Order Code RL30030
Clean Water Act:
A Summary of the Law
Updated November 17, 2008
Claudia Copeland
Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry DivisionApril 23, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL30030
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees 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 Originally enacted in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 act 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 without
discussing its implementation. Other CRS reports discuss implementation,
including CRS Report RL33800
R40098, Water Quality Issues in the 110th111th Congress:
Oversight and Implementation, and
numerous products cited in that report.
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 act 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 under deadlines
specified in the law. 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 act, federal jurisdiction is broad, particularly regarding establishment
of national
standards or effluent limitations. Certain responsibilities are delegated
to the states, and the act
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 act embodies the concept that all discharges into
the nation’s waters
are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit, which
is the act’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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
List of Tables
Table 1. Clean Water Act and Major Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
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 act 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 Report RL33800, Water Quality Issues in the 110th
Congress: Oversight and Implementation, by Claudia Copeland. Table 1 shows the
original 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
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
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 FY1990 (September 30, 1990). Programs did not lapse, however, and Congress
has continued to appropriate funds to carry out the act. 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
Title II and Title VI provisions which authorize federal financial assistance for
municipal sewage treatment plant construction. The other is the regulatory
requirements, found throughout the act, that apply to industrial and municipal
dischargers.
The act 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 mandated greater pollutant cleanup than BPT by no later than March 31,
1989, generally requiring that industry use the “best available technology” (BAT) that
is economically achievable. BAT level controls generally focus on toxic substances.
Compliance extensions of as long as two years are available for industrial sources
utilizing innovative or alternative technology. Failure to meet statutory deadlines
could lead to enforcement action.
The act 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 act requires each state to establish
CRS-4
water quality standards for all bodies of water in the state. These standards serve as
the backup to federally set technology-based requirements by indicating where
additional pollutant controls are needed to achieve the overall goals of the act. 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 act). 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 act 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 act also provides support to train personnel who
operate and maintain wastewater treatment facilities.
Federal and State Responsibilities
Under this act, federal jurisdiction is broad, particularly regarding establishment
of national standards or effluent limitations. The Environmental Protection Agency
CRS-5
(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, petroleum refining, and others). Certain responsibilities can
be assumed by qualified states, in lieu of EPA, and this act, 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. Responsibilities under
the act which may be carried out by qualified states include authority to issue
discharge permits to industries and municipalities and to enforce permits. (As of
November 2008, 46 states had been authorized to administer 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 act’s pollution control requirements. Since that time Congress
has authorized $65 billion and appropriated more than $78 billion in CWA funds to
aid 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 survey
conducted periodically by EPA and the states. The most recent estimate, published
in 2008, indicated that $202.5 billion more would be required to build and upgrade
municipal wastewater treatment plants in the United States and for other types of
water quality improvement projects that are eligible for funding under the act, an 8%
increase over the previous estimate from four years earlier.
Under the Title 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 act,
Congress attempted to deal with that apparent conflict by extending federal aid for
wastewater treatment construction through FY1994, yet providing a transition
towards full state and local government responsibility for financing after that date.
Grants under the previous Title II program were authorized through FY1990. Under
Title VI of the act, grants to capitalize State Water Pollution Control Revolving
Funds, or loan programs, were authorized beginning in FY1989 to replace the Title
II grants. States contribute matching funds, and under the revolving loan fund
CRS-6
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 has been
easier for some than others. The new financing requirements have been a problem
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
municipal sewers and how cities will pay for costly remediation projects. In 2000,
Congress amended the act to authorize a two-year $1.5 billion grant program to help
cities reduce these wet weather flows. Authorization for that wet weather grant
program expired at the end of FY2003 and has not been renewed.
Permits, Regulations, and Enforcement
To achieve its objectives, the act 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 act’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program (authorized in Section 402 of the act). 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 no more than five years 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 act.
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 act, 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
act. EPA may delegate certain Section 404 permitting responsibility to qualified
states and has done so twice (Michigan and New Jersey). For some time, the act’s
CRS-7
wetlands permit program has been 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
permits or other regulatory requirements under federal law. They are covered by
state programs for the management of runoff, under Section 319 of the act.
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, 33 U.S.C. §§140145, regulates the intentional disposal of wastes into ocean waters.) EPA also
provides guidance on technologies that will achieve BPT, BAT, and other effluent
limitations.
The NPDES permit, containing effluent limitations on what may be discharged
by a source, is the act’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 act — for negligent or
knowing violations — of as much as $50,000 per day, three years’ imprisonment, 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 act. EPA, working with the Army Corps of Engineers, also has responsibility
for enforcing against entities who fail to obtain or comply with a Section 404 permit.
