McCarthy began with an apology and said, “First, I want to tell you up front that I wish we had done a better job of rolling out our Clean Water Rule – from calling it WOTUS instead of the Clean Water Rule, to not being more crystal clear out of the gate about what we were and were not proposing, to not talking to all of you and others before we put out the interpretive rule.”
McCarthy said the science today is much better than when the initial Clean Water Act passed, and this science, along with Supreme Court rulings, has influenced the new proposed rule. She also said the comments gathered from over 400 meetings across the U.S. and the comments from over 1 million individuals were used to craft the revision. While the new rule is not final yet (as of March 16), McCarthy said they were preparing to send it to the Office of Management and Budget for review, which is the next step in the process.
McCarthy pointed out a few things this new rule would not do. “We’re not going to regulate puddles.” After realizing the definition of tributaries was “too vague and all-encompassing,” McCarthy said the new rule would narrow and clarify the definition. Based on the feedback received during the comment period, McCarthy said, “We heard concerns that the proposed rule would make erosional features in a farmer’s field subject to the Clean Water Act. Well, we never wanted that result, and we can fix that – we listened.”
Regarding the ditches, McCarthy said the only ditches EPA was interested in were natural or constructed streams that have the amount, duration and frequency of flow to look, act and function like a tributary.
McCarthy also said, “But one thing absolutely won’t change – and that’s the exclusions and exemptions for agriculture in the Clean Water Act. This rule doesn’t touch them. And I want to remind folks of what that means: Even in the limited number of cases where this rule will mean that a stream or wetland is clearly covered by the Clean Water Act, normal agricultural activities will continue with their current exemptions. So farmers and ranchers still won’t need an Army Corps permit to go about their business. It’s that simple, and we'll keep it that way.” FG
