House Report 116-576, Part 1 — Ocean Pollution Reduction Act II
Summary
Report 116-576, Part 1, dated November 16, 2020, is the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure report on the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act II, submitted by DeFazio with a Congressional Budget Office cost estimate. The bill would modify permitting requirements for discharges from the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant in San Diego. A permit under the bill would require a deep ocean outfall with a discharge depth of not less than 300 feet, not more than 12,000 metric tons of total suspended solids per year at first, and at least 83,000,000 gallons per day of water suitable for potable reuse by December 31, 2035. The report states the current section 301(h) variance was issued on October 1, 2017 and expires September 30, 2022.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Crpt Crpt 116Hrpt576 Crpt 116Hrpt576 Pt1
- Case
- Crpt Crpt 116Hrpt576 Crpt 116Hrpt576 Pt1
Cite this document
“House Report 116-576, Part 1 — Ocean Pollution Reduction Act II.”
Original at www.govinfo.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/crpt-crpt-116hrpt576-crpt-116hrpt576-pt1/
, SHA-256 baf0deab046c4b4f4f644aad5201bc80f7f4ff40c0ec23caa42d57832d6158d0.Full text
116TH CONGRESS REPT. 116–576
" HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES !
2d Session Part 1
OCEAN POLLUTION REDUCTION ACT II
NOVEMBER 16, 2020.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DEFAZIO, from the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 4611]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 4611) to modify permitting requirements
with respect to the discharge of any pollutant from the Point Loma
Wastewater Treatment Plant in certain circumstances, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill as
amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose of Legislation ............................................................................................. 3
Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 3
Hearings ................................................................................................................... 6
Legislative History and Consideration .................................................................. 6
Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 7
Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 7
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures ...................................................... 7
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .......................................................... 7
Performance Goals and Objectives ......................................................................... 8
Duplication of Federal Programs ............................................................................ 9
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits ... 9
Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 9
Preemption Clarification ......................................................................................... 9
Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 9
Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 9
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 9
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 10
Committee Correspondence .................................................................................... 11
19–006
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6646 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
2
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ocean Pollution Reduction Act II’’.
SEC. 2. SAN DIEGO POINT LOMA PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and section 307 of the Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1456), the Administrator, in coordination with the
State, may issue to the City a permit under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342) for a discharge from the Point Loma Plant into
marine waters, which, in lieu of the requirements of subsections (b)(1)(B) and (j)(5)
of section 301 the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1311) otherwise
applicable to the discharge of biochemical oxygen demand and total suspended sol-
ids, requires compliance with the requirements described in subsection (b).
(b) CONDITIONS.—A permit issued under this section shall require—
(1) maintenance of the currently designed deep ocean outfall from the Point
Loma Plant with a discharge depth of not less than 300 feet and distance from
the shore of not less than 4 miles;
(2) as applicable to the term of the permit, discharge of not more than 12,000
metric tons of total suspended solids per year commencing on the date of enact-
ment of this section, not more than 11,500 metric tons of total suspended solids
per year commencing on December 31, 2025, and not more than 9,942 metric
tons of total suspended solids per year commencing on December 31, 2027;
(3) discharge of not more than 60 milligrams per liter of total suspended sol-
ids, calculated as a 30-day average;
(4) removal of not less than 80 percent of total suspended solids on a monthly
average and not less than 58 percent of biochemical oxygen demand on an an-
nual average, taking into account removal occurring at all treatment processes
at related facilities for wastewater upstream from and at the Point Loma Plant;
(5) attainment of all other effluent limitations of secondary treatment as de-
termined by the Administrator pursuant to section 304(d)(1) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1314(d)(1)), other than with respect to
concentration limits for biochemical oxygen demand and total suspended solids;
(6) compliance with the requirements applicable to Federal issuance of a per-
mit under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, including
State approval consistent with section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act (33 U.S.C. 1341) and ocean discharge criteria evaluation pursuant to
section 403 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1343);
(7) implementation of the pretreatment program requirements of paragraphs
(5) and (6) of section 301(h) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1311(h)) in addition to the requirements of section 402(b)(8) of such Act
(33 U.S.C. 1342(b)(8));
(8) that the City provide 10 consecutive years of ocean monitoring data and
analysis for the period immediately preceding the date of each application for
a permit under this section sufficient to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Administrator that the discharge of pollutants pursuant to a permit issued
under this section will meet the requirements of section 301(h)(2) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1311(h)(2)) and that the applicant has
established and will maintain throughout the permit term an ocean monitoring
program that meets or exceeds the requirements of section 301(h)(3) of such Act
(33 U.S.C. 1311(h)(3)); and
(9) to the extent potable reuse is permitted by Federal and State regulatory
agencies, that the City demonstrate that at least 83,000,000 gallons per day on
an annual average of water suitable for potable reuse will be produced by De-
cember 31, 2035, taking into account production of water suitable for potable
reuse occurring at all treatment processes at related facilities for wastewater
upstream from and at the Point Loma Plant.
