B-166506.OM, AUG 8, 1980

B-166506.OM, AUG 8, 1980

SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S ROLE UNDER SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT - B-166506-O.M.

DIRECTOR, CED:

THIS RESPONDS TO YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AUTHORITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA) TO IMPLEMENT AND ENFORCE FULL SCALE SAFE DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS UNDER THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT (ACT), PUB. L. NO. 93-523, APPROVED DECEMBER 16, 1974, 88 STAT. 1661 (AS AMENDED IN 1977 AND 1979, LOCATED AT 42 U.S.C. SECS. 300F ET SEQ.) IN STATES WHICH HAVE NOT ASSUMED PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY (KNOWN AS "PRIMACY") UNDER THE ACT'S PROVISIONS.

EPA IS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH NATIONAL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS. THE ACT ANTICIPATES EPA'S PROVIDING "ASSISTANCE TO STATES IN CREATING AND SUSTAINING PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS SUPERVISION PROGRAMS ***" H.R. REP. NO. 96-186, 96TH CONG., 1ST SESS. 1 (1979). THIS ASSISTANCE WILL BE PROVIDED THROUGH TECHNICAL ADVICE AND GRANTS FOR STATES WILLING TO ASSUME PRIMACY. FOR THE STATES TO ASSUME THIS RESPONSIBILITY, THEY MUST COMPLY WITH EPA'S REGULATORY PROGRAM, THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHICH ARE MORE EXACTING THAN BUT TOTALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE STATUTE'S BASIC REQUIREMENTS. FOR EXAMPLE, EPA REQUIRES STATES TO APPROVE THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR ANY NEW DRINKING WATER CONSTRUCTION. AS OF MAY 1979, AT LEAST 40 STATES HAD ASSUMED PRIMACY.

WHILE THE ACT IS EXPLICIT ABOUT THE STATES' AND EPA'S ROLES IN STATES WHICH HAVE ASSUMED PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY, THE ACT DOES NOT CLEARLY DEFINE WHAT RESPONSIBILITY EPA HAS IN THOSE STATES WHICH DO NOT ASSUME PRIMACY. EPA'S POSITION IS THAT IN ORDER TO ASSURE THAT ALL DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS ARE SAFE, IT HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY AND THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE FULL PRIMACY PROGRAMS IN NON-PRIMACY STATES.

FOR THE REASONS DISCUSSED BELOW, WE REMAIN OF THE OPINION THAT EPA IS NOT REQUIRED TO ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR IMPLEMENTING SAFE DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS IN NON-PRIMACY STATES. ALTHOUGH WE ARE ALSO INCLINED TO THE VIEW THAT THE AGGREGATE OF EPA'S NUMEROUS PARTICULAR AUTHORITIES UNDER THE ACT IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY BROAD TO CLEARLY PROVIDE IT AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THAT RESPONSIBILITY, THE ISSUE IS VERY CLOSE, AND IN VIEW OF EPA'S CONTRARY POSITION, WE CANNOT DEFINITIVELY SAY THAT ITS ASSUMPTION OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY IS UNWARRANTED.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS

CONGRESS ENACTED THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT TO "ASSURE THAT WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS SERVING THE PUBLIC MEET MINIMUM NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH." H. REP. NO. 93-1185, 93D CONG. 2D SESS. 1 (1974) (HOUSE REPORT). THE CONGRESS INTENDED THAT STATES AND PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS TAKE PRINCIPAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENSURING THAT PROTECTION. ID. AT 21. MANY AUTHORITIES WERE ALSO ASSIGNED TO EPA, INCLUDING THE DUTY TO ESTABLISH NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS (DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS) APPLICABLE, WITH MINOR EXCEPTIONS, "TO EACH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM IN EACH STATE." 42 U.S.C. SEC. 300G.

