On the recordAugust 2, 2001
I will answer the question of the Senator from Virginia by simply saying it is based upon EPA recommendations. We know growth States, population changes, account for a big part of the increased needs. The Senator is also correct that there are some other localized factors, including waterways, the existence of waterways and other factors that bear on this. That is why I note that States that have been significantly underfunded include a big growth State such as California and the State of Illinois. I just do not understand why Illinois has been so drastically underfunded. Ohio, maybe that is because both Ohio and Illinois have substantial waterways, as the Senator from Virginia does. New Jersey is another State that has been woefully underfunded. Yet it is not as big a growth State as California or my own State of Arizona. Indiana is another State that is underfunded. It could be that series of rivers in the Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois area. I cannot explain why the EPA recommends exactly what it recommends and, in comparison to the existing formula, why some States are so much out of skew. One general reason is that of population growth. There are others, as the Senator has pointed out. The main reason this formula makes sense is EPA looks at all of this, applies a needs-based test, makes the recommendations, and those are the recommendations that we plug into the formula.
Source
govinfo.gov