(c) MILESTONES.—The Administrator, in coordination with the State, shall deter-
mine development milestones necessary to ensure compliance with this section and
include such milestones as conditions in each permit issued under this section be-
fore December 31, 2035.
(d) SECONDARY TREATMENT.—Nothing in this section prevents the City from alter-
natively submitting an application for the Point Loma Plant that complies with sec-
ondary treatment pursuant to section 301(b)(1)(B) and section 402 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1311(b)(1)(B); 33 U.S.C. 1342).
(e) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
3
(1) ADMINISTRATOR.—The term ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND.—The term ‘‘biochemical oxygen demand’’
means biological oxygen demand, as such term is used in the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act.
(3) CITY.—The term ‘‘City’’ means the City of San Diego, California.
(4) POINT LOMA PLANT.—The term ‘‘Point Loma Plant’’ means the Point Loma
Wastewater Treatment Plant owned by the City.
(5) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of California.
PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION
The purpose of H.R. 4611, as amended, is to provide an alter-
native process for the City of San Diego to comply with the Clean
Water Act’s permitting requirements for the continued operation of
the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant, while ensuring con-
tinued reductions of pollutant discharges and greater use of re-
claimed wastewater associated with the Plant.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
H.R. 4611 seeks to clarify that the City of San Diego, California,
can utilize the standard Clean Water Act National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System (NPDES) permit renewal process and
does not need a variance application to continue operating the E.W.
Blom Point Loma Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant
(‘‘Point Loma Plant’’) and the Point Loma Ocean Outfall, subject to
the implementation of the permitting requirements specified in the
bill.
The Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, more commonly known
as the Clean Water Act, prohibits the discharge of pollutants into
navigable waters unless such discharges are covered by a Federal
permit 1 as well as establishes national minimum standards for cer-
tain discharges, including discharges from publicly owned treat-
ment works. Section 301(b)(1)(B) 2 of the Clean Water Act requires
that all publicly owned treatment works in existence as of July 1,
1977, achieve effluent limitations based on secondary treatment
standards,3 established by the Administrator of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA), and defined pursuant to section
304(d)(1) 4 of the Act. These limitations and standards are imple-
mented through an NPDES permit, issued either by the EPA Ad-
ministrator or an approved State program, pursuant to section 402
of the Clean Water Act.5 The State of California is currently ap-
proved to implement the Clean Water Act NPDES program in the
state.6
Section 301(h) 7 of the Clean Water Act also includes a process
for certain publicly owned treatment works that discharge into ma-
rine waters to continue to operate under a Clean Water Act
NPDES permit with a limited variance from the secondary treat-
1 See 33 U.S.C. 1311(a).
2 See 33 U.S.C. 1311(b)(1)(B).
3 See https://www.epa.gov/npdes/secondary-treatment-standards. Secondary treatment is de-
fined in the regulation (40 CFR Part 133) in terms of effluent quality for total suspended solids
(TSS), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), and pH.
