April 15, 2019
The Honorable Andrew Wheeler Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The Honorable R.D. James Assistant Secretary of the Army Department of the Army, Civil Works
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA Docket Center, Office of Water Docket Mail Code 28221T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20460
Re: Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States,” Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW- 2018-0149
Administrator Wheeler and Assistant Secretary James:
The undersigned 155 organizations, representing millions of members and supporters submit the following comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) proposed Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States.” We urge the Agencies to withdraw this dangerous Dirty Water Rule proposal, which is expected to eliminate Clean Water Act protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and thousands of miles of streams, including sources of drinking water.
Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 in order to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters,” and for decades, the Clean Water Act safeguarded nearly all of our rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands. The proposed Dirty Water Rule is a drastic departure from Congress’s direction, from long-standing policies, and from the protections our water resources need. If the Agencies continue to move forward with this scheme it will be the most severe weakening of clean water protections since the Act’s inception.
The Agencies are proposing to drastically limit which water bodies the Clean Water Act protects from pollution. Under this proposal Clean Water Act protections would likely be cut for thousands of miles of streams, roughly half of the nation’s wetlands, and other critical water bodies. This would leave them without guaranteed protection under the Clean Water Act’s pollution control, prevention, and clean-up programs. The Agencies claim their proposed definition is based in law, but limiting Clean Water Act protections to only waters with a permanent or consistent flow or with a direct surface hydrological connection to other waters, has previously been rejected by a majority of Supreme Court Justices, by the George W. Bush administration, and by courts interpreting the Act.
Even worse, for the first time in the history of the Clean Water Act, the Agencies are proposing to end protections for critical water resources such as ephemeral (rain-dependent) streams, which have been in place for decades. Categorically excluding all ephemeral streams from protections is a dramatic departure from decades of regulatory practice that followed science and common sense to protect our nation’s water resources.
The proposal would supposedly continue protections for intermittent (also called seasonal) streams. But how the Agencies propose to determine whether or not a specific stream would be covered is confusing. For instance, the Agencies assert that for an intermittent stream to be protected, it must flow continuously for “certain times of a typical year,” but they do not explain what might qualify as “certain times,” and information needed to determine what the flow is in a “typical year” could be very difficult to obtain. Because of these and other confusing elements of the proposal, it is difficult to know exactly how many streams the Agencies are proposing to eliminate from protection.
We are also troubled the Agencies are inviting polluters to request even more severe rollbacks, such as whether or not the rules should exclude all streams that don’t flow-year round. There is no scientific basis for excluding these streams from protection. We believe that all streams, regardless of size or frequency of flow, should be safeguarded from pollution or destruction, because the science demonstrates that they serve critical functions.
The Agencies’ proposal would also be a disaster for our nation’s wetlands. The proposal would only include wetlands that literally abut or have some other surface water connection to other protected waters. This would automatically exclude approximately half of the nation’s wetlands from Clean Water Act protections and abandons decades of previous regulatory practice.
Excluding so many wetlands from Clean Water Act protections is reckless because it ignores the critical functions these resources perform. Wetlands protect the water quality of entire watersheds by filtering pollutants, storing floodwaters and reducing flood flows that can threaten property and infrastructure, and providing essential fish and wildlife habitat.
Since the Clean Water Act was passed in 1972, we have made significant progress in cleaning up many of our nation’s most treasured rivers. The Dirty Water Rule would allow oil and gas companies, real estate developers, and factory farmers to pollute and destroy many of these streams and wetlands, reversing that progress. Instead of giving a free pass to polluters, the Agencies should be doing more to ensure these streams and wetlands are safeguarded in order to better protect and restore the rivers, lakes, and bays on which all communities depend.
Our organizations urge the Agencies to swiftly withdraw this proposal, which would gut Clean Water Act protections for certain streams and most wetlands. This proposal makes no legal or scientific sense and is a giveaway to corporate polluters at the expense of public health and the environment.