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 act.
CRS-8
Selected References
Hamilton, Pixie, Timothy Miller, and Donna Myers. “Water Quality in the Nation’s
Streams and Aquifers — Overview of Selected Findings, 1991-2001.” U.S.
Geological Survey Circular 1265. May 2004.
Lavelle, Marianne. “Water Woes.” U.S. News & World Report. June 4, 2007. pp.
37-53.
U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Trends in Public Spending on Transportation
and Water Infrastructure, 1956 to 2004. August 2007. Pub. No. 2880. 38 p.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 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 2004, Report to Congress. January 2008.
266 p.
——. Clean Water State Revolving Fund Programs 2006 Annual Report. March
2007. EPA-832-R-07-001. 26 p.
——. National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress, 2002 Reporting Cycle.
October 2007. EPA-841-R-07-001. 39 p.
U.S. Government Accountability 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-9
Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act
(codified generally as 33 U.S.C., Chapter 26, Sections 1251-1387)
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
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
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. 121a
Sec. 201
Sec. 202
Sec. 203
Sec. 204
Sec. 205
Sec. 206
Sec. 207
Sec. 208
Sec. 209
Sec. 210
CRS-10
33 U.S.C.
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
Sewage collection systems
Definitions
Loan guarantees for construction of treatment
works
Public information on water recycling, reuse
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
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
Clean Water Act
(as amended)
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
CRS-11
33 U.S.C.
1344
1345
1346
Section Title
Permits for dredged or fill material
Disposal of sewage sludge
Coastal recreation water quality monitoring
and notification
Subchapter V 1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1372
1373
1374
General Provisions
Administration
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
Clean Water Act
(as amended)
Sec. 404
Sec. 405
Sec. 406
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
Sec. 501
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
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.
a. 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
Congressional Research Service
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................1
Background ................................................................................................................................2
Overview ....................................................................................................................................2
Federal and State Responsibilities .........................................................................................4
Titles II and VI—Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction ................................................4
Permits, Regulations, and Enforcement .......................................................................................5
Selected References ....................................................................................................................7
Tables
Table 1. Clean Water Act and Major Amendments .......................................................................1
Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act ..........................................................8
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 11
Congressional Research Service
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 act 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 Laws: Summaries of Major
Statutes Administered by the EPA, coordinated by Bonnie C. Gitlin. 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.1 Table 1 shows the original
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
P.L. 80-845
(Act of June 30, 1948)
1956
Water Pollution Control Act of 1956
P.L. 84-660
(Act of July 9, 1956)
1961
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
P.L. 87-88
1965
Water Quality Act of 1965
P.L. 89-234
1966
Clean Water Restoration Act
P.L. 89-753
1970
Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
P.L. 91-224, Part I
1972
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
P.L. 92-500
1977
Clean Water Act of 1977
P.L. 95-217
1981
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Amendments
P.L. 97-117
1987
Water Quality Act of 1987
P.L. 100-4
Authorizations for appropriations to support the law generally expired at the end of FY1990
(September 30, 1990). Programs did not lapse, however, and Congress has continued to
appropriate funds to carry out the act. 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.
1
For example, see CRS Report R40098, Water Quality Issues in the 111th Congress: Oversight and Implementation, by
Claudia Copeland.
Congressional Research Service
1
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
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 time-consuming 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.
Overview
The Clean Water Act (CWA) today consists of two major parts, one being the Title II and Title VI
provisions which authorize federal financial assistance for municipal sewage treatment plant
construction. The other is the regulatory requirements, found throughout the act, that apply to
industrial and municipal dischargers.
The act 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
Congressional Research Service
2
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
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 mandated greater pollutant cleanup than BPT by no later than March 31, 1989, generally
requiring that industry use the “best available technology” (BAT) that is economically achievable.
BAT level controls generally focus on toxic substances. Compliance extensions of as long as two
years are available for industrial sources utilizing innovative or alternative technology. Failure to
meet statutory deadlines could lead to enforcement action.
The act 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, Regulations, 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 act requires each state to establish water quality standards for all bodies of water in the state.
These standards serve as the backup to federally set technology-based requirements by indicating
where additional pollutant controls are needed to achieve the overall goals of the act. 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 more than 44,000 U.S. waters are impaired and require preparation 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.
Congressional Research Service
3
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
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 act). 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 act 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 act also
provides support to train personnel who operate and maintain wastewater treatment facilities.
