I 
110TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 5881 
To direct the President to enter into an arrangement with the National 
Academy of Sciences to evaluate certain Federal rules and regulations 
for potentially harmful impacts on public health, air quality, water qual-
ity, plant and animal wildlife, global climate, or the environment; and 
to direct Federal departments and agencies to create plans to reverse 
those impacts that are determined to be harmful by the National Acad-
emy of Sciences. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
APRIL 23, 2008 
Ms. LEE (for herself, Mr. GRIJALVA, and Mr. HONDA) introduced the fol-
lowing bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science and Tech-
nology, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infra-
structure, Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Energy and Commerce, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 
for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
committee concerned 
A BILL 
To direct the President to enter into an arrangement with 
the National Academy of Sciences to evaluate certain 
Federal rules and regulations for potentially harmful im-
pacts on public health, air quality, water quality, plant 
and animal wildlife, global climate, or the environment; 
and to direct Federal departments and agencies to create 
plans to reverse those impacts that are determined to 
be harmful by the National Academy of Sciences. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6652
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Environment and Pub-
lic Health Restoration Act of 2008’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
(a) GENERAL FINDINGS.—The Congress finds as fol-
lows: 
(1) As human beings, we share our environment 
with a wide variety of habitats and ecosystems that 
nurture and sustain a diversity of species. 
(2) The abundance of natural resources in our 
environment forms the basis for our economy and 
has greatly contributed to human development 
throughout history. 
(3) The accelerated pace of human development 
over the last several hundred years has significantly 
impacted our natural environment and its resources, 
the health and diversity of plant and animal wildlife, 
the availability of critical habitats, the quality of our 
air and our water, and our global climate. 
(4) The intervention of the Federal Government 
is necessary to minimize and mitigate human impact 
on the environment for the benefit of public health, 
maintain air quality and water quality, sustain the 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
diversity of plants and animals, combat global cli-
mate change, and protect the environment. 
(5) Laws and regulations in the United States 
have been created and promulgated to minimize and 
mitigate human impact on the environment for the 
benefit of public health, maintain air quality and 
water quality, sustain wildlife, and protect the envi-
ronment. 
(6) Such laws include the Antiquities Act of 
1906 (16 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) initiated by President 
Theodore Roosevelt to create the national park sys-
tem, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Clean Air Act (42 
U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92– 
500), the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Public Law 95– 
217), the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (Public 
Law 96–510), the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(Public Law 93–205), and the National Forest Man-
agement Act of 1976 (Public Law 94–588). 
(7) Attempts to repeal or weaken key environ-
mental safeguards pose dangers to the public health, 
air quality, water quality, wildlife, and the environ-
ment. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
(b) 
FINDINGS
ON
CHANGES
AND
PROPOSED 
CHANGES IN LAW.—The Congress finds that, since 2001, 
the following changes and proposed changes to existing 
law or regulations have negatively impacted or will nega-
tively impact the environment and public health: 
(1) CLEAN WATER.— 
(A) On May 9, 2002, the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and the United 
States Army Corps of Engineers put forth a 
final rule that reconciled section 404 regula-
tions of the Clean Water Act by redefining the 
term ‘‘fill material’’ and amending the defini-
tion of the term ‘‘discharge of fill material’’, re-
versing a 25-year-old Clean Water Act regula-
tion. The new rule fails to restrict the dumping 
of hardrock mining waste, construction debris, 
and other industrial wastes into rivers, streams, 
lakes, and wetlands. The rule further allows de-
structive mountaintop removal coal mining com-
panies to dump waste into streams and lakes, 
polluting the surrounding natural habitat and 
poisoning plants and animals that depend on 
those water sources. 
(B) On February 12, 2003, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency published the rule 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
‘‘National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Sys-
tem Permit Regulation and Effluent Limitation 
Guidelines and Standards for Concentrated 
Animal Feeding Operations’’—new livestock 
waste regulations that aimed to control factory 
farm pollution but which would severely under-
mine existing Clean Water Act protections. This 
regulation allows large-scale animal factories to 
foul the Nation’s waters with animal waste, al-
lows livestock owners to draft their own pollu-
tion-management plans and avoid groundwater 
monitoring, legalizes the discharge of contami-
nated runoff water rich in nitrogen, phos-
phorus, bacteria, and metals, and ensures that 
large factory farms are not held liable for the 
environmental damage they cause. In a 2005 
Federal Court Decision (Waterkeeper Alliance 
et al. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 (2nd Cir. 2005)), 
major parts of the rule were upheld, others va-
cated, and still others remanded back to the 
EPA. The EPA proposed rule revisions in June 
2006, along with supplementary revisions in 
March 2008, which are still pending final pro-
mulgation. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
(C) On March 19, 2003, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency published a new rule 
regarding the Total Maximum Daily Load pro-
gram of the Clean Water Act, which regulates 
the maximum amount of a particular pollutant 
that can be present in a body of water and still 
meet water quality standards. The new rule 
withdrew the existing regulation put forth on 
July 13, 2000, and halted momentum in clean-
ing up polluted waterways throughout the coun-
try. By abandoning the existing rule, the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency is undermining 
the effectiveness of clean-up plans and is allow-
ing States to avoid cleaning polluted waters en-
tirely by dropping them from their clean-up 
lists. Waterways play a crucial role in the lives 
of Americans and are critical to the livelihood 
of fish and wildlife. By dropping the July 2000 
rule, cleanup of existing polluted rivers, shore-
lines, and lakes will be delayed, harming more 
fish and wildlife and worsening the quality of 
drinking water. 