UNDER THE ACT, A STATE CAN ASSUME PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENFORCING DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS WHEN THE ADMINISTRATOR OF EPA (ADMINISTRATOR) DETERMINES THAT THE STATE HAS MET FIVE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, 42 U.S.C. SEC. 300G-2, AND TEN ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS. 40 C.F.R. SEC. 142.10 (1978). IF A STATE FAILS TO ENFORCE A DRINKING WATER REGULATION WHEN IT HAS PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY, THE ADMINISTRATOR IS REQUIRED TO UNDERTAKE VARIOUS NOTICE MEASURES AND PROVIDE ADVICE AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE STATE AND PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM AS MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO BRING THE SYSTEM INTO COMPLIANCE AS NEARLY AS POSSIBLE. 42 U.S.C. SEC. 300G 3(A)(1)(A)(II),(B). IF THE STATE FAILS TO TAKE APPROPRIATE CORRECTIVE ACTION, THE ADMINISTRATOR MAY COMMENCE A CIVIL ACTION IN A UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT TO REQUIRE COMPLIANCE.

ADDITIONALLY, A STATE WITH PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY MAY GRANT VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS TO DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS. ID. SECS. 300G- 4(A), 300G-5(A). A STATE IS REQUIRED TO PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE ADMINISTRATOR OF ALL VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS GRANTED BY IT, ID. SECS. 300G-4(A)(1)(C), 300G-5(C), AND THE ADMINISTRATOR IS REQUIRED TO REVIEW THEM PERIODICALLY. IF THE ADMINISTRATOR FINDS THAT, IN A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF INSTANCES, A STATE IS ABUSING ITS DISCRETION IN GRANTING VARIANCES OR EXEMPTIONS, HE MUST NOTIFY THE STATE, AND, AFTER A HEARING, EITHER RESCIND THE FINDING OF ABUSE OF DISCRETION OR PROMULGATE VARIANCE OR EXEMPTION REVOCATIONS OR TAKE OTHER ACTION DEEMED APPROPRIATE. ID. SECS. 300G-4(A)(1)(G)(I), 300G- 5(D)(2)(B).

THE ACT ALSO GRANTS THE EPA ADMINISTRATOR CERTAIN EMERGENCY POWERS. THOSE POWERS MAY BE EXERCISED WHEN THE ADMINISTRATOR RECEIVES INFORMATION THAT A CONTAMINANT PRESENT IN OR LIKELY TO ENTER A PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM MAY PRESENT AN IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL DANGER TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, AND STATE LOCAL AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT ACTED. ID. SEC. 3001. TO ABATE THIS CONDITION, THE ADMINISTRATOR MAY ISSUE ORDERS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND BRING COURT ACTIONS.

IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED AUTHORITIES, THE ADMINISTRATOR IS REQUIRED TO PROMULGATE GUIDELINES ESTABLISHING SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS OR TREATMENT TECHNIQUE REQUIREMENTS FOR VARIOUS CONTAMINANTS, ID. SEC. 300J- 3B(1) AND AUTHORIZED TO REQUIRE ANY PERSON WHO IS A SUPPLIER OF WATER, SUBJECT TO OR POSSIBLY SUBJECT TO A PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATION TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN RECORDS, MAKE REPORTS, CONDUCT MONITORING AND PROVIDE INFORMATION, ID. SEC. 300J-4(A). FURTHERMORE, THE ADMINISTRATOR ALSO IS AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT RESEARCH AND STUDIES, ID. SEC. 300J-1(A)(1), PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO STATES AND MUNICIPALITIES, ID. SEC. 300J- 1(A)(2)(A), MAKE EPA RESEARCH FACILITIES AVAILABLE, ID. SEC. 300J-1(B)(2), PROVIDE TRAINING AND MAKE GRANTS FOR PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS, ID. SEC. 300J-1(D), AND MAKE GRANTS TO STATES TO CARRY OUT PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM SUPERVISION PROGRAMS, ID. SEC. 300J-2.

IN STATES WHICH DO NOT QUALIFY FOR OR HAVE NOT ASSUMED PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY (NON-PRIMACY STATE), EPA IS AUTHORIZED TO GRANT VARIANCES, ID. SEC. 300G-4(A)(2), AND EXEMPTIONS, ID. SEC. 300G 5(F), AND TO ENTER AND INSPECT FACILITIES SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF THE ACT. ID. SEC. 300J-4(B)(1). WHEN THE ADMINISTRATOR FINDS PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS TO BE IN VIOLATION OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS, THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR MAY COMMENCE A CIVIL SUIT, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. ID. SEC. 300G-3(A)(2). IT DOES NOT, HOWEVER, AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR DIRECTLY TO ORDER CORRECTIVE ACTIONS EXCEPT IN EMERGENCIES.