Federal and State Responsibilities
Under this act, 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, petroleum refining, and
others). Certain responsibilities can be assumed by qualified states, in lieu of EPA, and this act,
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. Responsibilities under the act which
may be carried out by qualified states include authority to issue discharge permits to industries
and municipalities and to enforce permits. (As of April 2010, 46 states had been authorized to
administer this permit program; EPA issues discharge permits in the remaining states—Idaho,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico—and the District of Columbia.) 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 act’s pollution control
requirements. Since that time Congress has authorized $65 billion and appropriated more than
$78 billion in CWA funds to aid wastewater treatment plant construction. Grants are allocated
among the states according to a complex statutory formula that combines two factors: state
Congressional Research Service
4
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
population and an estimate of municipal sewage treatment funding needs derived from a survey
conducted periodically by EPA and the states. The most recent estimate, published in 2008,
indicated that $202.5 billion more would be required to build and upgrade municipal wastewater
treatment plants in the United States and for other types of water quality improvement projects
that are eligible for funding under the act, an 8% increase over the previous estimate from four
years earlier.
Under the Title 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 act, Congress attempted to deal with that apparent
conflict by extending federal aid for wastewater treatment construction through FY1994, yet
providing a transition towards full state and local government responsibility for financing after
that date. Grants under the previous Title II program were authorized through FY1990. Under
Title VI of the act, grants to capitalize State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds, or loan
programs, were authorized beginning in FY1989 to replace the 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 has been easier for some than others. The new financing requirements have been a
problem 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 municipal sewers and how cities will pay for costly
remediation projects. In 2000, Congress amended the act to authorize a two-year $1.5 billion
grant program to help cities reduce these wet weather flows. Authorization for that wet weather
grant program expired at the end of FY2003 and has not been renewed.
Permits, Regulations, and Enforcement
To achieve its objectives, the act 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 act’s National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program (authorized in Section 402 of the act).
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 no more
than five years 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
Congressional Research Service
5
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
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 act.
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 act, 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 act. EPA may
delegate certain Section 404 permitting responsibility to qualified states and has done so twice
(Michigan and New Jersey). For some time, the act’s wetlands permit program has been 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 permits or other regulatory
requirements under federal law. They are covered by state programs for the management of
runoff, under Section 319 of the act.
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, 33 U.S.C. §§1401-45, regulates the intentional disposal of
wastes into ocean waters.) EPA also provides guidance on technologies that will achieve BPT,
BAT, and other effluent limitations.
The NPDES permit, containing effluent limitations on what may be discharged by a source, is the
act’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
act—for negligent or knowing violations—of as much as $50,000 per day, three years’
imprisonment, 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 act. EPA, working with the Army
Corps of Engineers, also has responsibility for enforcing against entities who fail to obtain or
comply with a Section 404 permit.
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
Congressional Research Service
6
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
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 act.
Selected References
Hamilton, Pixie, Timothy Miller, and Donna Myers. “Water Quality in the Nation’s Streams and
Aquifers—Overview of Selected Findings, 1991-2001.” U.S. Geological Survey Circular
1265. May 2004.
Lavelle, Marianne. “Water Woes.” U.S. News & World Report. June 4, 2007. pp. 37-53.
U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Trends in Public Spending on Transportation and Water
Infrastructure, 1956 to 2004. August 2007. Pub. No. 2880. 38 p.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 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 2004, Report to Congress. January 2008. 266 p.
——. Clean Water State Revolving Fund Programs 2008 Annual Report. March 2009. EPA-83209-001. 28 p.
——. National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress for the 2004 Reporting Cycle.
January 2009. EPA-841-R-08-001. 37 p.
U.S. Government Accountability 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. GAO02-764. August 2002. 79 p.
Congressional Research Service
7
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act
(codified generally as 33 U.S.C., Chapter 26, Sections 1251-1387)
