|
The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of the Army are giving you until Oct. 9 to speak out on a proposed rule change that could strip Clean Water Act protections from up to 95% of wetlands and 79% of rivers and streams.
Sound like a hideous idea? Lots of people think so, but the proposal stems from a 2023 Supreme Court decision called Sackett vs. EPA, which limited the federal government’s jurisdiction over waters and wetlands covered by the Clean Water Act. Now the agencies are seeking to officially define what gets protection and what doesn't.
The agencies put forth a “Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” seeking public input on additional regulatory language.
Under this proposal, federal protections would only cover tributary rivers, streams and lakes that hold standing or flowing water year-round in ordinary conditions. This means "intermittent" streams where no water flows for periods exceeding 30 days would lose protection.
Wetlands would fare worse. They'd qualify only with a continuous, perennial surface connection to another protected water — or by being indistinguishable from a navigable water, the territorial seas, a jurisdictional impoundment or tributary.
The result: countless rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands stripped of safeguards. And for some, that's a plus.
“Landowners and developers may see significantly reduced permitting burdens for projects near intermittent or ephemeral waters and seasonally saturated wetlands,” according to some legal observers. “If adopted, this approach would mark the most significant narrowing of federal wetland jurisdiction since the Clean Water Act was enacted in 1972, with far-reaching implications for landowners, developers, agricultural operators, and environmental compliance nationwide.”
BUT YOU STILL HAVE TIME TO MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! Click here to submit a public comment, or go find some suggested language for your letter by clicking here. You’ve got until Oct. 9 — so step on it!
|