Report text available as:

(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?



115th Congress    }                                 {    Rept. 115-131
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session      }                                 {           Part 1

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



 
                REDUCING REGULATORY BURDENS ACT OF 2017

                                _______
                                

                  May 18, 2017.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Conaway, from the Committee on Agriculture, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 953]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Agriculture, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 953) to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
clarify Congressional intent regarding the regulation of the 
use of pesticides in or near navigable waters, and for other 
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon 
without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                           Brief Explanation

    The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2017, H.R. 953, 
amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 
and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify 
Congressional intent regarding the regulation of the use of 
pesticides in or near navigable waters.

                    Purpose and Need for Legislation


The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

    The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 
(FIFRA) is a regulatory statute that governs the sale and use 
of pesticides in the United States through the registration and 
labeling of such products. Its objective is to protect human 
health and the environment from unreasonable adverse effects of 
pesticides, taking into account the costs and benefits of 
various product uses. Pesticides regulated under FIFRA include 
insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, rodenticides, and other 
designated substances. The Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) reviews scientific data submitted by chemical 
manufacturers on toxicity and behavior in the environment to 
evaluate risks and exposure associated with a product's use.
    FIFRA prohibits the sale of any pesticide unless it is 
registered and labeled indicating approved uses and 
restrictions. It is a violation of federal law to use such a 
chemical in a manner that is inconsistent with the label 
instructions. If a registration is granted, EPA makes a finding 
that the chemical ``when used in accordance with widespread and 
commonly recognized practice it will not generally cause 
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.'' (7 U.S.C. 
136a(c)(5)(D).) EPA then specifies the approved uses and 
conditions of use of the pesticide, and this is required to be 
explained on the product label.

The Clean Water Act

    The objective of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
(commonly known as the Clean Water Act or the CWA) is to 
restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological 
integrity of the Nation's waters. The primary mechanism for 
achieving this objective is the CWA's prohibition on the 
discharge of any pollutant without a National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. EPA has the 
authority to regulate the discharge of pollutants either 
through general permits or through individual permits. NPDES 
permits specify limits on what pollutants may be discharged 
from point sources and in what amounts. Under the CWA, 46 
states have been authorized to implement NPDES permits and 
enforce permits. EPA manages the Clean Water Act program in the 
remaining states.
    NPDES permits are the basic regulatory tool of the CWA. EPA 
or an authorized state may issue compliance orders or file 
civil suits against those who violate the terms of a permit. In 
addition, in the absence of federal or state action, 
individuals may bring a citizen suit in United States District 
Court against those who violate the terms of an NPDES permit, 
or against those who discharge without a valid permit.

Litigation

    In over 30 years of administering the CWA, EPA had never 
required an NPDES permit for the application of a pesticide, 
when the pesticide is applied in a manner consistent with FIFRA 
and its regulations. While the CWA contains a provision 
granting citizen suits against those who violate permit 
conditions or those who discharge without an NPDES permit, 
FIFRA has no citizen suit provision. As a result, beginning in 
the late 1990s, a series of citizen lawsuits were filed by 
parties, contending that an NPDES permit is necessary when 
applying a FIFRA-regulated product over, into, or near 
waterbodies. These cases generated several Court of Appeals 
decisions that created confusion and concern among pesticide 
users regarding the applicability of the CWA with regard to 
pesticide use.
    As the litigation continued, concern and confusion grew 
among farmers, forest landowners, and public health officials, 
prompting EPA to issue interim, and later final, interpretive 
guidance in August 2003 and January 2005, and then to undertake 
a rulemaking to clarify and formalize the Agency's 
interpretation of the CWA as it applied to pesticide use. The 
EPA rule was finalized in November 2006 (71 Fed. Reg. 68483 
(Nov. 27, 2006)), and was the culmination of a three year 
participatory rulemaking process that began with the interim 
interpretive statement in 2003 and involved two rounds of 
public comment.
    The 2006 EPA rule codified EPA's long-standing 
interpretation that the application of chemical and biological 
pesticides for their intended purpose and in compliance with 
pesticide label restrictions is not a discharge of a 
``pollutant'' under the CWA, and therefore, that an NPDES 
permit is not required. The rule clearly defined specific 
circumstances in which the use of pesticides in accordance with 
all relevant requirements under FIFRA is not a CWA ``discharge 
of a pollutant,'' explaining in detail the rationale for the 
Agency's interpretation.
    When the rule was finalized, environmental groups, as well 
as farm and pesticide industry groups, filed petitions for 
review of the rule in several federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. 
The petitions were consolidated in the Sixth Circuit. The Sixth 
Circuit ultimately vacated the rule on January 7, 2009, in 
National Cotton Council v. EPA (553 F.3d 927; hereinafter, 
National Cotton Council), concluding that the final rule was 
not a reasonable interpretation of the CWA's permitting 
requirements. The Court rejected EPA's contention that, when 
pesticides are applied over, into, or near waterbodies to 
control pests, they are not considered pollutants as long as 
they comply with FIFRA, and held that NPDES permits are 
required for all pesticide applications that may leave a 
residue in water.
    In vacating the rule and requiring NPDES permits for 
pesticide applications, the Sixth Circuit substituted its own 
interpretation of how federal laws apply to the use of 
pesticides for EPA's longstanding interpretation of the laws, 
and overlaid a new permitting process that is duplicative of 
FIFRA's longstanding regulatory objectives. In the process, the 
Court undermined the traditional understanding of how the CWA 
interacts with other environmental statutes, particularly 
FIFRA, and judicially expanded the scope of CWA regulation 
further into areas and activities not originally envisioned or 
intended by Congress.
    As a result of the Court's decision, EPA was required to 
develop and implement a new and expanded NPDES permitting 
process under the CWA to cover pesticide use. EPA estimated 
that the ruling would affect approximately 365,000 pesticide 
applicators that perform some 5.6 million pesticide 
applications annually. (U.S. EPA, Fact Sheet for 2010 Public 
Notice of: Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) Pesticides General Permit (PGP) for Discharges 
from the Application of Pesticides to or over, including near 
Waters of the U.S., at 14, available at http://www.epa.gov/
npdes/pubs/proposed_pgp_fs.pdf; hereinafter, EPA Fact Sheet.) 
This virtually doubles the number of entities subject to NPDES 
permitting.
    The court's decision, which would apply nationally, was to 
be effective seven days after the deadline for rehearing 
expired or seven days after a denial of any petition for 
rehearing. Parties had until April 9, 2009 to seek rehearing.
    On April 9, 2009, the federal government chose not to seek 
rehearing in the National Cotton Council case. The government 
instead filed a motion to stay issuance of the Court's mandate 
for two years to provide EPA time to develop an entirely new 
NPDES permitting process to cover pesticide use. As part of 
this, EPA needed to propose and issue a final NPDES general 
permit for pesticide applications, for states to develop 
permits, and for EPA to provide outreach and education to the 
regulated community. Industry groups filed a petition seeking 
en banc review, asking the full Sixth Circuit to reconsider the 
decision from the three-judge panel.
    On June 8, 2009, the Sixth Circuit granted EPA a two-year 
stay of the Court's mandate, in response to their earlier 
request. The Sixth Circuit denied the industry groups' petition 
for rehearing in August 2009. The court-ordered deadline for 
EPA to promulgate a new permitting process for pesticides under 
the CWA was April 9, 2011. On March 3, 2011, EPA filed another 
request for an extension with the court. On March 28, 2011, the 
Sixth Circuit granted an extension through October 31, 2011.
    Two petitions were filed with the Supreme Court in December 
2009 by representatives of the agriculture community and the 
pesticide industry, requesting that the Supreme Court review 
the National Cotton Council case. A number of parties, 
including numerous Members of Congress, filed amicus briefs 
with the Supreme Court, in support of the petitions. Other 
parties filed amicus briefs in opposition to the petitions. On 
February 22, 2010, the Supreme Court denied the petitioners' 
request without comment.

EPA Development of a New Permitting Process to Cover Pesticide Use

    With a two-year stay of the Sixth Circuit's mandate in 
place, EPA moved ahead with developing a new NPDES permitting 
process to cover pesticide use. The permit covers four 
pesticide uses: (1) mosquito and other flying insect pest 
control; (2) aquatic weed and algae control; (3) aquatic 
nuisance animal control; and (4) forest canopy pest control. It 
is not intended to cover terrestrial applications to control 
pests on agricultural crops or forest floors, and does not 
cover activities exempt from permitting under the CWA 
(irrigation return flow, agricultural stormwater runoff) and 
discharges that will require coverage under an individual 
permit, such as discharges of pesticides to waterbodies that 
are considered impaired under CWA section 303(d) for that 
discharged pesticide. The permitting process imposes 
administrative requirements on prospective pesticide users, 
including filing a notice of intent, other reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, and in some cases monitoring and 
other requirements.

Implications

    The Committee has received testimony and other information 
on the implications of the Sixth Circuit's holding in the 
National Cotton Council case, and the new permitting process 
that EPA has had to develop under the CWA as a result of that 
holding, on state and local agencies, mosquito control 
districts, water districts, pesticide applicators, agriculture, 
forest managers, and other stakeholders. On February 16, 2011, 
the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment of the 
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure held a 
joint hearing with the Nutrition and Horticulture Subcommittee 
of the House Committee on Agriculture to consider means for 
reducing the regulatory burdens posed by the case, National 
Cotton Council v. EPA (6th Cir. 2009), and to consider related 
draft legislation.
    Despite being limited to four categories of pesticide uses, 
EPA's new general permit for covered pesticides is the single 
greatest expansion of the permitting process in the history of 
the NPDES program. As already noted, EPA has estimated that 
approximately 5.6 million covered pesticide applications per 
year by approximately 365,000 applicators are affected by the 
Court's ruling, virtually doubling the number of entities that 
have been subject to NPDES permitting. (EPA Fact Sheet.)
    With this expansion come real and tangible requirements for 
EPA, the states that have to issue the permits, those whose 
livelihoods depend on the use of pesticides, and even everyday 
citizens going about their daily lives.
    EPA has had to establish a new permitting process to 
conform its NPDES permit program to meet the Sixth Circuit's 
mandate. Even so, much of the responsibility of developing and 
issuing general permits has fallen on the states. Forty-six 
states face increased financial and administrative burdens in 
order to comply with the new permitting process. Some states 
have estimated that creating a new NPDES permitting scheme for 
pesticide use in their state has cost their state hundreds of 
thousands of dollars. In a time when many states have to make 
difficult budgetary cuts, the Nation cannot afford more 
financial burdens.
    The expanded permitting process also imposes significant 
new requirements on pesticide users, who encompass a wide range 
of individuals from state agencies, city and county 
municipalities, mosquito control districts, water districts, 
pesticide applicators, farmers, ranchers, forest managers, 
scientists, and others. Now that the permitting requirements 
are in effect, federal and state agencies are expending vital 
funds to initiate and maintain NPDES programs governing 
mosquito control, silvicultural, and other pesticide 
applications.
    The new permitting process has increased both the 
administrative difficulty and costs for pesticide applicators 
to come into compliance with the law. Compliance no longer 
means simply following instructions on a pesticide label. 
Instead, applicators have to navigate a complex process of 
identifying the relevant permit, filing with the regulatory 
authority a valid notice of intent to comply with the permit, 
and having a familiarity with all of the permit's conditions 
and restrictions. Some pesticide applicators also face 
significant monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping costs 
complying with their permits.
    Along with increased administrative burdens comes an 
increased monetary burden. Estimates are that the cost 
associated with the EPA permit scheme to small businesses and 
some local governments could be as high as $50,000 each, or 
more, annually.
    In addition to the costs of coming into compliance, 
pesticide users are subject to an increased risk of litigation 
and large fines. Pesticide applicators not in compliance face 
fines of up to $37,500 per day per violation, not including 
attorney's fees. Given the fact that a large number of 
applicators have never been subject to NPDES and its permitting 
process, even a good faith effort to be in compliance could 
fall short. Moreover, the CWA allows for private actions 
against individuals who may or may not have committed a 
violation. Thus, while EPA may exercise its judgment and 
refrain from prosecuting certain applicators, the applicators 
remain vulnerable to citizen suits. Unless Congress acts, 
hundreds of thousands of farmers, foresters, and public health 
pesticide users will continue to operate under threat of 
lawsuits.
    It is not only pesticide regulators and applicators who are 
being affected by the new permitting requirements. Rather, the 
Sixth Circuit's decision affects every day citizens, who rely 
on the benefits provided by pesticides and their responsible 
application. Pesticide use is an essential part of agriculture. 
Imposing a duplicative and burdensome permitting process on our 
Nation's farmers threatens their ability to continue to provide 
the country with a safe and reliable food supply. Many family 
farmers and small applicators lack the resources to ensure 
compliance with a cumbersome and detailed permit scheme. 
Moreover, for those farmers who are able to comply, delays that 
are inherent in permitting schemes are ill-suited for prompt 
pest control actions necessary in agriculture. Failure to apply 
a pesticide soon after a pest is first detected could result in 
recurring and greater pest damage in subsequent years if a 
prolific insect were to become established in plant hosts. The 
Secretary of Agriculture, Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack, has said that 
a permitting system under the CWA for pesticide use ``is ill-
suited to the demands of agricultural production.'' (Letter, 
Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture, to Hon. Lisa 
P. Jackson, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, 
Subject: The National Cotton Council of America, et al., v. 
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Mar. 6, 2009)).
    Forest landowners also are impacted under the new permit 
scheme. The permitting requirements apply to and are an 
inhibition to the use of forest pest control as a forest 
management tool, with the result of accelerated tree mortality 
and a general decline in overall forest health. It erects 
barriers for the control of pests, such as gypsy moth and 
forest tent caterpillar. This may be resulting in a higher 
incidence of preventable tree kills and defoliated landscapes.
    Moreover, the Sixth Circuit's holding has significant 
implications for public health. The National Centers for 
Disease Control officially recognizes the following as a 
partial list of mosquito-borne diseases--Eastern Equine 
Encephalitis, Japanese Encephalitis, La Crosse Encephalitis, 
St. Louis Encephalitis, West Nile Virus, Western Equine 
Encephalitis, Dengue Fever, Malaria, Rift Valley Fever, and 
Yellow Fever. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/list_mosquitoborne.htm.) 
EPA's permit program poses the risk of critical delays in 
emergency responses to insect and disease outbreaks and is 
diverting resources from controlling environmental pests to 
administrative requirements, monitoring, and litigation.
    Mosquito control districts have reported that NPDES 
compliance costs are forcing many mosquito control programs, 
both large and small, to redirect control resources to comply 
with the regulatory requirements. Many districts have reduced 
operations because of administrative and monitoring costs and 
fears of increased liability and potentially ruinous litigation 
under the CWA associated with complying with the new, court-
mandated NPDES requirements. In some states, preventive 
mosquito control strategies such as comprehensive larviciding 
are being curtailed in order to redirect resources toward 
increased administrative and water monitoring costs. Commercial 
applicators historically serving rural communities and small 
municipalities are increasingly opting to cancel their programs 
out of fear of increased liability under the CWA. These reduced 
mosquito control operations have resulted in increased risk of 
vector-borne disease such as West Nile Virus.
    In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
reported record-breaking outbreaks of mosquito-borne illnesses, 
such as West Nile Virus and Eastern Equine Encephalitis, around 
the Nation. In response to the outbreaks, numerous communities 
had to declare public health emergencies and undertook 
comprehensive mosquito spraying efforts. Some have suggested 
that the record-breaking outbreaks of mosquito-borne illnesses 
were at least in part the result of the new NPDES permit 
requirements and the resultant curtailment of preventive 
mosquito control measures. When the outbreaks occurred, 
emergency reactive control measures had to be implemented.

