Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 3:31 PM
Subject: Preserve the Waters of the US Act
( excerpt from information below )
-----The Preserve The Waters of the US Act (S-2245) would stop Washington overreach and block any further attempt to issue “guidance” to agency bureaucrats that says it is OK to regulate non-navigable water in people’s backyards and farms.
*Preserve the waters of the u.s. Act (S-2245)*
----------------------------------------
Land Rights Network
American Land Rights Association
PO Box 400 – Battle Ground, WA 98604
Phone: 360-687-3087 –
Fax: 360-687-2973
E-mail: alra@pacifier.com
Web Address: http://www.landrights.org
Legislative Office: 507 Seward Square SE – Washington, DC 20003
Block EPA & Corps Wetlands Jurisdiction Over Your Water & Land
*Do You Want The EPA &Corps In Your Backyard?*
Do you want the EPA & Corps jurisdiction over all forest roads?
If Not, Here’s Why You Need The *“Preserve The Waters Of The US Act” (S-2245)*
Below are action items to protect your water and your land as well as
roads on Federal land. But first, read this:
-----The EPA wants to lift the ban that prevents Washington, DC bureaucrats from regulating non-navigable
waters.
-----Lifting the navigable ban, passed by Congress to protect families, small businesses and farmers from federal
bureaucrats seizing their water or their land, would devastate economic and recreational activity as well as small communities across the U.S.
------You need to insist that Congress not remove the requirement set by Congress in the original Clean Water Act that said the EPA and Corps *can only regulate “navigable waters”*. The EPA and Corps want to eliminate the
word “navigable” and give the EPA and Corps jurisdiction over “all waters of the United States and all activities affecting all waters of the United States.”
-----If the ban is lifted, when it rains, your backyard or farm becomes a minefield of Washington red tape and taxes.
-----If you’re a farmer, when it rains, your backyard becomes a bonanza for Washington, DC bureaucrats to go on your property to force you from doing activities like building a swimming pool, installing a bird bath, running rainwater away from your home, irrigating your fields, installing stock watering ponds and many more.
-----If you’re a suburban homeowner, when it rains, the water in your backyard allows Washington, DC bureaucrats on your property to block you from doing basic things without a permit that can cost thousands of dollars and long delays causing great damage.
-----Congress blocked attempts by former Congressman James Oberstar (D-MN) and former Senator Russ Feingold (R-MN) from passing the Clean Water Restoration Act, which would have lifted the “navigable” ban. As with the EPA and Corp, Oberstar and Feingold tried to remove the word “navigable” from the Clean Water Act.
-----Despite Congress not changing the law, the Obama EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are attempting to remove this key protection for families, small business and farmers by issuing an internal guidance document to agency bureaucrats telling them it is now OK to regulate non-navigable waters on people’s property throughout the United
States. The Obama folks seem to care less about how they are ignoring two Supreme Court decisions.
-----The Preserve The Waters of the US Act (S-2245) would stop Washington overreach and block any further attempt to issue “guidance” to agency bureaucrats that says it is OK to regulate non-navigable water in people’s backyards and farms.
*Preserve the waters of the u.s. Act (S-2245)*
*Purpose:* To preserve existing rights and responsibilities with respect to waters of the U.S.
* **Background:* In May 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issued draft guidance on “Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act.”
This guidance document, which was sent in final form to OMB on February 21, 2012, significantly changes and expands what features are considered protected under the Clean Water Act and makes substantial additions, such as a first time inclusion of ditches and other water features that may flow, if at all, only after a heavy rainfall.
EPA and the Corps received over 230,000 comments from the public on their guidance, discussing the potential consequences of the draft guidance to governments, businesses, and landowners. They have not responded to the comments.
EPA and the Corps estimate that between 2 – 17% percent of non-jurisdictional determinations under current practice would be jurisdictional using the expanded tests of the new guidance.
This guidance has clear regulatory consequences and goes far beyond being simply advisory guidelines.
