Posted June 30, 2014
Sixteen
states have filed lawsuits against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), contesting a rule that expands the definition of bodies of water subject
to federal pollution controls, according to a Reuters article available here.
Feedstuffs also published an article available here
and Brownfield Ag News here.
The
actions are a coordinated challenge to an EPA
rule issued on May 27 that defines the jurisdiction of the EPA and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers over rivers, streams, lakes or marshes, which was meant
to clarify the waters protected by the anti-pollution provisions of the 1972
Clean Water Act (CWA).
There are two
lawsuits, one was filed in the United States District Court for the District of North
Dakota and the other in Texas. The states joining the lawsuit are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado,
Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming, according to Feedstuffs.
In the
lawsuit, the states contend the new definition of "Waters of the United
States" violates provisions of the CWA, the National Environmental Policy
Act, and the United States Constitution. Missouri attorney general Chris Koster
said that without such a ruling, the law would take effect 60 days after the
rule was published.
The states
assert that the EPA's rule wrongly broadens federal authority by placing a
majority of water and land resources management in the hands of the federal
government.
Missouri
Attorney General Chris Koster, who joined the suit, says the official
definition by EPA “extends the agencies’ regulation far beyond what a
reasonable person considers to be a waterway,” according to Brownfield
Ag News,
Missouri
Farm Bureau President Blake Hurst says he’s pleased Missouri’s and other
Attorney’s General have taken this action, ”Which is a pretty good indication
of how upset people are about the rule. There is a great deal of hope out in
farm country that he’ll be successful with this court case.”
Congress
and the courts have repeatedly affirmed the states have primary responsibility
for the protection of intrastate waters and land management, according to
Koster. In the lawsuit, the states argue that the burdens created by the new
EPA requirements on waters and lands are harmful to the states and will
negatively affect farmers, developers and landowners, according to Feedstuffs.
The new
EPA rule would extend federal jurisdiction over tributaries that may be
natural, man-altered or man-made, including canals and ditches, said the
complaint filed in Texas, according to Reuters.
The rule
fails to account for duration of water flow, suggesting federal agencies can
assert jurisdiction over “dry ponds, ephemeral streams, intermittent channels
and even ditches,” the Texas lawsuit stated.
One case
is State of Texas v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in U.S. Southern
District of Texas, No. 15-cv-162. The other is North Dakota v. U.S. EPA, No.
15-59 in Federal District of North Dakota.
For more information on the Clean Water Act, please visit
the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.
