H.R. 202: To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to limit citizens suits against publicly owned treatment works, to provide for defenses, to extend the period of a permit, to limit attorneys fees, and for other purposes.

Introduced:
Jan 04, 2013
Status:
Referred to Committee
Prognosis
1% chance of being enacted
Track this bill
Sponsor
Tom McClintock
Representative for California's 4th congressional district
Party
Republican
Text
Read Text »
Last Updated
Jan 04, 2013
Length
6 pages
Related Bills
H.R. 3544 (112th) was a previous version of this bill.

Referred to Committee
Last Action: Dec 01, 2011

 
Status

This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on January 4, 2013, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Progress
Introduced Jan 04, 2013
Referred to Committee Jan 04, 2013
Reported by Committee ...
Passed House ...
Passed Senate ...
Signed by the President ...
Prognosis

4% chance of getting past committee.
1% chance of being enacted.

Only 11% of bills made it past committee and only about 3% were enacted in 2011–2013. [show factors | methodology]

 
Summary

No summaries available.

Cosponsors
none
Committees

House Transportation and Infrastructure

Water Resources and Environment

The committee chair determines whether a bill will move past the committee stage.

 
Primary Source

THOMAS.gov (The Library of Congress)

GovTrack gets most information from THOMAS, which is updated generally one day after events occur. Activity since the last update may not be reflected here. Data comes via the congress project.

Widget

Get a bill status widget for your website »

Citation

Click a format for a citation suggestion:

Notes

H.R. stands for House of Representatives bill.

A bill must be passed by both the House and Senate in identical form and then be signed by the president to become law.

The bill’s title was written by its sponsor.

GovTrack’s Bill Summary

We don’t have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress Summary

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.


1/4/2013--Introduced.
Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to prohibit a citizen suit from being commenced against a publicly owned treatment works (POTW):
(1) to enforce an effluent standard or limitation unless the POTW is in significant non-compliance as defined in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) guidance document entitled "A General Design for SNC Redefinition Enhancement in PCS," or
(2) that is in significant non-compliance based on a manual designation as defined by such guidance document.
Prohibits liability for an unlawful discharge of a pollutant from a POTW for a person who can establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the immediate cause of such discharge and any damages was:
(1) an act of God;
(2) an act of war; or
(3) an act or omission of a third party other than an employee or agent of such person or one whose act or omission occurs in connection with a contractual relationship with such person, if such person exercised due care and took precautions against foreseeable acts or omissions of such third party and the consequences that could foreseeably result from such acts or omissions.
Requires the Administrator of EPA or a state to provide a 60-day waiting period between the notice of a violation of such Act by a POTW and the issuance of a civil penalty. Prohibits the Administrator from assessing a penalty for a violation if the POTW submits a viable plan for correcting the non-compliance within such period and thereafter implements such plan.
Requires any permit issued to the owner or operator of a POTW to discharge a pollutant under such Act to have a 15-year (currently five-year) term. Limits attorney fees with respect to actions involving POTWs to the prevailing fees in the community. Requires any new or increased treatment requirement associated with a permit issued to the owner or operator of a POTW to discharge a pollutant under such Act to be subject to a cost-benefit analysis.

House Republican Conference Summary

The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.


No summary available.

House Democratic Caucus Summary

The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

Use the comment space below for discussion of the merits of H.R. 202 with other GovTrack users.
Your comments are not read by Congressional staff.

comments powered by Disqus