< Back to Current Version

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

Changes from November 25, 2003 to February 1, 2006

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.


Order Code RL30030 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law Updated November 25, 2003February 1, 2006 Claudia Copeland Specialist in Environmental Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law Summary The principal law governing pollution of the nation’s surface waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act. Originally enacted in 1948, it was totally revised by amendments in 1972 that gave the Actact its current shape. The 1972 legislation spelled out ambitious programs for water quality improvement that have since been expanded and are still being implemented by industries and municipalities. This report presents a summary of the law, describing the essence of the statute without discussing its implementation. Other CRS products do discuss implementation, such as CRS Issue Brief IB89102, Implementing the Clean Water Act, and numerous reports cited in that issue brief. This report will be updated. The Clean Water Act consists of two major parts, one being the provisions which authorize federal financial assistance for municipal sewage treatment plant construction. The other is the regulatory requirements that apply to industrial and municipal dischargers. The Actact has been termed a technology-forcing statute because because of the rigorous demands placed on those who are regulated by it to achieve higher higher and higher levels of pollution abatement under deadlines specified in the law. Early Early on, emphasis was on controlling discharges of conventional pollutants (e.g., suspended solids or bacteria that are biodegradable and occur naturally in the aquatic environment), while control of toxic pollutant discharges has been a key focus of water quality programs more recently. Prior to 1987, programs were primarily directed at point source pollution, wastes discharged from discrete sources such as pipes and outfalls. Amendments in that year authorized measures to address nonpoint source pollution (stormwater runoff from farm lands, forests, construction sites, and urban areas), now estimated to represent more than 50% of the nation’s remaining water pollution problems. Under this Actact, federal jurisdiction is broad, particularly regarding establishment of national standards or effluent limitations. Certain responsibilities are delegated to the states, and the Actact embodies a philosophy of federal-state partnership in which the federal government sets the agenda and standards for pollution abatement, while states carry out day-to-day activities of implementation and enforcement. To achieve its objectives, the Actact embodies the concept that all discharges into the nation’s waters are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit, which is the Actact’s principal enforcement tool. The law has civil, criminal, and administrative enforcement provisions and also permits citizen suit enforcement. Financial assistance for constructing municipal sewage treatment plants and certain other types of water quality improvements projects is authorized under title VI. It authorizes grants to capitalize State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds, or loan programs. States contribute matching funds, and under the revolving loan fund concept, monies used for wastewater treatment construction will be repaid to a state, to be available for future construction in other communities. Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Federal and State Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Titles II and VI — Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction . . . . . . . 5 Permits, Regulations, and Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Selected References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 List of Tables Table 1. Clean Water Act and Major Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law Introduction The principal law governing pollution of the nation’s surface waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act. Originally enacted in 1948, it was totally revised by amendments in 1972 that gave the Actact its current shape. The 1972 legislation spelled out ambitious programs for water quality improvement that have since been expanded and are still being implemented by industries, municipalities and others. Congress made fine-tuning amendments in 1977, revised portions of the law in 1981, and enacted further amendments in 1987. This report presents a summary of the law, describing the essence of the statute. It is excerpted from a larger document, CRS Report RL30798, Environmental Protection Laws: Summaries of Statutes Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, by Susan Fletcher, coordinator. Many details and secondary provisions are omitted here, and even some major components are only briefly mentioned. Further, this report describes the statute without discussing its implementation. Other CRS products are more current and discuss implementation concerns. For example, see CRS Issue Brief IB89102, Implementing the Clean Water ActWater Quality: Implementing the Clean Water Act, by Claudia Copeland. Table 1 shows the original enactment enactment and subsequent major amendments. Table 2, at the end of this report, cites the major U.S. Code sections of the codified statute. Table 1. Clean Water