Sincerely,
April 15, 2019
The Honorable Andrew Wheeler Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The Honorable R.D. James Assistant Secretary of the Army
Department of the Army, Civil Works
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA Docket Center
Office of Water Docket Mail Code 28221T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20460
Re: Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States,” Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW- 2018-0149
Administrator Wheeler and Assistant Secretary James:
The undersigned 155 organizations, representing millions of members and supporters submit the following comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) proposed Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States.” We urge the Agencies to withdraw this dangerous Dirty Water Rule proposal, which is expected to eliminate Clean Water Act protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and thousands of miles of streams, including sources of drinking water.
Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 in order to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters,” and for decades, the Clean Water Act safeguarded nearly all of our rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands. The proposed Dirty Water Rule is a drastic departure from Congress’s direction, from long-standing policies, and from the protections our water resources need. If the Agencies continue to move forward with this scheme it will be the most severe weakening of clean water protections since the Act’s inception.
The Agencies are proposing to drastically limit which water bodies the Clean Water Act protects from pollution. Under this proposal Clean Water Act protections would likely be cut for thousands of miles of streams, roughly half of the nation’s wetlands, and other critical water bodies. This would leave them without guaranteed protection under the Clean Water Act’s pollution control, prevention, and clean-up programs. The Agencies claim their proposed definition is based in law, but limiting Clean Water Act protections to only waters with a permanent or consistent flow or with a direct surface hydrological connection to other waters, has previously been rejected by a majority of Supreme Court Justices, by the George W. Bush administration, and by courts interpreting the Act.
Even worse, for the first time in the history of the Clean Water Act, the Agencies are proposing to end protections for critical water resources such as ephemeral (rain-dependent) streams, which have been in place for decades. Categorically excluding all ephemeral streams from protections
is a dramatic departure from decades of regulatory practice that followed science and common sense to protect our nation’s water resources.
The proposal would supposedly continue protections for intermittent (also called seasonal) streams. But how the Agencies propose to determine whether or not a specific stream would be covered is confusing. For instance, the Agencies assert that for an intermittent stream to be protected, it must flow continuously for “certain times of a typical year,” but they do not explain what might qualify as “certain times,” and information needed to determine what the flow is in a “typical year” could be very difficult to obtain. Because of these and other confusing elements of the proposal, it is difficult to know exactly how many streams the Agencies are proposing to eliminate from protection.
We are also troubled the Agencies are inviting polluters to request even more severe rollbacks, such as whether or not the rules should exclude all streams that don’t flow-year round. There is no scientific basis for excluding these streams from protection. We believe that all streams, regardless of size or frequency of flow, should be safeguarded from pollution or destruction, because the science demonstrates that they serve critical functions.
The Agencies’ proposal would also be a disaster for our nation’s wetlands. The proposal would only include wetlands that literally abut or have some other surface water connection to other protected waters. This would automatically exclude approximately half of the nation’s wetlands from Clean Water Act protections and abandons decades of previous regulatory practice.
Excluding so many wetlands from Clean Water Act protections is reckless because it ignores the critical functions these resources perform. Wetlands protect the water quality of entire watersheds by filtering pollutants, storing floodwaters and reducing flood flows that can threaten property and infrastructure, and providing essential fish and wildlife habitat.
Since the Clean Water Act was passed in 1972, we have made significant progress in cleaning up many of our nation’s most treasured rivers. The Dirty Water Rule would allow oil and gas companies, real estate developers, and factory farmers to pollute and destroy many of these streams and wetlands, reversing that progress. Instead of giving a free pass to polluters, the Agencies should be doing more to ensure these streams and wetlands are safeguarded in order to better protect and restore the rivers, lakes, and bays on which all communities depend.
Our organizations urge the Agencies to swiftly withdraw this proposal, which would gut Clean Water Act protections for certain streams and most wetlands. This proposal makes no legal or scientific sense and is a giveaway to corporate polluters at the expense of public health and the environment.
