Other laws five

National Forest Management Act of 1976

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) is a cornerstone of environmental law intended to protect biodiversity in National Forests and to ensure public involvement in forest planning and management. It provides for logging while recognizing “the fundamental need to protect, and where appropriate, improve the quality of soil, water and air resources.” (http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/index.htm/)

Clean Water Act Connection: NFMA is supposed to ensure that timber will be harvested from National Forests “only where…soil, slope or other watershed conditions will not be irreversibly damaged.” It also specifies that “protection is provided for streams, stream-banks, shorelines, lakes, wetlands, and other bodies of water from detrimental changes in water temperatures, blockages of water courses, and deposits of sediment, where harvests are likely to seriously and adversely affect water conditions or fish habitat…”

The roadless area conservation rules adopted by the Clinton Administration were intended to protect millions of acres of roadless habitat for species of concern identified through NFMA regulations. The Bush Administration has compromised these rules through the “Healthy Forests Initiative.” To integrate the CWA with NFMA, citizens can insist that water quality standards, antidegradation and TMDLs be included as part of Forest Management Plans, where appropriate. Citizens should comment on timber sales with these CWA tools in mind and engage in the 401 certification process where federal licenses and permits are issued for forest activities.”

Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) was passed in order “to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations,” among other things. The Act establishes minimum requirements for surface coal mining activities and the reclamation of coal-mined lands. Coal mining activities on state and federal lands is prohibited without a permit, and a reclamation plan must be part of the permit application process. Disturbances to and adverse impacts on fish, wildlife and other environmental values are to be minimized by mine operators. In reclamation planning, land and water resource restoration is a priority.

The Act also creates an Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund. Money from the fund is used to reclaim and restore land and water resources which have been adversely affected by coal mining. The Act outlines monitoring and inspection provisions as well. (http://www.osmre.gov/)

Clean Water Act Connection: Active mines are required to obtain a mining permit under SMCRA as well as a NPDES permit for their activities. SMCRA is very important to the protection of water quality, particularly for acid producing coal mines. There are many aspects of SMCRA that regulate mining impacts on the “hydrological balance.” It is important that reclamation plans address water quality standards and adequately reclaim the land. SMCRA prohibits mining in specified federal areas, including those which are part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. To better address toxins from mining, citizens can insist that permit requirements prevent water pollution and that a 404 cumulative impacts analysis be completed.

Electric Consumers Protection Act (ECPA) of 1986

Thousands of hydropower dams that are operated by private developers, stockholder-owned utilities or state or local governments are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This federal agency issues 30- to 50-year licenses that specify how dams are to be operated, what minimum levels of water must be allowed to flow through the dams, what forms of fish passage must be installed and, in some cases, how watershed lands are managed. The licenses for hundreds of dams are up for renewal through 2010.

The EPCA of 1986 (an amendment to the Federal Power Act of 1920) requires the Commission to give “equal consideration” to both non-power values (such as the environment, recreation, fish and wildlife) and power objectives (development, efficiency, etc.) in making a licensing decision. The law also requires FERC to base mitigation for adverse effects on the recommendations of federal and state fish and wildlife agencies and to negotiate with the agencies if disagreements occur.

Clean Water Act Connection: Idaho Rivers United reports that the process of relicensing hydropower dams has “spawned creative ideas for river improvements, as well as negotiations among hydropower companies, natural resource agencies, non-governmental organizations and individuals to implement these rehabilitation measures. Remarkable river enhancement has resulted.” Protection of existing and designated uses needs to be part of the relicensing process. Additionally, to the extent that hydropower facilities are contributing to threats or impairment, relicensing processes should be coordinated with the development and implementation of TMDLs.