Development of Legislation in Response to the Sixth Circuit Decision

    As a result of concerns raised by federal, state, local, 
and private stakeholders regarding the interrelationship 
between FIFRA and the CWA and the concerns posed by the new and 
duplicative permitting process under the CWA, the House 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and House 
Committee on Agriculture sought technical assistance from EPA 
to draft very narrow legislation targeted only at responding to 
the Sixth Circuit's holding in National Cotton Council and 
return the state of pesticide regulation to the status quo, 
before the courts got involved. H.R. 935 is based on the 
technical assistance that EPA provided to the Committees, and 
is intended to be consistent with EPA's final rule from 
November 2006. The bill amends FIFRA and the CWA to eliminate 
the requirement of an NPDES permit for applications of 
pesticides authorized for sale, distribution, or use under 
FIFRA.

               Section-by-Section Analysis of Legislation


Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 of the bill designates the title of the bill as 
the ``Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2017.''

Section 2. Use of authorized pesticides

    Section 2 of the bill amends section 3(f) of FIFRA (7 
U.S.C. 136a(f)) by adding at the end a new paragraph (5). 
Paragraph (5) provides that, except as provided in section 
402(s) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (CWA), the 
Administrator or a state may not require a permit under the CWA 
for a discharge from a point source into navigable waters of a 
pesticide authorized for sale, distribution, or use under 
FIFRA, or the residue of such a pesticide, resulting from the 
application of such pesticide. The exceptions provided in 
section 402(s) of the CWA are provided in new subsection 
(s)(2), discussed further below.
    The net effect of this provision is to exempt, from the 
CWA's NPDES permitting process, a discharge from a point source 
into navigable waters of a pesticide authorized for sale, 
distribution, or use under FIFRA, or the residue of such a 
pesticide, resulting from the application of the pesticide, 
where the pesticide is used for its intended purpose and the 
use is in compliance with pesticide label requirements.
    The Committee received testimony in the 112th Congress on 
how EPA uses its full regulatory authority under FIFRA to 
ensure that pesticides do not cause unreasonable adverse 
effects on human health and the environment, including our 
Nation's water resources. The regulatory restrictions placed by 
EPA under FIFRA directly control the amount of pesticide 
available for transport to navigable waters, either by reducing 
the absolute amount of pesticide applied, or by changing 
application conditions to minimize transport and make transport 
of applied pesticide less likely.
    Therefore, as long as a pesticide is authorized for sale, 
distribution, or use under FIFRA, the pesticide is used for its 
intended purpose, and the use is in compliance with pesticide 
label requirements, then the Committee sees no need to require 
the user of the pesticide to apply for and obtain an NPDES 
permit for that use. The Committee believes that requiring an 
NPDES permit in such circumstances is unnecessary and imposes 
duplicative and wasteful regulatory requirements on EPA and 
state permitting agencies and on pesticide users.
    It is the intent of the Committee that, regarding 
biological pesticides, including those produced by plants, H.R. 
953 shall not apply to plants because they are not a point 
source. The exemption requires a discharge from a point source. 
Moreover, section 402 of the CWA only requires an NPDES permit 
for a point source discharge of a pollutant.

Section 3. Discharges of pesticides

    Section 3 of the bill amends section 402 of the Federal 
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342) by adding at the 
end a new subsection (s).
    New subsection (s)(1) provides that, except as provided in 
paragraph (2) of subsection (s), the Administrator or a State 
shall not require a permit under the CWA for a discharge from a 
point source into navigable waters of a pesticide authorized 
for sale, distribution, or use under FIFRA, or the residue of 
such a pesticide, resulting from the application of such 
pesticide. This provision is aimed at mirroring the provision 
added to FIFRA under section 2 of the bill.
    This provision, like that in section 2 of the bill, is 
intended to exempt from the CWA's NPDES permitting process, 
subject to the exceptions in paragraph (2), a discharge from a 
point source into navigable waters of a pesticide authorized 
for sale, distribution, or use under FIFRA, or the residue of 
such a pesticide, resulting from the application of the 
pesticide, where the pesticide is used for its intended purpose 
and the use is in compliance with pesticide label requirements.
    As noted earlier, as long as a pesticide is authorized for 
sale, distribution, or use under FIFRA, the pesticide is used 
for its intended purpose, and the use is in compliance with 
pesticide label requirements, then the Committee sees no need 
to require the user of the pesticide to apply for and obtain an 
NPDES permit for that use. The Committee believes that 
requiring an NPDES permit in such circumstances is unnecessary 
and imposes duplicative and wasteful regulatory requirements on 
EPA, state permitting agencies, and pesticide users.
    Paragraph (2) of new subsection (s) provides certain 
exceptions to the exemption from NPDES permitting provided in 
paragraph (1). The categories of discharges listed in 
paragraphs (2)(A) and (B) are not exempted and therefore 
require an NPDES permit if those discharges contain a pesticide 
or a residue of a pesticide as a component in those discharges. 
None of the exceptions in paragraph (2) are intended to expand 
the permitting authority of EPA or a state to require a permit 
under the CWA, or to provide a backdoor way to narrow or negate 
the exemption in paragraph (1) from the CWA's NPDES permitting 
process of a discharge from a point source into navigable 
waters of a pesticide authorized for sale, distribution, or use 
under FIFRA, or the residue of such a pesticide, resulting from 
the application of the pesticide, where the pesticide is used 
for its intended purpose and the use is in compliance with 
pesticide label requirements.
    The exception in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) applies 
to circumstances where there has been an application of a 
pesticide in violation of a provision of FIFRA relevant to 
protecting water quality, and as a result of that application 
of the pesticide in violation of FIFRA, there has been a 
discharge of a pesticide or residue of a pesticide that either 
would not have occurred but for the violation of FIFRA, or the 
amount of pesticide or residue of a pesticide contained in the 
discharge is greater than would have occurred without the 
violation of FIFRA. A violation of FIFRA is considered to be 
relevant to protecting water quality only if that violation 
results in the occurrence of a discharge of a pesticide or 
residue of a pesticide from an application of the pesticide, 
and that discharge either would not have occurred but for the 
violation, or the amount of pesticide or residue of a pesticide 
contained in the discharge is greater than would have occurred 
without the violation.
    Hence, a violation of FIFRA not involving or affecting a 
discharge into navigable waters of a pesticide or residue of a 
pesticide from an application of the pesticide (e.g., a 
violation of a FIFRA requirement that a person mixing a 
pesticide must wear protective clothing) does not trigger 
permitting requirements under the CWA and is not a violation of 
the CWA. Similarly, a violation of FIFRA, where a discharge of 
a pesticide or residue of a pesticide did not occur even with 
the FIFRA violation, or the amount of pesticide or residue of a 
pesticide contained in the discharge is not increased as 
compared to what would have occurred without the FIFRA 
violation, does not trigger permitting requirements under the 
CWA and is not a violation of the CWA. Enforcement under the 
CWA under the circumstances presented in paragraph (2)(A)(i) or 
(ii) would require proof of both a CWA violation and a FIFRA 
violation.
    It is the intent of the Committee that, regarding 
biological pesticides, including those produced by plants, H.R. 
953 shall not apply to plants because they are not a point 
source. The exemption requires a discharge from a point source. 
Moreover, section 402 of the CWA only requires an NPDES permit 
for a point source discharge of a pollutant.
    The bill is not intended to exempt from NPDES permitting 
under CWA section 402 certain discharges of waste streams 
merely because they may contain a pesticide or residue of a 
pesticide as a component in them. Therefore, the exceptions in 
subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) identify those types 
of discharges that remain subject to NPDES permitting under CWA 
section 402, even if those discharges may contain in them a 
pesticide or residue of a pesticide as a component. The 
categories of discharges described in subparagraphs (B) and (C) 
are intended to encompass all of the types of discharges, 
which, if they do contain as a component a pesticide or residue 
of a pesticide, would continue to require an NPDES permit.
    The exception in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) applies 
to stormwater discharges regulated under subsection (p) of CWA 
section 402. Discharges regulated under subsection (p) include 
stormwater discharged from certain municipal stormwater 
systems, certain areas associated with industrial activity, 
certain construction sites, and certain other impervious areas.
    The exception in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) applies 
to the following other discharges regulated under subsection 
(p) of CWA section 402: manufacturing or industrial effluent; 
treatment works effluent; and discharges incidental to the 
normal operation of a vessel, including a discharge resulting 
from ballasting operations or vessel biofouling prevention.
    ``Manufacturing or industrial effluent'' under subparagraph 
(C)(i) is intended to cover point source discharges of 
wastewater from facilities with manufacturing or industrial 
processes, where those discharges contain pollutants that are 
pesticides. This may include wastewater discharges containing 
pesticides from pesticide and other agricultural chemical 
manufacturing and formulating facilities, and facilities, 
including utilities, that use biocides to prevent fouling of 
lines, mains, pipes, or cooling towers.
    ``Treatment works effluent'' under subparagraph (C)(ii) is 
intended to cover point source discharges of wastewater from 
treatment works, where those discharges contain pollutants that 
are pesticides. The term ``treatment works'' is defined in 
section 212 of the CWA.
    ``Discharges incidental to the normal operation of a 
vessel, including a discharge resulting from ballasting 
operations or vessel biofouling prevention'' under subparagraph 
(C)(iii) is intended to cover point source discharges from 
vessels that are subject to permitting under EPA's NPDES 
vessels program that regulates incidental discharges from the 
normal operation of vessels, where those discharges contain 
pollutants that are pesticides. The vessels currently subject 
to permitting under the NPDES vessels program consist of all 
non-recreational, non-military vessels of 79 feet or greater in 
length which discharge into navigable waters.
    Recreational vessels as defined in section 502(25) of the 
CWA are exempted from NPDES permitting in section 402(r) of the 
CWA. It is the Committee's intent to leave undisturbed this 
exemption from NPDES permitting for recreational vessels in 
section 402(r). In addition, vessels of the Armed Forces, as 
defined in section 312(a)(14) of the CWA, are not subject to 
permitting under the NPDES vessels program. With the exception 
of ballast water discharges, non-recreational vessels less than 
79 feet in length, and all commercial fishing vessels, 
regardless of length, currently are not subject to permitting 
under the NPDES vessels program, although they may be in the 
future when a moratorium from regulation established by Public 
Law 112-213 ends on December 18, 2014.
    The intent of the Committee is for sections 2 and 3 of the 
bill to reverse the Sixth Circuit's holding in the National 
Cotton Council case and return the state of pesticide 
regulation to the status quo, before any courts ruled on the 
applicability of the CWA to pesticide applications regulated 
under FIFRA. H.R. 897 eliminates the requirement of an NPDES 
permit for the application of pesticides authorized for sale, 
distribution, or use under FIFRA.

                        Committee Consideration


                              I. HEARINGS

    In the 112th Congress, the Subcommittee on Nutrition and 
Horticulture of the Committee on Agriculture and the 
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment of the 
committee on Transportation and Infrastructure held a public 
joint hearing on February 16, 2011 to consider reducing the 
regulatory burdens posed by the case National Cotton Council v. 
EPA (6th Cir. 2009) and to review related draft legislation.
    Members of the Subcommittees heard testimony and considered 
draft legislation targeted at addressing the 6th Circuit Court 
ruling under which pesticide users would have to obtain a 
duplicate permit under the Clean Water Act for the use of 
pesticides. Pesticides are used by farmers, ranchers, forest 
managers, mosquito control districts, and water districts. 
Pesticide applications are highly regulated under the Federal 
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The order of the 
court would require pesticide applications that are not covered 
by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 
permit to be subject to a fine of up to $37,500 per day per 
violation. In addition to the costs of compliance, pesticide 
users will be subject to an increased risk of litigation under 
the citizen suit provision of the CWA. During the hearing, 
testimony was heard from six witnesses on two panels.