EPA'S POSITION

IN RESPONDING TO OUR REQUEST FOR ITS COMMENTS, EPA CONCLUDED:

"THE ACT REQUIRES EPA TO ESTABLISH NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER AND ENSURE THE ENFORCEMENT OF THOSE STANDARDS. EPA HAS DETERMINED THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF A DRINKING WATER PROGRAM IS AN ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENT TO CARRYING OUT THE PURPOSES OF THE ACT. WE THEREFORE BELIEVE THAT EPA IS REQUIRED AS WELL AS AUTHORIZED BY THE ACT TO IMPLEMENT A DRINKING WATER PROGRAM IN NONPRIMACY STATES ... IN ORDER TO SATISFY CONGRESS' MANDATE TO EPA IN THE ACT."

EPA STATED FURTHER THAT IT EXERCISED ITS:

"AUTHORITY IN NONPRIMACY STATES BY EITHER WORKING WITH THE STATES OR FULFILLING THE ROLE OF THE STATES IN IMPLEMENTING A DRINKING WATER PROGRAM TO ENSURE ADEQUATE ENFORCEMENT OF THE REGULATIONS. OPERATING A MEANINGFUL DRINKING WATER REGULATORY PROGRAM OBVIOUSLY INVOLVES MAINTAINING AN INVENTORY OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS AND CONDUCTING SANITARY SURVEYS IN ORDER TO IDENTIFY THOSE SYSTEMS WITH EXISTING OR POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS OF THE MONITORING OR MCL REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATIONS. THE ACT CLEARLY AUTHORIZES EPA TO CARRY OUT SUCH INSPECTION AND RECORD KEEPING FUNCTIONS. SECTION 1445. WITHOUT ATTENTION TO THESE IMPORTANT DATA GATHERING FUNCTIONS THAT GENERATE INFORMATION ON EXISTING OR POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS, THERE COULD BE NO EFFECTIVE JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE REGULATIONS."

EPA ALSO ASSERTED:

"*** AS NOTED ABOVE, THE ENFORCEMENT ROLE UNDER THE ACT IS INTENDED TO IDENTIFY SYSTEMS WITH POTENTIAL PROBLEMS AND ENSURE CORRECTION OF THOSE PROBLEMS BEFORE A HUMAN HEALTH HAZARD EXISTS. IN THE ABSENCE OF EPA'S IMPLEMENTING OF A DRINKING WATER PROGRAM IN NONPRIMACY STATES, THERE WOULD BE NO AGENCY TO COLLECT AND REVIEW MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE DATA TO DETERMINE WHETHER THERE HAD BEEN ANY VIOLATIONS OF THE REGULATIONS. SUCH A SITUATION WOULD UNDERMINE ANY EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF THE NATIONAL REGULATIONS, MAKING A MOCKERY OF CONGRESS' INTENT THAT ALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS IN ALL STATES COMPLY WITH NATIONAL DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS.

"WE STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THE ELEMENTS SET OUT IN 40 CFR 142.10 ARE NECESSARY FOR AN EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM AND THAT EPA CLEARLY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT SUCH A PROGRAM IN A NONPRIMACY STATE."

MOREOVER, EPA RELIES ON STATEMENTS MADE BY SENATOR MUSKIE DURING FLOOR CONSIDERATION OF THE BILL EXTENDING THE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE ACT AND BY CONGRESSMAN ROGERS DURING HOUSE FLOOR DEBATE ON THE 1977 EXTENSION OF THE ACT. SENATOR MUSKIE STATED:

"THE HOUSE BILL PROVIDES SOMEWHAT HIGHER PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION LEVELS THAN DID THE SENATE BILL. THIS INCREMENT WILL GIVE EPA THE RESOURCES NECESSARY TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THE DRINKING WATER PROGRAM IN STATES WHICH HAVE NOT ASSUMED PRIMACY. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH CONGRESSIONAL INTENT. THIS LEGISLATION AUTHORIZES EPA TO ADMINISTER ALL ELEMENTS OF THE PROGRAM, INCLUDING ENFORCEMENT, MONITORING, INFORMATION COLLECTION, GRANTING OF VARIANCES AND EXCEPTIONS IN THE ABSENCE OF A STATE PROGRAM.

