[House Report 113-581]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


113th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     113-581

======================================================================

 
    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE BILL (H.R. 5078) TO PRESERVE 
  EXISTING RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES WITH RESPECT TO WATERS OF THE 
UNITED STATES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION 
  OF THE RESOLUTION (H. RES. 644) CONDEMNING AND DISAPPROVING OF THE 
  OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWFUL STATUTORY 
REQUIREMENT TO NOTIFY CONGRESS BEFORE RELEASING INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT 
   UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA, AND EXPRESSING 
NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS OVER THE RELEASE OF FIVE TALIBAN LEADERS AND 
            THE REPERCUSSIONS OF NEGOTIATING WITH TERRORISTS

                                _______
                                

 September 8, 2014.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

           Mr. Bishop of Utah, from the Committee on Rules, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 715]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 715, by a record vote of 7 to 3, report the 
same to the House with the recommendation that the resolution 
be adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 5078, the 
Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act 
of 2014, under a structured rule. The resolution provides one 
hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the 
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure. The resolution waives all 
points of order against consideration of the bill. The 
resolution waives all points of order against provisions in the 
bill. The resolution makes in order only those amendments 
printed in this report. Each such amendment may be offered only 
in the order printed in this report, may be offered only by a 
Member designated in this report, shall be considered as read, 
shall be debatable for the time specified in this report 
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be 
subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
or in the Committee of the Whole. The resolution waives all 
points of order against the amendments printed in this report. 
The rule provides one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
    Section 2 of the resolution provides for consideration of 
H. Res. 644, Condemning and disapproving of the Obama 
administration's failure to comply with the lawful statutory 
requirement to notify Congress before releasing individuals 
detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 
and expressing national security concerns over the release of 
five Taliban leaders and the repercussions of negotiating with 
terrorists, under a closed rule. The resolution provides one 
hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services. The 
resolution waives all points of order against consideration of 
the resolution. The resolution provides that the amendments to 
the resolution and the preamble recommended by the Committee on 
Armed Services now printed in the resolution shall be 
considered as adopted and the resolution, as amended, shall be 
considered as read. The resolution provides one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.

                         EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

    The waiver of all points of order against consideration of 
H.R. 5078 includes a waiver of clause 4(a) of rule XIII, which 
prohibits consideration of legislation in the House until the 
third calendar day on which each report of a committee on that 
measure or matter has been available to Members, Delegates and 
the Resident Commissioner. The waiver is necessary because the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure filed a 
supplemental report to accompany H.R. 5078 on September 8, 
2014. However, it is important to note that the Congressional 
Budget Office cost estimate included in the supplemental report 
has been publicly available since August 1, 2014.
    Although the resolution waives all points of order against 
provisions in H.R. 5078, the Committee is not aware of any 
points of order. The waiver is prophylactic in nature.
    Although the resolution waives all points of order against 
the amendments printed in this report, the Committee is not 
aware of any points of order. The waiver is prophylactic in 
nature.
    Although the resolution waives all points of order against 
consideration of H. Res. 644, the Committee is not aware of any 
points of order. The waiver is prophylactic in nature.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    The results of each record vote on an amendment or motion 
to report, together with the names of those voting for and 
against, are printed below:

Rules Committee record vote No. 185

    Motion by Ms. Foxx to report the rule. Adopted: 7-3

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Majority Members                      Vote               Minority Members               Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Foxx........................................          Yea   Ms. Slaughter.....................          Nay
Mr. Bishop of Utah..............................  ............  Mr. McGovern......................          Nay
Mr. Cole........................................          Yea   Mr. Hastings of Florida...........          Nay
Mr. Woodall.....................................          Yea   Mr. Polis.........................  ............
Mr. Nugent......................................          Yea
Mr. Webster.....................................          Yea
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen................................  ............
Mr. Burgess.....................................          Yea
Mr. Sessions, Chairman..........................          Yea
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          SUMMARY OF THE AMENDMENTS TO H.R. 5078 MADE IN ORDER

    1. DeFazio (OR): Requires the Secretary of the Army and the 
Administrator of the EPA to withdraw both the proposed and 
interpretive rules published in April 2014, and to instead 
develop and issue for public comment a revised proposed rule to 
define Waters of the United States after consultation with 
States, local governments and stakeholders. (10 minutes)
    2. Bishop, Tim (NY): Provides policy provisions that the 
Secretary and Administrator are prohibited from including in a 
final rule. (10 minutes)
    3. Bishop, Tim (NY): States that provisions of the bill do 
not apply if it is determined implementation is likely to have 
an adverse impact on water quality. (10 minutes)

