AZ Central - EPA Seeks to Grab Unprecedented Power

Op-Ed

By David Schweikert

When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created in December of 1970, it was intended to embody an attitude of synergy and harmony with Congress and the States, while tackling the quality of our air, land and water.

Today, there is little harmony and synergy and in its place, friction and isolation. Instead of working alongside States, and those who are most affected by regulations, we see an elusive, unaccountable agency bulldoze past any attempt to engage.

Earlier this year, the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a proposed rule that would amend the definition of the "waters of the U.S.'under the Clean Water Act (CWA). Not only would this rule expand the EPA's regulatory reach to every body of water in the country, it would give the agency control over vast areas of land simply because it might hold or convey water. Under this rule, the breadth of the EPA's power is expanded to unprecedented levels, and once finalized; there are very few options for appeal.

The issue I have with this rule is twofold:

The EPA released the proposed rule along with a scientific assessment, titled the "Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence."This study purportedly validates the scientific underpinnings of the proposed regulatory changes detailing the connectivity of streams and wetlands to downstream waters, but has not been independently vetted by the Scientific Advisory Board.

EPA guidelines for rulemaking require these analyses on the scientific assessment to be finalized before either compilation of research can be used by the EPA as validation or scientific reasoning for a rule.

Given the obligation the EPA has to scientific integrity, it is incredibly troubling to see the complete disregard for the scientific process of review and analysis.

While ultimately, CWA jurisdiction is a legal question, the Agency's refusal to wait for the science undercuts the opportunity for informed policy choices.

The second issue I have with this proposed rule is the major Federal power grab. The proposed rule never actually defines "waters." Instead of drawing clear boundaries of what is or isn't considered "water,' the EPA gives itself a wide latitude of discretion to make these determinations on a case-by-case basis.

On June 2nd, I will be hosting a roundtable here in Phoenix about the rule's potential consequences on the state of Arizona. By the time the session is over, people across the country will have just over a month to submit public comment on the rule.

Action needs to be taken. Join me in calling on the EPA and the Corps to tell us exactly every body of water that it intends to regulate. The EPA's guessing game is a foolish and irresponsible response to a valid need for clarity.

Source