{
  "id": "R42587",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R42587",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 428156,
      "date": "2014-02-18",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T23:07:01.969838",
      "title": "Whether Logging Road Runoff Requires a Clean Water Act Permit: Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center",
      "summary": "U.S. forests are crisscrossed by thousands of miles of logging roads. When it rains or snow melts, runoff from these roads can be environmentally harmful, so how to address this runoff under the Clean Water Act (CWA) has long been an issue. \nOn March 20, 2013, the Supreme Court in Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center addressed one aspect of this issue: logging road runoff that is discharged into CWA-covered waters from ditches, culverts, or other channels. Such conveyances arguably make the runoff a \u201cpoint source\u201d under the CWA, which normally means that a permit under the act\u2019s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) is required. Special CWA provisions, however, exempt stormwater runoff, unless, as relevant here, it is \u201cassociated with industrial activity.\u201d In Decker, the Supreme Court upheld 7-1 EPA\u2019s long-standing reading of its Industrial Stormwater Rule that logging road runoff, even if channeled, is not \u201cassociated with industrial activity\u201d and so does not require a NPDES permit. This reversed the Ninth Circuit and affirmed EPA\u2019s view that logging road runoff is subject only to a requirement of best management practices.\nIn upholding EPA\u2019s reading of its rule as exempting logging road runoff from the NPDES program, the Court observed that references in the Industrial Stormwater Rule suggest that its natural reading should be confined to traditional industrial buildings, and so does not extend to logging operations. Moreover, EPA had espoused this reading for a long time; it had not been adopted recently in response to this litigation. In light of these factors, the Court viewed the precept that courts owe deference to agency interpretations of their own rules as applying in full force. Finally, the state of Oregon had invested much effort in developing best management practices for stormwater runoff from logging roads, so EPA, as the Court saw it, could reasonably have concluded that further federal regulation would be unnecessary. \nEPA\u2019s response to the Ninth Circuit ruling was to amend the Industrial Stormwater Rule. The amended rule, issued in November 2012 three days prior to the oral argument before the Supreme Court, makes explicit the agency\u2019s long-standing position that logging roads do not need CWA discharge permits for stormwater runoff. The Supreme Court opinion actually deals with EPA\u2019s reading of the prior, less explicit version of the Industrial Stormwater Rule. The amended rule may or may not be resurrected on remand to the district court. For the moment, however, the status quo is unchanged: NPDES permits have never been required for logging road runoff, and they are not required as of now. EPA also is considering designating a subset of stormwater discharges from forest roads for regulation under flexible mechanisms available in the CWA, including non-permitting approaches, but the agency has not issued a proposal or announced a timetable for further action.\nCongressional interest in responding to the Ninth Circuit ruling has been strong. Congress enacted temporary measures that barred EPA until September 30, 2013, from requiring a permit for stormwater runoff associated with silviculture activities. The 2013 farm bill reauthorization (H.R. 2642, P.L. 113-79) includes a provision stating that discharges resulting from specified silviculture activities shall not require CWA discharge permits.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42587",
          "sha1": "2bdd18dd98091577c38b52cba851d26ed4ef4a6b",
          "filename": "files/20140218_R42587_2bdd18dd98091577c38b52cba851d26ed4ef4a6b.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42587",
          "sha1": "5aae76601987e054c23d8b3a8decdbf0db6432f3",
          "filename": "files/20140218_R42587_5aae76601987e054c23d8b3a8decdbf0db6432f3.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Environmental Policy"
  ]
}