4 See 33 U.S.C. 1314(d)(1).
5 See 33 U.S.C. 1342.
6 See https://www.epa.gov/npdes/npdes-state-program-authority.
7 33 U.S.C. 1311(h).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
4
ment standards. Section 301(h) 8 authorizes the EPA Adminis-
trator, with State concurrence, to issue such an NPDES variance
for discharges that meet the requirements of that subsection.9 EPA
regulations implementing section 301(h) require that NPDES
variances under section 301(h) must also comply with applicable
provisions of State, local, or other Federal laws or Executive Or-
ders, including the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16
U.S.C. 1451 et seq.); the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.); and Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.).10 NPDES permits, includ-
ing those issued with a 301(h) variance, have a duration of five
years and must be renewed.11
The Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Point Loma Plant, located in San Diego, California, began
operations in 1963.12 The Plant treats approximately 175 million
gallons of wastewater per day, generated in a 450-square-mile area
by more than 2.2 million residents.13 The Point Loma Plant oper-
ates as a chemically-assisted primary treatment plant, and is the
terminal treatment facility discharging to the Point Loma Ocean
Outfall—a 4.5 mile pipe that extends outward from the Point Loma
Plant and discharges treated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean at
a depth of more than 300 feet.14
8 See id.
9 The statutory requirements for a 301(h) variance are that:
(1) there is an applicable water quality standard specific to the pollutant for which
the modification is requested;
(2) the discharge of pollutants in accordance with such modified requirements will not
interfere, alone or in combination with pollutants from other sources, with the attain-
ment or maintenance of that water quality which assures protection of public water
supplies and the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population of
shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and allows recreational activities, in and on the water;
(3) the applicant has established a system for monitoring the impact of such dis-
charge on a representative sample of aquatic biota, to the extent practicable, and the
scope of such monitoring is limited to include only those scientific investigations which
are necessary to study the effects of the proposed discharge;
(4) such modified requirements will not result in any additional requirements on any
other point or nonpoint source;
(5) all applicable pretreatment requirements for sources introducing waste into such
treatment works will be enforced;
(6) in the case of any treatment works serving a population of 50,000 or more, with
respect to any toxic pollutant introduced into such works by an industrial discharger
for which pollutant there is no applicable pretreatment requirement in effect, sources
introducing waste into such works are in compliance with all applicable pretreatment
requirements, the applicant will enforce such requirements, and the applicant has in
effect a pretreatment program which, in combination with the treatment of discharges
from such works, removes the same amount of such pollutant as would be removed if
such works were to apply secondary treatment to discharges and if such works had no
pretreatment program with respect to such pollutant;
(7) to the extent practicable, the applicant has established a schedule of activities de-
signed to eliminate the entrance of toxic pollutants from nonindustrial sources into such
treatment works;
(8) here will be no new or substantially increased discharges from the point source
of the pollutant to which the modification applies above that volume of discharge speci-
fied in the permit; and
(9) the applicant at the time such modification becomes effective will be discharging
effluent which has received at least primary or equivalent treatment and which meets
the criteria established under section 304(a)(1) of the Act after initial mixing in the
waters surrounding or adjacent to the point at which such effluent is discharged.
10 See 40 CFR 125, Subpart G.
11 See 33 U.S.C. 1342(b)(1)(B).
12 https://www.sandiego.gov/public-utilities/customer-service/water-wastewater-facilities/point-
loma.