33 U.S.C.
Section Title
Clean Water Act
(as amended)
Subchapter I -
Research and Related Programs
1251
Declaration of goals and policy
Sec. 101
1252
Comprehensive programs for water pollution control
Sec. 102
1253
Interstate cooperation and uniform laws
Sec. 103
1254
Research, investigations, training and information
Sec. 104
1255
Grants for research and development
Sec. 105
1256
Grants for pollution control programs
Sec. 106
1257
Mine water pollution control demonstrations
Sec. 107
1258
Pollution control in the Great Lakes
Sec. 108
1259
Training grants and contracts
Sec. 109
1260
Applications for training grants or contracts;
allocations of grants or contracts
Sec. 110
1261
Award of scholarships
Sec. 111
1262
Definitions and authorizations
Sec. 112
1263
Alaska village demonstration project
Sec. 113
1264
Lake Tahoe study
Sec. 114
1265
In-place toxic pollutants
Sec. 115
1266
Hudson River PCB reclamation demonstration project
Sec. 116
1267
Chesapeake Bay
Sec. 117
1268
Great Lakes
Sec. 118
1269
Long Island Sound
Sec. 119
1270
Lake Champlain Basin program
Sec. 120
1273
Lake Pontchartrain Basin
Sec. 121
1274
Wet weather watershed pilot projects
Sec. 122
Subchapter II -
Grants for Construction of Treatment Works
1281
Purpose
Sec. 201
1282
Federal share
Sec. 202
1283
Plans, specifications, estimates, and payments
Sec. 203
1284
Limitations and conditions
Sec. 204
1285
Allotment
Sec. 205
1286
Reimbursement and advanced construction
Sec. 206
1287
Authorization
Sec. 207
1288
Areawide waste treatment management
Sec. 208
1289
Basin planning
Sec. 209
Congressional Research Service
8
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
33 U.S.C.
Section Title
Clean Water Act
(as amended)
1290
Annual survey
Sec. 210
1291
Sewage collection systems
Sec. 211
1292
Definitions
Sec. 212
1293
Loan guarantees for construction of treatment works
Sec. 213
1294
Public information on water recycling, reuse
Sec. 214
1295
Requirements for American materials
Sec. 215
1296
Determination of priority
Sec. 216
1297
Cost-effectiveness guidelines
Sec. 217
1298
Cost effectiveness
Sec. 218
1299
State certification of projects
Sec. 219
1300
Pilot program for alternative water source projects
Sec. 220
1301
Sewer overflow control grants
Sec. 221
Subchapter III -
Standards and Enforcement
1311
Effluent Limitations
Sec. 301
1312
Water quality related effluent limitations
Sec. 302
1313
Water quality standards and implementation plans
Sec. 303
1314
Information and guidelines
Sec. 304
1315
Water quality inventory
Sec. 305
1316
National standards of performance
Sec. 306
1317
Toxic and pretreatment effluent standards
Sec. 307
1318
Inspections, monitoring, and entry
Sec. 308
1319
Federal enforcement
Sec. 309
1320
International pollution abatement
Sec. 310
1321
Oil and hazardous substance liability
Sec. 311
1322
Marine sanitation devices
Sec. 312
1323
Federal facilities pollution control
Sec. 313
1324
Clean lakes
Sec. 314
1325
National study commission
Sec. 315
1326
Thermal discharges
Sec. 316
1327
Financing study
Sec. 317
1328
Aquaculture
Sec. 318
1329
Nonpoint source management programs
Sec. 319
1330
National estuary program
Sec. 320
Congressional Research Service
9
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
33 U.S.C.
Section Title
Clean Water Act
(as amended)
Subchapter IV -
Permits and Licenses
1341
Certification
Sec. 401
1342
National pollutant discharge elimination system
Sec. 402
1343
Ocean discharge criteria
Sec. 403
1344
Permits for dredged or fill material
Sec. 404
1345
Disposal of sewage sludge
Sec. 405
1346
Coastal recreation water quality monitoring and notification
Sec. 406
Subchapter V -
General Provisions
1361
Administration
Sec. 501
1362
General definitions
Sec. 502
1363
Water pollution control advisory board
Sec. 503
1364
Emergency powers
Sec. 504
1365
Citizen suits
Sec. 505
1366
Appearance
Sec. 506
1367
Employee protection
Sec. 507
1368
Federal procurement
Sec. 508
1369
Administrative procedure and judicial review
Sec. 509
1370
State authority
Sec. 510
1371
Other affected authority
Sec. 511
1372
Separability
Sec. 512
1372
Labor standards
Sec. 513
1373
Public health agency coordination
Sec. 514
1374
Effluent standards and water quality information advisory committee
Sec. 515
1375
Reports to Congress
Sec. 516
1376
General authorization
Sec. 517
1377
Indian tribes
Sec. 518
1251 note
Short title
Sec. 519
Subchapter VI -
State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds
1381
Grants to states for establishment of revolving funds
Sec. 601
1382
Capitalization grant agreements
Sec. 602
1383
Water pollution control revolving loan funds
Sec. 603
1384
Allotment of funds
Sec. 604
1385
Corrective action
Sec. 605
Congressional Research Service
10
Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
33 U.S.C.
Section Title
Clean Water Act
(as amended)
1386
Audits, reports, and fiscal controls; intended use plan
Sec. 606
1387
Authorization of appropriations
Sec. 607
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.
Author Contact Information
Claudia Copeland
Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy
ccopeland@crs.loc.gov, 7-7227
Congressional Research Service
11