by Mark Drajem BloombergBusiness
The Obama administration expanded protections for waterways to keep them free of pollutants, defying the Republican-led Congress as well as farmers, ranchers and builders who fought what they call overreach by government.
The Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a final regulation on what rivers, streams or wetlands are “waters of the U.S.” subject to federal oversight. The rule, issued after years of debate and delay, will help curb algal blooms or pollutants in waterways like the Mississippi River or bodies such as Lake Erie, the agencies said.
“Today’s final rule provides clarity and predictability about which waters are covered by the Clean Water Act,” Jo-Ellen Darcy, head of the Army Corps, told reporters Wednesday. “Our rule makes it clear which waters are covered, and which are not.”
Still, before the EPA’s final rule was issued, farmers, builders, manufacturers and electric utilities criticized a proposed version and turned the issue to this year’s most pitched environmental battle. The House passed a bill to block the rules and the Senate is considering a similar measure. President Barack Obama has vowed a veto.
CLICK HERE to read the full article posted in Bloomberg Business
Industry Reactions (Updated as they are received):
CLICK HERE for local reactions from Montana Senator Ryan Zinke, Montana Farm Bureau and the Montana Home Builders
U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement
“Instead of reaching a reasonable solution, today the EPA has ignored millions of Americans and taken more control over private land in our country. There is bipartisan agreement that Washington bureaucrats have gone beyond their authority and have no business regulating irrigation ditches, isolated ponds and other ‘non-navigable’ waters as waters of the United States. Under this outrageously broad rule, Washington will have control over how family farmers, ranchers and small businesses not only use their water, but also their privately owned land.
“After last week’s news reports, it’s clear that the EPA would rather skew public comments in its favor than acknowledge the real concerns Americans and Congress have with this overreaching rule.
“Instead of moving forward with a rule that fails to represent the interests of many Americans, we should act immediately to pass the bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act. We can protect America’s waterways and our farmers, ranchers and landowners. Today’s action ensures further momentum for our bill that says yes to clean water – and no to extreme bureaucracy.”
Statement by Bob Stallman, President, American Farm Bureau Federation,
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 27, 2015 – “We are undertaking a thorough analysis of the final WOTUS rule to determine whether the Environmental Protection Agency listened to the substantive comments farmers and ranchers submitted during the comment period. Based on EPA’s aggressive advocacy campaign in support of its original proposed rule—and the agency’s numerous misstatements about the content and impact of that proposal—we find little comfort in the agency’s assurances that our concerns have been addressed in any meaningful way.
“The process used to produce this rule was flawed. The EPA’s proposal transgressed clear legal boundaries set for it by Congress and the Courts and dealt more with regulating land use than protecting our nation’s valuable water resources. EPA’s decision to mount an aggressive advocacy campaign during the comment period has tainted what should have been an open and thoughtful deliberative process. While we know that farmers and ranchers were dedicated to calling for substantial changes to the rule, we have serious concerns about whether their comments were given full consideration.
“We expect to complete our review in the next few days. We are looking in particular at how the rule treats so-called ephemeral streams, ditches, small ponds and isolated wetlands. We will decide on an appropriate course of action once that review is complete.”
National Farmers Union Statement on Waters of the U.S. Final Rule
“NFU’s policy opposes any expansion of jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (CWA), but EPA has made genuine efforts in reaching out to agriculture stakeholders in the rule-making process and the final rule clearly demonstrates that the agency took the concerns of family agriculture under serious consideration. While the rule is not perfect from our perspective, the final rule is an improvement over the proposed rule.
“The final rule puts bright-line limits on jurisdiction over neighboring waters, offering farmers increased regulatory certainty and mitigating the risk of enforcement or litigation. The final rule also provides more clarity on which ditches fall under the Clean Water Act jurisdiction, removing a gray area that has caused farmers and ranchers an incredible amount of concern.
“We appreciate EPA’s work on the regional water features, but remain concerned about waters that cannot impact the quality of jurisdictional waters will fall under jurisdiction, or that farmers will not have the regulatory certainty they need to address these waters appropriately. NFU hopes EPA will clarify this process through timely guidance.”
