|
<br />Senator Jim Sasser (D-TN) has introduced S. 1606,
<br />the Federal Mandate Funding Act, to impose a two-
<br />year moratorium on new unfunded mandates and to
<br />require Congress to include a cost-sharing statement
<br />before "mandating" legislation is considered. It also
<br />establishes a "federal mandate assistance fund,"
<br />which would be a modWied form of revenue sharing
<br />targeting assistance to state and local governments
<br />based on the burden of federal mandates and their
<br />relative fiscal strength, calculated as a function of
<br />population, per capita Income, general tax effort, and
<br />the "relative fiscal gap."
<br />
<br />ENVIRONMENT
<br />
<br />Endangered Species Act
<br />
<br />On May 2, a federal district court invalidated the
<br />U.S. Fish and WildlWe Service's listing of the coastal
<br />California gnatcatcher as a threatened species under
<br />a final rule published on March 30, 1993. The listing
<br />decision relied in part on conclusions from a scientific
<br />report on taxonomic studies. However, the Service did
<br />not obtain nor release for public review the data upon
<br />which the report was based, and the building industry
<br />and others filed suit claiming the Service was legally
<br />required to make the data available for comment.
<br />
<br />Of note, Interior Secretary Babbitt has in the past
<br />used the gnatcatcher as an example of opportunities
<br />for cooperative ecosystem management to protect
<br />endangered species, while at the same time allowing
<br />reasonable development. Interior has already filed a
<br />motion for reconsideration of the court's decision, and
<br />alternatively a motion to stay the portion of the
<br />decision vacating the listing pending further public
<br />comment. Both motions are pending before the court.
<br />Interior may also appeal the decision, list the
<br />gnatcatcher on an emergency basis, or propose a
<br />new rule. Meanwhile, the controversial data have
<br />been obtained and released for public review. For
<br />more information contact Gail Kobetich, Field
<br />Supervisor, Carlsbad, California (619) 431-9440. (59
<br />FR 28509)
<br />
<br />WATER QUAUTY
<br />
<br />Clean Water Act-Reauthorization
<br />
<br />Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) , Chairman of the
<br />Senate Environment Public Works Committee, and his
<br />
<br />. .
<br />
<br />,,/
<br />
<br />staff, as well as Rep. Norm Mineta (D-CA), Chairman
<br />of the House Public Works Committee, and his staff,
<br />are working together with Senate Majority Leader ..
<br />George Mitchell (D-ME), EPA Administrator Carol .-
<br />Browner, and White House representatives to iron out
<br />a schedule for action on reauthorization of the Clean
<br />Water Act (CWA). While originally scheduled for
<br />Senate floor action following the Memorial Day recess,
<br />such action has been postponed at least for a few
<br />weeks. Meanwhile House committee action is pending.
<br />
<br />Senator Baucus is anxious to avoid floor fights and
<br />is working to resolve a number of difficult issues,
<br />including provisions in the Senate bill (S.2093) on
<br />control of non point source pollution, anti-degradation
<br />policies and requirements, treatment of toxics,
<br />wetlands protection, and provisions enabling states to
<br />adopt a watershed approach to water quality
<br />improvements. Further, of specific interest to western
<br />states, Senate committee members and staff continue
<br />to consider proposed amendments to protect state
<br />water rights and authorities, modify Section 518, which
<br />requires that Indian tribes be treated as states under
<br />certain conditions, provide protection from liability for
<br />state agencies and others who seek to remediate
<br />water quality problems at abandoned mine sites from
<br />liability, and clarny treatment of ephemeral, intermittent
<br />and effluent dominated streams. Given the Supreme ~
<br />Court's decision in the Elkhorn case (WSW #1046),
<br />Senate staff are inclined to recommend deleting from
<br />S. 2093 a provision amending CWA Section 401 to
<br />clarify that states have authority to certny that any
<br />federally licensed activity will comply with water quality
<br />standards set to protect designated stream uses.
<br />
<br />As a practical matter, reauthorization will depend
<br />upon Senate and House action being completed
<br />before the August recess. Optimistically, the Senate
<br />could pass a bill this month (WSW #1046 and #1045).
<br />The House Public Works Committee could markup a
<br />bill before the July 4 recess. The House Merchant
<br />Marine and Fisheries Committee wants to review
<br />provisions under its jurisdiction, which Chairman Gerry
<br />Studds (D-MA) says will take about two weeks.
<br />Following passage in the House, legislation would be
<br />submitted to a conference committee for possible
<br />action in September. Nevertheless, the prospects are
<br />far from certain, given the continuing opposition to
<br />several provisions of the bill from environmentalists,
<br />industry and states. Moreover, health care reform and
<br />Superfund reauthorization may take priority.
<br />
<br />The WESTERN STATES WATER COUNCIL is an organization of representatives appointed by the Governors of ~
<br />member states - Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, ....
<br />South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming, and associate member states Montana, Oklahoma, and Washington.
<br />
|