[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 152 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>






115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 152

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that clean water 
   is a national priority, and that the June 29, 2015, Waters of the 
           United States Rule should be withdrawn or vacated.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 27, 2017

 Mr. Gibbs (for himself, Mr. McClintock, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Marshall, Mr. 
Jody B. Hice of Georgia, Mr. Messer, Mr. Babin, Mrs. Wagner, Mr. Brady 
 of Texas, Mr. Denham, Mr. Marino, Mr. Franks of Arizona, Mr. Lewis of 
Minnesota, Mr. Hensarling, Mr. Thomas J. Rooney of Florida, Mr. Gaetz, 
Mr. Rogers of Alabama, Mr. King of Iowa, Mr. DesJarlais, Mrs. Noem, Mr. 
   Yoho, Mr. Gosar, Mr. Cramer, Mrs. Mimi Walters of California, Mr. 
    Harper, Mr. Westerman, Mr. Smucker, Mr. Graves of Missouri, Mr. 
Thompson of Pennsylvania, Mr. Culberson, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Renacci, Ms. 
  Jenkins of Kansas, Mr. Jones, Mr. Latta, Mr. Young of Iowa, and Mr. 
Grothman) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that clean water 
   is a national priority, and that the June 29, 2015, Waters of the 
           United States Rule should be withdrawn or vacated.

Whereas the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) 
        (commonly known as the ``Clean Water Act'') is one of the most important 
        laws in the United States and has led to decades of successful 
        environmental improvements;
Whereas the success of that Act depends on consistent adherence to the key 
        principle of cooperative federalism, under which the Federal Government 
        and State and local governments all have a role in protecting water 
        resources;
Whereas, in structuring the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
        et seq.) based on the foundation of cooperative federalism, Congress 
        left to the States their traditional authority over land and water, 
        including farmers' fields, nonnavigable, wholly intrastate water 
        (including puddles and ponds), and the allocation of water supplies;
Whereas compliance with the principle of cooperative federalism requires that 
        any regulation defining the term ``waters of the United States'' be 
        promulgated--

    (1) after the establishment of a proper regulatory baseline for, and an 
evaluation of the costs and benefits of, the proposed regulatory definition 
of the term;

    (2) in compliance with--

    G    (A) chapter 6 of title 5, United States Code (commonly known as 
the ``Regulatory Flexibility Act''); and

    G    (B) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq.); and

    (3) in consultation with States and local governments, including 
consultation with respect to--

    G    (A) alternative proposals for changing the regulatory definition 
of the term; and

    G    (B) the impact of the alternative proposals, including costs and 
benefits, on State and local governments and small entities;

Whereas, in promulgating the final rule entitled ``Clean Water Rule: Definition 
        of `Waters of the United States''' (80 Fed. Reg. 37054 (June 29, 2015)) 
        (referred to in this preamble as the ``Waters of the United States 
        Rule''), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and 
        the Chief of Engineers--

    (1) failed to follow the procedural steps described in the fourth 
whereas clause; and

    (2) claimed broad and expansive jurisdiction that encroaches on 
traditional State authority and undermines longstanding exemptions from 
Federal regulation under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
1251 et seq.); and

Whereas, on October 9, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth 
        Circuit--

    (1) issued a nationwide stay for the Waters of the United States Rule; 
and

    (2) found that the petitioners who requested that the court vacate the 
Waters of the United States Rule have a substantial possibility of success 
in a hearing on the merits of the case: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the final rule of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency and the Chief of Engineers entitled ``Clean Water Rule: 
Definition of `Waters of the United States''' (80 Fed. Reg. 37054 (June 
29, 2015)) should be vacated.
                                 <all>