(D) On June 5, 2007, the Environmental 
Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engi-
neers jointly issued a Guidance Document in 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
the form of a Legal Memorandum, titled ‘‘Clean 
Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Su-
preme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United 
States & Carabell v. United States’’. This new 
guidance dictates enforcement actions under the 
Clean Water Act, and calls for a complicated 
‘‘case-by-case’’ analysis to determine Clean 
Water Act jurisdiction for waterways that do 
not flow all year long. Such actions endanger 
small streams and wetlands that serve as im-
portant habitats for aquatic life, which play a 
fundamental role in safeguarding sources of 
clean drinking water and mitigate the risks and 
effects of floods and droughts. Further, the def-
inition provided therein for ‘‘waters of the 
United States’’ is applicable to the Clean Water 
Act as a whole, potentially affecting programs 
that control industrial pollution and sewage lev-
els, prevent oil spills, and set water quality 
standards for all waters in the United States 
protected under the Clean Water Act. 
(2) FORESTS AND LAND MANAGEMENT.— 
(A) On December 3, 2003, the President 
signed into law the Healthy Forests Restoration 
Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–148). Although 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
the law attempts to reduce the risk of cata-
strophic forest fires, it provides a boon to tim-
ber companies by accelerating the aggressive 
thinning of backcountry forests that are far 
from at-risk communities. The law allows for 
increased logging of large, fire-resistant trees 
that are not in close proximity of homes and 
communities; it undermines critical protections 
for endangered species by exempting Federal 
land management agencies from consulting with 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service be-
fore approving any action that could harm en-
dangered plants or wildlife; and it limits public 
participation by reducing the number of envi-
ronmental project reviews. 
(B) On April 21, 2008, the Department of 
Agriculture issued a Final Planning Rule and 
Record of Decision for National Forest System 
Land Management Planning. Similar to rules 
enacted by the Administration on January 5, 
2005, later remanded back to the agency in 
Federal district court for violating the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Endan-
gered Species Act of 1973, and the Administra-
tive Procedure Act (Citizens for Better Forestry 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 481 F. Supp. 2d 
1059 (N.D. Cal. 2007)), this revised rule elimi-
nates strict forest planning standards estab-
lished in 1982, and opens millions of acres of 
public lands to damaging and invasive logging, 
mining, and drilling operations. These regula-
tions would reverse more than 20 years of pro-
tection for wildlife and national forests by re-
moving the overall goal of ensuring ecological 
sustainability in managing the national forest 
system, weakening the National Forest Man-
agement Act of 1976, and effectively ending the 
review of forest management plans under the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 
(C) On September 20, 2006, the District 
Court for the Northern District of California, 
vacated the Protection of Inventoried Roadless 
Areas rule, enacted on May 13, 2005, which 
gave State Governors 18 months to petition the 
Federal Government to either restore the pre-
vious rule for their States, or submit a new 
management and development plan for national 
forest areas inventoried under the rule. Despite 
the enjoinment of the Administration’s 2005 
rule, and the subsequent restoration of the 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
original Roadless Area Conservation Rule, the 
Department of Agriculture has stated that 
States can still petition for a special rule under 
the authority of the Administrative Procedure 
Act. As a result, 58.5 million acres of wild na-
tional forests are still vulnerable to logging, 
road building, and other developments that may 
fragment natural habitats and negatively im-
pact fish and wildlife. 
(3) CLEAN AIR.— 
(A) On October 20, 2005, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency proposed the rule 
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration, Non-
attainment New Source Review, and New 
Source Performance Standards: Emissions Test 
for Electric Generating Units’’, along with a 
supplemental proposal on April 25, 2007. This 
new rule would significantly undermine the New 
Source Review Permitting Program, a key tool 
of the Clean Air Act which requires owners of 
industrial facilities to install modern pollution 
control mechanisms whenever existing equip-
ment is expanded, improved, replaced, or sig-
nificantly repaired. Under the rulemaking pro-
posal, power plants could make modifications 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
without installing controls as long as such 
changes do not increase ‘‘maximum hourly 
emissions 
achievable’’, 
effectively 
allowing 
plants to increase annual emissions of pollut-
ants such as sulfur dioxide by more than 
10,000 tons per year, any time modifications 
increase the hourly operations of the facility. 