*The legislation (S-2245) prevents EPA and the Corps from using this /guidance/ to change legal responsibilities under the Clean Water Act.*
*-----Regulation through Guidance:* By issuing a guidance document as opposed to going through the rulemaking process, EPA and the Corps are bypassing the necessary public outreach required under the Administrative Procedures Act and failing to fully consider the legal, economic, and unforeseen consequences of their actions.
* *
*-----Applies to all Clean Water Act (CWA) Programs:* In addition to the Corps §404 dredge and fill permits, the guidance applies to all CWA programs including §303 water quality standards, §401 state water quality certifications, §311 Oil Pollution Act (including SPCC), and §402 program (including NPDES permits, pesticide general permit, and storm water).
*-----Increasing Permits: *EPA and the Corps affirm that this guidance will result in an increase in jurisdictional determinations that will result in an increased need for permits. In addition to more Corps §404 permits, State-permitting authorities will be faced with more NPDES permits and more entities will be subject to CWA requirements.
*-----Economic and Job Impacts:* Additional regulatory costs associated with changes in jurisdiction and increases in permits will erect bureaucratic barriers to economic growth, negatively impacting farms, small businesses, commercial development, road construction and energy production, to name a few.
*-----Impact on State on Local Governments:* Changes to the “waters of the U.S.” definition may have far-reaching effects and unintended consequences on a number of state and local programs. The guidance creates significant unfunded mandates and preempts state and local authority.
*-----Conflicts with Supreme Court Rulings:* The guidance uses an overly broad interpretation of the /Rapanos /decision. The effect is virtually all wet areas that connect in any way to navigable waters are jurisdictional. Both the plurality opinion and Kennedy rejected this assertion in /Rapanos/.
*-----Private Property Rights:* Expanding federal control over intrastate waters will substantially interfere with the ability of individual landowners to use their property.
*-----Action Items:*
*-----1. It’s critical to get some of the Senators below as co-sponsors of the Preserve The Waters Of The US Act (S 2245). *You need to call, fax and e-mail your Senator (s) listed below to urge them to cosponsor the Preserve The Waters Of The US Act.
-----2. For more information about S 2245 type in to Google the following search term: Preserve The Waters Of The US Act.
-----3. Please forward this message to at least 10 other people. Your whole list if possible.
The best thing to do is write a letter with your letterhead and either fax it or e-mail it to your Senator (s).
They don’t like attachments so call ahead to ask for the staff person who handles the Clean Water Act and Wetlands issues. Ask for his personal e-mail and send him your letter.
...................................
Thank you for your help.
Chuck Cushman, American Land Rights
ccushman@pacifier.com
Look Chuck Cushman and American Land Rights up on Google by typing in the following search terms: Chuck Cushman, Charles Cushman, Charles S. ushman, American Land Rights Association, National Inholders
Association and League of Private Property Voters.
*Social Networking Update: * The American Land Rights Association has a Page on Facebook. Please be sure to hit the Like button. Also Executive Director Chuck Cushman is on Facebook.com.
You can also find American Land Rights Association and Chuck Cushman on LinkedIn.com. We are especially
active on LinkedIn.com so send an nvitation to connect and sign up.
American Land Rights is on Twitter as AmLandrights. Chuck Cushman is also on Twitter under ccushman98604
To unsubscribe please send an email with “Unsubscribe” in the
Subject Line to ALRA@pacifier.com.
Please forward this urgent message widely.
“Potential Indirect Economic Impacts and Benefits Associated with Guidance Clarifying the Scope of Clean Water Act Jurisdiction.” April 27, 2011
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/upload/cwa_guidance_impacts_benefits.pdf
Related Posts:
Subject: CWA meeting recap and information
House Committee: EPA Overstepped Its Authority
Oregon Water Resource Commission approved the Integrated Water Resource Strategy
Advisory Vote Meeting in Coquille "NO Bandon Marsh Expansion"
The "NO BANDON MARSH" Signs are now Available
The Nature Conservancy--Ecotrust Study on Salmon Economics
2010 Coastal Wetlands Grants
OWEB Listening Session Information & Agenda
This Land is... the Government's
Why is Bandon Marsh Refuge Considering an Expanded Boundary?
