.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JULY 24, 2000
Mr. STENHOLM (for himself, Mr. DICKEY, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. HAYES, Mr.
SANDLIN, Mr. BOEHLERT, Mr. SHOWS, Mr. COMBEST, Mr. BOYD, Mr.
SHERWOOD, Mr. TURNER, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. BALDACCI, Mr.
CHAMBLISS, Mr. BERRY, Mr. EWING, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr. HUTCHINSON,
Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, and Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin) introduced
the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure
A BILL
To ensure that certain controversial changes to the Environ-
mental Protection Agency’s total maximum daily load
program and permit program be subjected to adequate
public and congressional analysis and review.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘TMDL Regulatory Ac-
countability Act of 2000’’.
SEC. 2. ENSURING CONSIDERATION OF THE VIEWS OF THE
PUBLIC.
The Administrator shall—
(1) publish, not later the 5th day following the
date of enactment of this Act, in the Federal Reg-
ister a notice soliciting public comment for 120 days
on revisions to regulations pertaining to the national
pollutant discharge elimination system program and
the water quality planning and management pro-
gram published in the Federal Register on July 13,
2000 (65 Fed. Reg. 43586);
(2) solicit comments from each State regarding
the impact of such revisions on implementation and
effectiveness of existing State programs;
(3) hold public meetings for the purpose of re-
ceiving public comments on such revisions, including
meetings at locations that will provide a reasonable
opportunity for citizens of rural communities to both
attend and provide comments; and
(4) maintain a record of all public comments on
such revisions, including comments from States
under paragraph (2) and comments received at pub-
lic meetings under paragraph (3), in a publicly avail-
able docket and, not later than the 180th day fol-
lowing such date of enactment, publish a response to
the comments in the Federal Register.
SEC. 3. FILLING DATA GAPS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than the 120th day fol-
lowing the date of enactment of this Act, the Adminis-
trator shall transmit to Congress an analysis of the moni-
toring data needed for development and implementation
of TMDLs. Such analysis shall address the data gaps
identified by the Comptroller General in the March 2000
report issued by the General Accounting Office, entitled
‘‘Water Quality, Key EPA and State Decisions Limited
By Inconsistent and Incomplete Data’’, including gaps in
data needed to—
(1) assess all State waters;
(2) identify waters that are impaired;
(3) identify pollution sources;
(4) develop TMDLs; and
(5) develop plans to implement TMDLs.
(b) DATA COLLECTION COSTS.—The analysis under
subsection (a) shall include an estimate of the cost of col-
lecting the monitoring data.
(c) STATE INPUT.—In conducting the analysis under
subsection (a) and estimating the costs under subsection
(b), the Administrator shall solicit comments from each
State regarding the analysis and estimate.
SEC. 4. IMPROVING SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING.
(a) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Administrator shall
make arrangements with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a study on the scientific bases under-
lying the development of TMDLs.
(b) SCOPE.—The study shall include an evaluation of
each of the following:
(1) The information required to identify sources
of pollutant loadings and their respective contribu-
tions to water quality impairment.
(2) The information required to allocate reduc-
tions in pollutant loadings among sources.
(3) Whether such information is available for
use by States.
(4) Whether such information, if available, is
reliable.
(5) If such information is not available or is not
reliable, what methodologies should be used to ob-
tain such information.
(c) REVIEW.—Before submitting a report under sub-
section (d), the National Academy of Sciences shall pro-
vide appropriate Federal, State, and public and private
sector interests an opportunity to review and submit writ-
ten comments on the report. The final report shall incor-
porate such comments if appropriate.
(d) REPORT.—Not later than the 240th day following
the date of enactment of this Act, the National Academy
of Sciences shall transmit a report on the study to the
Administrator and Congress. The report shall include rec-
ommendations of the National Academy of Sciences for
improving the methodologies evaluated under the study.
(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$3,000,000. Such sums shall remain available until ex-
pended.
SEC. 5. ENSURING PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE BENE-
FITS AND COSTS OF REGULATORY CHANGES.
(a) UMRA ANALYSIS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to the revisions
referred to in section 2, the Administrator shall pre-
pare a written statement containing the information
specified in section 202(a) of the Unfunded Man-
dates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532(a); 109
Stat. 64–65) and shall conduct the analyses required
under section 205 of such Act (2 U.S.C. 1535).
(2) RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMPTROLLER
GENERAL.—In preparing the statement and con-
ducting the analyses referred to in paragraph (1)—
(A) the Administrator shall address the
concerns regarding the economic analysis per-
formed by the Administrator on these regu-
latory changes identified by the Comptroller
General in a June 21, 2000, report entitled
‘‘Clean Water Act: Proposed Revisions to EPA
Regulations to Clean Up Polluted Waters’’; and
(B) the Administrator, consistent with the
recommendations of the Comptroller General,
shall—
(i) use alternative baseline assump-
tions, including an assumption that accu-
rately reflects the water quality data cur-
rently available for the development and
implementation of TMDLs, and conduct a
sensitivity analysis to assess the effect of
different assumptions on the analyses;
(ii) quantify benefits using the same
baseline assumptions used to quantify
costs; and
(iii) consider costs to regulated enti-
ties and other Federal agencies, as well as
costs to States.
(b) EFFECTS ON SMALL ENTITIES.—The Adminis-
trator shall conduct analyses of the effects of the revisions
referred to in section 2 on small entities, including small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental
organizations. 
Such 
analyses 
shall 
include, 
at 
a
minimum—
(1) a description of and an estimate of the
number of small entities to which the regulations, as
revised, would apply;
(2) the cost to small entities resulting from im-
plementation of the regulations, as revised, by States
and the Environmental Protection Agency; and
(3) a description of the steps the Administrator
has taken to minimize the significant economic im-
pact on small entities, including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the al-
ternative adopted in the final rule and why each one
of the other significant alternatives to the rule con-
sidered by the Administrator that affect the impact
on small entities was rejected.
(c) INFORMATION FROM RELEVANT FEDERAL AGEN-
CIES.—In conducting the analyses under subsections (a)
and (b), the Administrator shall obtain information from
relevant Federal agencies, including the Department of
Agriculture, the Department of Defense, and the Small
Business Administration.
(d) REVIEW BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL.—At
least 60 days before publishing an analysis in the Federal
Register for public notice and comment under subsection
(e), the Administrator shall provide the Comptroller Gen-
eral with an opportunity to review and comment on such
analysis.
(e) PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT.—The Adminis-
trator shall publish the analyses required under sub-
sections (a) and (b) in the Federal Register not later than
150th day after the date of enactment of this Act and
shall solicit public comment for a period of not less than
60 days. Comments received shall be included in the pub-
licly available docket maintained under section 2.
(f) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS.—Not later than the
60th day following the last day of the comment period
under subsection (e), the Administrator shall publish a re-
sponse to comments in the Federal Register.
SEC. 6. USE OF INFORMATION TO IMPROVE CLEAN WATER
ACT PROGRAMS.
(a) AGENCY REVIEW OF INFORMATION AND REGULA-
TIONS.—The Administrator shall review all information
provided or developed under sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 and
shall consider whether or not the Administrator should
change the revisions referred to in section 2 based upon
such information.
(b) EXPLANATION TO CONGRESS.—Upon completing
the review, but not later than the 270th day following the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall
transmit to Congress an explanation of the Administra-