                           II. FULL COMMITTEE

    The Committee on Agriculture met, pursuant to notice, with 
a quorum present, on February 16, 2017, to consider H.R. 953, 
Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2015.
    H.R. 953 was placed before the Committee for consideration. 
Without objection, a first reading of the bill was waived and 
it was open for amendment at any point.
    Chairman Conaway, Mr. Peterson, and Mr. Gibbs were 
recognized for statements. There being no amendments, Mr. 
Peterson was recognized to offer a motion that the bill H.R. 
953 be reported favorably to the House with recommendation that 
it do pass. The motion was subsequently approved by voice vote.
    At the conclusion of the meeting, Chairman Conaway advised 
Members that pursuant to the rules of the House of 
Representatives Members had until February 21, 2017, to file 
any supplemental or minority views with the Committee.
    Without objection, staff was given permission to make any 
necessary clerical, technical or conforming changes to reflect 
the intent of the Committee. Chairman Conaway thanked all the 
Members and adjourned the meeting.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, H.R. 953 was reported by voice vote with a 
majority quorum present. There was no request for a recorded 
vote.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee on Agriculture's 
oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the 
body of this report.

           Budget Act Compliance (Sections 308, 402, and 423)

    The provisions of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (relating to estimates of new 
budget authority, new spending authority, new credit authority, 
or increased or decreased revenues or tax expenditures) are not 
considered applicable. The estimate and comparison required to 
be prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives and sections 402 and 423 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974 submitted to the Committee prior to the 
filing of this report are as follows:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, February 24, 2017.
Hon. K. Michael Conaway,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 953, the Reducing 
Regulatory Burdens Act of 2017.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jon Sperl.
            Sincerely,
                                             Mark P. Hadley
                                        (For Keith Hall, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 953--Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2017

    H.R. 953 would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) and states authorized to issue permits under the National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) from requiring a 
permit for some discharges of pesticides. Specifically, public 
and private entities would no longer need to obtain an NPDES 
permit for certain discharges of pesticides if their use is 
authorized under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act, or in cases where the discharge is regulated 
as either a stormwater, municipal, or industrial discharge 
under the Clean Water Act.
    Based on information from the EPA, CBO estimates that 
enacting this legislation would have no significant effect on 
the federal budget. Any administrative savings to the EPA that 
might result from issuing fewer permits would be negligible 
because the EPA has delegated the authority to issue most NPDES 
permits to states.
    Enacting H.R. 953 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to 
the bill. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 953 would not 
increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of 
the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
    H.R. 953 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jon Sperl. This 
estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    H.R. 953 does not authorize funding, therefore, clause 
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is inapplicable.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee report incorporates the 
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office pursuant to sections 402 and 423 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committee within the meaning of section 5(b) of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act was created by this 
legislation.

                Applicability to the Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 
104-1).

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopted as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (Public Law 104-4).

  Earmark Statement Required by Clause 9 of Rule XXI of the Rules of 
                        House of Representatives

    H.R. 953 does not contain any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House Representatives.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    This bill does not establish or reauthorize a program of 
the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another 
Federal program, a program that was included in any report from 
the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to 
section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a 
program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance.

                  Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings

    The Committee does not believe that the legislation directs 
an executive branch official to conduct any specific rule 
making proceedings within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 551.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italic and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

          FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
SEC. 3. REGISTRATION OF PESTICIDES.