Act and Major Amendments (codified generally as 33 U.S.C. 1251-1387) Year Act Public Law 1948 Federal Water Pollution Control Act 1956 Water Pollution Control Act of 1956 1961 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments Water Quality Act of 1965 Clean Water Restoration Act Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments Clean Water Act of 1977 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Amendments Water Quality Act of 1987 1965 1966 1970 1972 1977 1981 1987 Public Law P.L. 80-845 (Act of June 30, 1948) P.L. 84-660 (Act of July 9, 1956) P.L. 87-88 1965 1966 1970 1972 1977 1981 1987 P.L. 89-234 P.L. 89-753 P.L. 91-224, Part I P.L. 92-500 P.L. 95-217 P.L. 97-117 P.L. 100-4 CRS-2 Authorizations for appropriations to support the law generally expired at the end of fiscal year 1990FY1990 (Sept. 30, 1990). Programs did not lapse, however, and Congress has has continued to appropriate funds to carry out the Actact. Since the 1987 amendments, although Congress has enacted several bills that reauthorize and modify a number of individual provisions in the law, none comprehensively addressed major programs or requirements. Background The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 was the first comprehensive statement of federal interest in clean water programs, and it specifically provided state and local governments with technical assistance funds to address water pollution problems, including research. Water pollution was viewed as primarily a state and local problem, hence, there were no federally required goals, objectives, limits, or even guidelines. When it came to enforcement, federal involvement was strictly limited to matters involving interstate waters and only with the consent of the state in which the pollution originated. During the latter half of the 1950s and well into the 1960s, water pollution control programs were shaped by four laws which amended the 1948 statute. They dealt largely with federal assistance to municipal dischargers and with federal enforcement programs for all dischargers. During this period, the federal role and federal jurisdiction were gradually extended to include navigable intrastate, as well as interstate, waters. Water quality standards became a feature of the law in 1965, requiring states to set standards for interstate waters that would be used to determine actual pollution levels and control requirements. By the late 1960s, there was a widespread perception that existing enforcement procedures were too timeconsuming and that the water quality standards approach was flawed because of difficulties in linking a particular discharger to violations of stream quality standards. Additionally, there was mounting frustration over the slow pace of pollution cleanup efforts and a suspicion that control technologies were being developed but not applied to the problems. These perceptions and frustrations, along with increased public interest in environmental protection, set the stage for the 1972 amendments. The 1972 statute did not continue the basic components of previous laws as much as it set up new ones. It set optimistic and ambitious goals, required all municipal and industrial wastewater to be treated before being discharged into waterways, increased federal assistance for municipal treatment plant construction, strengthened and streamlined enforcement, and expanded the federal role while retaining the responsibility of states for day-to-day implementation of the law. The 1972 legislation declared as its objective the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. Two goals also were established: zero discharge of pollutants by 1985 and, as an interim goal and where possible, water quality that is both “fishable” and “swimmable” by mid-1983. While those dates have passed, the goals remain, and efforts to attain them continue. CRS-3 Overview The Clean Water Act (CWA) today consists of two major parts, one being the titleTitle II and titleTitle VI provisions which authorize federal financial assistance for municipal sewage treatment plant construction. The other is the regulatory requirements, found throughout the Actact, that apply to industrial and municipal dischargers. The Actact has been termed a technology-forcing statute because of the rigorous demands placed on those who are regulated by it to achieve higher and higher levels of pollution abatement. Industries were given until July 1, 1977, to install “best practicable control technology” (BPT) to clean up waste discharges. Municipal wastewater treatment plants were required to meet an equivalent goal, termed “secondary treatment,” by that date. (Municipalities unable to achieve secondary treatment by that date were allowed to apply for case-by-case extensions up to July 1, 1988. According to EPA, 86% of all cities met the 1988 deadline; the remainder were put under administrative or court-ordered schedules requiring compliance as soon as possible. However, many cities continue to make investments in building or upgrading facilities needed to achieve secondary treatment, and funding needs remain high; see discussion below.) Cities that discharge wastes into marine waters were eligible for case-by-case waivers of the secondary treatment requirement, where sufficient showing could be made that natural factors provide significant elimination of traditional forms of pollution and that both balanced populations of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and water