Sincerely,
AAUW Duluth Branch Alabama Rivers Alliance
Alaska Community Action on Toxics Alliance for the Great Lakes
Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments
Amagansett Springs Aquifer Protection American Chestnut Land Trust inc American Rivers
American Sustainable Business Council Anacostia Watershed Society Appalachian Trail Conservancy Association to Preserve Cape Cod Audubon Naturalist Society
Austin Coalition for Environmental Sustainability Backbone Campaign
Baltimore Tree Trust
Berkshire Environmental Action Team (BEAT) Black Warrior Riverkeeper
Blue Heron Environmental Network Inc. Cacapon Institute
Cahaba River Society
Capital Region Land Conservancy Center for a Sustainable Coast Center for Progressive Reform Chemung River Friends
Citizens Coalition for a Safe Community Citizens for a Healthy Bay
Clark Fork Coalition Clean Water Action
Columbia River Crab Fisherman’s Association Committee on the Middle Fork Vermilion river Concerned Citizens of Cattaraugus County Conservation Alabama
Conservation Voters New Mexico
CT Coalition for Environmental Justice CURE (Clean Up the River Environment) Detroit Audubon
Dr. Whyte Pediatrics
Earth Forum of Howard County Earthjustice
Earthworks
Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation (EPCAMR) Ecological Land Management
Endangered Habitats League Endangered Species Coalition Environment Arizona Environment California Environment Colorado Environment Connecticut Environment Florida Environment Georgia
Environment Illinois Environment Iowa Environment Maine Environment Maryland Environment Massachusetts Environment Michigan Environment Minnesota Environment Missouri Environment Montana Environment Nevada Environment New Hampshire Environment New Jersey Environment New Mexico Environment New York Environment North Carolina Environment Ohio Environment Oregon Environment Rhode Island Environment Texas Environment Virginia Environment Washington
Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform Environmental Protection Network
Environmental Working Group Farmington River Watershed Association
Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights Friends of Dyke Marsh
Friends of the Middle River Friends of the Mississippi River Friends of the Nanticoke River Friends of the Rappahannock Friends of the Rouge
Great Rivers Habitat Alliance Greenpeace US
Groundwork Lawrence Healthy Gulf
Helene Forst, Chairperson Long Island Businesses for Responsible Energy, Inc. Hip Hop Caucus
Hip Hop Caucus Idaho Rivers United
Illinois Council of Trout Unlimited Interfaith Partners for the Chesapeake Junction Coalition
Kentucky Resources Council Kentucky Waterways Alliance Lancaster Land Trust
Land Stewardship Project League of Conservation Voters Los Padres ForestWatch Maine Conservation Voters
Mankato Area Environmentalists Maryland League of Conservation Voters Massachusetts Rivers Alliance
Michigan Wildlife Conservancy
Minnesota Division of the Izaak Walton League of America Minnesota Environmental Partnership
Minnesota Forestry Association Minnesota Ornithologists Union Mystic River Watershed Association National Wildlife Federation NeighborSpace
NEOGAP (Network for Oil and Gas Accountability and Protection) Nevada Conservation League
New Jersey Conservation Foundation New York Public Interest Research Group
No DAPL & No Pipelines We The People Petition Ohio Environmental Council
Ohio River Foundation Oil Change U.S.
Otsego County Conservation Association OVEC-Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition Parks & Trails Council of Minnesota PennEnvironment
Pennsylvania Council of Churches People Concerned about Chemical Safety People’s Action for Clean Energy Pollinator Friendly Alliance
Potomac Conservancy Rachel Carson Council River Network
Rock Creek Conservancy Save EPA
Save Lake Superior Association Save Our Sky Blue Waters Severn River Association
Sierra Club
St. Mary’s River Watershed Association Surfrider Foundation
Taunton River Watershed Alliance Tennessee Clean Water Network The St. Marys EarthKeepers
The Wilderness Society
Trade justice alliance
Tulpehocken Creek Trout Unlimited Tuolumne River Trust
Utah Rivers Council
Virginia Association for Biological Farming Virginia Conservation Network
Voyageurs National Park Association WE ACT for Environmental Justice
Western Colorado Alliance for Community Action Western Organization of Resource Councils WildEarth Guardians
Wisconsin Environment
April 15, 2019
The Honorable Andrew Wheeler Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The Honorable R.D. James Assistant Secretary of the Army
Department of the Army, Civil Works
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA Docket Center
Office of Water Docket Mail Code 28221T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20460
Re: Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States,” Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW- 2018-0149
Administrator Wheeler and Assistant Secretary James:
The undersigned 155 organizations, representing millions of members and supporters submit the following comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) proposed Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States.” We urge the Agencies to withdraw this dangerous Dirty Water Rule proposal, which is expected to eliminate Clean Water Act protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and thousands of miles of streams, including sources of drinking water.
Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 in order to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters,” and for decades, the Clean Water Act safeguarded nearly all of our rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands. The proposed Dirty Water Rule is a drastic departure from Congress’s direction, from long-standing policies, and from the protections our water resources need. If the Agencies continue to move forward with this scheme it will be the most severe weakening of clean water protections since the Act’s inception.
The Agencies are proposing to drastically limit which water bodies the Clean Water Act protects from pollution. Under this proposal Clean Water Act protections would likely be cut for thousands of miles of streams, roughly half of the nation’s wetlands, and other critical water bodies. This would leave them without guaranteed protection under the Clean Water Act’s pollution control, prevention, and clean-up programs. The Agencies claim their proposed definition is based in law, but limiting Clean Water Act protections to only waters with a permanent or consistent flow or with a direct surface hydrological connection to other waters, has previously been rejected by a majority of Supreme Court Justices, by the George W. Bush administration, and by courts interpreting the Act.
Even worse, for the first time in the history of the Clean Water Act, the Agencies are proposing to end protections for critical water resources such as ephemeral (rain-dependent) streams, which have been in place for decades. Categorically excluding all ephemeral streams from protections
is a dramatic departure from decades of regulatory practice that followed science and common sense to protect our nation’s water resources.
The proposal would supposedly continue protections for intermittent (also called seasonal) streams. But how the Agencies propose to determine whether or not a specific stream would be covered is confusing. For instance, the Agencies assert that for an intermittent stream to be protected, it must flow continuously for “certain times of a typical year,” but they do not explain what might qualify as “certain times,” and information needed to determine what the flow is in a “typical year” could be very difficult to obtain. Because of these and other confusing elements of the proposal, it is difficult to know exactly how many streams the Agencies are proposing to eliminate from protection.
We are also troubled the Agencies are inviting polluters to request even more severe rollbacks, such as whether or not the rules should exclude all streams that don’t flow-year round. There is no scientific basis for excluding these streams from protection. We believe that all streams, regardless of size or frequency of flow, should be safeguarded from pollution or destruction, because the science demonstrates that they serve critical functions.
The Agencies’ proposal would also be a disaster for our nation’s wetlands. The proposal would only include wetlands that literally abut or have some other surface water connection to other protected waters. This would automatically exclude approximately half of the nation’s wetlands from Clean Water Act protections and abandons decades of previous regulatory practice.
Excluding so many wetlands from Clean Water Act protections is reckless because it ignores the critical functions these resources perform. Wetlands protect the water quality of entire watersheds by filtering pollutants, storing floodwaters and reducing flood flows that can threaten property and infrastructure, and providing essential fish and wildlife habitat.
Since the Clean Water Act was passed in 1972, we have made significant progress in cleaning up many of our nation’s most treasured rivers. The Dirty Water Rule would allow oil and gas companies, real estate developers, and factory farmers to pollute and destroy many of these streams and wetlands, reversing that progress. Instead of giving a free pass to polluters, the Agencies should be doing more to ensure these streams and wetlands are safeguarded in order to better protect and restore the rivers, lakes, and bays on which all communities depend.
Our organizations urge the Agencies to swiftly withdraw this proposal, which would gut Clean Water Act protections for certain streams and most wetlands. This proposal makes no legal or scientific sense and is a giveaway to corporate polluters at the expense of public health and the environment.
