[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 148 (Wednesday, October 29, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11346-S11350]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ENZI:
  S. 1332. A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to recognize 
and protect State efforts to improve environmental mitigation and 
compliance

[[Page S11347]]

through the promotion of voluntary environmental audits, including 
limited protection from discovery and limited protection from 
penalties, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.


              the state environmental audit protection act

  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the State 
Environmental Audit Protection Act. It is a bill that would improve 
environmental quality across this Nation by enlisting the voluntary aid 
of people to seek out environmental problems and to correct violations 
using State environmental audit laws. This legislation would provide 
protection for those States that have fully debated the issue and after 
the debate, have chosen to enact aggressive and proactive environmental 
audit laws.
  First, I would like to explain briefly what an audit law is and how 
it works. State legislatures have chosen to enact many different kinds 
of audit laws with varying levels of incentives. It is important to 
note that audit laws are not all the same. This concept is apparently 
lost on those who try to mis-characterize every audit law in the most 
sinister and fearful terms. It is important that we recognize the 
difference.
  The purpose of audit laws are to provide incentives for regulated 
entities to search for and disclose environmental violations and to 
clean them up at their own expense. Entities cover all kinds of groups 
with operations that may have an effect on the environment, such as 
businesses, schools, hospitals, towns, and counties. The incentives can 
range from relief from penalties to protection of voluntarily gathered 
information. The incentives usually require full disclosure and due 
diligence in correcting violations. When there is protection of 
information, some States simply agree not to inspect based on 
disclosure of an audit, others go further by allowing that certain 
documents will not be used against the entity in enforcement actions.
  It is important to keep in mind when considering protection of 
documents that audits are conducted in good faith. By definition, any 
information that is compiled is voluntary and as such is above and 
beyond what is otherwise required by law. Following from that, any 
disclosures are a net gain above traditional enforcement.
  Consider for a moment, Mr. President, the decisions a small business 
faces with regard to its environmental performance. Many small 
businesses are already required to monitor and report certain emissions 
and audit protections do not cover those reports. But consider a 
business that is not on an inspection schedule and has no required 
emissions reporting. If that entity wants to review its performance 
under environmental laws, it would have to conduct a study. It would 
have to pay an auditor to come in and review its operations--that would 
be voluntary. Without audit protection, that business would take on a 
big risk--a risk big enough so that most small entities would never 
undertake a voluntary audit. The risk is that once they spend the money 
to review their activities, if they find a violation and report it, 
they face both fines and cleanup expenses. Furthermore, if they don't 
report it, they risk criminal activity by knowingly violating the law.
  Faced with the liabilities, without an audit law, most people would 
not voluntarily police themselves. The risks are too big. Folks choose 
instead to just take their chances and wait for the inspectors. After 
all, inspectors only visit 2 percent of all regulated entities anyway. 
Just 2 percent, Mr. President.
  How do we encourage the other 98 percent to really think about their 
environmental performance?
  Audit laws recognize good-faith efforts to improve environmental 
compliance. They encourage people to look for problems and know with 
assurance that they won't be penalized for their efforts.
  Today, Mr. President, 24 States have enacted some form of audit law; 
16 more have legislation pending. These laws have been on the books for 
