In 2015 the Obama administration published a new definition of “Waters of the United States (WOTUS).” In February 2019, the Trump administration proposes changes to that definition. See Federal Register Vol 84, No 31. The public has until April 15, 2019 to comment on the changes to the proposed definition of WOTUS.
Trump’s proposed rule change first repeals the Obama changes and then redefines the WOTUS, by omitting the nexus theory*, redefining navigable waters and adding “a typical year” and “upland” definitions. See comparison.
In my mind all water is interconnected. So why define it at all. Every impact is significant whether the waters are navigable or not. I believe the emphasis instead should be on how to determine jurisdictional authority and who will keep our water the safest.
*Nexus theory “includes two parts. First, there must be a connection to a downstream waters of the US. Second, the area in question must have an effect on the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable water.” (SwampSchool)
SUBMIT COMMENTS
To submit comments regarding these proposed changes, use one or all of the methods below. Be sure to identify Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OW–2018–0149 as the subject:
•Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/ (preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
•Email: OW-Docket@epa.gov. Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– 2018–0149 in the subject line of the message. Paste Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– 2018–0149 into the search box.
•Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Office of Water Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– 2018–0149 in the subject line of the letter.
And don’t forget to let your congressmen know how you feel. Go to congress and don’t forget to identify Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OW–2018–0149 as the subject .
Got to admit the “navigable waters” definition has problems. On my land there are stream beds that don’t have navigable waters all the time, or sometimes for years.
Makes for ripe opportunities for legal wrangling.
Hi! Jim — yes, it certainly does!
I guess mud flats and seeps or springs that at best lead to a pond or go into the street do not count. I remember a term called intermittent lentic wetlands. I had some holes dug in this area of clay/shale, that functioned as water holes. I guess where the Amerindian village was. This area was where the fiercest fighting was.
It is a small piece of land between a historic dump and my father-in-law’s seventies landfill. The soil type is wrong too. Astonishingly I saw sphagnum moss on the main access road going up into the landfill right near the road. A clear stream comes out of a spring in the middle of the dump. Landfill seeps are abused springs.
They added six or so acres to the landfill for the second dump; some of it the highest point in Hocking County. The rest was next to the road and around the oil well. I walked up to the knob, what is left of the former Blueberry Hill and saw a rock pool fed by rainwater, which I would have liked to keep. It was considered landfill…wetland musings.
Thanks for sharing your wetland musings, Cindy. I hope we’re doing a better job of locating our landfills these days.
I had to look up lentic wetlands. ‘Found a great little explanation on-line. According to Wikipedia, lentic ecosystems refer to relatively still or standing water.
Thought you might like to read one letter sent regarding this legislation from the a multi-group of science socitities provided by ESA. See https://www.esa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019_4_10-Science-Societies-WOTUS-Letter-Final.pdf In a nutshell, it states “The proposed rule fails the fundamental test of being functional, and promises to leave the citizens, communities and businesses of the United States with diminished ecosystem services.”