Described as ‘‘effectively unenforceable’’ by the 
Director of the Environmental Protection Agen-
cy’s Air Enforcement Division, the proposed 
rule weakens the effectiveness of the Clean Air 
Act and fails to hold the oldest and dirtiest in-
dustrial facilities accountable for reducing the 
amount of pollution they produce, allowing 
them to continue to emit harmful toxic pollut-
ants that will have a detrimental impact on 
public health and the environment. 
(B) On March 27, 2008, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency issued a new rule re-
vising National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
for Ozone (NAAQS), which sets new EPA air 
pollution limits for ground level ozone, or smog, 
allowed in the air. Despite a requirement that 
directs the EPA to set air pollution limits low 
enough, and with a ‘‘margin of safety’’ suffi-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
cient to protect even the most sensitive groups, 
this new rule sets primary and secondary stand-
ards at .075 parts per million, well above the 
lower level of .060 found to affect some healthy 
individuals. The Clean Air Scientific Advisory 
Committee unanimously recommended a range 
of .060 to .070 for the primary ozone NAAQS. 
Because existing law allows nonattainment 
areas up to twenty years to meet air quality 
standards, the long-term implications of this 
new standard and its extensive impact on public 
health across the country necessitate standards 
supported by available scientific data in order 
to ensure adequate public protection from seri-
ous diseases linked to ozone pollution including 
asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. 
(C) On January 3, 2007, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency published a proposed 
rule to amend the General Provisions of the 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous 
Air Pollutants (NESHAP). This rule would 
eliminate the decade-old ‘‘once-in-always-in’’ 
policy which requires major source compliance 
with maximum achievable control technology 
standards (MACT), subverting the intent of the 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
Clean Air Act for major sources of hazardous 
air pollutants to achieve maximum emissions re-
ductions. By allowing a major source to acquire 
‘‘area source’’ status by obtaining potential-to- 
emit permits, and thereby avoid compliance 
with MACT standards, the proposed rule would 
allow for significantly higher emission levels of 
toxic air pollutants from existing plants across 
the country. Such a provision significantly de-
grades toxic air pollution standards, and in-
creases health risks for millions of people ex-
posed to higher levels of air toxicity. 
SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF POLICY. 
It is the policy of the United States Government to 
work in conjunction with States, territories, tribal govern-
ments, international organizations, and foreign govern-
ments in order to act as a steward of the environment 
for the benefit of public health, maintain air quality and 
water quality, sustain the diversity of plant and animal 
species, combat global climate change, and protect the en-
vironment for future generations to enjoy. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
SEC. 4. STUDY AND REPORT ON PUBLIC HEALTH OR ENVI-
RONMENTAL IMPACT OF REVISED RULES, 
REGULATIONS, LAWS, OR PROPOSED LAWS. 
(a) STUDY.—Not later than 30 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the President shall enter into 
an arrangement under which the National Academy of 
Sciences will conduct a study to determine the impact on 
public health, air quality, water quality, wildlife, and the 
environment of the following regulations, laws, and pro-
posed laws: 
(1) CLEAN WATER.— 
(A) Final Revisions to the Clean Water 
Act Regulatory Definitions of ‘‘Fill Material’’ 
and ‘‘Discharge of Fill Material’’, finalized and 
published in the Federal Register on May 9, 
2002 (67 FR 31129), amending title 40, Code 
of Federal Regulations, part 232. 
(B) National Pollutant Discharge Elimi-
nation System Permit Regulation and Effluent 
Limitation Guidelines and Standards for Con-
centrated Animal Feeding Operations, finalized 
and published in the Federal Register on Feb-
ruary 12, 2003 (68 FR 7176), amending title 
40, Code of Federal Regulations, parts 9, 122, 
123, and 412. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
(C) A March 19, 2003, rule published in 
the Federal Register (68 FR 13608) with-
drawing a July 13, 2000, rule revising the 
Total Maximum Daily Load program of the 
Clean Water Act (65 FR 43586), amending 
title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, parts 9, 
122, 123, 124, and 130. 
(2) FORESTS AND LAND MANAGEMENT.— 
(A) Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 
2003, signed into law on December 3, 2003 
(Public Law 108–148). 
(B) National Forest System Land Manage-
ment Planning Rule, finalized and published in 
the Federal Register on April 21, 2008 (73 FR 
21468), replacing the 2005 final rule (70 FR 
1022, Jan. 5, 2005), as amended March 3, 
2006 (71 FR 10837) and the 2000 final rule 
adopted on November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67514) 
as amended on September 29, 2004 (69 FR 
58055), amending title 36, Code of Federal 
Regulations, part 219. 
(C) The application of the Administrative 
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 to 559, 701 to 
706, et seq.), such that States may petition for 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
02:23 Apr 25, 2008
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5881.IH
H5881
wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS