Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

name redacted

Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy

October 18, 2016

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

RL30030

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 Originally enacted in 1948, it was totally revised by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 dimensions. 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 statute without discussing its

implementation. Other CRS reports discuss implementation, including CRS Report R42883,

Water Quality Issues in the 113th Congress: An Overview, 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, that is, wastes

discharged by industrial and municipal facilities from discrete sources such as pipes and outfalls.

Amendments to the law in that year authorized measures to address nonpoint source pollution

(runoff from farm lands, forests, construction sites, and urban areas), which is estimated to

represent more than 50% of the nation’s remaining water pollution problems. The act also

prohibits discharge of oil and hazardous substances into U.S. waters.

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 is based on 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 are repaid to states, to be available for future construction in other communities.

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

Tables

Table 1. Clean Water Act and Major Amendments ......................................................................... 1

Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act ............................................................ 7

Contacts

Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 10

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 and 2014.

This report presents a summary of the law, describing the statute. It is excerpted from a larger

document, CRS Report RL30798, Environmental Laws: Summaries of Major Statutes

Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. Many details and secondary provisions

are omitted here, and even some major components are only briefly mentioned. Further, this

report describes the statute, while other CRS products discuss implementation issues.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

2014

Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (Title V)

P.L. 113-121

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, CRS Report R43867, Water Quality Issues in the 114th Congress: An Overview.

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 that 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 parts, broadly speaking, one being the Title II

and Title VI provisions, which authorize federal financial assistance for municipal sewage

treatment plant construction. The other is 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,

Congressional Research Service

2

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

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 that 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 also 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 (see below).

The CWA 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

issued by states or EPA (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

that 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 40,000 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.

Prior to the 1987 amendments, programs in the Clean Water Act were primarily directed at point

source pollution, wastes discharged from discrete and identifiable industrial and municipal

sources, such as pipes and other outfalls. In contrast, except for general planning activities, little

attention had been given to nonpoint source pollution (runoff of stormwater or snowmelt 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

Congressional Research Service

3

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

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.

The CWA provides for special regulation of the discharge of oil or hazardous substances, because

of the potentially catastrophic effects of such events on public health and welfare. Section 311

prohibits the discharge of oil or hazardous substances into U.S. waters. It also requires higher

standards of care in the management and movement of oil, including a requirement for spill

prevention plans; it enables the government to recover the costs of cleaning up oil and hazardous

substance discharges; and it provides for penalties for such discharges. In 1990, Congress enacted

the Oil Pollution Act, which partially amended Section 311 and established a comprehensive

system for the cleanup of oil spills, adding a mechanism to impose liability for such spills.2

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

authorizes 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 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 that may be carried out by qualified states include

authority to issue discharge permits to industries and municipalities and to enforce permits; 46

states have been authorized to administer this permit program. EPA issues discharge permits in

the remaining states—Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico—the District of

Columbia, and most U.S. territories. In addition, as noted above, all 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

2

P.L. 101-380; 33 U.S.C. §2701 et seq.

Congressional Research Service

4

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

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

$94 billion in CWA funds to aid wastewater treatment plant construction and other eligible

projects. 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 indicated that, as of 2012, $271 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, a 20% decrease from the

previous estimate from four years earlier. According to EPA, states’ needs can change for a

variety of reasons, such as actual changes in needs, availability of project documentation, and

ability to fund and staff data collection and entry efforts.

Under the Title II construction grants program established in 1972, federal grants were made for

several types of projects 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 balance between assisting municipal funding needs, which remain

large, and the impact of assistance programs such as the Clean Water Act’s on federal spending

and budget deficits. In the 1987 amendments, Congress balanced these competing priorities 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 are repaid to the state, to be available for project loans to other communities.

All states now have functioning loan programs, but the shift from federal grants to loans was

easier for some than others. The new financing requirements have been a challenge for some

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.

Permits, Regulations, and Enforcement

To achieve its objectives, the CWA embodies the concept that all discharges into the nation’s

waters are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit. Thus, more than 65,000

conventional 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). NPDES permits also are required for more than 150,000

industrial and municipal sources of stormwater discharges. 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 where needed for water quality

protection). Permits specify the effluent limitations a discharger must meet, and the deadline for

compliance. Sources also are required to maintain records and to carry out effluent monitoring

Congressional Research Service

5

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

activities. Permits are issued for up to 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 wetlands permit program has been one of

the most controversial parts of the law. Some who wish to undertake development projects in

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

are authorized to 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.3) 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.

3

CRS Report RS20028, Ocean Dumping Act: A Summary of the Law, by n( ame redacted)

Congressional Research Service

.

6

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

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 or permit requirement. Citizens also may bring suit

against the Administrator of EPA for failure to carry out a nondiscretionary duty under the act.

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

Congressional Research Service

7

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

33 U.S.C.

Section Title

Clean Water Act

(as amended)

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

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

Congressional Research Service

8

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

33 U.S.C.

Section Title

Clean Water Act

(as amended)

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

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

Congressional Research Service

9

Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law

33 U.S.C.

Section Title

Clean Water Act

(as amended)

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

1386

Audits, reports, and fiscal controls; intended use plan

Sec. 606

1387

Authorization of appropriations

Sec. 607

1388

Requirements

Sec. 608

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

(name re dacted)

Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy

-redacted-@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Congressional Research Service

10

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in

the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without

permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a

third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public

understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in

connection with CRS' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

copyright on any CRS report we have republished.