several years in some States and I would point out--you don't see the 
examples of abuses that many claimed would occur during the State 
legislative debates.
  Wyoming is one of the States that has passed an audit law. I was the 
prime sponsor in that process during my time in the Wyoming State 
Senate. I studied examples and results from other States that had gone 
through the process. I worked closely with our State Department of 
Environmental Quality and with members of the regulated community. I 
worked with various resource and conservation groups in Wyoming and we 
crafted a bill that provides very reasonable incentives for people to 
review their operations and clean up the problems they find. We 
provided no criminal immunity or criminal privilege. We deferred to 
Federal laws wherever conflicts existed. There was a consensus. The 
bill made it out of committee unanimously and then passed the House and 
the Senate by more than a two-thirds majority.
  We had a vigorous debate in Wyoming. In the end, after all the public 
deliberation, we passed a reasonable bill. But it was a consensus of 
the legislators elected by the people of Wyoming. When I got to 
Washington, several States were meeting with the EPA. The EPA was using 
threats of overfiling and delayed approval of State enforcement 
programs. Overfiling means the EPA could use a document done at extra 
expense and exposure to a company in order to be sure there was no harm 
to the environment, only to find the EPA could use those documents as a 
road map for levying fines. The EPA wanted us to change the Wyoming 
law--in spite of repeated assertions from our own State attorney 
general that the law did not compromise our enforcement authority.
  Wyoming's scenario is not unique. Working with other States where 
this has happened has led me to offer this piece of legislation.
  The strange thing I find is that the EPA touts the value of audits. 
The concept has been trumpeted as part of their reinventing 
environmental regulation initiative and a final policy on audits was 
released in early 1996. Administrator Carol Browner called it, ``a 
policy that provides real incentives for industry and others to 
voluntarily identify and correct environmental violations.''
  President Clinton in his 1995 State of the Union Address, stressed 
the need for more common sense and fairness in our environmental 
regulations. He recognized the limitations of the command and control 
approach. He stated that ``Washington is not the source of all answers 
and that we should shift more decision-making authority from the 
Federal Government to States, tribes and local communities.''
  Apparently the EPA feels the States are not ready to handle audits. 
Apparently, Mr. President, State attorneys general are unable to verify 
with certainty that audit laws are reasonable. In its own astonishing 
way--and in seeming contradiction to its own objectives--the EPA 
remains opposed to State efforts to reinvent command and control 
through the use of audits.
  The problem with EPA's audit policy is that ordinary people do not 
want to use it. Big business will agree to negotiate with the EPA. They 
will enter into cooperative agreements and consent agreements because 
they have entire departments of environmental litigators.
  Small businesses don't have that. They don't trust the EPA. They see 
the EPA Office of Compliance Assistance trying to help them out, while 
Criminal Enforcement across the hall is concocting ways to put them in 
jail--and boy would those offices love to work together. The EPA has 
little accountability to folks at home. It is just too unpredictable. 
That is why people need statutory protection before they will take on 
the potential liability of audits.
  I would like to take a minute to explain my approach to the issue. 
The legislation I am introducing would provide a safe-harbor for State 
laws that fit within certain limits. It would not give any authority to 
any State unless they go through the full legislative process, 
including all of the local discussion and debate that entails. That is 
a critical part of this process and something we should recognize. The 
boundaries of the safe-harbor we create would describe what State laws 
may provide:
  Limited protection from discovery for audit information--but only 
information that is not required to be gathered. All legal reporting 
requirements

