Background

The National Office is pleased to provide you with this Legislative Alert, which contains an analysis and overview of the Beach Protection Act of 2007 (H.R. 2537).  Introduced by Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.), the bill would reauthorize the Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act of 2000 for fiscal years (FY) 2008-2012.  On October 31, the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee unanimously approved (H.R. 2537) and ordered the bill reported to the full House.

Member Agency Perspectives Sought
Given the increased attention being paid to this legislation, NACWA is seeking member comment on what, if any, impact the legislation could have on member agency operations.  NACWA is particularly interested in member feedback on the areas where H.R. 2537 would alter the original BEACH Act by:

• Expanding authority to include source tracking of beach contamination by the states through the use of DNA testing methods to clarify whether the contamination originates primarily from human sewage, animal runoff, or elsewhere; and
• Mandating the inclusion of rapid testing methods in EPA’s revised or new water quality criteria for pathogens and pathogen indicators.

NACWA’s support for the legislation has not been sought, but Committee staff is open to the Association providing input on issues or concerns with the legislation.  Accordingly, please submit any comments to Byron DeLuke, NACWA’s Legislative Affairs Manager, by November 21, at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

H.R. 2537 Boosts Funding; Could Impact Related Litigation

Under the original BEACH Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to work with states to ensure they use the latest science to set up comprehensive monitoring and notification programs for beach waters in order to provide up-to-date information on the condition of all public beaches.  The bill authorizes grants annually to the states to help set up these programs.

H.R. 2537 would increase the grants made to states from $30 million annually to $40 million.  The purpose of these grants would be expanded to require source tracking of beach contamination, enhanced public notification of beach contamination through a publicly accessible and searchable global information system database, and the development of measures to ensure closures or advisories are issued within 24 hours after the state verifies that coastal waters do not meet water quality standards for pathogens.

H.R. 2537 Would Require New Rapid Testing Methods

The reauthorization legislation also requires EPA to approve new rapid testing methods for inclusion in the new or revised water quality criteria for pathogens and pathogen indicators.  Language in the bill does not however define what specific testing methods are to be used, only that the term ‘rapid testing method’ means a method of testing for which results are available within two hours.  Also, the new rapid testing techniques are not to be used solely by EPA when publishing new or revised water quality criteria, but are instead meant to be included alongside traditional methods for testing ambient water quality along the nation’s beaches.

The inclusion of rapid testing methods in H.R. 2537 could also influence some of the issues being litigated in the related NRDC v. EPA case, in which NACWA is an intervener.  With the outcome of the litigation still unclear, Congress would, in effect, bypass the court by telling EPA they are to include rapid testing methods in the revised water quality criteria.  While this likely would not affect the deadlines and timetable at issue in the litigation, if the legislation should pass before the litigation is complete, a court order would have to take into account the requirement to include new rapid testing methods.

Companion Legislation Is Slow to Gain Support in the Senate

In May, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) introduced companion legislation (S. 1506) in the Senate.  S. 1506 authorizes $60 million annually for grants, but is otherwise identical to the House bill.  It has been referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), but has not been scheduled for consideration.  Currently, the bill has only one cosponsor, and NACWA has learned during discussions with Sen. Lautenberg’s staff that there is no timetable for Senate action.  NACWA will continue to work with staff in both the House and Senate to ensure any member concerns are addressed and funding levels are approved at $60 million.

NACWA thanks you for your perspective on these issues, and again, please feel free to contact Byron DeLuke at bdeluke@nacwa.org This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it in advance of the Nov. 21 comment deadline with any questions or concerns.