White House Conference Sets Stage for New Era of Conservation
Judge says Oregon's river temperature standards need more scrutiny
Subject: Preserve the Waters of the US Act
( excerpt from information below )
-----The Preserve The Waters of the US Act (S-2245) would stop Washington overreach and block any further attempt to issue “guidance” to agency bureaucrats that says it is OK to regulate non-navigable water in people’s backyards and farms.
*Preserve the waters of the u.s. Act (S-2245)*
----------------------------------------
Land Rights Network
American Land Rights Association
PO Box 400 – Battle Ground, WA 98604
Phone: 360-687-3087 –
Fax: 360-687-2973
E-mail: alra@pacifier.com
Web Address: http://www.landrights.org
Legislative Office: 507 Seward Square SE – Washington, DC 20003
Block EPA & Corps Wetlands Jurisdiction Over Your Water & Land
*Do You Want The EPA &Corps In Your Backyard?*
Do you want the EPA & Corps jurisdiction over all forest roads?
If Not, Here’s Why You Need The *“Preserve The Waters Of The US Act” (S-2245)*
Below are action items to protect your water and your land as well as
roads on Federal land. But first, read this:
-----The EPA wants to lift the ban that prevents Washington, DC bureaucrats from regulating non-navigable
waters.
-----Lifting the navigable ban, passed by Congress to protect families, small businesses and farmers from federal
bureaucrats seizing their water or their land, would devastate economic and recreational activity as well as small communities across the U.S.
------You need to insist that Congress not remove the requirement set by Congress in the original Clean Water Act that said the EPA and Corps *can only regulate “navigable waters”*. The EPA and Corps want to eliminate the
word “navigable” and give the EPA and Corps jurisdiction over “all waters of the United States and all activities affecting all waters of the United States.”
-----If the ban is lifted, when it rains, your backyard or farm becomes a minefield of Washington red tape and taxes.
-----If you’re a farmer, when it rains, your backyard becomes a bonanza for Washington, DC bureaucrats to go on your property to force you from doing activities like building a swimming pool, installing a bird bath, running rainwater away from your home, irrigating your fields, installing stock watering ponds and many more.
-----If you’re a suburban homeowner, when it rains, the water in your backyard allows Washington, DC bureaucrats on your property to block you from doing basic things without a permit that can cost thousands of dollars and long delays causing great damage.
-----Congress blocked attempts by former Congressman James Oberstar (D-MN) and former Senator Russ Feingold (R-MN) from passing the Clean Water Restoration Act, which would have lifted the “navigable” ban. As with the EPA and Corp, Oberstar and Feingold tried to remove the word “navigable” from the Clean Water Act.
-----Despite Congress not changing the law, the Obama EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are attempting to remove this key protection for families, small business and farmers by issuing an internal guidance document to agency bureaucrats telling them it is now OK to regulate non-navigable waters on people’s property throughout the United
States. The Obama folks seem to care less about how they are ignoring two Supreme Court decisions.
-----The Preserve The Waters of the US Act (S-2245) would stop Washington overreach and block any further attempt to issue “guidance” to agency bureaucrats that says it is OK to regulate non-navigable water in people’s backyards and farms.
*Preserve the waters of the u.s. Act (S-2245)*
*Purpose:* To preserve existing rights and responsibilities with respect to waters of the U.S.
* **Background:* In May 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issued draft guidance on “Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act.”
This guidance document, which was sent in final form to OMB on February 21, 2012, significantly changes and expands what features are considered protected under the Clean Water Act and makes substantial additions, such as a first time inclusion of ditches and other water features that may flow, if at all, only after a heavy rainfall.
EPA and the Corps received over 230,000 comments from the public on their guidance, discussing the potential consequences of the draft guidance to governments, businesses, and landowners. They have not responded to the comments.
EPA and the Corps estimate that between 2 – 17% percent of non-jurisdictional determinations under current practice would be jurisdictional using the expanded tests of the new guidance.
This guidance has clear regulatory consequences and goes far beyond being simply advisory guidelines.
*The legislation (S-2245) prevents EPA and the Corps from using this /guidance/ to change legal responsibilities under the Clean Water Act.*
*-----Regulation through Guidance:* By issuing a guidance document as opposed to going through the rulemaking process, EPA and the Corps are bypassing the necessary public outreach required under the Administrative Procedures Act and failing to fully consider the legal, economic, and unforeseen consequences of their actions.