[[Page S11348]]

and permitting disclosures remain in effect and could not be covered by 
an audit privilege.
  A State audit law may provide limited protection from penalties if 
violations are promptly disclosed and cleaned up. Note, the protection 
will not cover criminal actions, and the law must preserve the ability 
of regulators to halt activities that pose imminent danger to public 
health.

  Third, if a State law falls within the safe-harbor, the EPA would be 
prohibited from withholding State enforcement authority or overfiling 
against individuals simply because of the State's audit law.
  Last, the bill would require an annual State performance report that 
will help measure the success of different laws, so we can see what 
works and what doesn't.
  I want to point out that this legislation will not dilute 
enforcement. There are safeguards to ensure that State audit laws 
always act to supplement--not to supplant--existing enforcement. It is 
important to note that. Audits are an affirmative tool. Used properly, 
they can only be used to improve environmental conditions above the 
status quo. They do not protect any entity from regular inspection or 
monitoring.
  The principle of audit incentives is simple and reasonable. It is no 
surprise to me that nearly half of our States have chosen to enact some 
form of audit legislation. It is a positive tool that helps people 
understand and comply with environmental laws. It gives people a chance 
to ask questions without being penalized. It gives them the chance to 
figure out what they are doing wrong and fix it--without adding steep 
penalties to the cost of compliance. This bill will put into law 
methods that have been tested and work.
  Mr. President, small business owners don't take time to read the 
layer after layer of byzantine regulations constructed by Washington 
lawyers. I know because my wife and I were small business owners for 26 
years. In a small business, the owner is the same one who counts the 
change, helps the customers and vacuums the floor.
  He or she has to stay in business, make payroll, and keep up with 
constantly evolving mandates from a never-ending supply of Federal 
attorneys. And while the small business owner has many jobs, these 
attorneys have only one job, to create and modify mandates and to 
investigate citizens. There are over 17,000 employees at the EPA and 
now, in spite of the rhetoric about reinventing regulations, they want 
funds for another 200 enforcement police.
  We don't need more police to improve environmental compliance--we 
need translators to interpret the regulations.
  But the fact is, the heavy-handed, command and control approach works 
well for the EPA--especially in Washington. Here I am beginning to see 
the process by which they protect and expand their regulatory 
supremacy. It is an artful combination of nebulous policies, and self-
defining authority. Taken from this perspective, the EPA clearly views 
any State audit laws as a direct assault on its unbridled jurisdiction 
and power.
  Shortly after promoting its own audit policy as a reinvention of 
regulation, the EPA was quick to remind that State audit laws ``would 
cause environmental programs delegated to states * * * to revert to 
national control at EPA.'' Since then, they have used their leverage to 
compel States to modify laws in accordance with the will of EPA 
guidelines.
  This absolute circumvention of the democratic process is astonishing 
to me. As a former State legislator, I think it is a tragedy that the 
EPA is denying States the chance to test reasonable and innovative 
solutions to a cleaner environment. Instead of promoting reinvention, 
the EPA is perpetuating an environmental race to mediocrity.
  Some of the people listening may wonder how Wyoming's audit law has 
fared. Well, Mr. President, I am proud to report that after repeated 
delays from the EPA on our title 5 clean air permits, and after threats 
to withdraw delegation of other programs--the EPA has finally decided 
that statutory changes may not be necessary in Wyoming's law, even 
though there remain problems to be worked out.
  At least, Mr. President, that's what they tell us today. They just 
might change their minds tomorrow. It is no wonder that Wyomingites are 
afraid to use our State audit law.
  I feel it is time we put this issue to rest by defining a ``safe-
harbor'' and giving State laws the certainty they need to be effective. 
I would encourage Members to take a look at this bill and to support 
it.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1332

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``State Environmental Audit 
     Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS

       Congress finds that--
       (1) consistent with the purpose of voluntary environmental 
     audits of enhancing United States environmental mitigation 
     efforts, it is in the interest of the United States to allow 
     and encourage States to enact and implement such incentive 
     programs as are consistent with the specific and respective 
     needs and situations of the States;
       (2) State environmental incentive laws should be allowed 
     and encouraged by the Federal government as a means of 
     enabling regulated entities to set minimum requirements in 
     environmental mitigation efforts by the entities;
       (3) a strong regulatory enforcement effort is necessary to 
     ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local laws that 
     protect the environment and public health;
       (4) the use of voluntary environmental audits, in 
     accordance with respective State laws, is intended to 
     supplement, not supplant, regulatory enforcement efforts to 
     improve the environmental compliance of regulated entities;
       (5) the protections offered by the amendments made by this 
     Act do not relieve regulated entities from the need to comply 
     with otherwise applicable requirements to disclose 
     information under Federal, State, or local environmental 
     laws; and
       (6)(A) law and regulatory policies provide ample precedent 
     for the constructive use of voluntary audits;
       (B) the final policy on the use of environmental audits (60 
     Fed. Reg. 66706) issued by the Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency--
       (i) provides incentives for conducting audits; and
       (ii) includes limited protection from discovery and 
     disclosure of audit information and discretionary relief from 
     an enforcement action for voluntary disclosure of violations;
       (C) Advisory Circular 120-56, issued by the Administrator 
     of the Federal Aviation Administration, commits to a policy 
     of cooperative problem-solving and use of self-evaluation 
     incentives as a means of enhancing aviation safety in the 
     commercial airline industry; and
       (D) the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (15 U.S.C. 1691 et 
     seq.) provides discovery protection for information developed 
     by creditors as a result of self-tests that are voluntarily 
     conducted to determine the level of compliance with that Act.

     SEC. 3. VOLUNTARY AUDIT PROTECTION.

       (a) In General.--Part VI of title 28, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after chapter 176 the following:

               ``CHAPTER 177--VOLUNTARY AUDIT PROTECTION

``Sec.
``3601. Recognition of State efforts to provide voluntary environmental 
              audit incentives.
``3602. Performance Report.
``3603. Definitions.

     ``Sec. 3601. Recognition of State efforts to provide 
       voluntary environmental audit incentives

       ``(a) Voluntary Environmental Audit Incentive Laws.--
       ``(1) Limited protection from discovery.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (C), 
     a State law may provide that a voluntary environmental audit 
     report, or a finding, opinion, or other communication related 
     to and constituting part of a voluntary environmental audit 
     report, shall not be--
       ``(i) subject to discovery or any other investigatory 
     procedure governed by Federal, State, or local law; or
       ``(ii) admissible as evidence in any Federal, State, or 
     local judicial action or administrative proceeding.
       ``(B) Testimony.--Except as provided in subparagraph (C), a 
     State law may provide that an entity, or an individual who 
     performs a voluntary environmental audit on behalf of the 
     entity, shall not be required to give testimony in any 
     Federal, State, or local judicial action or administrative 
     proceeding concerning the voluntary environmental audit.
       ``(C) Information not subject to protection.--The 
     protections described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall not 
     apply to any information that is otherwise required to be 
     disclosed under a Federal, State, or local law.

[[Page S11349]]

       ``(2) Limited protection for disclosure.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     a State law may provide that an entity that promptly 
     discloses information about noncompliance with a covered 
     Federal law, that is discovered as a result of a voluntary 
     environmental audit or through a compliance management 
     system, to an appropriate Federal, State, or local official 
     may be protected, in whole or in part, from an enforcement 
     action in a Federal, State, or local judicial or 
     administrative proceeding.
       ``(B) Disclosure not subject to protection.--A State law 
     described in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to 
     noncompliance with a covered Federal law that is--
       ``(i) not discovered voluntarily; or
       ``(ii) the result of a willful and knowing violation or 
     gross negligence by the entity disclosing the information.
       ``(b) Prohibited Federal Activities.--A Federal agency 
     shall not--
       ``(1) refuse to delegate enforcement authority under a 
     covered Federal law to a State or local agency or refuse to 
     approve or authorize a State or local program under a covered 
     Federal law because the State has in effect a voluntary 
     environmental audit incentive law;
       ``(2) make a permit, license, or other authorization, a 
     contract, or a consent decree or other settlement agreement 
     contingent on a person waiving any protection under a State 
     voluntary environmental audit incentive law; or
       ``(3) take any other action that has the effect of 
     requiring a State to rescind or limit any protection of a 
     State voluntary environmental audit incentive law.

