 |
| Rep. Adrian Smith |
While Congress has been out of session, I have spent the last few weeks traveling Nebraska’s Third District meeting with constituents and listening to your thoughts, concerns, and ideas.
One of the issues I have heard most about is the Waters of the United States (WOTUS). This proposal would allow the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers to expand federal regulatory powers over waters of the U.S. under the Clean Water Act.
The word “navigable” was included in the Clean Water Act more than 80 times in order to limit the jurisdiction of the federal government on farms, ranches, man-made conveyances, and other local water jurisdictions. Attempts to alter this interpretation without Congressional approval are a clear overreach of statutory authority and clearly defy the intent of the law. Further, this change could severely harm Nebraska’s agriculture economy.
Common Sense Nebraska, a coalition of Nebraska organizations which have come together in response to the WOTUS proposal released a report this week detailing the many problems this rule would cause for our state. The report was compiled by former director of the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) Mike Linder and indicates the rule would increase costs and uncertainty for agriculture producers.
Linder’s analysis confirms the proposal would “impose a blanket jurisdictional determination over thousands of acres of private property” causing “unnecessary property restrictions and uncertainty as to what that actually means to a farmer or rancher.” This finding refutes the EPA’s claims the rule would not have much effect on farmers and ranchers.
As beneficiaries of clean water, Nebraska producers take numerous steps to protect the natural resources of our state. We all agree safeguards are necessary, but this proposed rule ignores safeguards already in place, and steps NDEQ has taken to work with producers to protect our water.
I have written the EPA and Army Corps to express my objections to this plan, and many Nebraskans are speaking out as well. The EPA recently announced it would extend the comment period until November 14, 2014. While this delay is a positive development, I question their motive of moving the deadline for comments on this economically disastrous rule until after the midterm elections.
I encourage all interested Nebraskans to continue making their voices heard on this rule at: http://www.regulations.gov. We have fought this overreach before, and we must continue to let the EPA and other agencies know where we stand.
One of the issues I have heard most about is the Waters of the United States (WOTUS). This proposal would allow the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers to expand federal regulatory powers over waters of the U.S. under the Clean Water Act.
The word “navigable” was included in the Clean Water Act more than 80 times in order to limit the jurisdiction of the federal government on farms, ranches, man-made conveyances, and other local water jurisdictions. Attempts to alter this interpretation without Congressional approval are a clear overreach of statutory authority and clearly defy the intent of the law. Further, this change could severely harm Nebraska’s agriculture economy.
Common Sense Nebraska, a coalition of Nebraska organizations which have come together in response to the WOTUS proposal released a report this week detailing the many problems this rule would cause for our state. The report was compiled by former director of the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) Mike Linder and indicates the rule would increase costs and uncertainty for agriculture producers.
Linder’s analysis confirms the proposal would “impose a blanket jurisdictional determination over thousands of acres of private property” causing “unnecessary property restrictions and uncertainty as to what that actually means to a farmer or rancher.” This finding refutes the EPA’s claims the rule would not have much effect on farmers and ranchers.
As beneficiaries of clean water, Nebraska producers take numerous steps to protect the natural resources of our state. We all agree safeguards are necessary, but this proposed rule ignores safeguards already in place, and steps NDEQ has taken to work with producers to protect our water.
I have written the EPA and Army Corps to express my objections to this plan, and many Nebraskans are speaking out as well. The EPA recently announced it would extend the comment period until November 14, 2014. While this delay is a positive development, I question their motive of moving the deadline for comments on this economically disastrous rule until after the midterm elections.
I encourage all interested Nebraskans to continue making their voices heard on this rule at: http://www.regulations.gov. We have fought this overreach before, and we must continue to let the EPA and other agencies know where we stand.
No comments:
Post a Comment