Ch. 1— Summary * 17 



Issue IB: Options to decrease Federal involvement 

 in managing wetlands 



If Federal involvement in protecting wetlands ap- 

 pears to Congress to be too great, a number of op- 

 tions could be adopted. Some options reduce fund- 

 ing for Federal programs; others reduce the scope 

 of the 404 program. Legislative action is desired 

 by some who favor extensive and permanent re- 

 forms in the program. The following options for 

 decreasing the level of Federal involvement will also 

 decrease wetlands protection, costs for the Federal 

 Government, and regulatory costs to developers. 

 How great these decreases will be is unknown. 



Option 1: Amend section 404. 



In a February 10, 1983, letter to EPA, the As- 

 sistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) outlined 

 several possible legislative changes to section 404, 

 including the options below. OTA analysis indicates 

 that any combination of these options that includes 

 either of the first two changes probably would pro- 

 vide a level of Federal wedand regulation and 404- 

 related costs to industry similar to those that 

 existed prior to full implementation of the 404 

 program. 



Transfer the 404 program to the States. — Most 

 coastal wetlands are reasonably well regulated by 

 404 and State programs; most inland wetlands are 

 not. In those coastal States with strong wedand pro- 

 grams, transfer of the 404 program to the States 

 probably would not affect wedand use in a major 

 way. In States with relatively weak or no programs, 

 such an option would reduce control over wedands, 

 especially inland wetlands, unless the Federal Gov- 

 ernment provided large amounts of financial and 

 technical assistance to strengthen State programs. 

 Even with assistance, some States still might not 

 effectively regulate wetland use. 



Expand the use of general permits to include 

 all projects other than those occurring in tradi- 

 tionally navigable waters. — Since monitoring and 

 enforcement requirements for general permits are 

 usually not a high priority in most Corps districts, 

 development of most wetlands would, for all prac- 

 tical purposes, be uncontrolled by the Federal Gov- 

 ernment. Instead, States would have primary re- 

 sponsibility for regulating the use of most wedands. 



Eliminate permitting requirements for any in- 

 cidental discharges. — If section 404(f)2 were elim- 

 inated, it would be very unclear whether or not the 

 Corps would be required to regulate discharges of 

 dredged or fill material that are incidental to ac- 

 tivities that convert waters of the United States to 

 a new use. Thus, the clearing of wedands, such as 

 the bottom land hardwoods, would probably be- 

 come less stringendy regulated than it is at present. 



Make 404(b) 1 guidelines only advisory in na- 

 ture. — Section 404(b)l guidelines are developed by 

 EPA in conjunction with the Corps. Through this 

 change, EPA's role in the 404 program would be 

 significandy reduced and nonenvironmental factors 

 could be used by the Corps to override environmen- 

 tal concerns. 



Give the Corps sole authority to define 

 "dredged material" and "fill material" and ac- 

 tivities that constitute a discharge. — This pro- 

 vision would eliminate EPA's current legal involve- 

 ment in Corps decisions about what activities and 

 types of fill material, such as garbage, would be 

 regulated. 



Option 2: Decrease appropriations for acquisition, 

 easement, and leasing programs. 



The Federal Government spends several million 

 dollars each year for wetland acquisition, ease- 

 ments, or leases. Federal funding for these pro- 

 grams could be decreased; similarly, lower priori- 

 ty could be given to wetland purchases. Either ac- 

 tion would have little effect on industry. 



Option 3: Rescind Executive Order 11990. 



Regulations developed by many Federal agen- 

 cies in response to Executive Order 1 1990, Protec- 

 tion of Wetlands, could be rescinded. This would 

 allow, for instance. Federal assistance to farmers 

 for wetland drainage. 



Issue 2: Should the Federal Government improve its 

 policymaking capability through a system- 

 atic collection and analysis of additional in- 

 formation about wedands? 



At this time there is uncertainty about current 

 trends in wetland use, the environmental 

 significance of further wedand conversions, and 