quality standards would be protected. The primary focus of BPT was on controlling discharges of conventional pollutants, such as suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demanding materials, fecal coliform and bacteria, and pH. These pollutants are substances which are biodegradable (i.e., bacteria can break them down), occur naturally in the aquatic environment, and deplete the dissolved oxygen concentration in water which is necessary for fish and other aquatic life. The Act requiredact mandated greater pollutant cleanup than BPT by no later than March 31, 1989, generally demandingrequiring that industry use the “best available technology” (BAT) that that is economically achievable. BAT level controls generally focus on toxic substances. Compliance extensions of as long as 2two years are available for industrial sources sources utilizing innovative or alternative technology. Failure to meet statutory deadlines deadlines could lead to enforcement action. The Actact utilizes both water quality standards and technology-based effluent limitations to protect water quality. Technology-based effluent limitations are specific numerical limitations established by EPA and placed on certain pollutants from certain sources. They are applied to industrial and municipal sources through numerical effluent limitations in discharge permits (see discussion of Permits, Regulation, and Enforcement, below). Water quality standards are standards for the overall quality of water. They consist of the designated beneficial use or uses of a waterbody (recreation, water supply, industrial, or other), plus a numerical or narrative statement identifying maximum concentrations of various pollutants which would not interfere with the designated use. The Actact requires each state to establish water quality standards for all bodies of water in the state. These standards serve as CRS-4 the backup to federally set technology-based requirements by indicating where additional pollutant controls are needed to achieve the overall goals of the Actact. In waters where industrial and municipal sources have achieved technology-based effluent limitations, yet water quality standards have not been met, dischargers may be required to meet additional pollution control requirements. For each of these waters, the act requires states to set a total maximum daily load (TMDL) of pollutants at a level that ensures that applicable water quality standards can be attained and maintained. A TMDL is both a planning process for attaining water quality standards and a quantitative assessment of pollution problems, sources, and pollutant reductions needed to restore and protect a river, stream, or lake. Based on state reports, EPA estimates that nearly 34,000 U.S. waters are impaired and require preparations of TMDLs. Control of toxic pollutant discharges has been a key focus of water quality programs. In addition to the BPT and BAT national standards, states are required to implement control strategies for waters expected to remain polluted by toxic chemicals even after industrial dischargers have installed the best available cleanup technologies required under the law. Development of management programs for these post-BAT pollutant problems was a prominent element in the 1987 amendments and is a key continuing aspect of CWA implementation. Prior to the 1987 amendments, programs in the Clean Water Act were primarily directed at point source pollution, wastes discharged from discrete and identifiable sources, such as pipes and other outfalls. In contrast, except for general planning activities, little attention had been given to nonpoint source pollution (stormwater runoff from agricultural lands, forests, construction sites, and urban areas), despite estimates that it represents more than 50% of the nation’s remaining water pollution problems. As it travels across land surface towards rivers and streams, rainfall and snowmelt runoff picks up pollutants, including sediments, toxic materials, and conventional wastes (e.g., nutrients) that can degrade water quality. The 1987 amendments authorized measures to address such pollution by directing states to develop and implement nonpoint pollution management programs (Section 319 of the Actact). States were encouraged to pursue groundwater protection activities as part of their overall nonpoint pollution control efforts. Federal financial assistance was authorized to support demonstration projects and actual control activities. These grants may cover up to 60% of program implementation costs. While the Actact imposes great technological demands, it also recognizes the need for comprehensive research on water quality problems. This is provided throughout the statute, on topics including pollution in the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay, in-place toxic pollutants in harbors and navigable waterways, and water pollution resulting from mine drainage. The Actact also provides support to train personnel who operate and maintain wastewater treatment facilities. Federal and State Responsibilities. Under this Actact, federal jurisdiction is broad, particularly regarding establishment of national standards or effluent limitations. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues regulations containing the BPT and BAT effluent standards applicable to categories of industrial sources (such as iron and steel manufacturing, organic chemical manufacturing, CRS-5 petroleum refining, and others). Certain responsibilities are delegated to the states, and this Actact, like other environmental laws, embodies a philosophy of federal-state partnership in which the federal government sets the agenda and standards for pollution abatement, while states carry out day-to-day activities of implementation and enforcement. Delegated responsibilities under the Actact include authority for qualified states to issue discharge permits to industries and municipalities and to enforce permits. (As of November 2003January 2006, 45 states had been delegated responsibility CRS-5 for for this permit program; EPA issues discharge permits in the remaining states.) In addition, as noted above, states are responsible for establishing water quality standards. Titles II and VI — Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Federal law has authorized grants for planning, design, and construction of municipal sewage treatment facilities since 1956 (Act of July 9, 1956, or P.L. 84-660). Congress greatly expanded this grant program in 1972 in order to assist cities in meeting the Actact’s pollution control requirements. Since that time Congress has authorized $65 billion and appropriated nearly $75 billion in CWA funds to aid wastewater wastewater treatment plant construction. Grants are allocated among the states according to a complex statutory formula that combines two factors: state population and an estimate of municipal sewage treatment funding needs derived from a biennial survey survey conducted by EPA and the states. The most recent estimate, completed in 2003, indicates that $181 billion more would be required to build and upgrade municipal municipal wastewater treatment plants in the United States and for other types of water quality improvement projects that are eligible for funding under the Actact. Under the titleTitle II construction grants program established in 1972, federal grants were made for several types of projects (such as secondary or more stringent treatment and associated sewers) based on a priority list established by the states. Grants were generally available for as much as 55% of total project costs. For projects using innovative or alternative technology (such as reuse or recycling of water), as much as 75% federal funding was allowed. Recipients were responsible for non-federal costs but were not required to repay federal grants. Policymakers have debated the tension between assisting municipal funding needs, which remain large, and the impact of aid programs such as the Clean Water Act’s on federal spending and budget deficits. In the 1987 amendments to the Actact, Congress attempted to deal with that apparent conflict by extending federal aid for wastewater treatment construction through fiscal year 1994FY1994, yet providing a transition towards full state and local government responsibility for financing after that date. Grants under the previous titleTitle II program were authorized through fiscal year 1990. Under titleFY1990. Under Title VI of the Actact, grants to capitalize State Water Pollution Control Revolving Revolving Funds, or loan programs, were authorized beginning in fiscal year 1989 FY1989 to replace the title Title II grants. States contribute matching funds, and under the revolving loan fund concept, monies used for wastewater treatment construction will be repaid to a state fund, to be available for future construction in other communities. All states now have functioning loan programs, but the shift from federal grants to loans, loans has been easier for some than others. The new financing requirements have been a problem CRS-6 for cities (especially small towns) that have difficulty repaying project loans. Statutory authorization for grants to capitalize state loan programs expired in 1994; however, Congress has continued to provide annual appropriations. An issue affecting some cities is overflow discharges of inadequately treated wastes from from municipal sewers and how cities will pay for costly remediation projects. In 2000, Congress amended the Actact to authorize a two-year $1.5 billion grant program to help cities reduce these wet weather flows. CRS-6 Permits, Regulations, and Enforcement To achieve its objectives, the Actact embodies the concept that all discharges into the nation’s waters are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit. Thus, more than 65,000 industrial and municipal dischargers must obtain permits from EPA (or qualified states) under the Actact’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program (authorized in Section 402 of the Actact). An NPDES permit requires the discharger (source) to attain technology-based effluent limits (BPT or BAT for industry, secondary treatment for municipalities, or more stringent for water quality protection). Permits specify the control technology applicable to each pollutant, the effluent limitations a discharger must meet, and the deadline for compliance. Sources are required to maintain records and to carry out effluent monitoring activities. Permits are issued for 5five-year periods and must be renewed thereafter to allow continued discharge. The NPDES permit incorporates numerical effluent limitations issued by EPA. The initial BPT limitations focused on regulating discharges of conventional pollutants, such as bacteria and oxygen-consuming materials. The more stringent BAT limitations emphasize controlling toxic pollutants — heavy metals, pesticides, and other organic chemicals. In addition to these limitations applicable to categories of industry, EPA has issued water quality criteria for more than 115 pollutants, including 65 named classes or categories of toxic chemicals, or “priority pollutants.” These criteria recommend ambient, or overall, concentration levels for the pollutants and provide guidance to states for establishing water quality standards that will achieve the goals of the Actact. A separate type of permit is required to dispose of dredged or fill material in the nation’s waters, including wetlands. Authorized by Section 404 of the Actact, this permit program is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, subject to and using EPA’s environmental guidance. Some types of activities are exempt from permit requirements, including certain farming, ranching, and forestry practices which do not alter the use or character of the land; some construction and maintenance; and activities already regulated by states under other provisions of the Actact. EPA may delegate certain Section 404 permitting responsibility to qualified states and has done so twice (Michigan and New Jersey). For some time, the Actact’s wetlands permit program has become one of the most controversial parts of the law. Some who wish to develop wetlands maintain that federal regulation intrudes on and impedes private land-use decisions, while environmentalists seek more protection for remaining wetlands and limits on activities that take place in wetlands. Nonpoint sources of pollution, which EPA and states believe are responsible for the majority of water quality impairments in the nation, are not subject to CWA CRS-7 permits or other regulatory requirements under federal law. They are covered by state programs for the management of runoff, under Section 319 of the Actact. Other EPA regulations under the CWA include guidelines on using and disposing of sewage sludge and guidelines for discharging pollutants from land-based sources into the ocean. (A related law, the Ocean Dumping Act, 33U.S.C. 1401-45, §§140145, regulates the intentional disposal of wastes into ocean waters.) EPA also provides provides guidance on technologies that will achieve BPT, BAT, and other effluent limitations. CRS-7 The NPDES permit, containing effluent limitations on what may be discharged by a source, is the Actact’s principal enforcement tool. EPA may issue a compliance order or bring a civil suit in U.S. district court against persons who violate the terms of a permit. The penalty for such a violation can be as much as $25,000 per day. Stiffer penalties are authorized for criminal violations of the Actact — for negligent or knowing violations — of as much as $50,000 per day, 3three years’ imprisonment, or or both. A fine of as much as $250,000, 15 years in prison, or both, is authorized for ‘knowing endangerment’ — violations that knowingly place another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. Finally, EPA is authorized to assess civil penalties administratively for certain well-documented violations of the law. These civil and criminal enforcement provisions are contained in Section 309 of the Actact. EPA, working with the Army Corps of Engineers, also has responsibility for enforcing against entities who engage in activities that destroy or alter wetlands. While the CWA addresses federal enforcement, the majority of actions taken to enforce the law are undertaken by states, both because states issue the majority of permits to dischargers and because the federal government lacks the resources for day-to-day monitoring and enforcement. Like most other federal environmental laws, CWA enforcement is shared by EPA and states, with states having primary responsibility. However, EPA has oversight of state enforcement and retains the right to bring a direct action where it believes that a state has failed to take timely and appropriate action or where a state or local agency requests EPA involvement. Finally, the federal government acts to enforce against criminal violations of the federal law. In addition, individuals may bring a citizen suit in U.S. district court against persons who violate a prescribed effluent standard or limitation. Individuals also may bring citizen suits against the Administrator of EPA or equivalent state official (where program responsibility has been delegated to the state) for failure to carry out a nondiscretionary duty under the Actact. Selected References Loeb, Penny. Very Troubled Waters. U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, vol. 125, no. 12. Sept. 28, 1998. pp. 39, 41-42. Schneider, Paul. Clear Progress, 25 Years of the Clean Water Act. AUDUBON. September/October 1997. pp. 36-47, 106-107. CRS-8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The National Water Quality Inventory, 2000 Report. Washington, August 2002. EPA841-R-02-001. 207 p. —— EPA’s Draft Report on the Environment, Technical Document. Chapter 2, Purer Water. June 2003. EPA 600-R-03-050. pp. 2-1 - 2-64. —— Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 2000, Report to Congress. August 2003. EPA-832-R-03-001. 1 vol. U.S. General Accounting Office. Water Quality, A Catalog of Related Federal Programs. GAO/RCED-96-173. June 1996. 64 p. —— Water Infrastructure: Information on Financing, Capital Planning, and Privatization. (GAO-02-764) August 2002. 79 p. CRS-89 Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act1 (codified generally as 33 U.S.C., Chapter 26, Sections 1251-1387) Clean Water Act (as amended) 33 U.S.C. Section Title 33 U.S.C. Subchapter I 1251 1252 1267 1268 1269 1270 1273 1274 Section Title Research and Related Programs Declaration of goals and policy Comprehensive programs for water pollution control Interstate cooperation and uniform laws Research, investigations, training and information Grants for research and development Grants for pollution control programs Mine water pollution control demonstrations Pollution control in the Great Lakes Training grants and contracts Applications for training grants or contracts; allocations of grants or contracts Award of scholarships Definitions and authorizations Alaska village demonstration project Lake Tahoe study In-place toxic pollutants Hudson River PCB reclamation demonstration project Chesapeake Bay Great Lakes Long Island Sound Lake Champlain Basin program Lake Pontchartrain Basin Wet weather watershed pilot projects sec. 117 sec. 118 sec. 119 sec. 120 sec. 121 sec. 1212 Subchapter II 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 Grants for Construction of Treatment Works Purpose Federal share Plans, specifications, estimates, and payments Limitations and conditions Allotment Reimbursement and advanced construction Authorization Areawide waste treatment management Basin planning Annual survey sec. 201 sec. 202 sec. 203 sec. 204 sec. 205 sec. 206 sec. 207 sec. 208 sec. 209 sec. 210 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 sec. 101 sec. 102 sec. 103 sec. 104 sec. 105 sec. 106 sec. 107 sec. 108 sec. 109 sec. 110 sec. 111 sec. 112 sec. 113 sec. 114 sec. 115 sec. 116 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 Clean Water Act (as amended) sec. 101 sec. 102 sec. 103 sec. 104 sec. 105 sec. 106 sec. 107 sec. 108 sec. 109 sec. 110 sec. 111 sec. 112 sec. 113 sec. 114 sec. 115 sec. 116 sec. 117 sec. 118 sec. 119 sec. 120 sec. 121 sec. 1212 sec. 201 sec. 202 sec. 203 sec. 204 sec. 205 sec. 206 sec. 207 sec. 208 sec. 209 1 NOTE: This table shows only the major code sections. For more detail and to determine when a section was added, the reader should consult the official printed version of the U.S. Code. 2 This provision was added by P.L. 106-554. Another Section 121, added by P.L. 106-457, is classified to Section 1273 of Title 33. CRS-9 Clean Water Act (as amended) 33 U.S.C. Section Title 1291 1292 1293 10 33 U.S.C. 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 Subchapter III 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 Section Title Annual survey Sewage collection systems Definitions Loan guarantees for construction of treatment works Public information Requirements for American materials Determination of priority Cost-effectiveness guidelines Cost effectiveness State certification of projects Pilot program for alternative water source projects Sewer overflow control grants 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 Subchapter III 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 Standards and Enforcement Effluent Limitations Water quality related effluent limitations Water quality standards and implementation plans Information and guidelines Water quality inventory National standards of performance Toxic and pretreatment effluent standards Inspections, monitoring, and entry Federal enforcement International pollution abatement Oil and hazardous substance liability Marine sanitation devices Federal facilities pollution control Clean lakes National study commission Thermal discharges Financing study Aquaculture Nonpoint source management programs National estuary program Subchapter IV - Permits and Licenses 1341 Certification 1342 National pollutant discharge elimination system 1343 Ocean discharge criteria 1344 Permits for dredged or fill material 1345 Disposal of sewage sludge 1346 Coastal recreation water quality monitoring and notification Subchapter V - General Provisions 1361 Administration 1362 General definitions Clean Water Act (as amended) sec. 210 sec. 211 sec. 212 sec. 213 sec. 214 sec. 215 sec. 216 sec. 217 sec. 218 sec. 219 sec. 220 sec. 221 sec. 301 sec. 302 sec. 303 sec. 304 sec. 305 sec. 306 sec. 307 sec. 308 sec. 309 sec. 310 sec. 311 sec. 312 sec. 313 sec. 314 sec. 315 sec. 316 sec. 317 sec. 318 sec. 319 sec. 320 sec. 401 sec. 402 sec. 403 sec. 404 sec. 405 sec. 406 sec. 501 sec. 502 CRS-1011 33 U.S.C. Section Title 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1251 note Section Title General definitions Water pollution control advisory board Emergency powers Citizen suits Appearance Employee protection Federal procurement Administrative procedure and judicial review State authority Other affected authority Separability Labor standards Public health agency coordination Effluent standards and water quality information advisory committee Reports to Congress General authorization Indian tribes Short title 1375 1376 1377 1251 note Subchapter VI - State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds 1381 Grants to states for establishment of revolving funds 1382 Capitalization grant agreements 1383 Water pollution control revolving loan funds 1384 Allotment of funds 1385 Corrective action 1386 Audits, reports, and fiscal controls; intended use plan 1387 Authorization of appropriations Clean Water Act (as amended) sec. 502 sec. 503 sec. 504 sec. 505 sec. 506 sec. 507 sec. 508 sec. 509 sec. 510 sec. 511 sec. 512 sec. 513 sec. 514 sec. 515 sec. 516 sec. 517 sec. 518 sec. 519 sec. 601 sec. 602 sec. 603 sec. 604 sec. 605 sec. 606 sec. 607