CLEAN WATER ACT JURISDICTIONAL RULE

Emily W. Coyner, PGNational Stone, Sand & Gravel Association

703 526-1064ecoyner@nssga.org

April 8, 2014

Previously, Waters of the US=

Now-Waters of the US=

2014 Jurisdictional Rule

• Tributaries: no SN required; adds wetlands, ponds, lakes, ditches; can be broken by dams and be man-made

• Expands “adjacent” definition• Adds “case by case” consideration of virtually

every other type of “water”• Some ditches excluded, but tough to prove

2014 Jurisdictional Rule

• Goes FAR beyond court decisions• No frequency or amount of flow limits• Complicates/Slows/Increases Costs of CWA

404 Permitting• Also impacts other CWA programs– More NPDES testing?

• Economic study-very low estimates

Background• Rapanos/SWANCC Need for clarity/rule• Previous congressional failure to remove

“navigable” from Clean Water Act • April 2011 Draft Guidance• September 2013 Draft Rule to White House– Guidance withdrawn– Draft Connectivity Study released for review

• March 2014-Draft Rule released

EPA Draft Connectivity Report

• NSSGA commented November 6– Science should be done before rule–Connections in specific areas/seasons–Not quantifiable, so how regulated?

• House Science Committee oversight• Scientific Advisory Board review & scrutiny–April 28 & May 2 Meetings/June Final

Report

Proposed Rule Advocacy

• Meeting and educating members of Congress– Years worth of effort with other industries– Letters, Appropriations, Hearings

• Meetings with EPA– Explaining operations and permits

• White House meetings– Economic impacts– Slow infrastructure & energy priorities

Current Jurisdiction Proposed

2013 NSSGA White HouseMeetings

• 12/12: Specific aggregates industry examples – Dry washes and floodplains; desktop studies– Costs for mitigation very high

• 12/23: EPA’s Economic Study & “significance”– Deep recession data & existing “asks”– All or nothing costs and benefits– Misuse of data, studies outdated & used out of

context

Congressional Opposition

• Ramped up immediately after rule release• Budget Hearings:– EPA Administrator grilled over rule costs,

expansion and timing– Corps threatened with no funding for this rule

• “Biggest land grab in the history of the world”• “Profound economic impact” • Oversight, specific hearings

What’s Next

• Rule comments due 90 days from FR notice

• Hearings/Congressional Pressure–November: Senate Flip?

• SAB Panel Connectivity Review May-June–Significance/Quantification