13 See id.
14 See infra at 15. The ocean outfall consists of an original 11,226-foot-long outfall section that
was constructed in 1963 and a 12,246-foot-long extension that was added in 1993. The total
length of the outfall system is 23,472 feet, or approximately 4.5 miles.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 5601 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
5
In 1979, the City of San Diego applied for a 301(h) variance,
which was approved by EPA and the State.15 Since that time, the
Point Loma Plant has generally operated, and is currently oper-
ating, under a section 301(h) permit variance 16 to discharge their
wastewater with less than full secondary treatment through the
Ocean Outfall to the nearby coastal waters. The current 301(h)
variance was issued on October 1, 2017, and expires September 30,
2022.17
According to the City of San Diego, it is impracticable for the
Point Loma Plant to meet the secondary treatment requirements of
the Clean Water Act, which has required the Point Loma Plant to
seek a section 301(h) variance for its continued operation.18 The
current 301(h) variance provides the Point Loma Plant with a
modification related to its discharge levels for Total Suspended Sol-
ids (TSS) and Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD).19
In addition, the City of San Diego is engaged in a long-term ef-
fort to reduce discharges from the Point Loma Plant to coastal
waters while reclaiming treated wastewater for eventual potable
and non-potable reuse in the area.20 For example, in connection
with enactment of the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act (Pub. L. 103–
431), the City has constructed treatment facilities with the capacity
for 45,000,000 gallons of reclaimed wastewater per day, which has
also resulted in a reduction in the discharge of TSS and BOD by
the facility.
In May 2020, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control
Board issued a new NPDES permit for the North City Water Rec-
lamation and Pure Water Facility (part of San Diego’s Pure Water
program) to combine tertiary treated recycled water and additional
highly advanced treatment (reverse osmosis, oxidation,
ultrafiltration, etc.), and then discharge to the Miramar reservoir
for eventual drinking water use.21 Once fully operating, this will
re-direct a portion of the Point Loma discharge to the North City/
Pure Water facility. However, while the ocean discharges from the
Point Loma Plant will be reduced, such discharges will not be
eliminated in the foreseeable future.
15 See United States of America v. City of San Diego, U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of California, March 31, 1994; 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19501 *; 38 ERC (BNA) 1718.
16 See Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Permit for the City of San Diego E.W. Blom Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharge
for the Pacific Ocean Through the Point Loma Ocean Outfall (NPDES No. CA0107409), found
at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-08/documents/ca0107409-point_loma_301h_
decision_and_tdd_2017-08-04.pdf.
17 See id.
18 The City has expressed concern that local geographic limitations, including the adjacency
of the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant to the Cabrillo National Monument, the Point
Loma Ecological Reserve, and the U.S. Naval Base at Point Loma, California, prevent the con-
struction of treatment facilities that would be required to achieve full compliance with the sec-
ondary treatment requirements of the Clean Water Act. The City has also expressed the view
that establishing a standard that allows for greater use of reclaimed wastewater to address the
long-term water supply needs of the region makes more practical sense than requiring the treat-
ment of wastewater that would ultimately be discharged into the Pacific Ocean.
19 See supra note 15. According to information provided by EPA, the Point Loma Plant cur-
rently removes approximately 80% of TSS, and BOD removal is approximately 55–60%. Existing
secondary treatment standards require publicly owned treatment works to meet TSS and BOD
removal at 85% minimum.
20 See ‘‘Application for Renewal of NPDES CA0107409 and 301(h) Modified Secondary Treat-
ment Requirements,’’ City of San Diego Public Utilities, Water and Wastewater. January 2015.
Accessed at https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/ploovol2_15.pdf.
21 See https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/board_decisions/adopted_orders/orders2020
.html.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 5601 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
6
H.R. 4611, the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act II
The purpose of H.R. 4611, as amended, is to address the long-
term Clean Water Act permitting requirements for the City of San
Diego and co-cities which feed into Point Loma Plant for waste-
water treatment.
H.R. 4611, as amended, provides for an alternative process for
the Point Loma Plant to achieve compliance with the Clean Water
Act’s NPDES permitting requirements, other than the existing
301(h) variance conditions, while ensuring continued reductions of
pollutant discharges and greater use of reclaimed wastewater asso-
ciated with the Plant. The legislation also eliminates the need to
reapply for the variance specifically for the Point Loma Plant, and
provides direction to EPA for including minimum treatment levels
for the NPDES permit to be issued to Point Loma Plant.