  (a) Requirement of Registration.--Except as provided by this 
Act, no person in any State may distribute or sell to any 
person any pesticide that is not registered under this Act. To 
the extent necessary to prevent unreasonable adverse effects on 
the environment, the Administrator may by regulation limit the 
distribution, sale, or use in any State of any pesticide that 
is not registered under this Act and that is not the subject of 
an experimental use permit under section 5 or an emergency 
exemption under section 18.
  (b) Exemptions.--A pesticide which is not registered with the 
Administrator may be transferred if--
          (1) the transfer is from one registered establishment 
        to another registered establishment operated by the 
        same producer solely for packaging at the second 
        establishment or for use as a constituent part of 
        another pesticide produced at the second establishment; 
        or
          (2) the transfer is pursuant to and in accordance 
        with the requirements of an experimental use permit.
  (c) Procedure for Registration.--
          (1) Statement required.--Each applicant for 
        registration of a pesticide shall file with the 
        Administrator a statement which includes--
                  (A) the name and address of the applicant and 
                of any other person whose name will appear on 
                the labeling;
                  (B) the name of the pesticide;
                  (C) a complete copy of the labeling of the 
                pesticide, a statement of all claims to be made 
                for it, and any directions for its use;
                  (D) the complete formula of the pesticide;
                  (E) a request that the pesticide be 
                classified for general use or for restricted 
                use, or for both; and
                  (F) except as otherwise provided in paragraph 
                (2)(D), if requested by the Administrator, a 
                full description of the tests made and the 
                results thereof upon which the claims are 
                based, or alternatively a citation to data that 
                appear in the public literature or that 
                previously had been submitted to the 
                Administrator and that the Administrator may 
                consider in accordance with the following 
                provisions:
                          (i) With respect to pesticides 
                        containing active ingredients that are 
                        initially registered under this Act 
                        after the date of enactment of the 
                        Federal Pesticide Act of 1978, data 
                        submitted to support the application 
                        for the original registration of the 
                        pesticide, or an application for an 
                        amendment adding any new use to the 
                        registration and that pertains solely 
                        to such new use, shall not, without the 
                        written permission of the original data 
                        submitter, be considered by the 
                        Administrator to support an application 
                        by another person during a period of 
                        ten years following the date the 
                        Administrator first registers the 
                        pesticide, except that such permission 
                        shall not be required in the case of 
                        defensive data.
                          (ii) The period of exclusive data use 
                        provided under clause (i) shall be 
                        extended 1 additional year for each 3 
                        minor uses registered after the date of 
                        enactment of this clause and within 7 
                        years of the commencement of the 
                        exclusive use period, up to a total of 
                        3 additional years for all minor uses 
                        registered by the Administrator if the 
                        Administrator, in consultation with the 
                        Secretary of Agriculture, determines 
                        that, based on information provided by 
                        an applicant for registration or a 
                        registrant, that--
                                  (I) there are insufficient 
                                efficacious alternative 
                                registered pesticides available 
                                for the use;
                                  (II) the alternatives to the 
                                minor use pesticide pose 
                                greater risks to the 
                                environment or human health;
                                  (III) the minor use pesticide 
                                plays or will play a 
                                significant part in managing 
                                pest resistance; or
                                  (IV) the minor use pesticide 
                                plays or will play a 
                                significant part in an 
                                integrated pest management 
                                program.
                        The registration of a pesticide for a 
                        minor use on a crop grouping 
                        established by the Administrator shall 
                        be considered for purposes of this 
                        clause 1 minor use for each 
                        representative crop for which data are 
                        provided in the crop grouping. Any 
                        additional exclusive use period under 
                        this clause shall be modified as 
                        appropriate or terminated if the 
                        registrant voluntarily cancels the 
                        product or deletes from the 
                        registration the minor uses which 
                        formed the basis for the extension of 
                        the additional exclusive use period or 
                        if the Administrator determines that 
                        the registrant is not actually 
                        marketing the product for such minor 
                        uses.
                          (iii) Except as otherwise provided in 
                        clause (i), with respect to data 
                        submitted after December 31, 1969, by 
                        an applicant or registrant to support 
                        an application for registration, 
                        experimental use permit, or amendment 
                        adding a new use to an existing 
                        registration, to support or maintain in 
                        effect an existing registration, or for 
                        reregistration, the Administrator may, 
                        without the permission of the original 
                        data submitter, consider any such item 
                        of data in support of an application by 
                        any other person (hereinafter in this 
                        subparagraph referred to as the 
                        ``applicant'') within the fifteen-year 
                        period following the date the data were 
                        originally submitted only if the 
                        applicant has made an offer to 
                        compensate the original data submitter 
                        and submitted such offer to the 
                        Administrator accompanied by evidence 
                        of delivery to the original data 
                        submitter of the offer. The terms and 
                        amount of compensation may be fixed by 
                        agreement between the original data 
                        submitter and the applicant, or, 
                        failing such agreement, binding 
                        arbitration under this subparagraph. 
                        If, at the end of ninety days after the 
                        date of delivery to the original data 
                        submitter of the offer to compensate, 
                        the original data submitter and the 
                        applicant have neither agreed on the 
                        amount and terms of compensation nor on 
                        a procedure for reaching an agreement 
                        on the amount and terms of 
                        compensation, either person may 
                        initiate binding arbitration 
                        proceedings by requesting the Federal 
                        Mediation and Conciliation Service to 
                        appoint an arbitrator from the roster 
                        of arbitrators maintained by such 
                        Service. The procedure and rules of the 
                        Service shall be applicable to the 
                        selection of such arbitrator and to 
                        such arbitration proceedings, and the 
                        findings and determination of the 
                        arbitrator shall be final and 
                        conclusive, and no official or court of 
                        the United States shall have power or 
                        jurisdiction to review any such 
                        findings and determination, except for 
                        fraud, misrepresentation, or other 
                        misconduct by one of the parties to the 
                        arbitration or the arbitrator where 
                        there is a verified complaint with 
                        supporting affidavits attesting to 
                        specific instances of such fraud, 
                        misrepresentation, or other misconduct. 
                        The parties to the arbitration shall 
                        share equally in the payment of the fee 
                        and expenses of the arbitrator. If the 
                        Administrator determines that an 
                        original data submitter has failed to 
                        participate in a procedure for reaching 
                        an agreement or in an arbitration 
                        proceeding as required by this 
                        subparagraph, or failed to comply with 
                        the terms of an agreement or 
                        arbitration decision concerning 
                        compensation under this subparagraph, 
                        the original data submitter shall 
                        forfeit the right to compensation for 
                        the use of the data in support of the 
                        application. Notwithstanding any other 
                        provision of this Act, if the 
                        Administrator determines that an 
                        applicant has failed to participate in 
                        a procedure for reaching an agreement 
                        or in an arbitration proceeding as 
                        required by this subparagraph, or 
                        failed to comply with the terms of an 
                        agreement or arbitration decision 
                        concerning compensation under this 
                        subparagraph, the Administrator shall 
                        deny the application or cancel the 
                        registration of the pesticide in 
                        support of which the data were used 
                        without further hearing. Before the 
                        Administrator takes action under either 
                        of the preceding two sentences, the 
                        Administrator shall furnish to the 
                        affected person, by certified mail, 
                        notice of intent to take action and 
                        allow fifteen days from the date of 
                        delivery of the notice for the affected 
                        person to respond. If a registration is 
                        denied or canceled under this 
                        subparagraph, the Administrator may 
                        make such order as the Administrator 
                        deems appropriate concerning the 
                        continued sale and use of existing 
                        stocks of such pesticide. Registration 
                        action by the Administrator shall not 
                        be delayed pending the fixing of 
                        compensation.
                          (iv) After expiration of any period 
                        of exclusive use and any period for 
                        which compensation is required for the 
                        use of an item of data under clauses 
                        (i), (ii), and (iii), the Administrator 
                        may consider such item of data in 
                        support of an application by any other 
                        applicant without the permission of the 
                        original data submitter and without an 
                        offer having been received to 
                        compensate the original data submitter 
                        for the use of such item of data.
                          (v) The period of exclusive use 
                        provided under clause (ii) shall not 
                        take effect until 1 year after 
                        enactment of this clause, except where 
                        an applicant or registrant is applying 
                        for the registration of a pesticide 
                        containing an active ingredient not 
                        previously registered.
                          (vi) With respect to data submitted 
                        after the date of enactment of this 
                        clause by an applicant or registrant to 
                        support an amendment adding a new use 
                        to an existing registration that does 
                        not retain any period of exclusive use, 
                        if such data relates solely to a minor 
                        use of a pesticide, such data shall 
                        not, without the written permission of 
                        the original data submitter, be 
                        considered by the Administrator to 
                        support an application for a minor use 
                        by another person during the period of 
                        10 years following the date of 
                        submission of such data. The applicant 
                        or registrant at the time the new minor 
                        use is requested shall notify the 
                        Administrator that to the best of their 
                        knowledge the exclusive use period for 
                        the pesticide has expired and that the 
                        data pertaining solely to the minor use 
                        of a pesticide is eligible for the 
                        provisions of this paragraph. If the 
                        minor use registration which is 
                        supported by data submitted pursuant to 
                        this subsection is voluntarily canceled 
                        or if such data are subsequently used 
                        to support a nonminor use, the data 
                        shall no longer be subject to the 
                        exclusive use provisions of this clause 
                        but shall instead be considered by the 
                        Administrator in accordance with the 
                        provisions of clause (i), as 
                        appropriate.
                  (G) If the applicant is requesting that the 
                registration or amendment to the registration 
                of a pesticide be expedited, an explanation of 
                the basis for the request must be submitted, in 
                accordance with paragraph (10) of this 
                subsection.
          (2) Data in support of registration.--
                  (A) In general.--The Administrator shall 
                publish guidelines specifying the kinds of 
                information which will be required to support 
                the registration of a pesticide and shall 
                revise such guidelines from time to time. If 
                thereafter the Administrator requires any 
                additional kind of information under 
                subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, the 
                Administrator shall permit sufficient time for 
                applicants to obtain such additional 
                information. The Administrator, in establishing 
                standards for data requirements for the 
                registration of pesticides with respect to 
                minor uses, shall make such standards 
                commensurate with the anticipated extent of 
                use, pattern of use, the public health and 
                agricultural need for such minor use, and the 
                level and degree of potential beneficial or 
                adverse effects on man and the environment. The 
                Administrator shall not require a person to 
                submit, in relation to a registration or 
                reregistration of a pesticide for minor 
                agricultural use under this Act, any field 
                residue data from a geographic area where the 
                pesticide will not be registered for such use. 
                In the development of these standards, the 
                Administrator shall consider the economic 
                factors of potential national volume of use, 
                extent of distribution, and the impact of the 
                cost of meeting the requirements on the 
                incentives for any potential registrant to 
                undertake the development of the required data. 
                Except as provided by section 10, within 30 
                days after the Administrator registers a 
                pesticide under this Act the Administrator 
                shall make available to the public the data 
                called for in the registration statement 
                together with such other scientific information 
                as the Administrator deems relevant to the 
                Administrator's decision.
                  (B) Additional data.--(i) If the 
                Administrator determines that additional data 
                are required to maintain in effect an existing 
                registration of a pesticide, the Administrator 
                shall notify all existing registrants of the 
                pesticide to which the determination relates 
                and provide a list of such registrants to any 
                interested person.
                  (ii) Each registrant of such pesticide shall 
                provide evidence within ninety days after 
                receipt of notification that it is taking 
                appropriate steps to secure the additional data 
                that are required. Two or more registrants may 
                agree to develop jointly, or to share in the 
                cost of developing, such data if they agree and 
                advise the Administrator of their intent within 
                ninety days after notification. Any registrant 
                who agrees to share in the cost of producing 
                the data shall be entitled to examine and rely 
                upon such data in support of maintenance of 
                such registration. The Administrator shall 
                issue a notice of intent to suspend the 
                registration of a pesticide in accordance with 
                the procedures prescribed by clause (iv) if a 
                registrant fails to comply with this clause.
                  (iii) If, at the end of sixty days after 
                advising the Administrator of their agreement 
                to develop jointly, or share in the cost of 
                developing data, the registrants have not 
                further agreed on the terms of the data 
                development arrangement or on a procedure for 
                reaching such agreement, any of such 
                registrants may initiate binding arbitration 
                proceedings by requesting the Federal Mediation 
                and Conciliation Service to appoint an 
                arbitrator from the roster of arbitrators 
                maintained by such Service. The procedure and 
                rules of the Service shall be applicable to the 
                selection of such arbitrator and to such 
                arbitration proceedings, and the findings and 
                determination of the arbitrator shall be final 
                and conclusive, and no official or court of the 
                United States shall have power or jurisdiction 
                to review any such findings and determination, 
                except for fraud, misrepresentation, or other 
                misconduct by one of the parties to the 
                arbitration or the arbitrator where there is a 
                verified complaint with supporting affidavits 
                attesting to specific instances of such fraud, 
                misrepresentation, or other misconduct. All 
                parties to the arbitration shall share equally 
                in the payment of the fee and expenses of the 
                arbitrator. The Administrator shall issue a 
                notice of intent to suspend the registration of 
                a pesticide in accordance with the procedures 
                prescribed by clause (iv) if a registrant fails 
                to comply with this clause.
                  (iv) Notwithstanding any other provision of 
                this Act, if the Administrator determines that 
                a registrant, within the time required by the 
                Administrator, has failed to take appropriate 
                steps to secure the data required under this 
                subparagraph, to participate in a procedure for 
                reaching agreement concerning a joint data 
                development arrangement under this subparagraph 
                or in an arbitration proceeding as required by 
                this subparagraph, or to comply with the terms 
                of an agreement or arbitration decision 
                concerning a joint data development arrangement 
                under this subparagraph, the Administrator may 
                issue a notice of intent to suspend such 
                registrant's registration of the pesticide for 
                which additional data is required. The 
                Administrator may include in the notice of 
                intent to suspend such provisions as the 
                Administrator deems appropriate concerning the 
                continued sale and use of existing stocks of 
                such pesticide. Any suspension proposed under 
                this subparagraph shall become final and 
                effective at the end of thirty days from 
                receipt by the registrant of the notice of 
                intent to suspend, unless during that time a 
                request for hearing is made by a person 
                adversely affected by the notice or the 
                registrant has satisfied the Administrator that 
                the registrant has complied fully with the 
                requirements that served as a basis for the 
                notice of intent to suspend. If a hearing is 
                requested, a hearing shall be conducted under 
                section 6(d) of this Act. The only matters for 
                resolution at that hearing shall be whether the 
                registrant has failed to take the action that 
                served as the basis for the notice of intent to 
                suspend the registration of the pesticide for 
                which additional data is required, and whether 
                the Administrator's determination with respect 
                to the disposition of existing stocks is 
                consistent with this Act. If a hearing is held, 
                a decision after completion of such hearing 
                shall be final. Notwithstanding any other 
                provision of this Act, a hearing shall be held 
                and a determination made within seventy-five 
                days after receipt of a request for such 
                hearing. Any registration suspended under this 
                subparagraph shall be reinstated by the 
                Administrator if the Administrator determines 
                that the registrant has complied fully with the 
                requirements that served as a basis for the 
                suspension of the registration.
                  (v) Any data submitted under this 
                subparagraph shall be subject to the provisions 
                of paragraph (1)(D). Whenever such data are 
                submitted jointly by two or more registrants, 
                an agent shall be agreed on at the time of the 
                joint submission to handle any subsequent data 
                compensation matters for the joint submitters 
                of such data.
                  (vi) Upon the request of a registrant the 
                Administrator shall, in the case of a minor 
                use, extend the deadline for the production of 
                residue chemistry data under this subparagraph 
                for data required solely to support that minor 
                use until the final deadline for submission of 
                data under section 4 for the other uses of the 
                pesticide established as of the date of 
                enactment of the Food Quality Protection Act of 
                1996, if--
                          (I) the data to support other uses of 
                        the pesticide on a food are being 
                        provided;
                          (II) the registrant, in submitting a 
                        request for such an extension, provides 
                        a schedule, including interim dates to 
                        measure progress, to assure that the 
                        data production will be completed 
                        before the expiration of the extension 
                        period;
                          (III) the Administrator has 
                        determined that such extension will not 
                        significantly delay the Administrator's 
                        schedule for issuing a reregistration 
                        eligibility determination required 
                        under section 4; and
                          (IV) the Administrator has determined 
                        that based on existing data, such 
                        extension would not significantly 
                        increase the risk of any unreasonable 
                        adverse effect on the environment. If 
                        the Administrator grants an extension 
                        under this clause, the Administrator 
                        shall monitor the development of the 
                        data and shall ensure that the 
                        registrant is meeting the schedule for 
                        the production of the data. If the 
                        Administrator determines that the 
                        registrant is not meeting or has not 
                        met the schedule for the production of 
                        such data, the Administrator may 
                        proceed in accordance with clause (iv) 
                        regarding the continued registration of 
                        the affected products with the minor 
