Winter 1994
Legislative News
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds
Browner Unveils Clinton
Clean Water Initiative
Administrator Carol Browner proudly announced
the release of the Administration's proposal for the
Clean Water Act Reauthorization at a February 1st
press conference before a standing room only crowd
in the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Joined by
several key lawmakers, including Senate Environ-
ment and Public Works Committee Chairman Max
Baucus (D-MT), Ranking Republican John Chafee
(R-RI) and Subcommittee Chairman Bob Graham
(D-FL), and House Merchant Marine Committee
Chairman Gerry Studds (D-MA), the Administra-
tor outlined the major concepts behind the Clinton
Clean Water Initiative, which was well received by
the Members of Congress as well as the environ-
mental community. Reauthorization of the Clean
Water Act was cited as a priority by the President in
his January 25 State of the Union Address to Con-
gress, and Chairman Baucus and Ranking Repub-
lican Chafee say that revitalizing the Act is their
committee's top legislative priority.
t tT
1 oday, the Clinton Administration calls
for fundamental change in the law that protects
our nation's waters...
We've done the easy part by controlling
pollution at the end of the pipeline. For the first
time ever, we are tackling the hard part -- the
control of polluted runoff, which is the biggest
remaining barrier Wface in keeping the
nations waters clean."
Senate Clean Water Bill Awaits
Full Committee Markup
On February 2nd, the Senate Environment and
Public Works (EPW Subcommittee on Clean Wa-
ter, Fisheries and the Environment, chaired by
Senator Bob Graham (D-FL), forwarded to the
full EPW Committee a recently circulated redraft
of S. 1114. The subcommittee deferred substan-
tive action on the measure until full committee
markup, scheduled for February 23, in order to
have additional time to review the newly re-
leased Clinton Clean Water Initiative, as well as
to ha ve time to more closely examine the so-called
"Graham mark." Senator Graham redrafted the
original S. 1114, introduced last June by full Com-
mittee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) and Rank-
ing Minority Member John Chafee (R-RI), report-
edly to ease the bill's expected impact on states.
(State officials are increasingly finding a sympa-
thetic ear in the White House and in Congress to
their outcries against unfunded mandates).
At press time, Title III (the nonpoint source and
watershed provisions) of the Graham mark was
being redrafted. While most of Title IH remains
unchanged from the original S. 1114, there are
some modifications. The Graham mark, for
example, deletes the provision in Title I that
reserves an increasing percentage of the State
Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) for watershed plan-
ning. Graham felt that such a set-aside would
essentially coerce states into the watershed pro-
gram, thus taking away the voluntary approach
originally envisioned. Other noteworthy changes
include a new provision granting automatic ap-
Highlights of Administration Proposal - Page 4
Senate Markup -- Continued on Page 3
-------
Studds Wetlands Legislation Receives Interagency Review
On November 8, Congressman Gerry Studds,
chairman of the House Merchant Marine Com-
mittee, introduced H.R. 3465, the Wetlands Pro-
tection and Management Act. The bill, cospon-
sored by Congressman Kika De La Garza (D-TX),
chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, is
expected to be a major factor in the upcoming
Clean Water Act (CWA) reauthorization debate.
According to committee staff, the bill parallels the
Administration’s Wetlands policy announced on
August 24. The Interagency Working Group on
Federal Wetlands Policy, which drafted the Ad-
ministration plan, is currently reviewing the bill
for consistencywith the Administration proposal.
The bill adds an explicit statement to the CWA
that wetlands protection and restoration is the
national policy. H.R 3465 also establishes a goal
of no net loss of wetlands acres, based on current
wetlands acres, functions and values. With re-
gard to wetlands delineations, H.R 3465 requires
continued use of the 1987 Army Corps of Engi-
neers (Corps) Delineation manual and prohibits
issuance of a new manual until completion of the
National Academy of Sciences’ study, which is
due to be released late this year. Any proposed
changes to the manual would first have to be field
tested and subject to a public comment period.
The bill gives the Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
the responsibility for making wetlands delinea-
tions on agricultural lands, and it requires a Memo-
randum of Agreement among SCS, EPA and
the Corps within 180 days after enactment to
set forth procedures to effect this change.
In terms of changes to the 404 permitting
process, H.R. 3465 makes programmatic
general permits available to states with
existing regulatory programs. This au-
thority would be granted on the premise
that the activities permitted would have
minimal individual or cumulative impacts
on the environment and that the State
regulatory program would provide the
same level of protection as the Federal 404
program. The Corps, EPA, the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration (NOAA) would have the opportunity to
review state permit applications and decisions.
The bill also establishes expedited permitting for
projects involving less than one acre. For such
projects, if the Corps failed to make a decision
within 60 days, the permit would automatically be
approved.
The bill calls for increased monitoring and evalu-
ation of the permitting program, and requires that
the Corps, in consultation with EPA, the Depart-
ment of the Interior, and SCS, issue a report to
Congress every two years on the number of per-
mits granted, withdrawn or denied, in addition to
estimates on the adverse effects on the total acre-
age, functions and values of wetlands resulting
from the issuance of both individual and general
permits. Estimates of wetlands preserved or re-
stored through mitigation, along with estimates
on the rate of compliance and failure with mitiga-
tion requirements, would also be required in this
biennial report.
H.R. 3465 requires that procedures be established
for an administrative appeals process for penal-
ties, delineations, and permit decisions under Sec-
tion 404. In terms of permit decisions, persons
adversely affected by a permit decision or third
parties participating in the public comment pro-
cess could appeal the issuance or denial of a permit
without going to court.
The bill requires the Secretary of the Inte-
nor (acting through the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service), in consultation with
EPA, to issue strict regulations for the es-
tablishment, operation, monitoring and en-
forcement of mitigation banks. For ex-
ample, under these regulations mitigation
banks would have to provide, to the extent
practicable, for the full replacement of the
acreage, functions and values of the lost wet-
lands in close proximity to the impacted wet-
lands. Moreover, performance bonds would
be required by permi tees to ensure completion
of a mitigation project, unless the project cov-
ered less than 5 acres or was to restore prior
converted cropland.
Page 2
OWOW Legislative News
Winter ‘94
-------
H.R. 3465 clarifies that activities such as excava-
tion, ditching, channelization and other activities
resulting in wetlands loss or degradation are cov-
ered under Section 404. The bill also exempts
certain activities and lands from Section 404 per-
mitting requirements, including 53 million acres
of prior converted croplands.
The bill calls for full funding of the United States
Department of Agriculture’s Wetlands Reserve
Program. it also specifies elements to be included
in State Wetlands Conservation Plans (SWCPs)
and provides that funding should be used for both
the development and implementation of SWCPs.
Biological Survey Act Passes House
After first approving a series of amendments de-
signed to appease Members concerned about H.R.
1845’s potential impact on private property rights,
the House passed this legislation to formally au-
thorize the creation of the National Biological
Survey. H.R. 1845, which cleared the House on
October 26, formally creates a new agency within
the Interior Department charged with studying,
monitoring and cataloguing the nation’s plant and
animal life. Interior Secretary Babbitt argues that
such a baseline of data will better enable federal
agencies to make the most environmentally sound
decisions on managing our land and natural re-
sources. Supporters of the legislation also feel it
will be an effective tool in anticipating declines in
species so that measures can be taken before they
become threatened or endangered.
Despite the delay in obtaining Congressional au-
thorization (the Senate has not yet acted on H.R.
1845), the new agency is already operating within
the Interior Department thanks to a shifting of
staff and resources from the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land
Management, and the National Park
Service. In addition, the fiscal year
1994 Interior Appropriations Bill in-
cluded $163.5 million to help fund the
biological survey.
Senate Markup -- Conzirn ed from Page 1
proval of Comprehensive Conservation and Man-
agement Plans (CCMPs) under the National Estu-
ary Program as watershed plans under new Sec-
tion 321. Also, states (or an area of a state) that
have in effect a program approved pursuant to the
Coastal Zone Management Act will be considered
to meet the new nonpoint source requirements
under the amended Section 319 program.
The Graham mark also incorporates revised por-
tions of S. 1304, the Baucus-Chafee wetlands bill
introduced lastJuly. In his rewrite, Graham made
several significant changes, including a new pro-
vision that would remove the Agency’s current
authority to require Federal processing of indi-
vidual permits in states that have assumed the
Section 404 program in circumstances where a
state proposes a permit over EPA’s objections.
The Graham rewrite would provide only for pro-
gram withdrawal if a state issues inappropriate
permits. Assistant Administrator Bob Perciasepe
advised the Subcommittee during the markup
that he believes that such provisions would be
ill-advised. The Graham mark also authorizes
EPA and the Corps to make grants to states admin-
istering the 404 program in amounts correspond-
ing to the costs to the Federal government to
implement the program. Additionally, the Gra-
ham mark deletes provisions from S. 1304, which
would have made localities and/or regional au-
thorities eligible to operate the wetlands program
on behalf of the Corps, including theauthority to
issue programmatic general permits. The Clinton
Wetlands Plan endorses delegating such author-
ity, provided there are environmental safeguards
in place, such as an approved comprehensive
wetlands management plan. The environmental
community is generally concerned about delegat-
ing authority to local and regional
authorities under Section 404, ar-
guing that they are too susceptible
to pressures from developers.
Page 3
OWOW Legislative News
Winter ‘94
-------
Highlights of the President’s Clean Water Initiative
Nonpoint Sources
A key feature of the Administration proposal
focuses on tackling pollution from diffuse sources,
including nonpoint sources, storm waterand com-
bined sewer overflows, which account for over
half of remaining impairments of ourwaterbodies.
Under the Clinton initiative, existing nonpoint
sources in watersheds where water quality stan-
dards are not being met or are threatened would
have to implement best available management
measures or site-specific plans within seven and
one-half years of enactment. If impairments con-
tinue, more stringent measures would have to be
implemented within five years to meet water
quality standards. Very importantly, all new
nonpoint sources would have to implement these
measures statewide to make sure that clean wa-
terways stay clean.
To ensure implementation, states can use a mix of
regulatory and voluntary approaches that would
include enforcement authorities. State authori-
ties would be backed by federal enforcement
authorities that could be exercised. if a state fails.
If a state does not establish an effective nonpoint
source program, nonpoint source grants would
be withheld, and EPA would be authorized to
establish enforceable minimum controls. The
Administration proposes that federal agencies
should comply with management measures in
watersheds to the same extent as non-federal
parties in those watersheds. To help states de-
velop strengthened nonpoint source programs,
funding would be increased from a base of $50
million in fiscal year 93 to $80 million in fiscal year
94 and $100 million per year for each fiscal year
from 1995 through 1998.
Watershed Approach
To mOst efficiently and effectively address the
highest remaining water resource problems, the
Administration proposes that the Clean Water
Act guide and reward comprehensive state wa-
tershed management programs. To be eligible for
incentives, states would identify the watersheds
most in need of attention—those that are im-
paired, threatened, or in need of special protection.
For those watersheds, states would designate
multidisciplinary, multiorganizational teams and
their lead agencies. Watershed teams would be
charged with establishing environmental objec-
tives for the watershed, including water quality
standards and other goals to protect important
habitatsuchas wet landsand riparian areas. Teams
would identify the highest priority problems in the
watershed; develop and implement action plans to
solve those problems; and revise their plans and
actions, as needed. To ensure environmental
progress, states would establish a schedule pro-
viding that management plans for all priority wa-
tershed are in place within 10 years of enactment
and all waters are meeting environmental objec-
tives within 15 years.
States with approved watershed programs would
be eligible for several incentives, including, for
example, the opportunity to tailoror target nonpoint
sources controls upon demonstration to EPA that
such measures would attain environmental objec-
tives identified under the watershed plan and be
backed up by adequate authorities. Other incen-
tives would include eligibility to align the timing of
permits along a watershed basis and to receive a
“multi-purpose” state water grant.
Wetlands Protection
Although the Clinton Wetlands plan, announced
last August, is not physically attached to the
151-page Clinton Clean Water Initiative, the wet-
lands plan is very much a part of the
Administration’s position and is expected to be a
key feature in the upcoming reauthorization de-
bate. The package seeksto break the deadlock over
Federal wetlands policy. Some of the highlights
include:
• Embracing the goal of no overall net loss of the
Nation’s remaining wetlands resource base, and a
long-term commitment to increasing the quality
and quantity of the Nation’s wetlands.
• Improving the permitting process by providing
an administrative appeals process and establish-
ing permit decision time frames.
Page 4
OWOW Legislative News
Winier ‘93
-------
• Eliminating duplication and inconsistency
between Section 404 and the USDA’s
“Swampbuster” program by relying on a single
agency’s wetlands determination (generally, SCS
on agricultural and associated lands and the
Corps on other areas) for purposes of both pro-
grams. EPA, Corps, SCS, and FWS recently
signed a Memorandum of Agreement to provide
for this, as well as consistent methods for delin-
eating wetlands and training personnel.
• Expanding partnerships with state, Tribal and
local governments, the private sector and indi-
vidual citizens to strengthen wetlands protec-
tion efforts and to build strong state and local
programs.
• Clarifying the definition of “discharge of
dredged material” to ensure that activities that
have environmental effects of concern, such as
ditching and channelization, or mechanized land
clearing, will be consistently regulated.
• Clarifying in the CWA that “prior converted
cropland” is not regulated under the CWA, con-
sistent with the recent EPA/Corps rulemaking
to that effect.
• Increasing funding for the Wetlands Reserve
Program, including support for the Emergency
Wetlands Reserve Program passed by Congress
to assist flood-stricken farmers who wish to vol-
untarily restore wetlands on their property.
Comprehensive Wetlands Management Plans
The Clinton proposal also encourages the devel-
opment of comprehensive wetlands management
plans, which could be developed in conjunction
with the state watershed program (described
above) or through specific state or local wetlands
planning initiatives. Such plans would have to
include an inventory and characterization of all
wetland resources within the unit boundary,
including an assessment of their functions and
values; identification of potential wetland resto-
ration sites; and identification of activities, pro-
grams and policies that have a direct or indirect
adverse affect on wetlands. Specific wetland
goals consistent with the goals of the CWA would
also be established. Upon approval by EPA, in
consultation with the Corps, a comprehensive
plan would become eligible for general permits,
including a programmatic general permit; other
measures to expedite processing under Section
404; as well as technical and financial assistance.
National Estuary Program
The fact that EPA currently has no statutory au-
thority to provide financial assistance to Manage-
ment Conferences under Section 320 once a Com-
prehensive Conservation and Management Plan
(CCMP) is developed has proven to be a major
detriment to estuary programs seeking to imple-
ment approved management plans. Under Sec-
tion 320, Management Conferences are required
to coordinate and facilitate the implementation of
the CCMP, assess its effectiveness, and review
proposed Federal projects for CCMP consistency;
yet, the statute provides no grant authority to
support these post-CCMP activities. The Clinton
Initiative proposes that Section 320 be amended
to provide EPA the authority to award grants
from currently available funds to support limited
oversight and facilitation activities. Management
conferences would be extended or reconvened
for a limited time in order to conduct such over-
sight activities, after which states would be ex-
pected to incorporate and adopt CCMPs as water-
shed plans under the new proposed Section 321.
Copies of the Clinton Clean Water Initiative can
& obtained b calling EPA’s Water Resources
Center (contractor peruted) at 260-7786 An
cl i zronw vercion is also being made available
through the Nonpoint Source Bulletin Board and
T ia the Global Acti and lnforinatwn Network
Library of Atnerzcu Online The Clinton -
Wetlands Plan can be obtained by caIlin the
Wetlands Hot/inc ( .ontractor operated) at 800.
32-7823. :
Page 5
OWOW Legislative News
Winter ‘94
-------
Wayland Testifies on Soil Quality Report
On Jan. 27, OWOW Director Bob Wayland, ac-
companied by AWPD Director Geoff Grubbs,
testified before the Senate Agriculture Conserva-
tion Subcommittee on the National Academy of
Science (NAS) report, entitled, “Soil and Water
Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture.” The Senate
panel, chaired by Senator Thomas Daschle (D-SD)
also heard testimony from Dr. Sandra Batie of
Michigan State University and chair of the NAS
panel, and Paul Johnson, chief of the Soil Conser-
vation Service (SCS). The purpose of the hearing
was to examine whether the report’s recommen-
dations should become central tenets in our agri-
cultural policy, as Congress prepares to reautho-
rize the 1990 Farm Bill, due to expire next year. In
her opening remarks, Dr. Batie stressed the im-
portance of conserving and enhancing soil qual-
ity, and she recommended that soil quality be
given the same attention in national policy as air
and water.
“Protecting soil quality is the first step to-
ward protecting water quality. . . High qual-
ity soils can prevent water pollution by ab-
sorbing and partitioning rainfall and by
breaking down agricultural, chemical wastes
and other potential pollutants.”
Dr. Sandra Batie
Dr. Batie summarized the conclusions of the re-
port and highlighted the following opportunities
to improve soil and water quality:
• Using fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation
water more efficiently to prevent pollution at its
source.
• Increasing the ability of farming systems to
resist soil erosion.
• Using field and landscape “buffer zones” such
as vegetation strips, livestock fences, and con-
structed wetlands, to reduce runoff.
Dr. Batie also discussed the importance of using
new technologies and data collection to target
problem areas. She said current agricultural poli-
cies have been a major barrier in changing the ways
farmers behave. While incentives will help to
encourage farmers to produce in a more environ-
mentally sound manner, she said long-term policy
goals should be independent of price support,
supply control or income support mechanisms.
Paul Johnson echoed Dr. Batie’s remarks and dis-
cussed how SCS and EPA are working together to
address problems on an ecosystem basis. In some
areas, he noted, erosion is not the greatest threat,
but instead it is salinization, compaction, acidifica-
tion and loss of biological activity. He mentioned
several steps SCS is taking including: ‘1) incorpo-
rating the buffer zone concept into SCS field manu-
als and guides; 2) moving toward performance
standards in the SCS Conservation Management
System; 3) continuing to work with EPA to de-
velop better standards to evaluate farms; and 4)
continued research into economically viable crop-
ping systems.
Bob Wayland gave the Soil and Water report high
marks, calling it a “timely and excellent” report
and noted its relevance for the upcoming Clean
WaterAct and Farm Bill reauthorizations. Wayland
discussed how EPA is working closely with the
United States Department Of Agriculture (USDA)
and SCS to address many of the chief problems
identified in the report. He explained that nutrient
management (including both fertilizer application
and manure management); pest management (in-
cluding the promotion and demonstration of inte-
grated pest management practices), irrigation man-
agement; erosion control and riparian barriers are
major components of the CWA Section 319 pro-
gram. Wayland emphasized that many measures
can be implemented in a cost-effective manner,
and that, in some cases, savings from reduced
inputs offset the cost of implementa-
tion. He expressed confi-
dence that continued
progress can be made in
addressing environmen-
tal degradation, while
maintaining the eco-
nomic vitality of Ameri-
can agriculture.
Page 6
o wow Legislative News
Winter ‘94
-------
The Senate panel generally supported the report’s
recommendations, and Chairman Daschle called
it “right on target” in its emphasis on soil quality
and a systems approach. The Senators were, how-
ever, particularly interested in whether the report
advocated mandatory controls on agricultural
practices. Dr. Batie acknowledged that there might
be circumstances where voluntary measures would
fail to achieve the necessary water quality results
desired by Congress, but she said that the report
did not elaborate on when or what mandatory
controls should be implemented. Wayland added
that Administrator Browner stated in previous
Senate testimony that voluntary approaches should
be relied upon as the strategy of first choice. He
explained, however, that if water quality impair-
ments continue after art initial round of voluntary
measures, more stringent measures would have to
be adopted. He noted that many states already
have adopted enforceable policies to cover certain
activities, such as animal feeding and dairy opera-
tions.
The Senators also questioned witnesses on the
report’s projected impact on farm profitability;
timber harvesting and other activities in buffer
zones; and farm commodity programs. In an-
swering a question about wetlands policy,
Wayland was surprised to learn that the Senate
panel was unfamiliar with the President’s wet-
lands policy announced last August. Senator Larry
Craig (R-ID) was particularly pleased to learn
about the recently signed the Memorandum of
Agreement with USDA, which he called “a major
breakthrough.”
EPA-Cabinet Bill Stalls in the House
Legislation to elevate EPA to Cabinet level, which
passed the Senate last May, stalled again in the
House of Representatives. The bill, H.R. 3425,
which was originally scheduled for House consid-
eration last November and postponed, has en-
countered a surge of unexpected opposition due
to disagreement over whether the new Depart-
ment should be required to conduct comparative
risk and costs-benefits analyses of environmental
regulations. (A similar amendment offered by
Senator Bennett Johnston (D-LA) was approved
by the Senate last May). On February 3, 227
Members of Congress joined together to oppose
the rule governing debate on the bill - essentially
killing consideration of the bill and sending it back
to the Rules Committee.
Congressman John Mica (R-FL), joined by Minor-
ity Whip Newt Gingrich (R-GA), lead the charge
against H.R. 3425 because the Rules Committee
disallowed his cost-benefit amendment and other
minority proposals. The Rules Committee, which
only allowed nine amendments for floor debate,
will likely be forced to allow consideration of the
Mica amendment, and possibly others, in order to
gain majority approval of the rule.
H.R. 3425 redesignates the EPA as the Department
of Environmental Protection (DEP) and transfers
all of EPA’s existing functions, responsibilities
and authorities to the new department. The bifi
establishes three new offices under the new De-
partment, including a new Bureau of Environ-
mental Statistics, charged with coordinating data
collection efforts; a new Office of Environmental
Justice, charged with addressing concerns that
low-income and minority populations are
disproportionally exposed to pollutants and p01-
luting facilities; and a new Office of Environmen-
tal Risk, charged with developing a strategy to
attain, to the greatest extent practicable, reduc-
tions in risk to human health and the environment
using available resources.
Unlike the Senate, the House chose not to address
the highly charged issue of abolishing the Council
of Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the Cabinet
legislation. President Clinton has proposed elimi-
nation of the Council in favor of a smaller White
House Office that will oversee compliance with
environmental laws, including the National Envi-
ronmental Policy Act. The House has chosen to
address this issue in separate legislation, H.R.
3512, which it passed by voice vote on November
2O H.R. 3512 would essentially abolish CEQ as it
is now configured, while statutorily reserving its
key duties and functions as responsibilities of the
White House. It authorizes $4.7 million over four
years for the smaller White House staff.
Cabinet Legislation -- Continued on Page 8
Page 7
OWOW Legislative News
Winter ‘93
-------
Safe Drinking Water Bills Introduced
Reauthorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA), which formally expired on September
30, 1991, has emerged as a top environmental
priority in the 103rd Congress. The outbreak of
intestinal disease in Milwaukee last year and the
recent advisories issued in the Washington, D.C.
area have focused national attention on the safety
of drinking water supplies.
In September, the Administration released its rec-
ommendations for SDWA reauthorization, which
feature a State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF); water-
shed protection; user fees that states could charge
to raise revenues for compliance costs; stream-
lined and strengthened enforcement measures;
improvements to the standards setting process;
and enhanced training and certification for sys-
tems operators.
Watershed protection is strongly emphasized in
the Administration’s package, which calls for the
development and implementation of Source Wa-
ter Protection Programs for both ground and sur-
face waters. The program would build upon
so-called “baseline” programs, and would include
a delineation of all drinking water protection ar-
eas; an assessment of the susceptibility of the water
supply to contamination from significant sources
or categories of sources located within drinking
water protection areas; and public education ini-
tiatives. States could also adopt an “enhanced”
local Source Water Protection Program, which
would build upon the base program, but include
more detailed source inventories and related vul-
nerability assessments, enforceable controls, state
oversight of implementation of controls, and a
process to periodically update the program. In
return, states would be offered incentives such as
alternative monitoring requirements and
prevention-based treatment exemptions.
Although the EPA appropriations bill for Fiscal
Year 1994 provides $599 million for a safe drinking
water SRF, Congress must first authorize the pro-
gram before the money will be appropriated. Sev-
eral reauthorization bills have been introduced in
the House and Senate, including a comprehensive
measure by Senate Environment and Public Works
Chairman Max Baucus, S. 1547. S. 1547 may be
marked up as early as February or March. The
Baucus bill establishes an SRF for the construction
of drinking water facilities; establishes flexible
maximum contaminant levels (MCL) standards;
streamlines enforcement; creates a multi-media
radon requirement; establishes a Best Available
Technology requirement for small systems; and
establishes a pollution prevention program. The
bill’s provisions to provide some relief for state
and localities from testing and monitoring stan-
dards, which many localities argue are too oner-
ous and costly, have, however, raised concerns at
EPA that the bill could delay compliance for small
systems for as long as 10 years.
Cabinet Legislation -- Continued from Page 7
The Senate version of the Cabinet legislation,
S.171, which passed on May 4 (see Spring Legis-
lative News) would, however, eliminate CEQ.
Therefore, House and Senate negotiators will have
to reconcile this issue and other differences if the
bill reaches conference. During Senate debate,
Senator Bond (R-MO) offered an amendment to
shift responsibility for identifying wetlands and
making decisions on agricultural lands from the
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to the Soil Con-
servation Service. Senator John Breaux (D-LA.)
agreed not to support this amendment in return
for the cre tion of an interagency task force to
study wetlands regulation, including
Swampbuster and Section 404. The Senate ulti-
mately passed a substitute amendment offered by
Senator Baucus that would have required the
Secretaries of the Environment, Agriculture, Inte-
rior and Army to make a recommendation back to
Congress on the proposed jurisdictional change
within 90 days after the bill’s enactment. How-
ever, this amendment is no longer relevant in light
of the recently signed Memorandum of Agree-
ment (MOA) among EPA, Corps, the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Department of
Agriculture to coordinate wetlands decisions.
Page 8
OWOW Legislative News
Winter ‘93
------- |