The Power Grab That Isn't

By Michael Kelly, Communications Director The following statements are dead wrong

1. “This could be the EPA’s most dramatic power grab ever…” – Steve Doocy, Fox News 2. “The EPA is redefining the meaning of the word water so as to give it, the EPA the ability to regulate ever body of water in the US, whether it is a little stream or whether it is a free standing pond.” – Andrew Napolitano, Fox News

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. These two Fox pundits are referring to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) forthcoming proposal to protect the drinking water for nearly one-third of all Americans. EPA will soon propose this rule because, right now, that drinking water is at risk. The small streams and wetlands that feed our drinking water supplies are at risk now because of pressure from polluters and policy decisions made by the Bush Administration in the mid-2000’s. Not only do these wetlands and streams feed drinking water sources, they help us deal with floodwaters and EPA is simply trying to restore protections to these vital water resources and make the Clean Water Act work the way it has since 1972. And they have the science to back it up. In addition to announcing it will soon propose a new rule, EPA released a comprehensive, peer-reviewed report that documents just how connected our water is. This synthesis of more than 1,000 studies and articles shows that these small bodies of water are vital parts of our water infrastructure and discusses the critical functions they perform. The conclusions are commonsense – what happens in upstream  streams or wetlands affects the entire watershed  downstream. Visit this page to send a note to EPA to support the science report. EPA does not want to regulate every body of water in the country. In fact, the Agency has clearly stated exactly what it wants to protect and what it will not regulate through this rule. Here’s a short list of exemptions from current law and the forthcoming proposed rule. Exemptions from Clean Water Act permitting continue for:

• Agricultural stormwater discharges.
• Return flows from irrigated agriculture.
• Normal farming, silvicultural, and ranching activities.
• Upland soil and water conservation practices.
• Construction and maintenance of farm or stock ponds or irrigation ditches.
• Maintenance of drainage ditches.
• Construction or maintenance of farm, forest, and temporary mining roads.

Exclusions from Clean Water Act jurisdiction continue for:

• Prior Converted Cropland, including the role of USDA.
• Waste Treatment Systems.

The proposed rule submitted to OMB for review includes exclusions from Clean Water Act jurisdiction for:

• Non-tidal drainage, including tiles, and irrigation ditches excavated on dry land.
• Artificially irrigated areas that would be dry if irrigation stops.
• Artificial lakes or ponds used for purposes such as stock watering or irrigation.
• Areas artificially flooded for rice growing.
• Artificial ornamental waters created for primarily aesthetic reasons.
• Water-filled depressions created as a result of construction activity.
• Pits excavated in uplands for fill, sand, or gravel that fill with water.

So, not every body of water in the US. This forthcoming rule is about two things: protecting drinking water and making sure our laws work the way they are supposed to. The Clean Water Act is our most fundamental water protection law and right now, because of bad policy decisions that put polluters before people, it doesn’t protect what Congress intended it to protect. EPA is not expanding its power or circumventing Congress. It is following the law to protect our water - a goal of the Clean Water Act that we’re nearly 30 years overdue in achieving. And it's following the law by following the science, which says what even children know – our water is connected. We all live downstream which means we have to do whatever we can to protect the water upstream. Click here to read even more about the attacks on EPA's proposed rule and see the video from which the above quotes were pulled.