Sincerely,
AAUW Duluth Branch Alabama Rivers Alliance
Alaska Community Action on Toxics Alliance for the Great Lakes
Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments
Amagansett Springs Aquifer Protection American Chestnut Land Trust inc American Rivers
American Sustainable Business Council Anacostia Watershed Society Appalachian Trail Conservancy Association to Preserve Cape Cod Audubon Naturalist Society
Austin Coalition for Environmental Sustainability Backbone Campaign
Baltimore Tree Trust
Berkshire Environmental Action Team (BEAT) Black Warrior Riverkeeper
Blue Heron Environmental Network Inc. Cacapon Institute
Cahaba River Society
Capital Region Land Conservancy Center for a Sustainable Coast Center for Progressive Reform Chemung River Friends
Citizens Coalition for a Safe Community Citizens for a Healthy Bay
Clark Fork Coalition Clean Water Action
Columbia River Crab Fisherman’s Association Committee on the Middle Fork Vermilion river Concerned Citizens of Cattaraugus County Conservation Alabama
Conservation Voters New Mexico
CT Coalition for Environmental Justice CURE (Clean Up the River Environment) Detroit Audubon
Dr. Whyte Pediatrics
Earth Forum of Howard County Earthjustice
Earthworks
Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation (EPCAMR) Ecological Land Management
Endangered Habitats League Endangered Species Coalition Environment Arizona Environment California Environment Colorado Environment Connecticut Environment Florida Environment Georgia
Environment Illinois Environment Iowa Environment Maine Environment Maryland Environment Massachusetts Environment Michigan Environment Minnesota Environment Missouri Environment Montana Environment Nevada Environment New Hampshire Environment New Jersey Environment New Mexico Environment New York Environment North Carolina Environment Ohio Environment Oregon Environment Rhode Island Environment Texas Environment Virginia Environment Washington
Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform Environmental Protection Network
Environmental Working Group Farmington River Watershed Association
Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights Friends of Dyke Marsh
Friends of the Middle River Friends of the Mississippi River Friends of the Nanticoke River Friends of the Rappahannock Friends of the Rouge
Great Rivers Habitat Alliance Greenpeace US
Groundwork Lawrence Healthy Gulf
Helene Forst, Chairperson Long Island Businesses for Responsible Energy, Inc. Hip Hop Caucus
Hip Hop Caucus Idaho Rivers United
Illinois Council of Trout Unlimited Interfaith Partners for the Chesapeake Junction Coalition
Kentucky Resources Council Kentucky Waterways Alliance Lancaster Land Trust
Land Stewardship Project League of Conservation Voters Los Padres ForestWatch Maine Conservation Voters
Mankato Area Environmentalists Maryland League of Conservation Voters Massachusetts Rivers Alliance
Michigan Wildlife Conservancy
Minnesota Division of the Izaak Walton League of America Minnesota Environmental Partnership
Minnesota Forestry Association Minnesota Ornithologists Union Mystic River Watershed Association National Wildlife Federation NeighborSpace
NEOGAP (Network for Oil and Gas Accountability and Protection) Nevada Conservation League
New Jersey Conservation Foundation New York Public Interest Research Group
No DAPL & No Pipelines We The People Petition Ohio Environmental Council
Ohio River Foundation Oil Change U.S.
Otsego County Conservation Association OVEC-Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition Parks & Trails Council of Minnesota PennEnvironment
Pennsylvania Council of Churches People Concerned about Chemical Safety People’s Action for Clean Energy Pollinator Friendly Alliance
Potomac Conservancy Rachel Carson Council River Network
Rock Creek Conservancy Save EPA
Save Lake Superior Association Save Our Sky Blue Waters Severn River Association
Sierra Club
St. Mary’s River Watershed Association Surfrider Foundation
Taunton River Watershed Alliance Tennessee Clean Water Network The St. Marys EarthKeepers
The Wilderness Society
Trade justice alliance
Tulpehocken Creek Trout Unlimited Tuolumne River Trust
Utah Rivers Council
Virginia Association for Biological Farming Virginia Conservation Network
Voyageurs National Park Association WE ACT for Environmental Justice
Western Colorado Alliance for Community Action Western Organization of Resource Councils WildEarth Guardians
Wisconsin Environment
Recent Comments