"THE 1962 PUBLIC HEALTH STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER WERE VOLUNTARY. THE 1974 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT MANDATED UNIFORM NATIONAL REGULATIONS. ENACTING THE 1974 ACT, THE CONGRESS INTENDED STATES TO ASSUME PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY, OR PRIMACY, ONCE MINIMUM STANDARDS HAD BEEN MET. MEETING NATIONAL STANDARDS IN THE ABSENCE OF STATE PRIMACY IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. IN SHORT, THE ADDED AUTHORIZATION PROVIDES NECESSARY OPERATING ROOM TO MANAGE THESE RESPONSIBILITIES EFFECTIVELY." CONG. REC., S11634 (DAILY ED. AUGUST 3, 1979).

AND CONGRESSMAN ROGERS SAID:

"IF A STATE DOES ATTAIN RESPONSIBILITY OVER ITS DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS, IT, RATHER THAN EPA, WILL HAVE THE PREROGATIVE OF REGULATING AND SUPERVISING STATE PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS. ***" 124 CONG. REC. H6855 (DAILY ED. JULY 12, (1977)).

DISCUSSION

IN GREAT MEASURE THE DIFFICULTY IN ASCERTAINING THE EXTENT OF EPA'S AUTHORITY IN NONPRIMACY STATES IS DUE TO THE AMBIGUITY OF THE ACT AND ITS LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. UNLIKE THE DETAILED ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY CONFERRED UPON EPA WHEN IT FINDS VIOLATIONS IN STATES WITH PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY, THE ONLY ENFORCEMENT MEASURE PROVIDED BY THE ACT IN NONPRIMACY STATES IS FOR THE EPA ADMINISTRATOR TO BRING CIVIL ACTIONS IN FEDERAL COURTS. IN OUR OPINION, THIS REMEDY, WITHOUT MORE, DOES NOT EXPLICITLY AUTHORIZE EPA TO IMPLEMENT DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS IN NONPRIMACY STATES.

ON THE OTHER HAND, IN ADDITION TO THE AUTHORITY TO BRING CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS, THE ACT PROVIDES EPA WITH THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS AND TO ENTER AND INSPECT FACILITIES SUBJECT TO THE ACT IN NONPRIMACY STATES, AMONG OTHER THINGS. WHILE IT IS A CLOSE QUESTION, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THESE AUTHORITIES CAN BE CONSTRUED COLLECTIVELY AS SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW EPA TO FULLY IMPLEMENT DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS IN NONPRIMACY STATES. IN VIEW OF EPA'S STRONG ASSERTION OF SUCH AUTHORITY, AND THE DEFERENCE TO BE ACCORDED ITS INTERPRETATION OF THE ACT, WE CANNOT SAY THAT ITS ACTIONS IN THIS INSTANCE ARE CLEARLY LEGALLY OBJECTIONABLE.

ALTHOUGH WE ALSO THINK THE ACT'S LEGISLATIVE HISTORY SUGGESTS THAT IT WAS NOT CONTEMPLATED THAT EPA WOULD IMPLEMENT DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS IN NONPRIMACY STATES, MANY OF THE PERTINENT STATEMENTS COULD ALSO BE CONSTRUED AS SHOWING THAT EPA WAS INTENDED TO HAVE SUCH AUTHORITY. FOR EXAMPLE, THE HOUSE REPORT ACCOMPANYING THE LEGISLATION STATED:

"IT IS THE COMMITTEE'S INTENT THAT STATES AND PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS TAKE THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR INSURING THE SAFETY OF THE NATION'S DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES. WHILE FEDERAL STANDARD SETTING AND BACK-UP ENFORCEMENT IS AUTHORIZED, THE COMMITTEE IS HOPEFUL THAT STATE AND FEDERAL COOPERATION WILL BE THE RULE AND THAT THE STATES WILL TAKE THE LEAD IN ADOPTING STANDARDS, REVIEWING COMPLIANCE STRATEGY, AND WHERE NECESSARY BRINGING ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS." HOUSE REPORT AT 21.

"WHILE THE COMMITTEE VIEWS THE PROBLEM OF UNSAFE DRINKING WATER AS A MATTER WHICH IS AND SHOULD BE PRIMARILY THE CONCERN OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THE COMMITTEE HAS DETERMINED THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALSO HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THE SAFETY OF THE WATER ITS CITIZENS DRINK. IN THE COMMITTEE'S VIEW, THIS RESPONSIBILITY ARISES FROM TWO MAIN FACTORS. FIRST, THE CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF UNHEALTHY DRINKING WATER ARE NOT CONFINED WITHIN THE BORDERS OF STATE OR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. SECOND, THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM OF UNSAFE DRINKING WATER, IN THE COMMITTEE'S VIEW, MUST BE FOUND IN A COOPERATIVE EFFORT IN WHICH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ASSISTS, REINFORCES, AND SETS STANDARDS FOR THE STATE AND LOCAL EFFORTS. ID. AT 8. * * * * *

"MOREOVER, IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT ADDITIONAL FEDERAL ASSISTANCE, RESEARCH, AND SUPPORT IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO ENABLE STATE AND LOCAL EFFORTS TO PROVIDE SAFE WATER TO BE SUCCESSFUL *** THE COMMITTEE FINDS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST BEAR A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY WITH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO ENSURE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH AND THE SAFETY OF DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES." ID. AT 9.

SIMILAR COMMENTS CAN BE FOUND IN THE SENATE REPORT. FOR EXAMPLE:

"UNDER S. 433, PRIME RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF DRINKING WATER WILL REMAIN WITH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL EXERCISE A NEW RESPONSIBILITY TO SET STANDARDS AND PROVIDE ASSISTANCE IN ORDER TO PROTECT PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES FROM CONTAMINATION. S. REP. NO. 93-231, 93D CONG. 1ST SESS. AT 1 (1973).

"THE STATES WILL BE PRIMARILY RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING THE STANDARDS WITH FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT IF THE STATES FAIL TO ACT OR IN CASES OF IMMINENT HAZARD." ID. AT 2.

"THE CONGRESS RECOGNIZES THE NEEDS OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR ASSISTANCE TO ASSURE QUALITY WATER FOR DRINKING AND OTHER HUMAN USES AND THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUPPLY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, RESEARCH, MONITORING, AND TESTING INFORMATION AS WELL AS ASSISTANCE TO THE STATES IN OPERATING DRINKING WATER SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS." ID. AT 4.

ASIDE FROM THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY ACCOMPANYING THE PASSAGE OF THE ACT, WE ALSO AGREE THAT SENATOR MUSKIE'S AND CONGRESSMAN ROGERS' ABOVE QUOTED STATEMENTS TEND TO SUPPORT EPA'S CONTENTION THAT IT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS IN NONPRIMACY STATES.

IN SUM, BASED ON OUR REVIEW OF THE STATUTE AND ITS LEGISLATIVE HISTORY, WE ARE INCLINED TO THE VIEW THAT CONGRESS DID NOT CLEARLY AUTHORIZE EPA TO IMPLEMENT DRINKING WATER PROGRAMS IN NONPRIMACY STATES. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE EXTENSIVE PARTICULAR AUTHORITIES CONFERRED UPON EPA BY STATUTE, THE SAME LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND EPA'S LEGAL POSITION PROVIDE A BASIS FOR ASSERTING THAT EPA DOES HAVE THIS AUTHORITY. THUS, WE CANNOT DEFINITIVELY SAY THAT THE ASSUMPTION OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY IS UNWARRANTED.

WE SUGGEST THAT YOU CONSIDER BRINGING THIS MATTER TO CONGRESS' ATTENTION IN YOUR FUTURE WORK IN THIS PROGRAM AREA AND THAT YOU RECOMMEND TO CONGRESS THAT THE AMBIGUOUS LEGISLATION COVERING EPA'S AUTHORITY TO TAKE OVER STATE RESPONSIBILITIES BE CLARIFIED.