             TEXT OF AMENDMENTS TO H.R. 5078 MADE IN ORDER

 1. An Amendment To Be Offered by Representative Defazio of Oregon or 
                 His Designee, Debatable for 10 Minutes

  Page 3, strike line 3 and all that follows through line 23 on 
page 8 and insert the following (and redesignate the subsequent 
section accordingly):

SECTION 1. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSED AND INTERPRETIVE RULES.

  Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary and the Administrator shall withdraw--
          (1) the proposed rule described in the notice of 
        proposed rule published in the Federal Register 
        entitled ``Definition of `Waters of the United States' 
        Under the Clean Water Act'' (79 Fed. Reg. 22188 (April 
        21, 2014)); and
          (2) the interpretive rule described in the notice of 
        availability published in the Federal Register entitled 
        ``Notice of Availability Regarding the Exemption from 
        Permitting Under Section 404(f)(1)(A) of the Clean 
        Water Act to Certain Agricultural Conservation 
        Practices'' (79 Fed. Reg. 22276 (April 21, 2014)).

SEC. 2. DEVELOPMENT OF REVISED RULE.

  (a) In General.--The Secretary and the Administrator shall 
develop a revised proposed rule to define the term ``waters of 
the United States'' as used in the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and to identify--
          (1) the scope or types of waters covered under that 
        Act; and
          (2) the scope or types of waters not covered under 
        that Act.
  (b) Consultation.--In developing the revised proposed rule, 
the Secretary and the Administrator shall--
          (1) consider the public comments received on the 
        proposed and interpretive rules referred to in section 
        1; and
          (2) consult with and solicit recommendations from 
        State and local officials, stakeholders, and other 
        interested parties.
  (c) Publication.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
withdrawal of the proposed and interpretive rules under section 
1, the Secretary and the Administrator shall publish the 
revised proposed rule in the Federal Register.
                              ----------                              


 2. An Amendment To Be Offered by Representative Bishop of New York or 
                 His Designee, Debatable for 10 Minutes

  Beginning on page 3, strike line 7 and all that follows 
through page 4, line 20, and insert the following:
  (a) In General.--The Secretary and the Administrator are 
prohibited from implementing any final rule that is based on 
the proposed rule described in the notice of proposed rule 
published in the Federal Register entitled ``Definition of 
`Waters of the United States' Under the Clean Water Act'' (79 
Fed. Reg. 22188 (April 21, 2014)) if such final rule--
          (1) expands the scope of the Federal Water Pollution 
        Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq.) beyond those 
        waterbodies covered prior to the decisions of the U.S. 
        Supreme Court in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook 
        County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (531 U.S. 159 
        (2001)) and Rapanos v. United States (547 U.S. 715 
        (2006));
          (2) is inconsistent with the judicial opinions of 
        Justice Scalia or Justice Kennedy in the Rapanos 
        decision;
          (3) increases the regulation of ditches when compared 
        to existing Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
        regulations or guidance;
          (4) eliminates historical statutory or regulatory 
        exemptions for agriculture;
          (5) increases the scope of the Federal Water 
        Pollution Control Act with respect to groundwater;
          (6) requires Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
        regulation of erosional features;
          (7) requires Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
        permits for land-use activities;
          (8) requires Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
        regulation of farm ponds, puddles, water on driveways, 
        birdbaths, or playgrounds;
          (9) is inconsistent with the latest peer-reviewed 
        studies; or
          (10) was promulgated without public notice or 
        comment.
                              ----------                              


 3. An Amendment To Be Offered by Representative Bishop of New York or 
                 His Designee, Debatable for 10 Minutes

  At the end of the bill, add the following:

SEC. 5. LIMITATION ON APPLICABILITY.

  None of the provisions in this Act shall apply if the 
Administrator determines that the implementation of such 
provisions is likely--
          (1) to increase the interstate movement of pollutants 
        through surface waters;
          (2) to increase the costs to be incurred by a State 
        to maintain or achieve approved water quality standards 
        for the State; or
          (3) to cause or contribute to the impairment of 
        surface or coastal waters of a State.

                                  
