Police Officers Protecting Children Act

Mr. Speaker, last week, the House agreed to the conference report on H.R. 2642, the Farm Bill. Section 12313 of this legislation addresses an issue that should not go unnoticed, and I would like to make its intent clear.

In the 112th Congress, the House passed H.R. 2541, the Silviculture Regulatory Consistency Act, introduced by Representative Herrera Beutler. The stated intent of this legislation was to return Clean Water Act permitting of silvicultural operations around forest roads to the same standards that applied before recent court decisions created uncertainty about which standards should be used. Before court actions, a Clean Water Act permit was not required for nursery operations, site preparation, reforestation and subsequent cultural treatment, thinning, prescribed burning, pest and fire control, harvesting operations, surface drainage, or road use, construction, and maintenance. Permits were only required for activities that involved rock crushing, gravel washing, log sawing and log storage. That standard has worked for many years, and I support continuing that standard.

However, as originally written, H.R. 2541 could have created legal ambiguity on what should be covered with a Clean Water Act permit. I introduced an amendment to H.R. 2541 in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee clarifying that activities exempt from permitting are limited to the silvicultural activities specified in the bill, and not all silvicultural activities. The language I sponsored and set forth as an amendment of this bill is generally the same as that in Section 12313 of the Farm Bill. Thankfully, the Farm Bill addresses this issue without ambiguity. Put simply, those activities which required a Clean Water Act permit in the past should continue to do so. Those which did not should continue to be exempt.

I appreciate Representative Herrera Beutler's efforts on this issue and I am pleased that this issue has been addressed without ambiguity.