Clean Water Act: A Summary of the Law
Clean Water Act:
A Summary of the Law
Updated November 17, 2008
Claudia Copeland
Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
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 Originally enacted in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 discussing its implementation. Other CRS reports discuss implementation,th
including CRS Report RL33800, Water Quality Issues in the 110 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
In troduction ......................................................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
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 implementationth
concerns. For example, see CRS Report RL33800, Water Quality Issues in the 110
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)
YearActPublic Law
1948Federal Water Pollution Control ActP.L. 80-845
(Act of June 30, 1948)
1956Water Pollution Control Act of 1956P.L. 84-660
(Act of July 9, 1956)
1961Federal Water Pollution Control Act P.L. 87-88
Amendments
1965Water Quality Act of 1965P.L. 89-234
1966Clean Water Restoration ActP.L. 89-753
1970Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970P.L. 91-224, Part I
1972Federal Water Pollution Control Act P.L. 92-500
Amendments
1977Clean Water Act of 1977P.L. 95-217
1981Municipal Wastewater Treatment P.L. 97-117
Construction Grants Amendments
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 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 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
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
(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
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
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
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.
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.
——. Clean Water State Revolving Fund Programs 2006 Annual Report. March
——. 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.
Table 2. Major U.S. Code Sections of the Clean Water Act
(codified generally as 33 U.S.C., Chapter 26, Sections 1251-1387)
Clean Water Act
Subchapter I - Research and Related Programs
1251Declaration of goals and policySec. 101
1252Comprehensive programs for water pollutionSec. 102
control
1253Interstate cooperation and uniform lawsSec. 103
1254Research, investigations, training andSec. 104
information
1255Grants for research and developmentSec. 105
1256Grants for pollution control programsSec. 106
1257Mine water pollution control demonstrationsSec. 107
1258Pollution control in the Great LakesSec. 108
1259Training grants and contractsSec. 109
1260Applications for training grants or contracts;Sec. 110
allocations of grants or contracts
1261Award of scholarshipsSec. 111
1262Definitions and authorizationsSec. 112
1263Alaska village demonstration projectSec. 113
1264Lake Tahoe studySec. 114
1265In-place toxic pollutantsSec. 115
1266Hudson River PCB reclamationSec. 116
demonstration project
1267Chesapeake BaySec. 117
1268Great LakesSec. 118
1269Long Island SoundSec. 119
1270Lake Champlain Basin programSec. 120
1273Lake Pontchartrain BasinSec. 121
Subchapter II -Grants for Construction of Treatment Works
1281PurposeSec. 201
1282Federal shareSec. 202
1283Plans, specifications, estimates, and paymentsSec. 203
1284Limitations and conditionsSec. 204
1285AllotmentSec. 205
1286Reimbursement and advanced constructionSec. 206
1287AuthorizationSec. 207
1288Areawide waste treatment managementSec. 208
1289Basin planningSec. 209
Clean Water Act
1291Sewage collection systemsSec. 211
1292DefinitionsSec. 212
1293Loan guarantees for construction of treatmentSec. 213
works
1294Public information on water recycling, reuseSec. 214
1295Requirements for American materialsSec. 215
1296Determination of prioritySec. 216
1297Cost-effectiveness guidelinesSec. 217
1298Cost effectivenessSec. 218
1299State certification of projectsSec. 219
1300 Pilot program for alternative water source projects Sec. 220
1301Sewer overflow control grantsSec. 221
Subchapter III - Standards and Enforcement
1311Effluent LimitationsSec. 301
1312Water quality related effluent limitationsSec. 302
1313Water quality standards and implementationSec. 303
plans
1314Information and guidelinesSec. 304
1315Water quality inventorySec. 305
1316National standards of performanceSec. 306
1317Toxic and pretreatment effluent standardsSec. 307
1318Inspections, monitoring, and entrySec. 308
1319Federal enforcementSec. 309
1320International pollution abatementSec. 310
1321Oil and hazardous substance liabilitySec. 311
1322Marine sanitation devicesSec. 312
1323Federal facilities pollution controlSec. 313
1324Clean lakesSec. 314
1325National study commissionSec. 315
1326Thermal dischargesSec. 316
1327Financing studySec. 317
1328AquacultureSec. 318
1329Nonpoint source management programsSec. 319
1330National estuary programSec. 320
Subchapter IV -Permits and Licenses
1341CertificationSec. 401
1342National pollutant discharge eliminationSec. 402
system
Clean Water Act
1344Permits for dredged or fill materialSec. 404
1345Disposal of sewage sludgeSec. 405
1346 Coastal recreation water quality monitoring Sec. 406
and notification
Subchapter V - General Provisions
1361AdministrationSec. 501
1362General definitionsSec. 502
1363Water pollution control advisory boardSec. 503
1364Emergency powersSec. 504
1365Citizen suitsSec. 505
1366AppearanceSec. 506
1367Employee protectionSec. 507
1368Federal procurementSec. 508
1369Administrative procedure and judicial reviewSec. 509
1370State authoritySec. 510
1371Other affected authoritySec. 511
1372SeparabilitySec. 512
1372Labor standardsSec. 513
1373Public health agency coordinationSec. 514
1374Effluent standards and water qualitySec. 515
information advisory committee
1375Reports to CongressSec. 516
1376General authorizationSec. 517
1377Indian tribesSec. 518
1251 noteShort titleSec. 519
Subchapter VI - State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds
1381Grants to states for establishment ofSec. 601
revolving funds
1382Capitalization grant agreementsSec. 602
1383Water pollution control revolving loan fundsSec. 603
1384Allotment of fundsSec. 604
1385Corrective actionSec. 605
1386Audits, reports, and fiscal controls; intendedSec. 606
use plan
1387Authorization of appropriationsSec. 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