     ``Sec. 3602. Performance report

       ``(a) In general.--Section 3601 shall not apply to a State 
     voluntary environmental audit incentive law unless the 
     appropriate State agency compiles and submits to appropriate 
     Federal agencies an annual report in accordance with this 
     section on the performance of the State voluntary 
     environmental audit incentive law during the previous 
     calendar year.
       ``(b) Provisions of Report.--The performance report shall 
     include--
       ``(1) the number of noncompliance disclosures that were 
     received by the State pursuant to the State voluntary 
     environmental audit incentive law, with an indication of the 
     noncompliance disclosures that were made by--
       ``(A) regulated entities that are normally inspected; and
       ``(B) regulated entities that are not on inspection 
     schedules;
       ``(2) the categories and sizes of regulated entities that 
     disclosed noncompliance problems pursuant to the State 
     voluntary environmental audit incentive law and a description 
     of the noncompliance problems that were disclosed;
       ``(3) the status of remediation undertaken by regulated 
     entities in the State to correct noncompliance problems that 
     were disclosed pursuant to the State voluntary environmental 
     audit incentive law; and
       ``(4) a certification from the State attorney general that 
     the State maintains the necessary regulatory authority to 
     carry out administration and enforcement of delegated 
     programs in light of the State voluntary environmental audit 
     incentive law.
       ``(c) Additional Information.--In addition to the 
     information required under subsection (b), the State agency 
     may include additional information in the annual performance 
     report that the State agency considers important to 
     demonstrate the performance of a State voluntary 
     environmental audit law.