HEARINGS
For the purposes of section 103(i) of H. Res. 6 of the 116th Con-
gress the following hearing was used to develop or consider H.R.
4611:
On February 27, 2020, the Subcommittee on Water Resources
and Environment held a hearing, entitled ‘‘Proposals for a Water
Resources Development Act of 2020: Members’ Day Hearing.’’ Rep-
resentative Scott Peters testified before the Subcommittee on the
issues addressed within H.R. 4611.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND CONSIDERATION
H.R. 4611 was introduced in the House on October 4, 2019, by
Mr. Peters and referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and the Committee on Natural Resources. Within
the Committee, H.R. 4611 was referred to the Subcommittee on
Water Resources and Environment.
On September 30, 2020, the Subcommittee on Water Resources
and Environment was discharged from further consideration of
H.R. 4611.
The Committee met in open session to consider H.R. 4611 on
September 30, 2020, and ordered the measure to be reported to the
House with a favorable recommendation, as amended, by voice
vote.
The following amendments were offered:
An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mrs.
Napolitano (#1); was AGREED TO by voice vote.
An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana (#1A); was WITHDRAWN.
Page 1, line 4, strike ‘‘SAN DIEGO POINT LOMA’’ and insert
‘‘WASTEWATER FACILITY OCEAN DISCHARGE’’.
Page 1, line 10, strike ‘‘the State, may issue to the City’’ and
insert ‘‘the applicable State, may issue to a municipality’’.
Page 1, beginning on line 12, strike ‘‘the Point Loma Plant’’
and insert ‘‘a treatment works’’.
Page 2, beginning on line 3, strike ‘‘the currently designed
deep ocean outfall from the Point Loma Plant’’ and insert ‘‘a
deep ocean outfall from the treatment works’’.
Page 2, beginning on line 23, strike ‘‘Point Loma Plant’’ and
insert ‘‘treatment works’’.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
7
Page 3, line 22, strike ‘‘City’’ and insert ‘‘municipality’’.
Page 4, line 11, strike ‘‘City’’ and insert ‘‘municipality’’.
Page 4, line 18, strike ‘‘Point Loma Plant’’ and insert ‘‘treat-
ment works’’.
Page 4, line 20, insert ‘‘applicable’’ before ‘‘State’’.
Page 4, line 25, strike ‘‘the City’’ and insert ‘‘a municipality’’.
Page 5, line 1, strike ‘‘the Point Loma Plant’’ and insert ‘‘a
treatment works’’.
Page 5, strike lines 13 through 19 and insert a new sub-
section entitled ‘‘(3) FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CON-
TROL ACT TERMS.’’
COMMITTEE VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representa-
tives 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 consider-
ation of H.R. 4611, as amended.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT 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 over-
sight findings and recommendations are reflected in this report.
NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Represent-
atives does not apply where a cost estimate and comparison pre-
pared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under sec-
tion 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely
submitted prior to the filing of the report and is included in the re-
port. Such a cost estimate is included in this report.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
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. 4611 from the Director of the Con-
gressional Budget Office:
U.S. CONGRESS,
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE,
Washington, DC, November 13, 2020.
Hon. PETER A. DEFAZIO,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has pre-
pared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4611, the Ocean Pollution
Reduction Act II.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
8
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased
to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Stephen Rabent.
Sincerely,
PHILLIP L. SWAGEL,
Director.
Enclosure.
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program controls water pollution by regulating point sources of dis-
charge into the waters of the United States. Under that program,
publicly owned wastewater treatment works must meet secondary
treatment standards specified by law. The Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) generally delegates the authority to administer
the NPDES program to individual states.
Under current law, the Point Loma Plant in San Diego, Cali-
fornia, can apply to be exempted from secondary treatment stand-
ards if it meets certain conditions. H.R. 4611 would eliminate the
need for an application and would allow that exemption under the
plant’s normal NPDES permit if it meets additional conditions that
include implementing a pretreatment program and a water reuse
program.