                        use and shall inform the public of such 
                        action. Notwithstanding the provisions 
                        of this clause, the Administrator may 
                        take action to modify or revoke the 
                        extension under this clause if the 
                        Administrator determines that the 
                        extension for the minor use may cause 
                        an unreasonable adverse effect on the 
                        environment. In such circumstance, the 
                        Administrator shall provide, in writing 
                        to the registrant, a notice revoking 
                        the extension of time for submission of 
                        data. Such data shall instead be due in 
                        accordance with the date established by 
                        the Administrator for the submission of 
                        the data.
                  (vii) If the registrant does not commit to 
                support a specific minor use of the pesticide, 
                but is supporting and providing data in a 
                timely and adequate fashion to support uses of 
                the pesticide on a food, or if all uses of the 
                pesticide are nonfood uses and the registrant 
                does not commit to support a specific minor use 
                of the pesticide but is supporting and 
                providing data in a timely and adequate fashion 
                to support other nonfood uses of the pesticide, 
                the Administrator, at the written request of 
                the registrant, shall not take any action 
                pursuant to this clause in regard to such 
                unsupported minor use until the final deadline 
                established as of the date of enactment of the 
                Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, for the 
                submission of data under section 4 for the 
                supported uses identified pursuant to this 
                clause unless the Administrator determines that 
                the absence of the data is significant enough 
                to cause human health or environmental 
                concerns. On the basis of such determination, 
                the Administrator may refuse the request for 
                extension by the registrant. Upon receipt of 
                the request from the registrant, the 
                Administrator shall publish in the Federal 
                Register a notice of the receipt of the request 
                and the effective date upon which the uses not 
                being supported will be voluntarily deleted 
                from the registration pursuant to section 
                6(f)(1). If the Administrator grants an 
                extension under this clause, the Administrator 
                shall monitor the development of the data for 
                the uses being supported and shall ensure that 
                the registrant is meeting the schedule for the 
                production of such data. If the Administrator 
                determines that the registrant is not meeting 
                or has not met the schedule for the production 
                of such data, the Administrator may proceed in 
                accordance with clause (iv) of this 
                subparagraph regarding the continued 
                registration of the affected products with the 
                minor and other uses and shall inform the 
                public of such action in accordance with 
                section 6(f)(2). Notwithstanding the provisions 
                of this clause, the Administrator may deny, 
                modify, or revoke the temporary extension under 
                this subparagraph if the Administrator 
                determines that the continuation of the minor 
                use may cause an unreasonable adverse effect on 
                the environment. In the event of modification 
                or revocation, the Administrator shall provide, 
                in writing, to the registrant a notice revoking 
                the temporary extension and establish a new 
                effective date by which the minor use shall be 
                deleted from the registration.
                  (viii)(I) If data required to support 
                registration of a pesticide under subparagraph 
                (A) is requested by a Federal or State 
                regulatory authority, the Administrator shall, 
                to the extent practicable, coordinate data 
                requirements, test protocols, timetables, and 
                standards of review and reduce burdens and 
                redundancy caused to the registrant by multiple 
                requirements on the registrant.
                  (II) The Administrator may enter into a 
                cooperative agreement with a State to carry out 
                subclause (I).
                  (III) Not later than 1 year after the date of 
                enactment of this clause, the Administrator 
                shall develop a process to identify and assist 
                in alleviating future disparities between 
                Federal and State data requirements.
                  (C) Simplified procedures.--Within nine 
                months after the date of enactment of this 
                subparagraph, the Administrator shall, by 
                regulation, prescribe simplified procedures for 
                the registration of pesticides, which shall 
                include the provisions of subparagraph (D) of 
                this paragraph.
                  (D) Exemption.--No applicant for registration 
                of a pesticide who proposes to purchase a 
                registered pesticide from another producer in 
                order to formulate such purchased pesticide 
                into the pesticide that is the subject of the 
                application shall be required to--
                          (i) submit or cite data pertaining to 
                        such purchased product; or
                          (ii) offer to pay reasonable 
                        compensation otherwise required by 
                        paragraph (1)(D) of this subsection for 
                        the use of any such data.
                  (E) Minor use waiver.--In handling the 
                registration of a pesticide for a minor use, 
                the Administrator may waive otherwise 
                applicable data requirements if the 
                Administrator determines that the absence of 
                such data will not prevent the Administrator 
                from determining--
                          (i) the incremental risk presented by 
                        the minor use of the pesticide; and
                          (ii) that such risk, if any, would 
                        not be an unreasonable adverse effect 
                        on the environment.
          (3) Time for acting with respect to Application.--
                  (A) In general.--The Administrator shall 
                review the data after receipt of the 
                application and shall, as expeditiously as 
                possible, either register the pesticide in 
                accordance with paragraph (5), or notify the 
                applicant of the Administrator's determination 
                that it does not comply with the provisions of 
                the Act in accordance with paragraph (6).
                  (B) Identical or substantially similar.--(i) 
                The Administrator shall, as expeditiously as 
                possible, review and act on any application 
                received by the Administrator that--
                          (I) proposes the initial or amended 
                        registration of an end-use pesticide 
                        that, if registered as proposed, would 
                        be identical or substantially similar 
                        in composition and labeling to a 
                        currently-registered pesticide 
                        identified in the application, or that 
                        would differ in composition and 
                        labeling from such currently-registered 
                        pesticide only in ways that would not 
                        significantly increase the risk of 
                        unreasonable adverse effects on the 
                        environment; or
                          (II) proposes an amendment to the 
                        registration of a registered pesticide 
                        that does not require scientific review 
                        of data.
                  (ii) In expediting the review of an 
                application for an action described in clause 
                (i), the Administrator shall--
                          (I) review the application in 
                        accordance with section 33(f)(4)(B) 
                        and, if the application is found to be 
                        incomplete, reject the application;
                          (II) not later than the applicable 
                        decision review time established 
                        pursuant to section 33(f)(4)(B), or, if 
                        no review time is established, not 
                        later than 90 days after receiving a 
                        complete application, notify the 
                        registrant if the application has been 
                        granted or denied; and
                          (III) if the application is denied, 
                        notify the registrant in writing of the 
                        specific reasons for the denial of the 
                        application.
                  (C) Minor use registration.--
                          (i) The Administrator shall, as 
                        expeditiously as possible, review and 
                        act on any complete application--
                                  (I) that proposes the initial 
                                registration of a new pesticide 
                                active ingredient if the active 
                                ingredient is proposed to be 
                                registered solely for minor 
                                uses, or proposes a 
                                registration amendment solely 
                                for minor uses to an existing 
                                registration; or
                                  (II) for a registration or a 
                                registration amendment that 
                                proposes significant minor 
                                uses.
                          (ii) For the purposes of clause (i)--
                                  (I) the term ``as 
                                expeditiously as possible'' 
                                means that the Administrator 
                                shall, to the greatest extent 
                                practicable, complete a review 
                                and evaluation of all data, 
                                submitted with a complete 
                                application, within 12 months 
                                after the submission of the 
                                complete application, and the 
                                failure of the Administrator to 
                                complete such a review and 
                                evaluation under clause (i) 
                                shall not be subject to 
                                judicial review; and
                                  (II) the term ``significant 
                                minor uses'' means 3 or more 
                                minor uses proposed for every 
                                nonminor use, a minor use that 
                                would, in the judgment of the 
                                Administrator, serve as a 
                                replacement for any use which 
                                has been canceled in the 5 
                                years preceding the receipt of 
                                the application, or a minor use 
                                that in the opinion of the 
                                Administrator would avoid the 
                                reissuance of an emergency 
                                exemption under section 18 for 
                                that minor use.
                  (D) Adequate time for submission of minor use 
                data.--If a registrant makes a request for a 
                minor use waiver, regarding data required by 
                the Administrator, pursuant to paragraph 
                (2)(E), and if the Administrator denies in 
                whole or in part such data waiver request, the 
                registrant shall have a full-time period for 
                providing such data. For purposes of this 
                subparagraph, the term ``full-time period'' 
                means the time period originally established by 
                the Administrator for submission of such data, 
                beginning with the date of receipt by the 
                registrant of the Administrator's notice of 
                denial.
          (4) Notice of application.--The Administrator shall 
        publish in the Federal Register, promptly after receipt 
        of the statement and other data required pursuant to 
        paragraphs (1) and (2), a notice of each application 
        for registration of any pesticide if it contains any 
        new active ingredient or if it would entail a changed 
        use pattern. The notice shall provide for a period of 
        30 days in which any Federal agency or any other 
        interested person may comment.
          (5) Approval of registration.--The Administrator 
        shall register a pesticide if the Administrator 
        determines that, when considered with any restrictions 
        imposed under subsection (d)--
                  (A) its composition is such as to warrant the 
                proposed claims for it;
                  (B) its labeling and other material required 
                to be submitted comply with the requirements of 
                this Act;
                  (C) it will perform its intended function 
                without unreasonable adverse effects on the 
                environment; and
                  (D) when used in accordance with widespread 
                and commonly recognized practice it will not 
                generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on 
                the environment.
        The Administrator shall not make any lack of 
        essentiality a criterion for denying registration of 
        any pesticide. Where two pesticides meet the 
        requirements of this paragraph, one should not be 
        registered in preference to the other. In considering 
        an application for the registration of a pesticide, the 
        Administrator may waive data requirements pertaining to 
        efficacy, in which event the Administrator may register 
        the pesticide without determining that the pesticide's 
        composition is such as to warrant proposed claims of 
        efficacy. If a pesticide is found to be efficacious by 
        any State under section 24(c) of this Act, a 
        presumption is established that the Administrator shall 
        waive data requirements pertaining to efficacy for use 
        of the pesticide in such State.
          (6) Denial of registration.--If the Administrator 
        determines that the requirements of paragraph (5) for 
        registration are not satisfied, the Administrator shall 
        notify the applicant for registration of the 
        Administrator's determination and of the 
        Administrator's reasons (including the factual basis) 
        therefor, and that, unless the applicant corrects the 
        conditions and notifies the Administrator thereof 
        during the 30-day period beginning with the day after 
        the date on which the applicant receives the notice, 
        the Administrator may refuse to register the pesticide. 
        Whenever the Administrator refuses to register a 
        pesticide, the Administrator shall notify the applicant 
        of the Administrator's decision and of the 
        Administrator's reasons (including the factual basis) 
        therefor. The Administrator shall promptly publish in 
        the Federal Register notice of such denial of 
        registration and the reasons therefor. Upon such 
        notification, the applicant for registration or other 
        interested person with the concurrence of the applicant 
        shall have the same remedies as provided for in section 
        6.
          (7) Registration under special circumstances.--
        Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (5)--
                  (A) The Administrator may conditionally 
                register or amend the registration of a 
                pesticide if the Administrator determines that 
                (i) the pesticide and proposed use are 
                identical or substantially similar to any 
                currently registered pesticide and use thereof, 
                or differ only in ways that would not 
                significantly increase the risk of unreasonable 
                adverse effects on the environment, and (ii) 
                approving the registration or amendment in the 
                manner proposed by the applicant would not 
                significantly increase the risk of any 
                unreasonable adverse effect on the environment. 
                An applicant seeking conditional registration 
                or amended registration under this subparagraph 
                shall submit such data as would be required to 
                obtain registration of a similar pesticide 
                under paragraph (5). If the applicant is unable 
                to submit an item of data because it has not 
                yet been generated, the Administrator may 
                register or amend the registration of the 
                pesticide under such conditions as will require 
                the submission of such data not later than the 
                time such data are required to be submitted 
                with respect to similar pesticides already 
                registered under this Act.
                  (B) The Administrator may conditionally amend 
                the registration of a pesticide to permit 
                additional uses of such pesticide 
                notwithstanding that data concerning the 
                pesticide may be insufficient to support an 
                unconditional amendment, if the Administrator 
                determines that (i) the applicant has submitted 
                satisfactory data pertaining to the proposed 
                additional use, and (ii) amending the 
                registration in the manner proposed by the 
                applicant would not significantly increase the 
                risk of any unreasonable adverse effect on the 
                environment. Notwithstanding the foregoing 
                provisions of this subparagraph, no 
                registration of a pesticide may be amended to 
                permit an additional use of such pesticide if 
                the Administrator has issued a notice stating 
                that such pesticide, or any ingredient thereof, 
                meets or exceeds risk criteria associated in 
                whole or in part with human dietary exposure 
                enumerated in regulations issued under this 
                Act, and during the pendency of any risk-
                benefit evaluation initiated by such notice, if 
                (I) the additional use of such pesticide 
                involves a major food or feed crop, or (II) the 
                additional use of such pesticide involves a 
                minor food or feed crop and the Administrator 
                determines, with the concurrence of the 
                Secretary of Agriculture, there is available an 
                effective alternative pesticide that does not 
                meet or exceed such risk criteria. An applicant 
                seeking amended registration under this 
                subparagraph shall submit such data as would be 
                required to obtain registration of a similar 
                pesticide under paragraph (5). If the applicant 
                is unable to submit an item of data (other than 
                data pertaining to the proposed additional use) 
                because it has not yet been generated, the 
                Administrator may amend the registration under 
                such conditions as will require the submission 
                of such data not later than the time such data 
                are required to be submitted with respect to 
                similar pesticides already registered under 
                this Act.
                  (C) The Administrator may conditionally 
                register a pesticide containing an active 
                ingredient not contained in any currently 
                registered pesticide for a period reasonably 
                sufficient for the generation and submission of 
                required data (which are lacking because a 
                period reasonably sufficient for generation of 
                the data has not elapsed since the 
                Administrator first imposed the data 
                requirement) on the condition that by the end 
                of such period the Administrator receives such 
                data and the data do not meet or exceed risk 
                criteria enumerated in regulations issued under 
                this Act, and on such other conditions as the 
                Administrator may prescribe. A conditional 
                registration under this subparagraph shall be 
                granted only if the Administrator determines 
                that use of the pesticide during such period 
                will not cause any unreasonable adverse effect 
                on the environment, and that use of the 
                pesticide is in the public interest.
          (8) Interim administrative review.--Notwithstanding 
        any other provision of this Act, the Administrator may 
        not initiate a public interim administrative review 
        process to develop a risk-benefit evaluation of the 
        ingredients of a pesticide or any of its uses prior to 
        initiating a formal action to cancel, suspend, or deny 
        registration of such pesticide, required under this 
        Act, unless such interim administrative process is 
        based on a validated test or other significant evidence 
        raising prudent concerns of unreasonable adverse risk 
        to man or to the environment. Notice of the definition 
        of the terms ``validated test'' and ``other significant 
        evidence'' as used herein shall be published by the 
        Administrator in the Federal Register.
          (9) Labeling.--
                  (A) Additional statements.--Subject to 
                subparagraphs (B) and (C), it shall not be a 
                violation of this Act for a registrant to 
                modify the labeling of an antimicrobial 
                pesticide product to include relevant 
                information on product efficacy, product 
                composition, container composition or design, 
                or other characteristics that do not relate to 
                any pesticidal claim or pesticidal activity.
                  (B) Requirements.--Proposed labeling 
                information under subparagraph (A) shall not be 
                false or misleading, shall not conflict with or 
                detract from any statement required by law or 
                the Administrator as a condition of 
                registration, and shall be substantiated on the 
                request of the Administrator.
                  (C) Notification and disapproval.--
                          (i) Notification.--A registration may 
                        be modified under subparagraph (A) if 
                        --
                                  (I) the registrant notifies 
                                the Administrator in writing 
                                not later than 60 days prior to 
                                distribution or sale of a 
                                product bearing the modified 
                                labeling; and
                                  (II) the Administrator does 
                                not disapprove of the 
                                modification under clause (ii).
                          (ii) Disapproval.--Not later than 30 
                        days after receipt of a notification 
                        under clause (i), the Administrator may 
                        disapprove the modification by sending 
                        the registrant notification in writing 
                        stating that the proposed language is 
                        not acceptable and stating the reasons 
                        why the Administrator finds the 
                        proposed modification unacceptable.
                          (iii) Restriction on sale.--A 
                        registrant may not sell or distribute a 
                        product bearing a disapproved 
                        modification.
                          (iv) Objection.--A registrant may 
                        file an objection in writing to a 
                        disapproval under clause (ii) not later 
                        than 30 days after receipt of 
                        notification of the disapproval.
                          (v) Final action.--A decision by the 
                        Administrator following receipt and 
                        consideration of an objection filed 
                        under clause (iv) shall be considered a 
                        final agency action.
                  (D) Use dilution.--The label or labeling 
                required under this Act for an antimicrobial 
                pesticide that is or may be diluted for use may 
                have a different statement of caution or 
                protective measures for use of the recommended 
                diluted solution of the pesticide than for use 
                of a concentrate of the pesticide if the 
                Administrator determines that --
                          (i) adequate data have been submitted 
                        to support the statement proposed for 
                        the diluted solution uses; and
                          (ii) the label or labeling provides 
                        adequate protection for exposure to the 
                        diluted solution of the pesticide.
          (10) Expedited registration of pesticides.--
                  (A) Not later than 1 year after the date of 
                enactment of this paragraph, the Administrator 
                shall, utilizing public comment, develop 
                procedures and guidelines, and expedite the 
                review of an application for registration of a 
                pesticide or an amendment to a registration 
                that satisfies such guidelines.
                  (B) Any application for registration or an 
                amendment, including biological and 
                conventional pesticides, will be considered for 
                expedited review under this paragraph. An 
                application for registration or an amendment 
                shall qualify for expedited review if use of 
                the pesticide proposed by the application may 
                reasonably be expected to accomplish 1 or more 
                of the following:
                          (i) Reduce the risks of pesticides to 
                        human health.
                          (ii) Reduce the risks of pesticides 
                        to nontarget organisms.
                          (iii) Reduce the potential for 
                        contamination of groundwater, surface 
                        water, or other valued environmental 
                        resources.
                          (iv) Broaden the adoption of 
                        integrated pest management strategies, 
                        or make such strategies more available 
                        or more effective.
                  (C) The Administrator, not later than 30 days 
                after receipt of an application for expedited 
                review, shall notify the applicant whether the 
                application is complete. If it is found to be 
                incomplete, the Administrator may either reject 
                the request for expedited review or ask the 
                applicant for additional information to satisfy 
                the guidelines developed under subparagraph 
                (A).
  (d) Classification of Pesticides.--
          (1) Classification for general use, restricted use, 
        or both.--
                  (A) As a part of the registration of a 
                pesticide the Administrator shall classify it 
                as being for general use or for restricted use. 
                If the Administrator determines that some of 
                the uses for which the pesticide is registered 
                should be for general use and that other uses 
                for which it is registered should be for 
                restricted use, the Administrator shall 
                classify it for both general use and restricted 
                use. Pesticide uses may be classified by 
                regulation on the initial classification and 
                registered pesticides may be classified prior 
                to reregistration. If some of the uses of the 
                pesticide are classified for general use and 
                other uses are classified for restricted use, 
                the directions relating to its general uses 
                shall be clearly separated and distinguished 
                from those directions relating to its 
                restricted uses. The Administrator may require 
                that its packaging and labeling for restricted 
                uses shall be clearly distinguishable from its 
                packaging and labeling for general uses.
                  (B) If the Administrator determines that the 
                pesticide, when applied in accordance with its 
                directions for use, warnings and cautions and 
                for the uses for which it is registered, or for 
                one or more of such uses, or in accordance with 
                a widespread and commonly recognized practice, 
                will not generally cause unreasonable adverse 
                effects on the environment, the Administrator 
                will classify the pesticide, or the particular 
                use or uses of the pesticide to which the 
                determination applies, for general use.
                  (C) If the Administrator determines that the 
                pesticide, when applied in accordance with its 
                directions for use, warnings and cautions and 
                for the uses for which it is registered, or for 
                one or more of such uses, or in accordance with 
                a widespread and commonly recognized practice, 
                may generally cause, without additional 
                regulatory restrictions, unreasonable adverse 
                effects on the environment, including injury to 
                the applicator, the Administrator shall 
                classify the pesticide, or the particular use 
                or uses to which the determination applies, for 
                restricted use:
                          (i) If the Administrator classifies a 
                        pesticide, or one or more uses of such 
                        pesticide, for restricted use because 
                        of a determination that the acute 
                        dermal or inhalation toxicity of the 
                        pesticide presents a hazard to the 
                        applicator or other persons, the 
                        pesticide shall be applied for any use 
                        to which the restricted classification 
                        applies only by or under the direct 
                        supervision of a certified applicator.
                          (ii) If the Administrator classifies 
                        a pesticide, or one or more uses of 
                        such pesticide, for restricted use 
                        because of a determination that its use 
                        without additional regulatory 
                        restriction may cause unreasonable 
                        adverse effects on the environment, the 
                        pesticide shall be applied for any use 
                        to which the determination applies only 
                        by or under the direct supervision of a 
                        certified applicator, or subject to 
                        such other restrictions as the 
                        Administrator may provide by 
                        regulation. Any such regulation shall 
                        be reviewable in the appropriate court 
                        of appeals upon petition of a person 
                        adversely affected filed within 60 days 
                        of the publication of the regulation in 
                        final form.
          (2) Change in classification.--If the Administrator 
        determines that a change in the classification of any 
        use of a pesticide from general use to restricted use 
        is necessary to prevent unreasonable adverse effects on 
        the environment, the Administrator shall notify the 
        registrant of such pesticide of such determination at 
        least forty-five days before making the change and 
        shall publish the proposed change in the Federal 
        Register. The registrant, or other interested person 
        with the concurrence of the registrant, may seek relief 
        from such determination under section 6(b).
          (3) Change in classification from restricted use to 
        general use.--The registrant of any pesticide with one 
        or more uses classified for restricted use may petition 
        the Administrator to change any such classification 
        from restricted to general use. Such petition shall set 
        out the basis for the registrant's position that 
        restricted use classification is unnecessary because 
        classification of the pesticide for general use would 
        not cause unreasonable adverse effects on the 
        environment. The Administrator, within sixty days after 
        receiving such petition, shall notify the registrant 
        whether the petition has been granted or denied. Any 
        denial shall contain an explanation therefor and any 
        such denial shall be subject to judicial review under 
        section 16 of this Act.
  (e) Products With Same Formulation and Claims.--Products 
which have the same formulation, are manufactured by the same 
person, the labeling of which contains the same claims, and the 
labels of which bear a designation identifying the product as 
the same pesticide may be registered as a single pesticide; and 
additional names and labels shall be added to the registration 
by supplemental statements.
  (f) Miscellaneous.--
          (1) Effect of change of labeling or formulation.--If 
        the labeling or formulation for a pesticide is changed, 
        the registration shall be amended to reflect such 
        change if the Administrator determines that the change 
        will not violate any provision of this Act.
          (2) Registration not a defense.--In no event shall 
        registration of an article be construed as a defense 
        for the commission of any offense under this Act. As 
        long as no cancellation proceedings are in effect 
        registration of a pesticide shall be prima facie 
        evidence that the pesticide, its labeling and packaging 
        comply with the registration provisions of the Act.
          (3) Authority to consult other federal agencies.--In 
        connection with consideration of any registration or 
        application for registration under this section, the 
        Administrator may consult with any other Federal 
        agency.
          (4) Mixtures of nitrogen stabilizers and fertilizer 
        products.--Any mixture or other combination of--
                  (A) 1 or more nitrogen stabilizers registered 
                under this Act; and
                  (B) 1 or more fertilizer products,
        shall not be subject to the provisions of this section 
        or sections 4, 5, 7, 15, and 17(a)(2) if the mixture or 
        other combination is accompanied by the labeling 
        required under this Act for the nitrogen stabilizer 
        contained in the mixture or other combination, the 
        mixture or combination is mixed or combined in 
        accordance with such labeling, and the mixture or 
        combination does not contain any active ingredient 
        other than the nitrogen stabilizer.
          (5) Use of authorized pesticides.--Except as provided 
        in section 402(s) of the Federal Water Pollution 
        Control Act, the Administrator or a State may not 
        require a permit under such Act for a discharge from a 
        point source into navigable waters of a pesticide 
        authorized for sale, distribution, or use under this 
        Act, or the residue of such a pesticide, resulting from 
        the application of such pesticide.
  (g) Registration Review.--
          (1)(A) General rule.--
                  (i) In general.--The registrations of 
                pesticides are to be periodically reviewed.
                  (ii) Regulations.--In accordance with this 
                subparagraph, the Administrator shall by 
                regulation establish a procedure for 
                accomplishing the periodic review of 
                registrations.
                  (iii) Initial registration review.--The 
                Administrator shall complete the registration 
                review of each pesticide or pesticide case, 
                which may be composed of 1 or more active 
                ingredients and the products associated with 
                the active ingredients, not later than the 
                later of--
                          (I) October 1, 2022; or
                          (II) the date that is 15 years after 
                        the date on which the first pesticide 
                        containing a new active ingredient is 
                        registered.
                  (iv) Subsequent registration review.--Not 
                later than 15 years after the date on which the 
                initial registration review is completed under 
                clause (iii) and each 15 years thereafter, the 
                Administrator shall complete a subsequent 
                registration review for each pesticide or 
                pesticide case.
                  (v) Cancellation.--No registration shall be 
                canceled as a result of the registration review 
                process unless the Administrator follows the 
                procedures and substantive requirements of 
                section 6.
          (B) Docketing.--
                  (i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), 
                after meeting with 1 or more individuals that 
                are not government employees to discuss matters 
                relating to a registration review, the 
                Administrator shall place in the docket minutes 
                of the meeting, a list of attendees, and any 
                documents exchanged at the meeting, not later 
                than the earlier of--
                          (I) the date that is 45 days after 
                        the meeting; or
                          (II) the date of issuance of the 
                        registration review decision.
                  (ii) Protected information.--The 
                Administrator shall identify, but not include 
                in the docket, any confidential business 
                information the disclosure of which is 
                prohibited by section 10.
          (C) Limitation.--Nothing in this subsection shall 
        prohibit the Administrator from undertaking any other 
        review of a pesticide pursuant to this Act.
          (2)(A) Data.--The Administrator shall use the 
        authority in subsection (c)(2)(B) to require the 
        submission of data when such data are necessary for a 
        registration review.
          (B) Data submission, compensation, and exemption.--
        For purposes of this subsection, the provisions of 
        subsections (c)(1), (c)(2)(B), and (c)(2)(D) shall be 
        utilized for and be applicable to any data required for 
        registration review.
  (h) Registration Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides.--
          (1) Evaluation of process.--To the maximum extent 
        practicable consistent with the degrees of risk 
        presented by an antimicrobial pesticide and the type of 
        review appropriate to evaluate the risks, the 
        Administrator shall identify and evaluate reforms to 
        the antimicrobial registration process that would 
        reduce review periods existing as of the date of 
        enactment of this subsection for antimicrobial 
        pesticide product registration applications and 
        applications for amended registration of antimicrobial 
        pesticide products, including--
                  (A) new antimicrobial active ingredients;
                  (B) new antimicrobial end-use products;
                  (C) substantially similar or identical 
                antimicrobial pesticides; and
                  (D) amendments to antimicrobial pesticide 
                registrations.
          (2) Review time period reduction goal.--Each reform 
        identified under paragraph (1) shall be designed to 
        achieve the goal of reducing the review period 
        following submission of a complete application, 
        consistent with the degree of risk, to a period of not 
        more than--
                  (A) 540 days for a new antimicrobial active 
                ingredient pesticide registration;
                  (B) 270 days for a new antimicrobial use of a 
                registered active ingredient;
                  (C) 120 days for any other new antimicrobial 
                product;
                  (D) 90 days for a substantially similar or 
                identical antimicrobial product;
                  (E) 90 days for an amendment to an 
                antimicrobial registration that does not 
                require scientific review of data; and
                  (F) 120 days for an amendment to an 
                antimicrobial registration that requires 
                scientific review of data and that is not 
                otherwise described in this paragraph.
          (3) Implementation.--
                  (A) Proposed rulemaking.--
                          (i) Issuance.--Not later than 270 
                        days after the date of enactment of 
                        this subsection, the Administrator 
                        shall publish in the Federal Register 
                        proposed regulations to accelerate and 
                        improve the review of antimicrobial 
                        pesticide products designed to 
                        implement, to the extent practicable, 
                        the goals set forth in paragraph (2).
                          (ii) Requirements.--Proposed 
                        regulations issued under clause (i) 
                        shall--
                                  (I) define the various 
                                classes of antimicrobial use 
                                patterns, including household, 
                                industrial, and institutional 
                                disinfectants and sanitizing 
                                pesticides, preservatives, 
                                water treatment, and pulp and 
                                paper mill additives, and other 
                                such products intended to 
                                disinfect, sanitize, reduce, or 
                                mitigate growth or development 
                                of microbiological organisms, 
                                or protect inanimate objects, 
                                industrial processes or 
                                systems, surfaces, water, or 
                                other chemical substances from 
                                contamination, fouling, or 
                                deterioration caused by 
                                bacteria, viruses, fungi, 
                                protozoa, algae, or slime;
                                  (II) differentiate the types 
                                of review undertaken for 
                                antimicrobial pesticides;
                                  (III) conform the degree and 
                                type of review to the risks and 
                                benefits presented by 
                                antimicrobial pesticides and 
                                the function of review under 
                                this Act, considering the use 
                                patterns of the product, 
                                toxicity, expected exposure, 
                                and product type;
                                  (IV) ensure that the 
                                registration process is 
                                sufficient to maintain 
                                antimicrobial pesticide 
                                efficacy and that antimicrobial 
                                pesticide products continue to 
                                meet product performance 
                                standards and effectiveness 
                                levels for each type of label 
                                claim made; and
                                  (V) implement effective and 
                                reliable deadlines for process 
                                management.
                          (iii) Comments.--In developing the 
                        proposed regulations, the Administrator 
                        shall solicit the views from 
                        registrants and other affected parties 
                        to maximize the effectiveness of the 
                        rule development process.
                  (B) Final regulations.--
                          (i) Issuance.--The Administrator 
                        shall issue final regulations not later 
                        than 240 days after the close of the 
                        comment period for the proposed 
                        regulations.
                          (ii) Failure to meet goal.--If a goal 
                        described in paragraph (2) is not met 
                        by the final regulations, the 
                        Administrator shall identify the goal, 
                        explain why the goal was not attained, 
                        describe the element of the regulations 
                        included instead, and identify future 
                        steps to attain the goal.
                          (iii) Requirements.--In issuing final 
                        regulations, the Administrator shall--
                                  (I) consider the 
                                establishment of a 
                                certification process for 
                                regulatory actions involving 
                                risks that can be responsibly 
                                managed, consistent with the 
                                degree of risk, in the most 
                                cost-efficient manner;
                                  (II) consider the 
                                establishment of a 
                                certification process by 
                                approved laboratories as an 
                                adjunct to the review process;
                                  (III) use all appropriate and 
                                cost-effective review 
                                mechanisms, including--
                                          (aa) expanded use of 
                                        notification and non-
                                        notification 
                                        procedures;
                                          (bb) revised 
                                        procedures for 
                                        application review; and
                                          (cc) allocation of 
                                        appropriate resources 
                                        to ensure streamlined 
                                        management of 
                                        antimicrobial pesticide 
                                        registrations; and
                                  (IV) clarify criteria for 
                                determination of the 
                                completeness of an application.
                  (C) Expedited review.--This subsection does 
                not affect the requirements or extend the 
                deadlines or review periods contained in 
                subsection (c)(3).
                  (D) Alternative review periods.--If the final 
                regulations to carry out this paragraph are not 
                effective 630 days after the date of enactment 
                of this subsection, until the final regulations 
                become effective, the review period, beginning 
                on the date of receipt by the Agency of a 
                complete application, shall be--
                          (i) 2 years for a new antimicrobial 
                        active ingredient pesticide 
                        registration;
                          (ii) 1 year for a new antimicrobial 
                        use of a registered active ingredient;
                          (iii) 180 days for any other new 
                        antimicrobial product;
                          (iv) 90 days for a substantially 
                        similar or identical antimicrobial 
                        product;
                          (v) 90 days for an amendment to an 
                        antimicrobial registration that does 
                        not require scientific review of data; 
                        and
                          (vi) 120 days for an amendment to an 
                        antimicrobial registration that 
                        requires scientific review of data and 
                        that is not otherwise described in this 
                        subparagraph.
                  (E) Wood preservatives.--An application for 
                the registration, or for an amendment to the 
                registration, of a wood preservative product 
                for which a claim of pesticidal activity listed 
                in section 2(mm) is made (regardless of any 
                other pesticidal claim that is made with 
                respect to the product) shall be reviewed by 
                the Administrator within the same period as 
                that established under this paragraph for an 
                antimicrobial pesticide product application, 
                consistent with the degree of risk posed by the 
                use of the wood preservative product, if the 
                application requires the applicant to satisfy 
                the same data requirements as are required to 
                support an application for a wood preservative 
                product that is an antimicrobial pesticide.
                  (F) Notification.--
                          (i) In general.--Subject to clause 
                        (iii), the Administrator shall notify 
                        an applicant whether an application has 
                        been granted or denied not later than 
                        the final day of the appropriate review 
                        period under this paragraph, unless the 
                        applicant and the Administrator agree 
                        to a later date.
                          (ii) Final decision.--If the 
                        Administrator fails to notify an 
                        applicant within the period of time 
                        required under clause (i), the failure 
                        shall be considered an agency action 
                        unlawfully withheld or unreasonably 
                        delayed for purposes of judicial review 
                        under chapter 7 of title 5, United 
                        States Code.
                          (iii) Exemption.--This subparagraph 
                        does not apply to an application for an 
                        antimicrobial pesticide that is filed 
                        under subsection (c)(3)(B) prior to 90 
                        days after the date of enactment of 
                        this subsection
                          (iv) Limitation.--Notwithstanding 
                        clause (ii), the failure of the 
                        Administrator to notify an applicant 
                        for an amendment to a registration for 
                        an antimicrobial pesticide shall not be 
                        judicially reviewable in a Federal or 
                        State court if the amendment requires 
                        scientific review of data within--
                                  (I) the time period specified 
                                in subparagraph (D)(vi), in the 
                                absence of a final regulation 
                                under subparagraph (B); or
                                  (II) the time period 
                                specified in paragraph (2)(F), 
                                if adopted in a final 
                                regulation under subparagraph 
                                (B).
          (4) Annual report.--
                  (A) Submission.--Beginning on the date of 
                enactment of this subsection and ending on the 
                date that the goals under paragraph (2) are 
                achieved, the Administrator shall, not later 
                than March 1 of each year, prepare and submit 
                an annual report to the Committee on 
                Agriculture of the House of Representatives and 
                the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and 
                Forestry of the Senate.
                  (B) Requirements.--A report submitted under 
                subparagraph (A) shall include a description 
                of--
                          (i) measures taken to reduce the 
                        backlog of pending registration 
                        applications;
                          (ii) progress toward achieving 
                        reforms under this subsection; and
                          (iii) recommendations to improve the 
                        activities of the Agency pertaining to 
                        antimicrobial registrations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                  FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
TITLE IV--PERMITS AND LICENSES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            national pollutant discharge elimination system

  Sec. 402. (a)(1) Except as provided in sections 318 and 404 
of this Act, the Administrator may, after opportunity for 
public hearing, issue a permit for the discharge of any 
pollutant, or combination of pollutants, notwithstanding 
section 301(a), upon condition that such discharge will meet 
either (A) all applicable requirements under sections 301, 302, 
306, 307, 308, and 403 of this Act, or (B) prior to the taking 
of necessary implementing actions relating to all such 
requirements, such conditions as the Administrator determines 
are necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.
  (2) The Administrator shall prescribe conditions for such 
permits to assure compliance with the requirements of paragraph 
(1) of this subsection, including conditions on data and 
information collection, reporting, and such other requirements 
as he deems appropriate.
  (3) The permit program of the Administrator under paragraph 
(1) of this subsection, and permits issued thereunder, shall be 
subject to the same terms, conditions, and requirements as 
apply to a State permit program and permits issued thereunder 
under subsection (b) of this section.
  (4) All permits for discharges into the navigable waters 
issued pursuant to section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899, 
shall be deemed to be permits issued under this title, and 
permits issued under this title shall be deemed to be permits 
issued under section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899, and shall 
continue in force and effect for their term unless revoked, 
modified, or suspended in accordance with the provisions of 
this Act.
  (5) No permit for a discharge into the navigable waters shall 
be issued under section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899, after 
the date of enactment of this title. Each application for a 
permit under section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899, pending on 
the date of enactment of this Act shall be deemed to be an 
application for a permit under this section. The Administrator 
shall authorize a State, which he determines has the capability 
of administering a permit program which will carry out the 
objective of this Act, to issue permits for discharges into the 
navigable waters within the jurisdiction of such State. The 
Administrator may exercise the authority granted him by the 
preceding sentence only during the period which begins on the 
date of enactment of this Act and ends either on the ninetieth 
day after the date of the first promulgation of guidelines 
required by section 304(i)(2) of this Act, or the date of 
approval by the Administrator of a permit program for such 
State under subsection (b) of this section, whichever date 
first occurs, and no such authorization to a State shall extend 
beyond the last day of such period. Each such permit shall be 
subject to such conditions as the Administrator determines are 
necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. No such 
permit shall issue if the Administrator objects to such 
issuance.
  (b) At any time after the promulgation of the guidelines 
required by subsection (i)(2) of section 304 of this Act, the 
Governor of each State desiring to administer its own permit 
program for discharges into navigable waters within its 
jurisdiction may submit to the Administrator a full and 
complete description of the program it proposes to establish 
and administer under State law or under an interstate compact. 
In addition, such State shall submit a statement from the 
attorney general (or the attorney for those State water 
pollution control agencies which have independent legal 
counsel), or from the chief legal officer in the case of an 
interstate agency, that the laws of such State, or the 
interstate compact, as the case may be, provide adequate 
authority to carry out the described program. The Administrator 
shall approve each such submitted program unless he determines 
that adequate authority does not exist:
  (1) To issue permits which--
          (A) apply, and insure compliance with, any applicable 
        requirements of sections 301, 302, 306, 307, and 403;
          (B) are for fixed terms not exceeding five years; and
          (C) can be terminated or modified for cause 
        including, but not limited to, the following:
                  (i) violation of any condition of the permit;
                  (ii) obtaining a permit by misrepresentation, 
                or failure to disclose fully all relevant 
                facts;
                  (iii) change in any condition that requires 
                either a temporary or permanent reduction or 
                elimination of the permitted discharge;
          (D) control the disposal of pollutants into wells;
  (2)(A) To issue permits which apply, and insure compliance 
with, all applicable requirements of section 308 of this Act, 
or
  (B) To inspect, monitor, enter, and require reports to at 
least the same extent as required in section 308 of this Act;
  (3) To insure that the public, and any other State the waters 
of which may be affected, receive notice of each application 
for a permit and to provide an opportunity for public hearing 
before a ruling on each such application;
  (4) To insure that the Administrator receives notice of each 
application (including a copy thereof) for a permit;
  (5) To insure that any State (other than the permitting 
State), whose waters may be affected by the issuance of a 
permit may submit written recommendations to the permitting 
State (and the Administrator) with respect to any permit 
application and, if any part of such written recommendations 
are not accepted by the permitting State, that the permitting 
State will notify such affected State (and the Administrator) 
in writing of its failure to so accept such recommendations 
together with its reasons for so doing;
  (6) To insure that no permit will be issued if, in the 
judgment of the Secretary of the Army acting through the Chief 
of Engineers, after consultation with the Secretary of the 
department in which the Coast Guard is operating, anchorage and 
navigation of any of the navigable waters would be 
substantially impaired thereby;
  (7) To abate violations of the permit or the permit program, 
including civil and criminal penalties and other ways and means 
of enforcement;
  (8) To insure that any permit for a discharge from a publicly 
owned treatment works includes conditions to require the 
identification in terms of character and volume of pollutants 
of any significant source introducing pollutants subject to 
pretreatment standards under section 307(b) of this Act into 
such works and a program to assure compliance with such 
pretreatment standards by each such source, in addition to 
adequate notice to the permitting agency of (A) new 
introductions into such works of pollutants from any source 
which would be a new source as defined in section 306 if such 
source were discharging pollutants, (B) new introductions of 
pollutants into such works from a source which would be subject 
to section 301 if it were discharging such pollutants, or (C) a 
substantial change in volume or character of pollutants being 
introduced into such works by a source introducing pollutants 
into such works at the time of issuance of the permit. Such 
notice shall include information on the quality and quantity of 
effluent to be introduced into such treatment works and any 
anticipated impact of such change in the quantity or quality of 
effluent to be discharged from such publicly owned treatment 
works; and
  (9) To insure that any industrial user of any publicly owned 
treatment works will comply with sections 204(b), 307, and 308.
  (c)(1) Not later than ninety days after the date on which a 
State has submitted a program (or revision thereof) pursuant to 
subsection (b) of this section, the Administrator shall suspend 
the issuance of permits under subsection (a) of this section as 
to those discharges subject to such program unless he 
determines that the State permit program does not meet the 
requirements of subsection (b) of this section or does not 
conform to the guidelines issued under section 304(i)(2) of 
this Act. If the Administrator so determines, he shall notify 
the State of any revisions or modifications necessary to 
conform to such requirements or guidelines.
  (2) Any State permit program under this section shall at all 
times be in accordance with this section and guidelines 
promulgated pursuant to section 304(i)(2) of this Act.
  (3) Whenever the Administrator determines after public 
hearing that a State is not administering a program approved 
under this section in accordance with requirements of this 
section, he shall so notify the State and, if appropriate 
corrective action is not taken within a reasonable time, not to 
exceed ninety days, the Administrator shall withdraw approval 
of such program. The Administrator shall not withdraw approval 
of any such program unless he shall first have notified the 
State, and made public, in writing, the reasons for such 
withdrawal.
          (4) Limitations on partial permit program returns and 
        withdrawals.--A State may return to the Administrator 
        administration, and the Administrator may withdraw 
        under paragraph (3) of this subsection approval, of--
                  (A) a State partial permit program approved 
                under subsection (n)(3) only if the entire 
                permit program being administered by the State 
                department or agency at the time is returned or 
                withdrawn; and
                  (B) a State partial permit program approved 
                under subsection (n)(4) only if an entire 
                phased component of the permit program being 
                administered by the State at the time is 
                returned or withdrawn.
  (d)(1) Each State shall transmit to the Administrator a copy 
of each permit application received by such State and provide 
notice to the Administrator of every action related to the 
consideration of such permit application, including each permit 
proposed to be issued by such State.
  (2) No permit shall issue (A) if the Administrator within 
ninety days of the date of his notification under subsection 
(b)(5) of this section objects in writing to the issuance of 
such permit, or (B) if the Administrator within ninety days of 
the date of transmittal of the proposed permit by the State 
objects in writing to the issuance of such permit as being 
outside the guidelines and requirements of this Act. Whenever 
the Administrator objects to the issuance of a permit under 
this paragraph such written objection shall contain a statement 
of the reasons for such objection and the effluent limitations 
and conditions which such permit would include if it were 
issued by the Administrator.
  (3) The Administrator may, as to any permit application, 
waive paragraph (2) of this subsection.
  (4) In any case where, after the date of enactment of this 
paragraph, the Administrator, pursuant to paragraph (2) of this 
subsection, objects to the issuance of a permit, on request of 
the State, a public hearing shall be held by the Administrator 
on such objection. If the State does not resubmit such permit 
revised to meet such objection within 30 days after completion 
of the hearing, or, if no hearing is requested within 90 days 
after the date of such objection, the Administrator may issue 
the permit pursuant to subsection (a) of this section for such 
source in accordance with the guidelines and requirements of 
this Act.
  (e) In accordance with guidelines promulgated pursuant to 
subsection (i)(2) of section 304 of this Act, the Administrator 
is authorized to waive the requirements of subsection (d) of 
this section at the time he approves a program pursuant to 
subsection (b) of this section for any category (including any 
class, type, or size within such category) of point sources 
within the State submitting such program.
  (f) The Administrator shall promulgate regulations 
establishing categories of point sources which he determines 
shall not be subject to the requirements of subsection (d) of 
this section in any State with a program approved pursuant to 
subsection (b) of this section. The Administrator may 
distinguish among classes, types, and sizes within any category 
of point sources.
  (g) Any permit issued under this section for the discharge of 
pollutants into the navigable waters from a vessel or other 
floating craft shall be subject to any applicable regulations 
promulgated by the Secretary of the Department in which the 
Coast Guard is operating, establishing specifications for safe 
transportation, handling, carriage, storage, and stowage of 
pollutants.
  (h) In the event any condition of a permit for discharges 
from a treatment works (as defined in section 212 of this Act) 
which is publicly owned is violated, a State with a program 
approved under subsection (b) of this section or the 
Administrator, where no State program is approved or where the 
Administrator determines pursuant to section 309(a) of this Act 
that a State with an approved program has not commenced 
appropriate enforcement action with respect to such permit, may 
proceed in a court of competent jurisdiction to restrict or 
prohibit the introduction of any pollutant into such treatment 
works by a source not utilizing such treatment works prior to 
the finding that such condition was violated.
  (i) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the 
authority of the Administrator to take action pursuant to 
section 309 of this Act.
  (j) A copy of each permit application and each permit issued 
under this section shall be available to the public. Such 
permit application or permit, or portion thereof, shall further 
be available on request for the purpose of reproduction.
  (k) Compliance with a permit issued pursuant to this section 
shall be deemed compliance, for purposes of sections 309 and 
505, with sections 301, 302, 306, 307, and 403, except any 
standard imposed under section 307 for a toxic pollutant 
injurious to human health. Until December 31, 1974, in any case 
where a permit for discharge has been applied for pursuant to 
this section, but final administrative disposition of such 
application has not been made, such discharge shall not be a 
violation of (1) section 301, 306, or 402 of this Act, or (2) 
section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899, unless the 
Administrator or other plaintiff proves that final 
administrative disposition of such application has not been 
made because of the failure of the applicant to furnish 
information reasonably required or requested in order to 
process the application. For the 180-day period beginning on 
the date of enactment of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act Amendments of 1972, in the case of any point source 
discharging any pollutant or combination of pollutants 
immediately prior to such date of enactment which source is not 
subject to section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899, the 
discharge by such source shall not be a violation of this Act 
if such a source applies for a permit for discharge pursuant to 
this section within such 180-day period.
  (l) Limitation on Permit Requirement.--
          (1) Agricultural return flows.--The Administrator 
        shall not require a permit under this section for 
        discharges composed entirely of return flows from 
        irrigated agriculture, nor shall the Administrator 
        directly or indirectly, require any State to require 
        such a permit.
          (2) Stormwater runoff from oil, gas, and mining 
        operations.--The Administrator shall not require a 
        permit under this section, nor shall the Administrator 
        directly or indirectly require any State to require a 
        permit, for discharges of stormwater runoff from mining 
        operations or oil and gas exploration, production, 
        processing, or treatment operations or transmission 
        facilities, composed entirely of flows which are from 
        conveyances or systems of conveyances (including but 
        not limited to pipes, conduits, ditches, and channels) 
        used for collecting and conveying precipitation runoff 
        and which are not contaminated by contact with, or do 
        not come into contact with, any overburden, raw 
        material, intermediate products, finished product, 
        byproduct, or waste products located on the site of 
        such operations.
          (3) Silvicultural activities.--
                  (A) NPDES permit requirements for 
                silvicultural activities.--The Administrator 
                shall not require a permit under this section 
                nor directly or indirectly require any State to 
                require a permit under this section for a 
                discharge from runoff resulting from the 
                conduct of the following silviculture 
                activities conducted in accordance with 
                standard industry practice: nursery operations, 
                site preparation, reforestation and subsequent 
                cultural treatment, thinning, prescribed 
                burning, pest and fire control, harvesting 
                operations, surface drainage, or road 
                construction and maintenance.
                  (B) Other requirements.--Nothing in this 
                paragraph exempts a discharge from 
                silvicultural activity from any permitting 
                requirement under section 404, existing 
                permitting requirements under section 402, or 
                from any other federal law.
                  (C) The authorization provided in Section 
                505(a) does not apply to any non-permitting 
                program established under 402(p)(6) for the 
                silviculture activities listed in 402(l)(3)(A), 
                or to any other limitations that might be 
                deemed to apply to the silviculture activities 
                listed in 402(l)(3)(A).
  (m) Additional Pretreatment of Conventional Pollutants Not 
Required.--To the extent a treatment works (as defined in 
section 212 of this Act) which is publicly owned is not meeting 
the requirements of a permit issued under this section for such 
treatment works as a result of inadequate design or operation 
of such treatment works, the Administrator, in issuing a permit 
under this section, shall not require pretreatment by a person 
introducing conventional pollutants identified pursuant to a 
section 304(a)(4) of this Act into such treatment works other 
than pretreatment required to assure compliance with 
pretreatment standards under subsection (b)(8) of this section 
and section 307(b)(1) of this Act. Nothing in this subsection 
shall affect the Administrator's authority under sections 307 
and 309 of this Act, affect State and local authority under 
sections 307(b)(4) and 510 of this Act, relieve such treatment 
works of its obligations to meet requirements established under 
this Act, or otherwise preclude such works from pursuing 
whatever feasible options are available to meet its 
responsibility to comply with its permit under this section.
  (n) Partial Permit Program.--
          (1) State submission.--The Governor of a State may 
        submit under subsection (b) of this section a permit 
        program for a portion of the discharges into the 
        navigable waters in such State.
          (2) Minimum coverage.--A partial permit program under 
        this subsection shall cover, at a minimum, 
        administration of a major category of the discharges 
        into the navigable waters of the State or a major 
        component of the permit program required by subsection 
        (b).
          (3) Approval of major category partial permit 
        programs.--The Administrator may approve a partial 
        permit program covering administration of a major 
        category of discharges under this subsection if--
                  (A) such program represents a complete permit 
                program and covers all of the discharges under 
                the jurisdiction of a department or agency of 
                the State; and
                  (B) the Administrator determines that the 
                partial program represents a significant and 
                identifiable part of the State program required 
                by subsection (b).
          (4) Approval of major component partial permit 
        programs.--The Administrator may approve under this 
        subsection a partial and phased permit program covering 
        administration of a major component (including 
        discharge categories) of a State permit program 
        required by subsection (b) if--
                  (A) the Administrator determines that the 
                partial program represents a significant and 
                identifiable part of the State program required 
                by subsection (b); and
                  (B) the State submits, and the Administrator 
                approves, a plan for the State to assume 
                administration by phases of the remainder of 
                the State program required by subsection (b) by 
                a specified date not more than 5 years after 
                submission of the partial program under this 
                subsection and agrees to make all reasonable 
                efforts to assume such administration by such 
                date.
  (o) Anti-Backsliding.--
          (1) General prohibition.--In the case of effluent 
        limitations established on the basis of subsection 
        (a)(1)(B) of this section, a permit may not be renewed, 
        reissued, or modified on the basis of effluent 
        guidelines promulgated under section 304(b) subsequent 
        to the original issuance of such permit, to contain 
        effluent limitations which are less stringent than the 
        comparable effluent limitations in the previous permit. 
        In the case of effluent limitations established on the 
        basis of section 301(b)(1)(C) or section 303(d) or (e), 
        a permit may not be renewed, reissued, or modified to 
        contain effluent limitations which are less stringent 
        than the comparable effluent limitations in the 
        previous permit except in compliance with section 
        303(d)(4).
          (2) Exceptions.--A permit with respect to which 
        paragraph (1) applies may be renewed, reissued, or 
        modified to contain a less stringent effluent 
        limitation applicable to a pollutant if--
                  (A) material and substantial alterations or 
                additions to the permitted facility occurred 
                after permit issuance which justify the 
                application of a less stringent effluent 
                limitation;
                  (B)(i) information is available which was not 
                available at the time of permit issuance (other 
                than revised regulations, guidance, or test 
                methods) and which would have justified the 
                application of a less stringent effluent 
                limitation at the time of permit issuance; or
                  (ii) the Administrator determines that 
                technical mistakes or mistaken interpretations 
                of law were made in issuing the permit under 
                subsection (a)(1)(B);
                  (C) a less stringent effluent limitation is 
                necessary because of events over which the 
                permittee has no control and for which there is 
                no reasonably available remedy;
                  (D) the permittee has received a permit 
                modification under section 301(c), 301(g), 
                301(h), 301(i), 301(k), 301(n), or 316(a); or
                  (E) the permittee has installed the treatment 
                facilities required to meet the effluent 
                limitations in the previous permit and has 
                properly operated and maintained the facilities 
                but has nevertheless been unable to achieve the 
                previous effluent limitations, in which case 
                the limitations in the reviewed, reissued, or 
                modified permit may reflect the level of 
                pollutant control actually achieved (but shall 
                not be less stringent than required by effluent 
                guidelines in effect at the time of permit 
                renewal, reissuance, or modification).
        Subparagraph (B) shall not apply to any revised waste 
        load allocations or any alternative grounds for 
        translating water quality standards into effluent 
        limitations, except where the cumulative effect of such 
        revised allocations results in a decrease in the amount 
        of pollutants discharged into the concerned waters, and 
        such revised allocations are not the result of a 
        discharger eliminating or substantially reducing its 
        discharge of pollutants due to complying with the 
        requirements of this Act or for reasons otherwise 
        unrelated to water quality.
          (3) Limitations.--In no event may a permit with 
        respect to which paragraph (1) applies be renewed, 
        reissued, or modified to contain an effluent limitation 
        which is less stringent than required by effluent 
        guidelines in effect at the time the permit is renewed, 
        reissued, or modified. In no event may such a permit to 
        discharge into waters be renewed, reissued, or modified 
        to contain a less stringent effluent limitation if the 
        implementation of such limitation would result in a 
        violation of a water quality standard under section 303 
        applicable to such waters.
  (p) Municipal and Industrial Stormwater Discharges.--
          (1) General rule.--Prior to October 1, 1994, the 
        Administrator or the State (in the case of a permit 
        program approved under section 402 of this Act) shall 
        not require a permit under this section for discharges 
        composed entirely of stormwater.
          (2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply with 
        respect to the following stormwater discharges:
                  (A) A discharge with respect to which a 
                permit has been issued under this section 
                before the date of the enactment of this 
                subsection.
                  (B) A discharge associated with industrial 
                activity.
                  (C) A discharge from a municipal separate 
                storm sewer system serving a population of 
                250,000 or more.
                  (D) A discharge from a municipal separate 
                storm sewer system serving a population of 
                100,000 or more but less than 250,000.
                  (E) A discharge for which the Administrator 
                or the State, as the case may be, determines 
                that the stormwater discharge contributes to a 
                violation of a water quality standard or is a 
                significant contributor of pollutants to waters 
                of the United States.
          (3) Permit requirements.--
                  (A) Industrial discharges.--Permits for 
                discharges associated with industrial activity 
                shall meet all applicable provisions of this 
                section and section 301.
                  (B) Municipal discharge.--Permits for 
                discharges from municipal storm sewers--
                          (i) may be issued on a system- or 
                        jurisdiction-wide basis;
                          (ii) shall include a requirement to 
                        effectively prohibit non-stormwater 
                        discharges into the storm sewers; and
                          (iii) shall require controls to 
                        reduce the discharge of pollutants to 
                        the maximum extent practicable, 
                        including management practices, control 
                        techniques and system, design and 
                        engineering methods, and such other 
                        provisions as the Administrator or the 
                        State determines appropriate for the 
                        control of such pollutants.
          (4) Permit application requirements.--
                  (A) Industrial and large municipal 
                discharges.--Not later than 2 years after the 
                date of the enactment of this subsection, the 
                Administrator shall establish regulations 
                setting forth the permit application 
                requirements for stormwater discharges 
                described in paragraphs (2)(B) and (2)(C). 
                Applications for permits for such discharges 
                shall be filed no later than 3 years after such 
                date of enactment. Not later than 4 years after 
                such date of enactment the Administrator or the 
                State, as the case may be, shall issue or deny 
                each such permit. Any such permit shall provide 
                for compliance as expeditiously as practicable, 
                but in no event later than 3 years after the 
                date of issuance of such permit.
                  (B) Other municipal discharges.--Not later 
                than 4 years after the date of the enactment of 
                this subsection, the Administrator shall 
                establish regulations setting forth the permit 
                application requirements for stormwater 
                discharges described in paragraph (2)(D). 
                Applications for permits for such discharges 
                shall be filed no later than 5 years after such 
                date of enactment. Not later than 6 years after 
                such date of enactment, the Administrator or 
                the State, as the case may be, shall issue or 
                deny each such permit. Any such permit shall 
                provide for compliance as expeditiously as 
                practicable, but in no event later than 3 years 
                after the date of issuance of such permit.
          (5) Studies.--The Administrator, in consultation with 
        the States, shall conduct a study for the purposes of--
                  (A) identifying those stormwater discharges 
                or classes of stormwater discharges for which 
                permits are not required pursuant to paragraphs 
                (1) and (2) of this subsection;
                  (B) determining, to the maximum extent 
                practicable, the nature and extent of 
                pollutants in such discharges; and
                  (C) establishing procedures and methods to 
                control stormwater discharges to the extent 
                necessary to mitigate impacts on water quality.
        Not later than October 1, 1988, the Administrator shall 
        submit to Congress a report on the results of the study 
        described in subparagraphs (A) and (B). Not later than 
        October 1, 1989, the Administrator shall submit to 
        Congress a report on the results of the study described 
        in subparagraph (C).
          (6) Regulations.--Not later than October 1, 1993, the 
        Administrator, in consultation with State and local 
        officials, shall issue regulations (based on the 
        results of the studies conducted under paragraph (5)) 
        which designate stormwater discharges, other than those 
        discharges described in paragraph (2), to be regulated 
        to protect water quality and shall establish a 
        comprehensive program to regulate such designated 
        sources. The program shall, at a minimum, (A) establish 
        priorities, (B) establish requirements for State 
        stormwater management programs, and (C) establish 
        expeditious deadlines. The program may include 
        performance standards, guidelines, guidance, and 
        management practices and treatment requirements, as 
        appropriate.
  (q) Combined Sewer Overflows.--
          (1) Requirement for permits, orders, and decrees.--
        Each permit, order, or decree issued pursuant to this 
        Act after the date of enactment of this subsection for 
        a discharge from a municipal combined storm and 
        sanitary sewer shall conform to the Combined Sewer 
        Overflow Control Policy signed by the Administrator on 
        April 11, 1994 (in this subsection referred to as the 
        ``CSO control policy'').
          (2) Water quality and designated use review 
        guidance.--Not later than July 31, 2001, and after 
        providing notice and opportunity for public comment, 
        the Administrator shall issue guidance to facilitate 
        the conduct of water quality and designated use reviews 
        for municipal combined sewer overflow receiving waters.
          (3) Report.--Not later than September 1, 2001, the 
        Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report on 
        the progress made by the Environmental Protection 
        Agency, States, and municipalities in implementing and 
        enforcing the CSO control policy.
  (r) Discharges Incidental to the Normal Operation of 
Recreational Vessels.--No permit shall be required under this 
Act by the Administrator (or a State, in the case of a permit 
program approved under subsection (b)) for the discharge of any 
graywater, bilge water, cooling water, weather deck runoff, oil 
water separator effluent, or effluent from properly functioning 
marine engines, or any other discharge that is incidental to 
the normal operation of a vessel, if the discharge is from a 
recreational vessel.
  (s) Discharges of Pesticides.--
          (1) No permit requirement.--Except as provided in 
        paragraph (2), a permit shall not be required by the 
        Administrator or a State under this Act for a discharge 
        from a point source into navigable waters of a 
        pesticide authorized for sale, distribution, or use 
        under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
        Rodenticide Act, or the residue of such a pesticide, 
        resulting from the application of such pesticide.
          (2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the 
        following discharges of a pesticide or pesticide 
        residue:
                  (A) A discharge resulting from the 
                application of a pesticide in violation of a 
                provision of the Federal Insecticide, 
                Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act that is relevant 
                to protecting water quality, if--
                          (i) the discharge would not have 
                        occurred but for the violation; or
                          (ii) the amount of pesticide or 
                        pesticide residue in the discharge is 
                        greater than would have occurred 
                        without the violation.
                  (B) Stormwater discharges subject to 
                regulation under subsection (p).
                  (C) The following discharges subject to 
                regulation under this section:
                          (i) Manufacturing or industrial 
                        effluent.
                          (ii) Treatment works effluent.
                          (iii) Discharges incidental to the 
                        normal operation of a vessel, including 
                        a discharge resulting from ballasting 
                        operations or vessel biofouling 
                        prevention.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                  [all]