     ``Sec. 3603. Definitions

       ``In this chapter:
       ``(1) Covered federal law.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `covered Federal law' means--
       ``(i) the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.);
       ``(ii) the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et 
     seq.);
       ``(iii) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly 
     known as the `Clean Water Act') (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.);
       ``(iv) the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et 
     seq.);
       ``(v) the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.);
       ``(vi) the Noise Control Act of 1972 (42 U.S.C. 4901 et 
     seq.);
       ``(vii) the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et 
     seq.);
       ``(viii) the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.);
       ``(ix) the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
     seq.);
       ``(x) the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know 
     Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq.);
       ``(xi) the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
     13101 et seq.);
       ``(xii) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 
     et seq.);
       ``(xiii) chapter 51 of title 49, United States Code;
       ``(xiv) section 13 or 16 of the Act entitled `An Act making 
     appropriations for the construction, repair, and preservation 
     of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other 
     purposes', approved March 3, 1899 (commonly known as the 
     `River and Harbor Act of 1899') (33 U.S.C. 407, 411);
       ``(xv) the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 
     1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.); and
       ``(xvi) any other law enacted after the date of enactment 
     of this chapter that addresses subject matter similar to a 
     law listed in clauses (i) through (xv).
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `covered Federal law' 
     includes--
       ``(i) a regulation or other binding agency action issued 
     under a law referred to in subparagraph (A);
       ``(ii) the terms and conditions of a permit issued or other 
     administrative action taken under a law referred to in 
     subparagraph (A); and
       ``(iii) a State law that operates as a federally 
     enforceable law under a law referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     as a result of the delegation, approval, or authorization of 
     a State activity or program.
       ``(2) Enforcement action.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `enforcement action' means a 
     civil or administrative action undertaken for the purpose of 
     imposing a penalty or any other punitive sanction, including 
     imposition of a restriction on providing to or receiving from 
     the United States or any State or political subdivision a 
     good, material, service, grant, license, permit, or other 
     approval or benefit.
       ``(B) Exclusion.--The term `enforcement action' does not 
     include an action solely for the purpose of seeking 
     injunctive relief to remedy a continuing adverse public 
     health or environmental effect of a violation.
       ``(4) Environmental compliance management system.--The term 
     `environmental compliance management system' means the 
     systematic effort of a person or government entity, 
     appropriate to the size and nature of the person or 
     government entity, to prevent, detect, and correct a 
     violation of a covered Federal law through--
       ``(A) a compliance policy, standard, or procedure that 
     identifies how an employee or agent shall meet the 
     requirements of the law;
       ``(B) assignment of overall responsibility for overseeing 
     compliance with policies, standards, and procedures, and 
     assignment of specific responsibility for ensuring compliance 
     at each facility or operation;
       ``(C) a mechanism for systematically ensuring that 
     compliance policies, standards, and procedures are being 
     carried out, including--
       ``(i) a monitoring or auditing system that is reasonably 
     designed to detect and correct a violation; and
       ``(ii) a means for an employee or agent to report a 
     violation of an environmental requirement without fear of 
     retaliation;
       ``(D) an effort to communicate effectively the standards 
     and procedures of the person or government entity to 
     employees and agents of the person or government entity;
       ``(E) an appropriate incentive to managers and employees of 
     the person or government entity to perform in accordance with 
     any compliance policy or procedure of the person or 
     government entity, including consistent enforcement through 
     an appropriate disciplinary mechanism; and
       ``(F) a procedure for--
       ``(i) the prompt and appropriate correction of any 
     violation of law; and
       ``(ii) making any necessary modifications to the standards 
     or procedures of the person or government entity to prevent 
     future violations of law.
       ``(5) Federal agency.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `Federal agency' has the 
     meaning given the term `agency' in section 551 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `Federal agency' includes any 
     agency or instrumentality of an Indian Tribe with authority 
     to administer or enforce a covered Federal law.
       ``(6) Regulated entity.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `regulated entity' means a 
     person regulated under a covered Federal law, including an 
     officer, agent, or employee of the person.
       ``(B) Exclusions.--The term `regulated entity' does not 
     include an entity owned or operated by a Federal or State 
     agency.
       ``(7) State agency.--The term `State agency' means an 
     agency or instrumentality of the executive branch of a State 
     or local government with the authority to administer or 
     enforce any covered Federal law, including an agency or 
     instrumentality of 2 or more States or local governments, 
     whether or not the localities are in different States.
       ``(8) Voluntary environmental audit.--The term `voluntary 
     environmental audit' means an assessment, audit, 
     investigation, or review that is--
       ``(A) initiated voluntarily by a regulated entity, 
     including an officer, agent, or employee of a regulated 
     entity, but not including a regulated entity owned or 
     operated by a State or Federal agency;
       ``(B) carried out by an employee of the person, or a 
     consultant employed by the person, for the purpose of 
     carrying out the assessment, evaluation, investigation, or 
     review; and
       ``(C) carried out in good faith for the purpose of 
     determining or improving compliance with, or liability under, 
     a covered Federal law, or to assess the effectiveness of an 
     environmental compliance management system.
       ``(9) Voluntary environmental audit report.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `voluntary environmental audit 
     report' means a document prepared as a result of a voluntary 
     environmental audit.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `voluntary environmental audit 
     report' includes--
       ``(i) a field note, draft, memorandum, drawing, photograph, 
     computer software, stored or electronically recorded 
     information, map, chart, graph, survey, analysis (including a

[[Page S11350]]

     laboratory result, instrument reading, or field analysis), 
     and other information pertaining to an observation, finding, 
     opinion, suggestion, or conclusion, if the information is 
     collected or developed for the primary purpose and in the 
     course of creating a voluntary environmental audit;
       ``(ii) a document prepared by an auditor or evaluator, 
     which may describe the scope of the evaluation, the 
     information learned, any conclusions or recommendations, and 
     any exhibits or appendices;
       ``(iii) an analysis of all or part of a voluntary 
     environmental audit or issues arising from the audit; and
       ``(iv) an implementation plan or tracking system that 
     addresses an action taken or to be taken by the owner or 
     operator of a facility as a result of a voluntary 
     environmental audit.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of chapters of part VI 
     of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to chapter 176 the following:

``177. Voluntary Audit Protection...............................3601''.

     SEC. 4. ASSISTANCE FROM SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS.

       Section 21(c)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     648(c)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (Q), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (R), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(S) assisting small businesses in complying with the 
     requirements necessary to receive protections provided by any 
     applicable State voluntary environmental audit incentive 
     law.''.
                                 ______