Planning for the future requires careful consideration of pending legislation, particularly in the environmental area. Unlike most legal concerns confronting business today, environmental requirements are almost entirely a product of federal legislation. Morgan Lewis attorneys and paralegals routinely monitor legislative developments, both in Congress and in state legislatures, that could affect our clients.

• Testifying before the Senate and the House on Superfund reauthorization, including liability and remedy selection issues.
• Drafting proposed legislation on Superfund reform and amendments to the NWPA and LLRWPA for major trade associations.
• Communicating with members of Congress on behalf of various clients interested in specific RCRA and Superfund provisions.
• Assisting a major trade association with proposed amendments to the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy Act.
• Advancing technically sound and responsible legislative proposals addressing ground water protection.
• Advocating specific provisions in legislation regulating asbestos in buildings and indoor air contaminants.

Several of Morgan Lewis environmental attorneys are registered lobbyists who devote considerable time to briefing Senators, Representatives, and their staffs on issues of special concern to our clients. With assistance from John Quarles, William Lewis, Michael Steinberg, and other attorneys, Morgan Lewis has been successful in securing legislative action on behalf of our clients.

After passing reforms to the Safe Drinking Water Act and Pesticide Regulations in 1996, Congress failed to pass any major environmental legislation in 1997. Efforts to reauthorize the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act ("ISTEA"), Superfund, and the Endangered Species Act were delayed until 1998. Legislative attempts to overturn new Clean Air regulations also faltered. Nevertheless, Congress did succeed in passing the various appropriations bills, including an increase in funding for EPA, while avoiding the government shutdowns of the previous year. (For a more detailed look at the legislative successes and failures of recent years, see Alan Coffey s article on Congress and the Environment at the beginning of this edition of the Deskbook).

Among the specific areas likely to receive attention on Capitol Hill during 1998 are the following:

• Superfund Despite general agreement on the broad outlines of Superfund reform, and despite the introduction of many reauthorization bills in the House in 1997, the 105th Congress made scant progress toward reauthorization during its first session. Unless bipartisan agreement can somehow be reached early in 1998, it appears that any Superfund legislation in this Congress will be limited to politically popular "rifle-shot" issues, such as limiting the liability of small businesses and cities. It remains to be seen whether this would amount to enough program reform to provide a quid pro quo for reinstating the Superfund taxes that lapsed several years ago. Chairman Archer of the House Ways and Means Committee has repeatedly stated that the taxes will not be reinstated absent comprehensive reform of the Superfund program, thereby providing one of the few tangible incentives for Democrats and Republicans to come to the bargaining table.
• Endangered Species A bipartisan bill to reform the Endangered Species Act has passed the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and will likely be taken up in the Senate early in 1998. However, a number of partisan and regional issues regarding property and water rights may make the ultimate passage of the legislation in its current form difficult.
• Clean Air Efforts to overturn EPA s new, stricter air regulations failed in 1997 due to a threatened presidential veto and lack of support from several key Republicans. This situation is unlikely to change in 1998, with members unwilling to risk possible public backlash in an election year. Another issue which may arise is the Kyoto global warming agreements. Any treaty would require ratification by the Senate. The treaty would face fierce opposition as currently constituted, especially if developing countries are not included. As a result, President Clinton may hold off on presenting the agreement to the Senate until the issue of developing countries is addressed at a future conference.