Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014

Last updated

Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014
Great Seal of the United States (obverse).svg
Long titleTo preserve existing rights and responsibilities with respect to waters of the United States, and for other purposes.
Announced inthe 113th United States Congress
Sponsored by Rep. Steve Southerland II (R, FL-2)
Number of co-sponsors13
Codification
U.S.C. sections affected 33 U.S.C.   § 1344, 33 U.S.C.   § 1251 et seq.
Agencies affected United States Environmental Protection Agency, Supreme Court of the United States, United States Department of the Army
Legislative history

The Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014 (H.R. 5078) is a bill that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) from implementing or enforcing certain proposed regulations regarding the use of the nation’s waters and wetlands. [1]

Contents

The bill was introduced into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress.

Provisions of the bill

This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Research Service, a public domain source. [2]

The Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014 would prohibit the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from:

  • developing, finalizing, adopting, implementing, applying, administering, or enforcing the proposed rule entitled, "Definition of 'Waters of the United States' Under the Clean Water Act," issued on April 21, 2014, or the proposed guidance entitled, "Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected By the Clean Water Act," dated February 17, 2012; [2] or
  • using the proposed rule or proposed guidance, any successor document, or any substantially similar proposed rule or guidance as the basis for any rulemaking or decision regarding the scope or enforcement of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act). [2]

The bill would require the Army Corps and the EPA to withdraw the interpretive rule entitled, "Notice of Availability Regarding the Exemption from Permitting Under Section 404(f)(1)(A) of the Clean Water Act to Certain Agricultural Conservation Practices," issued on April 21, 2014. [2]

The bill would require the Army Corps and the EPA to consult with relevant state and local officials to develop recommendations for a regulatory proposal that would identify the scope of waters covered under the Clean Water Act and the scope of waters not covered. [2]

Congressional Budget Office report

This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Budget Office, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on July 16, 2014. This is a public domain source. [1]

H.R. 5078 would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) from implementing or enforcing certain proposed regulations regarding the use of the nation’s waters and wetlands. The legislation would affect direct spending because it would reduce fees collected by the Corps for issuing permits under the Clean Water Act (CWA). However, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the change in those fees would be negligible. Because the legislation would affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Enacting H.R. 5078 would not affect revenues. In addition, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 5078 would have no significant effect on discretionary spending by EPA or the Corps. [1]

Under the CWA, EPA and the Corps, along with the states, serve as co-regulators of the nation’s waters. H.R. 5078 would prohibit the agencies from developing, finalizing, adopting, implementing, or enforcing the following: [1]

  • A proposed rule published in the Federal Register on April 21, 2014, that defines the scope of waters protected by the CWA;
  • Draft Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act, submitted to the Office of Management and Budget on February 21, 2012, that clarifies how EPA and the Corps should identify U.S. waters protected by the CWA and implement two Supreme Court decisions on this issue; and
  • An interpretive rule published in the Federal Register on April 21, 2014, to clarify the types of discharges of dredged or fill material associated with certain agricultural conservation practices that can be exempted from section 404 permits.

Finally, enacting this legislation would require EPA and the Corps to jointly consult with state regulatory officials to develop recommendations for an alternative regulatory proposal instead of the proposed rules and draft guidance; such recommendations would be provided to the Congress in a final report.

The regulatory changes proposed under current law would expand the area covered by federal regulations and the number of permits issued by the Corps under the CWA. The legislation would probably prevent, reduce, or delay such an expansion of federally regulated waters. However, because the amount of permit fees collected by the Corps is nominal, CBO estimates enacting H.R. 5078 would have an insignificant effect on direct spending over the 2015-2024 period. [1]

As with similar legislative proposals directing EPA to prepare alternatives to proposed rules, CBO estimates that enacting this legislation would have no significant net impact on federal spending. Under the bill, we expect that EPA resources that would have been used to develop and implement the currently proposed rules and draft guidance would be used to develop an alternative regulatory proposal and a report to the Congress. [1]

H.R. 5078 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and any costs incurred by state, local, or tribal governments would result from participation in a voluntary federal program. [1]

Procedural history

The Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on July 11, 2014 by Rep. Steve Southerland II (R, FL-2). [3] It was referred to the United States House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the United States House Transportation Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. It was reported on July 31, 2014 alongside House Report 113-568. [3] On September 9, 2014, the House voted to pass the bill in Roll Call Vote 489 by a vote of 262-152. [3]

Debate and discussion

The Water Advocacy Coalition (WAC), which calls itself an "inter-industry coalition representing the construction, real estate, mining, agriculture, forestry, manufacturing, energy sectors, and wildlife conservation interests," supported the bill and urged Representatives to vote for it. [4] According to WAC, H.R. 5078 would improve the existing situation - a dispute over who owned and controlled some waters - by "requiring the agencies to conduct a transparent, representative, and open consultation with state and local officials to develop a consensus about those waters that should be under federal jurisdiction." [4]

The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) supported the bill, arguing that under the proposed rule, "electric cooperatives will face significant challenges as we strive to provide our member-owners with reliable and affordable energy." [5] The NRECA also argued that the proposed rule could result in the need for groups to gain many federal permits "causing uncertainty, delay, and cost." [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

United States Environmental Protection Agency U.S. federal government agency

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is an independent executive agency of the United States federal government tasked with environmental protection matters. President Richard Nixon proposed the establishment of EPA on July 9, 1970; it began operation on December 2, 1970, after Nixon signed an executive order. The order establishing the EPA was ratified by committee hearings in the House and Senate. The agency is led by its administrator, who is appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. The current administrator is Michael S. Regan. The EPA is not a Cabinet department, but the administrator is normally given cabinet rank.

Clean Water Act 1972 U.S. federal law regulating water pollution

The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary federal law in the United States governing water pollution. Its objective is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters; recognizing the responsibilities of the states in addressing pollution and providing assistance to states to do so, including funding for publicly owned treatment works for the improvement of wastewater treatment; and maintaining the integrity of wetlands.

Concentrated animal feeding operation American type of intensive animal farming at large scale

In animal husbandry, a concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO), as defined by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), is an intensive animal feeding operation (AFO) in which over 1,000 animal units are confined for over 45 days a year. An animal unit is the equivalent of 1,000 pounds of "live" animal weight. A thousand animal units equates to 700 dairy cows, 1,000 meat cows, 2,500 pigs weighing more than 55 pounds (25 kg), 10,000 pigs weighing under 55 pounds, 10,000 sheep, 55,000 turkeys, 125,000 chickens, or 82,000 egg laying hens or pullets.

Regulation of ship pollution in the United States

In the United States, several federal agencies and laws have some jurisdiction over pollution from ships in U.S. waters. States and local government agencies also have responsibilities for ship-related pollution in some situations.

Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001), was a decision by the US Supreme Court that interpreted a provision of the Clean Water Act. Section 404 of the Act requires permits for the discharge of dredged or fill materials into "navigable waters," which is defined by the Act as "waters of the United States." That provision was the basis for the federal wetlands-permitting program.

The migratory bird rule, adopted by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asserted that the Clean Water Act (CWA) covers regulation of isolated waters "which are or would be used as habitat by... migratory birds that cross state lines." The rule was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2001.

No net loss wetlands policy

"No net loss" is the United States government's overall policy goal regarding wetlands preservation. The goal of the policy is to balance wetland loss due to economic development with wetlands reclamation, mitigation, and restorations efforts, so that the total acreage of wetlands in the country does not decrease, but remains constant or increases. To achieve the objective of no net loss, the federal government utilizes several different environmental policy tools which legally protect wetlands, provide rules and regulations for citizens and corporations interacting with wetlands, and incentives for the preservation and conservation of wetlands. Given the public benefits provided by wetland ecosystem services, such as flood control, nutrient farming, habitat, water filtration, and recreational area, the estimations that over half the acreage of wetlands in the United States has been lost within the last three centuries is of great concern to local, state, and federal agencies as well as the public interest they serve.

Water quality law

Water quality laws govern the protection of water resources for human health and the environment. Water quality laws are legal standards or requirements governing water quality, that is, the concentrations of water pollutants in some regulated volume of water. Such standards are generally expressed as levels of a specific water pollutants that are deemed acceptable in the water volume, and are generally designed relative to the water's intended use - whether for human consumption, industrial or domestic use, recreation, or as aquatic habitat. Additionally, these laws provide regulations on the alteration of the chemical, physical, radiological, and biological characteristics of water resources. Regulatory efforts may include identifying and categorizing water pollutants, dictating acceptable pollutant concentrations in water resources, and limiting pollutant discharges from effluent sources. Regulatory areas include sewage treatment and disposal, industrial and agricultural waste water management, and control of surface runoff from construction sites and urban environments. Water quality laws provides the foundation for regulations in water standards, monitoring, required inspections and permits, and enforcement. These laws may be modified to meet current needs and priorities.

Steve Southerland (Florida politician) American politician

William Steve Southerland II is an American lobbyist and former Republican Party politician who served as the U.S. representative for Florida's 2nd congressional district from 2011 to 2015. The district includes most of the eastern Florida Panhandle, from Panama City to the state capital, Tallahassee. He was narrowly defeated for re-election in 2014 by Democrat Gwen Graham, becoming one of only two incumbent House Republicans to lose a general election that year, along with Lee Terry of Nebraska.

Nonpoint source water pollution regulations in the United States

Nonpoint source (NPS) water pollution regulations are environmental regulations that restrict or limit water pollution from diffuse or nonpoint effluent sources such as polluted runoff from agricultural areas in a river catchments or wind-borne debris blowing out to sea. In the United States, governments have taken a number of legal and regulatory approaches to controlling NPS effluent. Nonpoint water pollution sources include, for example, leakage from underground storage tanks, storm water runoff, atmospheric deposition of contaminants, and golf course, agricultural, and forestry runoff.

Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc., 556 U.S. 208 (2009), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that reviewed the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) interpretation of the Clean Water Act regulations with regard to cooling water intakes for power plants. Existing facilities are mandated to use the "Best Technology Available" to "minimize the adverse environmental impact." The issue was whether the agency may use a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in choosing the Best Available Technology or (BAT) to meet the National Performance Standards (NPS).

United States regulation of point source water pollution Overview of the regulation of point source water pollution in the United States of America

Point source water pollution comes from discrete conveyances and alters the chemical, biological, and physical characteristics of water. In the United States, it is largely regulated by the Clean Water Act (CWA). Among other things, the Act requires dischargers to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to legally discharge pollutants into a water body. However, point source pollution remains an issue in some water bodies, due to some limitations of the Act. Consequently, other regulatory approaches have emerged, such as water quality trading and voluntary community-level efforts.

Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013

The Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013 is a bill that would require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to submit reports to both the United States Congress and the United States Department of Energy whenever it tried to implement a new regulation that would have significant compliance costs. The Department of Energy and Congress would then have the option of stopping or altering what the EPA proposed to do. According to a report about the bill from the United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce, the bill "provides for greater checks and balances over EPA's rulemaking activity by requiring, before the agency finalizes new energy-related rules estimated to cost more than $1 billion, that the agency submit a report to Congress providing information detailing certain cost, benefit, energy price, and job impacts, and also that the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with other relevant agencies, conduct a review of the energy price, reliability, and other energy-related impacts, and make a determination about whether the rule will cause significant adverse effects to the economy." The bill was introduced into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress.

Reducing Excessive Deadline Obligations Act of 2013

The Reducing Excessive Deadline Obligations Act of 2013 is a bill that would change the frequency of reports from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) about solid waste regulations. Instead of being forced to automatically review the regulations every three years, the EPA would be able to review them on an as needed basis. It would also grant precedence to state financial requirements for hazardous substances over federal requirements. The bill was introduced on June 6, 2013 into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress.

Electricity Security and Affordability Act

The Electricity Security and Affordability Act is a bill that would repeal a pending rule published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on January 8, 2014. The proposed rule would establish uniform national limits on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from new electricity-generating facilities that use coal or natural gas. The rule also sets new standards of performance for those power plants, including the requirement to install carbon capture and sequestration technology.

Farmers Undertake Environmental Land Stewardship Act

The Farmers Undertake Environmental Land Stewardship Act is a bill that would require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to modify the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule, which regulates oil discharges into navigable waters and adjoining shorelines. The rule requires certain farmers to develop an oil spill prevention plan that is certified by a professional engineer and may require them to make infrastructure changes. According to supporters, this bill would "ease the burden placed on farmers and ranchers" by making it easier for smaller farms to self-certify and raising the level of storage capacity under which farms are exempted. These rules apply to any storage units that contain oil, whether petroleum products or animal fats.

Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015

The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 is a bill that would make appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for FY2015. The bill would appropriate $34 billion, which is only $50 million less than these agencies currently receive. The appropriations for the United States Department of Energy and the United States Army Corps of Engineers are made by this bill.

Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2013 US proposal about pesticide laws

The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2013 is a bill that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and states authorized to issue a permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) from requiring a permit for some discharges of pesticides authorized for use under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The bill would clarify the law so that people did not have to get two permits in order to use the same pesticide.

Clean Water Rule 2015 EPA regulation

The Clean Water Rule is a 2015 regulation published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to clarify water resource management in the United States under a provision of the Clean Water Act of 1972. The regulation defined the scope of federal water protection in a more consistent manner, particularly over streams and wetlands which have a significant hydrological and ecological connection to traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and territorial seas. It is also referred to as the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, which defines all bodies of water that fall under U.S. federal jurisdiction. The rule was published in response to concerns about lack of clarity over the act's scope from legislators at multiple levels, industry members, researchers and other science professionals, activists, and citizens.

County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, No. 18-260, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving pollution discharges under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The case asked whether the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants that originate from a non-point source can be traced to reach navigable waters through mechanisms such as groundwater transport. In a 6–3 decision, the Court ruled that such non-point discharges require a permit when they are the "functional equivalent of a direct discharge", a new test defined by the ruling. The decision vacated the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and remanded the case with instructions to apply the new standard to the lower courts with cooperation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "CBO - H.R. 5078". Congressional Budget Office. August 2014. Retrieved September 10, 2014.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 "H.R. 5078 - Summary". United States Congress. Retrieved September 10, 2014.
  3. 1 2 3 "H.R. 5078 - All Actions". United States Congress. September 11, 2014. Retrieved September 11, 2014.
  4. 1 2 "Coalition Letter on H.R. 5078, the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act". U.S. Chamber of Commerce. July 16, 2014. Retrieved September 11, 2014.
  5. 1 2 "NRECA Supports H.R. 5078, the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act". NRECA. September 9, 2014. Retrieved September 11, 2014.

PD-icon.svg This article incorporates  public domain material from websites or documents ofthe United States Government .