27 



nature, if you will, are forced. On average, the Corps does quite 

 well in terms of its average performance. 



What we are concerned about is the outliers, if you will, that are 

 not being held up for a particular reason, the endangered species 

 issue or NEPA, for example. The deadline process will serve the 

 variance in permit time. 



Ms. Lambert. Hopefully. But again, there is no alternative meas- 

 ure that would be included if in fact that deadline is not met? 



Mr. Dickey. Again, the process under which the permit deadline 

 procedure will work is yet to be defined. 



Ms. Lambert. Has there been any kind of a scientific study al- 

 ready done on how well mitigation banking would or could work in 

 comparison to the association with wetlands. 



Mr. Wayland. The question goes not so much to mitigation 

 banking, but mitigation and how successful we are in replacing 

 wetlands. There have been a number of studies and frankly the re- 

 sults are quite mixed. 



All in all, I don't think we could say we have high confidence 

 that efforts to restore or create wetlands have been, over the long- 

 term, demonstrated to be successful in restoring the full range of 

 values that exist in a natural wetland. We recognize that restora- 

 tion is a partial solution. That is why it is not the approach of first 

 choice. 



Ms. Lambert. But there are several scientific studies? 



Mr. Wayland. Yes. 



Mr. Studds. The gentleman from North Carolina. 



Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You mentioned in your 

 statement that the SCS would be the lead agency, but you say it 

 will be in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service and 

 under the programmatic oversight of EPA and the Corps. 



Is that sort of the around about? 



Mr. Wayland. Of saying you are going to have four agencies in- 

 volved. 



Mr. Taylor. Would I have to check my programmatical oversight 

 before I plow? 



Mr. Wayland. Congressman, that is the same arrangement that 

 now exists between the Corps of Engineers and EPA. That means 

 that a particular decision will not be revisited by EPA or the Corps 

 when made by the SCS. 



If, however, there is an indication of a pattern of problems 

 within a particular SCS field office jurisdiction, EPA could declare 

 a special case and from that point forward make the determina- 

 tions until the necessary training or procedures are in place so that 

 the judgments by the SCS are reliable. That is what the term "pro- 

 grammatic oversight" means. This is the mechanism that exists at 

 present with jurisdictional determinations made by the Corps. 



Mr. Taylor. I understand it is not as much reinventing as I 

 thought it was. If I get agricultural approval for use of my farm- 

 land and I am plowing a field that might have been in question 

 and then I decide to lease that field to the Boy Scouts to build a 

 summer camp, do I come back and start the processes all over 

 again through EPA or the Corps or anyone else? I detected that a 

 moment ago in the gentlemen from California's question. 



