Idaho congressmen have teamed with other lawmakers to overturn a decision by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, over worry that a new pollution standard could have major impacts on logging operations.

"It's not necessarily about pollution, it's about how the industry is regulated," said Lindsay Nothern, spokesperson for U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo. "The existing rules and regulations that have been put in place were working well."

Crapo and Idaho Sen. Jim Risch joined other Western legislators last week in introducing the Silviculture Regulatory Consistency Act.

The legislation would overturn the Court of Appeals' ruling in National Environmental Defense Center v. Brown, asserting that logging road runoff is point source pollution.

That means that logging roads are now subject to Clean Water Act standards, requiring permitting from the Environmental Protection Agency that wasn't necessary before.

The lawmakers are upset, Nothern said, because the decision changes the previous model of logging road management used for 35 years.

"We establish regulations that everybody has agreed for many, many years has been fine," he said. "All of a sudden you have one rogue ruling that comes in, and the coalition of senators and congressmen who are filing this legislation feel the court was in error."

Their effort is likely to succeed, said Risch spokesperson Brad Hoaglun, because the coalition from Idaho, Oregon and Alaska is bipartisan.

"This has Republicans and Democrats saying, 'This wasn't the right decision,'" Hoaglun said.

The new permitting standard could hinder logging operations, said Shawn Keough, executive director of Associated Logging Contractors Inc.

"(The decision) really came as a shock," said Keough, also a state senator from Sandpoint.

She is frustrated that private forest land owners and the state of Idaho would need a permit to build a logging road, she said, or maintain forest roads.

All the private and public entities would inundate the EPA with permit applications, she said.

"For all those entities to have to go to the EPA for a permit would, in my mind, bring activities that need to occur to a standstill," she said. "The EPA is simply not set up to do that administrative paperwork in a timely fashion."

Since 1976, runoff from logging roads has been regulated under the EPA's Silviculture Rule, which excluded such runoff from permits under the agency's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System.

The EPA is already responding to the court decision, said David Powers, regional manager for forests and rangelands.

The agency is meeting with logging stakeholders about permits they can seek, Powers said.

He couldn't say how the EPA would be affected by many entities applying at once.

"I'm not sure it would bring anything to a standstill," he said, adding that applications take 30 to 60 days to process. "However, this is the first time the logging roads have been covered under the point source permit, so obviously there's a learning curve."

Terry Harris with Kootenai Environmental Alliance said he thinks the Circuit Court's decision is the proper interpretation of the law.

Holding logging roads to Clean Water Act standards could improve road construction and reduce nutrients that enter waterways, he said.

"The big problem in our local waterways and waterways around the country is sediment and nutrient runoff from basically road construction," he said. "If we get those problems under control, it will go a long way in cleaning up our waterways."