PDF _ 97-223 - The Army Corps of Engineers’ Nationwide Permits Program: Issues and Regulatory Developments
21-Aug-2008; Claudia Copeland; 30 p.

Update: Previous Releases:
June 27, 2007
May 19, 2005
February 2, 2005
Nationwide Permits for Wetlands Projects: Permit 26 and Other Issues and Controversies
http://www.NCSEonline.org/nle/crsreports/wetlands/wet-7.cfm

Abstract: Permits issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorize various types of development projects in wetlands and other waters of the United States. The Corps’ regulatory process involves two types of permits: general permits for actions by private landowners that are similar in nature and will likely have a minor effect on wetlands, and individual permits for more significant actions. The Corps uses general permits to minimize the burden of its regulatory program: they authorize landowners to proceed with a project without the time-consuming need to obtain standard individual permits in advance. About 90% of the Corps’ regulatory workload is processed in the form of general permits.

Nationwide permits are one type of general permit. Nationwide permits, which currently number 49, are issued for five-year periods and thereafter must be renewed. They were most recently reissued in total in March 2007. The current nationwide permit program has few strong supporters, for differing reasons. Developers and other industry groups say that it is too complex and burdened with arbitrary restrictions that limit opportunities for an efficient permitting process and have little environmental benefit. Environmentalists say that it does not adequately protect aquatic resources, because the review procedures and permit requirements are less rigorous than those for individual or standard permits. At issue is whether the program has become so complex and expansive that it cannot either protect aquatic resources or provide for a fair regulatory system, which are its dual objectives.

In addition to general objections, interest groups have a number of specific criticisms of the permits, such as requirements that there must be compensatory mitigation for impacts of some authorized activities, impacts of regional conditioning through which local aquatic considerations are addressed, concern that coal mining activities authorized by these permits have significant adverse environmental impacts, and the need to define “minimal adverse effects” for purposes of implementing the nationwide permit program. Coordinating implementation of the nationwide permits between federal and state governments also raises a number of issues. Of particular concern to states is tension over whether their authority to certify the nationwide permits is sufficient to assure that water quality standards or coastal zone management plans will not be violated.

Congressional interest in wetlands permit regulatory programs has been evident in the past in oversight hearings and in connection with specific provisions of bills to fund the Corps’ regulatory programs. For some time, there has been a stalemate over legislation that would revise wetlands regulatory law and that could, if enacted, modify the nationwide permit program. During this time, no consensus has emerged on whether or how to reform overall wetlands policy legislatively. Congressional involvement in these issues could arise again as a result of reissuance of the nationwide permits in 2007.

 [read report]

Topics: Wetlands, Natural Resources

210 
Start Over