* *
*-----Applies to all Clean Water Act (CWA) Programs:* In addition to the Corps §404 dredge and fill permits, the guidance applies to all CWA programs including §303 water quality standards, §401 state water quality certifications, §311 Oil Pollution Act (including SPCC), and §402 program (including NPDES permits, pesticide general permit, and storm water).
*-----Increasing Permits: *EPA and the Corps affirm that this guidance will result in an increase in jurisdictional determinations that will result in an increased need for permits. In addition to more Corps §404 permits, State-permitting authorities will be faced with more NPDES permits and more entities will be subject to CWA requirements.
*-----Economic and Job Impacts:* Additional regulatory costs associated with changes in jurisdiction and increases in permits will erect bureaucratic barriers to economic growth, negatively impacting farms, small businesses, commercial development, road construction and energy production, to name a few.
*-----Impact on State on Local Governments:* Changes to the “waters of the U.S.” definition may have far-reaching effects and unintended consequences on a number of state and local programs. The guidance creates significant unfunded mandates and preempts state and local authority.
*-----Conflicts with Supreme Court Rulings:* The guidance uses an overly broad interpretation of the /Rapanos /decision. The effect is virtually all wet areas that connect in any way to navigable waters are jurisdictional. Both the plurality opinion and Kennedy rejected this assertion in /Rapanos/.
*-----Private Property Rights:* Expanding federal control over intrastate waters will substantially interfere with the ability of individual landowners to use their property.
*-----Action Items:*
*-----1. It’s critical to get some of the Senators below as co-sponsors of the Preserve The Waters Of The US Act (S 2245). *You need to call, fax and e-mail your Senator (s) listed below to urge them to cosponsor the Preserve The Waters Of The US Act.
-----2. For more information about S 2245 type in to Google the following search term: Preserve The Waters Of The US Act.
-----3. Please forward this message to at least 10 other people. Your whole list if possible.
The best thing to do is write a letter with your letterhead and either fax it or e-mail it to your Senator (s).
They don’t like attachments so call ahead to ask for the staff person who handles the Clean Water Act and Wetlands issues. Ask for his personal e-mail and send him your letter.
...................................
Thank you for your help.
Chuck Cushman, American Land Rights
ccushman@pacifier.com
Look Chuck Cushman and American Land Rights up on Google by typing in the following search terms: Chuck Cushman, Charles Cushman, Charles S. ushman, American Land Rights Association, National Inholders
Association and League of Private Property Voters.
*Social Networking Update: * The American Land Rights Association has a Page on Facebook. Please be sure to hit the Like button. Also Executive Director Chuck Cushman is on Facebook.com.
You can also find American Land Rights Association and Chuck Cushman on LinkedIn.com. We are especially
active on LinkedIn.com so send an nvitation to connect and sign up.
American Land Rights is on Twitter as AmLandrights. Chuck Cushman is also on Twitter under ccushman98604
To unsubscribe please send an email with “Unsubscribe” in the
Subject Line to ALRA@pacifier.com.
Please forward this urgent message widely.
“Potential Indirect Economic Impacts and Benefits Associated with Guidance Clarifying the Scope of Clean Water Act Jurisdiction.” April 27, 2011
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/upload/cwa_guidance_impacts_benefits.pdf
Related Posts:
Subject: CWA meeting recap and information
House Committee: EPA Overstepped Its Authority
Oregon Water Resource Commission approved the Integrated Water Resource Strategy
Advisory Vote Meeting in Coquille "NO Bandon Marsh Expansion"
The "NO BANDON MARSH" Signs are now Available
The Nature Conservancy--Ecotrust Study on Salmon Economics
2010 Coastal Wetlands Grants
OWEB Listening Session Information & Agenda
This Land is... the Government's
Why is Bandon Marsh Refuge Considering an Expanded Boundary?
White House Conference Sets Stage for New Era of Conservation
Judge says Oregon's river temperature standards need more scrutiny
RSS Feed