(v) a single measure of financial capa-
bility or affordability (such as median 
household income) should be viewed in the 
context of other economic measures, rather 
than as a threshold to be achieved; and 
(vi)(I) consideration should be given 
to the economic outlook of a community, 
including the potential impact of program 
requirements over time, in the development 
of implementation schedules; and 
(II) the assessment should take into 
consideration other essential community 
investments relating to water quality im-
provements; 
(B) with respect to the timing of imple-
mentation of water quality-related improve-
ments— 
(i) environmental improvement imple-
mentation schedules should be structured 
to mitigate the potential adverse impact on 
distressed populations resulting from the 
costs of the improvements; and 
(ii) implementation schedules should 
reflect local community financial conditions 
and economic impacts; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
00:13 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 099200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6353.IH
H6353
tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
(C) with respect to implementation of 
methodologies— 
(i) a determination of local financial 
capability may be achieved through an 
evaluation of an array of factors the rel-
ative importance of which may vary across 
regions and localities; and 
(ii) 
an 
appropriate 
methodology 
should give consideration to such various 
factors as are appropriate to recognize the 
prevailing and projected economic concerns 
in a community; and 
(D) the residential indicator should be re-
vised to include— 
(i) a consideration of costs imposed 
upon ratepayers for essential utilities; 
(ii) increased consideration and quan-
tification of local community-imposed costs 
in regional systems; 
(iii) a mechanism to assess impacts on 
communities with disparate economic con-
ditions throughout the entire service area 
of a utility; 
(iv) a consideration of the industrial 
and population trends of a community; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
00:13 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 099200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6353.IH
H6353
tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
(v) recognition that— 
(I) the median household income 
of a service area reflects a numerical 
median rather than the distribution of 
incomes within the service area; and 
(II) more representative methods 
of determining affordability, such as 
shelter costs, essential utility pay-
ments, State affordability criteria, and 
State and local tax efforts, should be 
considered; 
(vi) a consideration of low-income 
ratepayer percentages; and 
(vii) impacts relating to program de-
livery, such as water quality infrastructure 
market saturation and program manage-
ment. 
(3) IMPLEMENTATION.—The updated guidance 
should indicate that, in a case in which a previously 
approved long-term control plan or associated en-
forceable agreement allows for modification of the 
plan or terms of the agreement (including financial 
capability considerations), and all parties are in 
agreement that a change is needed or that the plan 
or agreement contains a reopener provision to ad-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
00:13 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 099200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6353.IH
H6353
tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
dress changes in the economic or financial status of 
the community since the effective date of the plan or 
agreement, reconsideration and modification of fi-
nancial capability determinations and implementa-
tion schedules based on the criteria described in 
paragraph (2) is appropriate. 
(c) PUBLICATION AND SUBMISSION.—Upon comple-
tion of the updating of guidance under subsection (b), the 
Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register and 
submit to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives 
the updated guidance. 
Æ 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
00:13 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 099200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H6353.IH
H6353
tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS