Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Copeland, Claudia" in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Animal Waste and Hazardous Substances: Current Laws and Legislative Issues [March 11, 2014]
From the Summary: "The animal sector of agriculture has undergone major changes in the last several decades: organizational changes within the industry to enhance economic efficiency have resulted in larger confined production facilities that often are geographically concentrated. These changes, in turn, have given rise to concerns over the management of animal wastes and potential impacts on environmental quality. Federal environmental law does not regulate all agricultural activities, but certain large animal feeding operations (AFOs) where animals are housed and raised in confinement are subject to regulation. The issue of applicability of these laws to livestock and poultry operations-- especially the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, the Superfund law) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)--has been controversial and has drawn congressional attention. Both Superfund and EPCRA have reporting requirements that are triggered when specified quantities of certain substances are released to the environment. In addition, Superfund authorizes federal cleanup of releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants and imposes strict liability for cleanup and injuries to natural resources from releases of hazardous substances."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2014-03-11
-
Controversies over Redefining 'Fill Material' Under the Clean Water Act [January 23, 2014]
"In May 2002, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) announced a regulation redefining two key terms, 'fill material' and 'discharge of fill material,' in rules that implement Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This report discusses the 2002 rule, focusing on how it changes which material and types of activities are regulated under Section 404 and the significance of these issues, especially for the mining industry. The Clean Water Act contains two different permitting regimes: (1) Section 402 permits (called the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, or NPDES, permit program) address the discharge of most pollutants, and (2) Section 404 permits address the discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable waters of the United States at specified sites. These permit programs differ in nature and approach. The NPDES program focuses on the effects of pollutant discharges on water quality. The 404 program considers effects on the aquatic ecosystem and other national and resource interests. The Corps and EPA have complementary roles under Section 404. Landowners seeking to discharge dredged or fill material must obtain a permit from the Corps under Section 404. EPA provides environmental guidance on 404 permitting. The determination of what is 'fill material' is important, since fill material is subject to 404 permit requirements, while discharge of non-fill material is regulated by EPA under the Section 402 NPDES permit program."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2014-01-23
-
Clean Water Act and Pollutant Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) [January 17, 2014]
"Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to identify waters that are impaired by pollution, even after application of pollution controls. For those waters, states must establish a total maximum daily load (TMDL) of pollutants to ensure that water quality standards can be attained. A TMDL is both a quantitative assessment of pollution sources and pollutant reductions needed to restore and protect U.S. waters and a planning process for attaining water quality standards. Implementation of Section 303(d) was dormant until states and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) were prodded by lawsuits. […] First, Section 303(d) does not require implementation, and states' strategies for implementation vary widely. Only a few have laws requiring implementation plans, while many others rely on less structured policies. Second, a number of barriers to implementation can be identified. The most prominent is insufficient funding, but technical impediments such as insufficient scientific data also are a challenge. At the same time, factors that may aid effective implementation include active involvement of stakeholders and governments, and adequate resources. The TMDL program is in a period of transition and increasingly is addressing new challenges-- more complex TMDLs, larger scale impairments, and nonpoint sources. Other than oversight hearings on the Chesapeake Bay TMDL, Congress has not shown active interest in the TMDL program for more than a decade. Some stakeholders, especially states, believe that several issues present Congress with an opportunity to examine the TMDL provisions of the CWA."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2014-01-17
-
H.R. 3080 and S. 601: Side-by-Side Comparison of Selected Provisions [January 15, 2014]
From the Document: "This report provides a side-by-side analysis of selected provisions of House-passed H.R. 3080, the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2013 (WRDDA 2013), and Senate-passed S. 601, the Water Resources Development Act of 2013 (WRDA 2013). Both bills represent omnibus legislation for Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) water resources activities. On October 31, 2013, the Senate took up H.R. 3080, and replaced the text passed by the House with the text of S. 601 as passed by the Senate. The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a conference. While the House and Senate versions of H.R. 3080 are the basis for conference, this report compares H.R. 3080 as passed by the House and S. 601 as passed by the Senate, which is identical to the Senate version of H.R. 3080. […] During the bills' consideration, Members expressed frustration with how long Corps projects take. Many Members have also expressed interest in authorizing new projects and deauthorizing older unconstructed projects. Some Members want more prominent nonfederal roles. Others support more funding for harbor maintenance and improved inland waterway construction. H.R. 3080 and S. 601 would address these issues, but often using different means. The earmark debate and concerns about congressional roles also shaped each bill's approach. The Administration provided comments during congressional deliberations; the most recent was a December 2013 letter from the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works (ASA), to the conferees."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Carter, Nicole T.; Frittelli, John; Luther, Linda G. . . .
2014-01-15
-
EPA's Vessel General Permit: Background and Issues [January 8, 2014]
"In November 2011 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed two Clean Water Act (CWA) permits to regulate certain types of vessel discharges into U.S. waters. The proposed permits would replace a single Vessel General Permit (VGP) issued in 2008 that was due to expire in December 2013. As proposed, the permits would apply to approximately 71,000 large domestic and foreign vessels and perhaps as many as 138,000 small vessels. This universe of regulated entities is diverse as well as large, consisting of tankers, freighters, barges, cruise ships and other passenger vessels, and commercial fishing vessels. [...] On March 28, 2013, EPA issued a final version of the VGP for large vessels. It took effect December 19, 2013. The permit for smaller vessels is still under review. [...] In 2008 Congress enacted two bills to exempt certain vessels from a CWA permit requirement, thus restricting the population of vessels subject to the VGP. One was a permanent permit moratorium for recreational vessels of all sizes. The other act was a temporary permit moratorium for small commercial vessels and commercial fishing vessels, which has been extended twice by Congress and is due to expire in December 2014. The draft sVGP, still under interagency review, would apply to these vessels, if the moratorium expires. In the 113th Congress, a bill to make that moratorium permanent has been introduced (H.R. 3464)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2014-01-08
-
Energy-Water Nexus: The Water Sector's Energy Use [January 3, 2014]
"Water and energy are resources that are reciprocally and mutually linked, because meeting energy needs requires water, often in large quantities, for mining, fuel production, hydropower, and power plant cooling, and energy is needed for pumping, treatment, and distribution of water and for collection, treatment, and discharge of wastewater. This interrelationship is often referred to as the energy-water nexus, or the water-energy nexus. There is growing recognition that 'saving water saves energy.' Energy efficiency initiatives offer opportunities for delivering significant water savings, and likewise, water efficiency initiatives offer opportunities for delivering significant energy savings. In addition, saving water also reduces carbon emissions by saving energy otherwise generated to move and treat water. This report provides background on energy for facilities that treat and deliver water to end users and also dispose of and discharge wastewater. Energy use for water is a function of many variables, including water source (surface water pumping typically requires less energy than groundwater pumping), treatment (high ambient quality raw water requires less treatment than brackish or seawater), intended end-use, distribution (water pumped long distances requires more energy), amount of water loss in the system through leakage and evaporation, and level of wastewater treatment (stringency of water quality regulations to meet discharge standards). Likewise, the intensity of energy use of water, which is the relative amount of energy needed for a task such as pumping water, varies depending on characteristics such as topography (affecting groundwater recharge), climate, seasonal temperature, and rainfall. Most of the energy used for water-related purposes is in the form of electricity."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2014-01-03
-
Wastewater Treatment: Overview and Background [October 30, 2014]
"The Clean Water Act prescribes performance levels to be attained by municipal sewage treatment plants in order to prevent the discharge of harmful wastes into surface waters. The act also provides financial assistance so that communities can construct treatment facilities to comply with the law. The availability of funding for this purpose continues to be a major concern of states and local governments. This report provides background on municipal wastewater treatment issues, federal treatment requirements and funding, and recent legislative activity. Meeting the nation's wastewater infrastructure needs efficiently and effectively is likely to remain an issue of considerable interest to policymakers."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2014
-
Environmental Laws: Summaries of Major Statutes Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency [December 20, 2013]
"With congressional approval, the Nixon Administration established the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970 under an executive branch reorganization plan, which consolidated numerous federal pollution control responsibilities that had been divided among several federal agencies. EPA's responsibilities grew over time as Congress enacted an increasing number of environmental statutes and major amendments to these statutes. EPA's primary responsibilities have evolved to include the regulation of air quality, water quality, and chemicals in commerce; the development of regulatory criteria for the management and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes; and the cleanup of environmental contamination. The implementation and enforcement of many of these federal authorities is delegated to the states. EPA also provides financial assistance to states and local governments to aid them in administering pollution control programs and in complying with certain federal environmental requirements. Several federal statutes provide the legal authority for EPA's programs and activities. The major provisions of each of the following statutes are summarized in this report, as laid out in existing law as of this writing."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bearden, David M.; Copeland, Claudia; Luther, Linda G. . . .
2013-12-20
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? [December 12, 2013]
"Since Barack Obama was sworn in as President in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations implementing the pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Critics have reacted strongly. Many, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules. The House has conducted vigorous oversight of the agency in the 112th and 113th Congresses, and has approved several bills that would overturn specific regulations or limit the agency's authority. […] This report provides background information on EPA regulatory activity during the Obama Administration to help address these issues. […] The report includes tables that show which rules remain under development, and an appendix that describes major or controversial rules that are now final. The report also discusses factors that affect the timeframe in which regulations take effect, including statutory and judicial deadlines, public comment periods, judicial review, and permitting procedures, the net results of which are that existing facilities are likely to have several years before being required to comply with most of the regulatory actions under discussion. Unable to account for such factors, which will vary from case to case, timelines that show dates for proposal and promulgation of EPA regulations effectively underestimate the complexities of the regulatory process and overstate the near-term impact of many of the regulatory actions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Copeland, Claudia
2013-12-12
-
Wetlands: An Overview of Issues [December 5, 2013]
"Recent Congresses have considered numerous policy topics that involve wetlands. Many reflect issues of long-standing interest, such as applying federal regulations on private lands, wetland loss rates, and restoration and creation accomplishments. The issue receiving the greatest attention recently has been determining which wetlands should be included and excluded from permit requirements under the Clean Water Act's (CWA) program that regulates waste discharges affecting wetlands, which is administered by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As a result of Supreme Court rulings in 2001 (in the SWANCC case) that narrowed federal regulatory jurisdiction over certain isolated wetlands, and in 2006 (in the 'Rapanos-Carabell' decision), the jurisdictional reach of the permit program has been narrowed. […] The national policy goal of no net loss, endorsed by administrations for the past two decades, had been reached by 2004, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service, as the rate of loss had been more than offset by net gains through expanded restoration efforts authorized in multiple laws. However, more recent data show wetlands losses of nearly 14,000 acres per year. Many protection advocates say that gains do not necessarily account for the changes in quality of the remaining wetlands, and many also view federal protection efforts as inadequate or uncoordinated. Others, who advocate the rights of property owners and development interests, characterize these efforts as too intrusive. Numerous state and local wetland programs add to the complexity of the protection effort."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2013-12-05
-
Legislative Options for Financing Water Infrastructure [November 27, 2013]
"This report addresses several options being considered by Congress to address the financing needs of local communities for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects and to decrease or close the gap between available funds and projected needs. Some of the options exist and are well established, but they are under discussion for expansion or modification. Other innovative policy options for water infrastructure have recently been proposed, especially to supplement or complement existing financing tools. Some are intended to provide robust, longterm revenue to support existing financing programs and mechanisms. Some are intended to encourage private participation in furnishing drinking water and wastewater services. Six options that are reflected in recent legislative proposals, including budgetary implications, are discussed. [1] Increase funding for the State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs in the Clean Water Act (H.R. 1877 in the 113th Congress) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (H.R. 5320 in the 111th Congress), [2] Create a federal water infrastructure trust fund (H.R. 1877 in the 113th Congress and H.R. 6249 in the 112th Congress), [3] Create a 'Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act' Program, or WIFIA (S. 601 and S. 335 in the 113th Congress), [4] Create a National Infrastructure Bank (H.R. 2084 and H.R. 505 in the 113th Congress), [5] Lift private activity bond restrictions on water infrastructure projects (included in the Administration's FY2014 budget request and S. 939 and H.R. 1802 in the 112th Congress), and [6] Reinstate authority for the issuance of Build America Bonds (included in the Administration's FY2014 budget request and H.R. 535 and H.R. 789 in the 113th Congress). A number of these issues and options were examined in hearings by House and Senate committees in the 112th Congress. Legislation to create a WIFIA program (S. 601) has been passed by the Senate and is being considered by a House-Senate conference committee."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia; Maguire, Steven; Mallett, William
2013-11-27
-
Animal Waste and Hazardous Substances: Current Laws and Legislative Issues [September 10, 2013]
From the Summary: "The animal sector of agriculture has undergone major changes in the last several decades: organizational changes within the industry to enhance economic efficiency have resulted in larger confined production facilities that often are geographically concentrated. These changes, in turn, have given rise to concerns over the management of animal wastes and potential impacts on environmental quality. Federal environmental law does not regulate all agricultural activities, but certain large animal feeding operations (AFOs) where animals are housed and raised in confinement are subject to regulation. The issue of applicability of these laws to livestock and poultry operations-- especially the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, the Superfund law) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)--has been controversial and has drawn congressional attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2013-09-10
-
Controversies over Redefining 'Fill Material' Under the Clean Water Act [August 21, 2013]
"In May 2002, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) announced a regulation redefining two key terms, 'fill material' and 'discharge of fill material,' in rules that implement Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This report discusses the 2002 rule, focusing on how it changes which material and types of activities are regulated under Section 404 and the significance of these issues, especially for the mining industry."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2013-08-21
-
Water Infrastructure Financing: History of EPA Appropriations [August 19, 2013]
"The principal federal program to aid municipal wastewater treatment plant construction is authorized in the Clean Water Act (CWA). Established as a grant program in 1972, it now capitalizes state loan programs. Authorizations since 1972 have totaled $65 billion, while appropriations have totaled nearly $90 billion. It has represented 25%-30% of total funds appropriated to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in recent years. In appropriations legislation, funding for EPA wastewater assistance is contained in the measure providing funds for the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, which includes EPA. Within the portion of that bill which funds EPA, wastewater treatment assistance is specified in an account now called State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG). Three trends in the funding of this account are most prominent: inclusion of non-infrastructure environmental grants to states, beginning in FY1993; increasing number and amount of special purpose grants since FY1989; and the addition of grant assistance for drinking water treatment projects in FY1997. This report summarizes, in chronological order, congressional activity to fund items in this account since 1987."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2013-08-19
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? [July 16, 2013]
"Since Barack Obama was sworn in as President in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations implementing the pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Critics have reacted strongly. Many, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules. The House conducted vigorous oversight of the agency in the 112th Congress, and approved several bills that would overturn specific regulations or limit the agency's authority. Similar action may occur in the 113th. Particular attention is being paid to the Clean Air Act, under which EPA has moved forward with the first federal controls on emissions of greenhouse gases and also addressed emissions of conventional pollutants from a number of industries; congressional scrutiny has focused as well on other environmental statutes and regulations implemented by EPA. Environmental groups and others disagree that the agency has overreached, and EPA states that critics' focus on the cost of controls obscures the benefits of new regulations, which, it estimates, far exceed the costs. It maintains that pollution control is an important source of economic activity, exports, and American jobs, as well. Further, the agency and its supporters say that EPA is carrying out the mandates detailed by Congress in the federal environmental statutes. This report provides background information on EPA regulatory activity during the Obama Administration to help address these issues. It examines 46 major or controversial regulatory actions taken by or under development at EPA since January 2009, providing details on the regulatory action itself, presenting an estimated timeline for completion of the rule (including identification of related court or statutory deadlines), and, in general, providing EPA's estimates of costs and benefits, where available. The report includes tables that show which rules have been finalized and which remain under development."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Copeland, Claudia
2013-07-16
-
Legislative Options for Financing Water Infrastructure [June 3, 2013]
"This report addresses several options being considered by Congress to address the financing needs of local communities for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects and to decrease or close the gap between available funds and projected needs. Some of the options exist and are well established, but they are under discussion for expansion or modification. Other innovative policy options for water infrastructure have recently been proposed, especially to supplement or complement existing financing tools. Some are intended to provide robust, longterm revenue to support existing financing programs and mechanisms. Some are intended to encourage private participation in furnishing drinking water and wastewater services. Six options that are reflected in recent legislative proposals, including budgetary implications, are discussed. 1) Increase funding for the State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs in the Clean Water Act (H.R. 1877 in the 113th Congress) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (H.R. 5320 in the 111th Congress), 2) Create a federal water infrastructure trust fund (H.R. 1877 in the 113th Congress and H.R. 6249 in the 112th Congress), 3) Create a 'Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act' Program, or WIFIA (S. 601 and S. 335 in the 113th Congress), 4) Create a National Infrastructure Bank (H.R. 2084 and H.R. 505 in the 113th Congress), 5) Lift private activity bond restrictions on water infrastructure projects (included in the Administration's FY2014 budget request and S. 939 and H.R. 1802 in the 112th Congress), and 6) Reinstate authority for the issuance of Build America Bonds (included in the Administration's FY2014 budget request and H.R. 535 and H.R. 789 in the 113th Congress). A number of these issues and options were examined in hearings by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment and by the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife in the 112th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Mallett, William; Maguire, Steven; Copeland, Claudia
2013-06-03
-
Controversies over Redefining 'Fill Material' Under the Clean Water Act [April 21, 2013]
"In May 2002, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) announced a regulation redefining two key terms, 'fill material' and 'discharge of fill material,' in rules that implement Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This report discusses the 2002 rule, focusing on how it changes which material and types of activities are regulated under Section 404 and the significance of these issues, especially for the mining industry."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2013-04-21
-
Water Quality Issues in the 113th Congress: An Overview [January 7, 2013]
"Much progress has been made in achieving the ambitious goals that Congress established 40 years ago in the Clean Water Act (CWA) to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. However, long-standing problems persist, and new problems have emerged. Water quality problems are diverse, ranging from pollution runoff from farms and ranches, city streets, and other diffuse or 'nonpoint' sources, to toxic substances discharged from factories and sewage treatment plants. There is little agreement among stakeholders about what solutions are needed and whether new legislation is required to address the nation's remaining water pollution problems. For some time, efforts to comprehensively amend the CWA have stalled as interests have debated whether and exactly how to change the law. Congress has instead focused legislative attention on enacting narrow bills to extend or modify selected CWA programs, but not any comprehensive proposals."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2013-01-07
-
Terrorism and Security Issues Facing the Water Infrastructure Sector [November 28, 2012]
"The September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have drawn attention to the security of many institutions, facilities, and systems in the United States, including the nation's water supply and water quality infrastructure. These systems have long been recognized as being potentially vulnerable to terrorist attacks of various types, including physical disruption, bioterrorism/chemical contamination, and cyber attack. Damage or destruction by terrorist attack could disrupt the delivery of vital human services in this country, threatening public health and the environment, or possibly causing loss of life. Further, since most water infrastructure is government-owned, it may serve as a symbolic and political target for some. This report presents an overview of this large and diverse sector, describes security-related actions by the government and private sector since 9/11, and discusses additional policy issues and responses, including congressional interest."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-11-28
-
Water Quality Issues in the 112th Congress: Oversight and Implementation [October 5, 2012]
"Much progress has been made in achieving the ambitious goals that Congress established nearly 40 years ago to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. However, long-standing problems persist, and new problems have emerged. Water quality problems are diverse, ranging from pollution runoff from farms and ranches, city streets, and other diffuse or 'nonpoint' sources, to 'point' source discharges of metals and organic and inorganic toxic substances from factories and sewage treatment plants. The principal law that deals with polluting activity in the nation's streams, lakes, estuaries, and coastal waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-500, enacted in 1972), commonly known as the Clean Water Act, or CWA. It consists of two major parts: regulatory provisions that impose progressively more stringent requirements on industries and cities to abate pollution and meet the statutory goal of zero discharge of pollutants; and provisions that authorize federal financial assistance for municipal wastewater treatment plant construction. […] Programs at the federal level are administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); state and local governments have primary day-to-day responsibilities to implement CWA programs through standard-setting, permitting, enforcement, and administering financial assistance programs. The water quality restoration objective declared in the 1972 act was accompanied by statutory goals to eliminate the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters by 1985 and to attain, wherever possible, waters deemed 'fishable and swimmable' by 1983. […] Many environmental groups believe that further fine-tuning is needed to maintain progress achieved to date and to address remaining water quality problems."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-10-05
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? [October 5, 2012]
"Since Barack Obama was sworn in as President of the United States in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations under the 11 pollution control statutes Congress has directed it to implement. Most of these statutes have not been amended for more than a decade, yet the agency is still addressing for the first time numerous directives given it by Congress, while also addressing newly emerging pollution problems and issues. The statutes also mandate that EPA conduct periodic reviews of many of the standards it issues, and the agency is doing these reviews, as well. […] EPA's actions, both individually and in sum, have generated controversy. […] This report provides a factual basis for discussion of these issues, which must ultimately be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The report identifies and briefly characterizes major regulatory actions promulgated, proposed, or under development by EPA since January 2009. The report uses data from EPA's Semiannual Regulatory Agendas and the list of economically significant reviews conducted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to compile a list of 45 regulatory actions proposed, promulgated, or under development by the agency."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia; McCarthy, James E.
2012-10-05
-
Mountaintop Mining: Background on Current Controversies [September 21, 2012]
"Mountaintop removal mining involves removing the top of a mountain in order to recover the coal seams contained there. This practice occurs in six Appalachian states (Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and Ohio). It creates an immense quantity of excess spoil (dirt and rock that previously composed the mountaintop), which is typically placed in valley fills on the sides of the former mountains, burying streams that flow through the valleys. Mountaintop mining is regulated under several laws, including the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). [...] This report provides background on regulatory requirements, controversies and legal challenges to mountaintop mining, and recent Administration actions. Congressional interest in these issues also is discussed, including legislation in the 111th Congress seeking to restrict the practice of mountaintop mining and other legislation intended to block the Obama Administration's regulatory actions. Attention to EPA's veto of the West Virginia mining permit and other federal agency actions has increased in the 112th Congress. Several bills have been introduced to clarify or restrict EPA's authority to veto CWA permits issued by the Corps (H.R. 457/S. 272; H.R. 517; H.R. 960/S. 468; and H.R. 2018)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-09-21
-
Clean Water Act and Pollutant Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) [September 21, 2012]
"Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to identify waters that are impaired by pollution, even after application of pollution controls. For those waters, states must establish a total maximum daily load (TMDL) of pollutants to ensure that water quality standards can be attained. A TMDL is both a quantitative assessment of pollution sources and pollutant reductions needed to restore and protect U.S. waters and a planning process for attaining water quality standards. Implementation of Section 303(d) was dormant until states and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) were prodded by lawsuits. The program has been controversial, in part because of requirements and costs faced by states to implement this 40-year-old provision of the law, as well as industries, cities, farmers, and others who may be required to use new pollution controls to meet TMDL requirements. Despite controversies, the TMDL program has become a core element of overall efforts to protect and restore water quality. States and EPA develop several thousand TMDLs annually, but many more need to be completed. The most recent information indicates that over 41,000 waterbodies do not meet water quality standards and need a TMDL to initiate corrective measures. The 303(d) program has evolved, and especially during the last decade, EPA and states have addressed more complex issues, including TMDLs involving both point (direct discharges) and nonpoint sources (diffuse discharges) such as stormwater; TMDLs for less-traditional causes of impairment such as ocean acidification and climate change; TMDLs for pollutants such as mercury that involve coordination among water, air, and other environmental programs; and multi-jurisdictional TMDLs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-09-21
-
Legislative Options for Financing Water Infrastructure [August 9, 2012]
"This report addresses several options being considered by Congress to address the financing needs of local communities for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects and to decrease or close the gap between available funds and projected needs. Some of the options exist and are well established, but they are under discussion for expansion or modification. Other innovative policy options have recently been proposed in connection with water infrastructure, especially to supplement or complement existing financing tools. Some are intended to provide robust, long-term revenue to support existing financing programs and mechanisms. Some are intended to encourage private participation in furnishing drinking water and wastewater services. […] Consensus exists among many stakeholders--state and local governments, equipment manufacturers and construction companies, and environmental advocates--on the need for more investment in water infrastructure. There is no consensus supporting a preferred option or policy, and many advocate a combination that will expand the financing 'toolbox' for projects. Some of the options discussed in this report may be helpful, but there is no single method that will address needs fully or close the financing gap completely. For example, some may be helpful to projects in large urban or multi-jurisdictional areas, while others may be more beneficial in smaller communities. It is unlikely that any of the recently proposed options could be up and running quickly, meaning that, at least for the near term, communities will continue to rely on the existing SRF [State Revolving Fund] programs, tax-exempt governmental bonds, and tax-exempt private activity bonds to finance their water infrastructure needs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia; Mallett, William; Maguire, Steven
2012-08-09
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or on Track? [August 8, 2012]
"Since Barack Obama was sworn in as President in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations implementing the pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Critics have reacted strongly. Many, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules. The House has conducted vigorous oversight of the agency in the 112th Congress, and has approved several bills that would overturn specific regulations or limit the agency's authority. Particular attention is being paid to the Clean Air Act, under which EPA has moved forward with the first federal controls on emissions of greenhouse gases and also addressed emissions of conventional pollutants from a number of industries. Environmental groups and others disagree that the agency has overreached, and EPA states that critics' focus on the cost of controls obscures the benefits of new regulations, which, it estimates, far exceed the costs; and it maintains that pollution control is an important source of economic activity, exports, and American jobs. Further, the agency and its supporters say that EPA is carrying out the mandates detailed by Congress in the federal environmental statutes. This report provides background information on recent EPA regulatory activity to help address these issues."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Copeland, Claudia
2012-08-08
-
Cooling Water Intake Structures: Summary of EPA's Proposed Rule [July 31, 2012]
"Thermoelectric generating plants and manufacturing facilities withdraw large volumes of water for production and, especially, to absorb heat from their industrial processes. Water withdrawals by power producers and manufacturers represent more than one-half of water withdrawn daily for various uses in the United States. Although water withdrawal is a necessity for these facilities, it also presents special problems for aquatic resources. In particular, the process of drawing surface water into the plant through cooling water intake structures (CWIS) can simultaneously pull in fish, shellfish, and tiny organisms, injuring or killing them. Congress enacted Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) specifically to address CWIS. Regulatory efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to implement Section 316(b) have a long and complicated history over 35 years, including legal challenges at every step by industry groups and environmental advocates. Currently most new facilities are regulated under rules issued in 2001, while rules for existing facilities were challenged and remanded to EPA for revisions. In response to the remands, in March 2011 EPA proposed national requirements affecting approximately 1,150 existing electric powerplants and manufacturing facilities. Even before release, the proposed regulations were highly controversial among stakeholders and some Members of Congress. The issue for Congress has been whether a stringent and costly environmental mandate could jeopardize reliability of electricity supply in the United States. Many in industry feared, while environmental groups hoped, that EPA would require installation of technology called closed-cycle cooling that most effectively minimizes the adverse environmental impacts of CWIS, but also is the most costly technology option."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-07-31
-
Stormwater Permits: Status of EPA's Regulatory Program [July 30, 2012]
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and states are implementing a federally mandated program for controlling stormwater discharges from industrial facilities and municipalities. Large cities and most industry sources are subject to rules issued in 1990, and EPA issued permit rules to cover smaller cities and other industrial sources and construction sites in 1999. Because of the large number of affected sources and deadline changes that led to confusion, numerous questions have arisen about this program. Impacts and costs of the program's requirements, especially on cities, are a continuing concern. The 109th Congress enacted omnibus energy legislation (P.L. 109-58, the Energy Policy Act of 2005) that included a provision giving the oil and gas industry regulatory relief from some stormwater control requirements. In May 2008, a federal court vacated an EPA rule implementing this provision. […] In 2009 the National Research Council issued a report calling for major changes to strengthen EPA's stormwater regulatory program, which it criticized as being inconsistent nationally and failing to adequately control all sources of stormwater discharge that contribute to waterbody impairment. In response, EPA has begun efforts to expand regulations and strengthen the current program with a revised rule that it expects to propose in mid-2013 and to finalize by December 2014. The new rule is expected to focus on stormwater discharges from newly developed and redeveloped, or post-construction, sites, such as subdivisions, roadways, industrial facilities, and commercial buildings or shopping centers."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-07-30
-
Animal Waste and Water Quality: EPA's Response to the 'Waterkeeper Alliance' Court Decision on Regulation of CAFOs [July 30, 2012]
From the Introduction: "This report describes major features of the 2003 CAFO [confined animal feeding operations] rule. It discusses the parts of the 2003 rule that were addressed in the federal court's 2005 decision and EPA's response, as reflected in the 2008 revised regulation. It then describes legal challenges to the 2008 rule, and the federal court's March 2011 ruling. The report also provides an overview of perspectives of key interest groups-- the livestock and poultry industry, states, and environmentalists--on these issues."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-07-30
-
Air Quality Issues and Animal Agriculture: EPA's Air Compliance Agreement [July 20, 2012]
"From an environmental quality standpoint, much of the interest in animal agriculture has focused on impacts on water resources, because animal waste, if not properly managed, can harm water quality through surface runoff, direct discharges, spills, and leaching into soil and groundwater. A more recent issue is the contribution of emissions from animal feeding operations (AFO), enterprises where animals are raised in confinement, to air pollution. AFOs can affect air quality through emissions of gases such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, hazardous air pollutants, and odor. These pollutants and compounds have a number of environmental and human health effects. Agricultural operations that emit large quantities of air pollutants may be subject to Clean Air Act (CAA) regulation and permits. Further, some livestock operations also may be regulated under the release reporting requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund, or CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). Questions about the applicability of these laws to livestock and poultry operations have been controversial and have drawn congressional attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-07-20
-
Animal Waste and Hazardous Substances: Current Laws and Legislative Issues [July 20, 2012]
From the Summary: "The animal sector of agriculture has undergone major changes in the last several decades, a fact that has drawn the attention of policymakers and the public. In particular, organizational changes within the industry to enhance economic efficiency have resulted in larger confined production facilities that often are geographically concentrated. Increased facility size and regional concentration of livestock and poultry operations have, in turn, given rise to concerns over the management of animal wastes from these facilities and potential impacts on environmental quality, public health and welfare. […] This report describes the provisions of Superfund and EPCRA [Emergency Planning and Community Right-to- Know Act], and enforcement actions under these laws that have received attention. Congressional scrutiny in the form of legislative proposals and oversight hearings is discussed. Bills intended to exempt animal manure from the requirements of Superfund and EPCRA have been introduced several times since the 109th Congress, and similar bills have also been introduced in the 112th Congress (H.R. 2997 and S. 1729). Issues raised by the legislation are analyzed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2012-07-20