Using information from EPA, CBO estimates that implementing
the bill would have an insignificant effect on EPA’s costs to admin-
ister the NPDES program over the 2021–2025 period. CBO expects
that EPA’s cost to administer the Point Loma Plant secondary
treatment standard waiver would shift to administering and evalu-
ating its performance under the NPDES permit.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Stephen Rabent. The
estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Director
of Budget Analysis.
PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of
the Rules of the House of Representatives, the performance goal
and objective of this legislation is to provide an alternative process
for the City of San Diego to achieve compliance with the Clean
Insert offset folio 11 here HR576.001
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
9
Water Act’s permitting requirements for the continued operation of
the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant, while ensuring con-
tinued reductions of pollutant discharges and greater use of re-
claimed wastewater associated with the Plant.
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Committee finds that no provision of H.R.
4611, as amended, establishes or reauthorizes a program of the fed-
eral government known to be duplicative of another federal pro-
gram, a program that was included in any report from the Govern-
ment Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of
Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified
in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED
TARIFF BENEFITS
In compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of the rule XXI.
FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of federal man-
dates 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 in-
tended to preempt state, local, or tribal law. The Committee finds
that H.R. 4611, as amended, 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 were created by this legislation.
APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE 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 Con-
gressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1).
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION
Section 1. Short title
This section provides that H.R. 4611 may be cited as the ‘‘Ocean
Pollution Reduction Act II’’.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
10
Sec. 2. San Diego Point Loma permitting requirements
Subsection (a) authorizes the EPA Administrator, in coordination
with the State, to issue an NPDES permit (under section 402 of the
Clean Water Act) for a discharge from the Point Loma Plant that
complies with the requirements of subsection (b).
Subsection (b) directs that a permit issued pursuant to this legis-
lation for the Point Loma Plant require the permittee to—
(1) Maintain the current Point Loma Ocean Outfall;
(2) Attain explicit annual limits for the discharge of TSS,
which decrease from a level of 12,000 metric tons on the date
of enactment to not more than 9,942 tons by December 31,
2027;
(3) Comply with designated discharge limits of TSS on a 30-
day average;
(4) Require the removal of not less than 80 percent of TSS
from the discharge on a monthly average, and not less than 58
percent of BOD on an annual average;
(5) Attain all other effluent limitations of secondary treat-
ment, as determined by the Administrator;
(6) Comply with other applicable requirements of sections
401 (state certification requirements), 402 (NPDES permit re-
quirements), and 403 (ocean outfall requirements) of the Clean
Water Act;
(7) Comply with pretreatment requirements of the Clean
Water Act;
(8) Provide the Administrator with consecutive years of
ocean monitoring data to assist in determining compliance
with this Act and the Clean Water Act; and
(9) Demonstrate that at least 83,000,000 gallons per day on
an annual average of water suitable for potable reuse will be
provided by December 31, 2035.
Subsection (c) requires the Administrator, in coordination with
the State, to develop and incorporate into the NPDES permit mile-
stones for compliance with the requirements of this Act.
Subsection (d) allows the permittee to pursue the construction of
facilities to comply with the normal secondary treatment require-
ments of the Clean Water Act.
Subsection (e) defines the terms ‘‘Administrator’’, ‘‘biochemical
oxygen demand’’, ‘‘City’’, ‘‘Point Loma Plant’’, and ‘‘State.’’
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
As reported by the Committee, H.R. 4611 makes no changes in
existing law.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
11
Insert offset folio 14 here HR576.002
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
12
Insert offset folio 15 here HR576.003
VerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR576P1.XXX HR576P1
File and source
- File
- CRPT_crpt-116hrpt576_crpt-116hrpt576-pt1.pdf
- Size
- 416,923 bytes
- SHA-256
- baf0deab046c4b4f4f644aad5201bc80f7f4ff40c0ec23caa42d57832d6158d0
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov