Author Topic: New Definitions  (Read 2068 times)

Tom Twosocks

  • Member
  • Sr. Member: 250 to 499 posts
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
New Definitions
« on: April 28, 2014, 07:39:10 PM »
We may be faced with some of these New Definitions being worked on

New "Waters of the United States" Definition Released

  Counties are strongly encouraged to submit written comments on potential impacts of the proposed regulation to the Federal Register *

On April 21, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jointly released a new proposed rule ? Definition of Waters of the U.S. Under the Clean Water Act ? that would amend the definition of "waters of the U.S." and potentially expand the range of waters that fall under federal jurisdiction. The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register, is open for public comment for 90 days, until July 21, 2014.
 
To read NACo's analysis of the proposed "waters of the U.S." definition, click here. This document includes a policy brief and a comparison chart showing existing and proposed regulatory language and its potential impacts on counties.

Why "Waters of the U.S." Regulation Matters to Counties

The proposed "waters of the U.S." regulation from EPA and the Corps could have significant impact on counties across the country, in the following ways:
Seeks to define waters under federal jurisdiction: The proposed rule would modify existing regulations, which have been in place for over 25 years, regarding which waters fall under federal jurisdiction through the Clean Water Act (CWA). The proposed modification aims to clarify issues raised in recent Supreme Court decisions that have created uncertainty over the scope of CWA jurisdiction and focuses on the interconnectivity of waters when determining which waters fall under federal jurisdiction. Because the proposed rule could expand the scope of CWA jurisdiction, counties could face significant impacts as more waters become federally protected and subject to new rules or standards.
 
Potentially increases the number of county-owned ditches under federal jurisdiction: The proposed rule would define ditches as "waters of the U.S." if they meet certain conditions. This means that more county-owned ditches would likely fall under federal oversight. In recent years, Section 404 permits have been required for ditch maintenance activities such as cleaning out vegetation and debris. Once a ditch is under federal jurisdiction, the Section 404 permit process can be extremely cumbersome, time-consuming and expensive, leaving counties vulnerable to citizen suits if the federal permit process is not streamlined.
 
Applies to all Clean Water Act programs, not just Section 404 permits: The proposed rule would apply not just to Section 404 permits, but is also relevant to other Clean Water Act programs, including stormwater, water reuse and green infrastructure. Such programs may become subject to increasingly complex and costly federal regulatory requirements under the proposed rule.
PLAN NOW TO RESPOND ON THE REGISTER THROUGH THE LINK ABOVE AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL, STATE, & NATIONAL ELECTED OFFICIALS. 
***************
* SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS

NACo is in the process of preparing suggested draft comments for counties. 

Written comments to EPA and Corps are due no later than July 21, 2014. If you submit comments, please share a copy with NACo?s Julie Ufner at jufner@naco.org or 202.942.4269.

 

ranc4

  • Guest
Re: New Definitions
« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2015, 06:57:44 PM »
ehh.  too bad when they complain of gold panners, and sluicers and even a dredge, digging up dirt they don't complain about swimmers in hordes of 30's, all out there kicking up the dirt and rocks.  then they would have some real people on their butts, amount and get shut down.  too bad they can find ways to complain about panning..

and the whole area gpaa has, will get pounded, until they come and ocmplain about you and shut that down. 

Id say they want everybody working some job, doing some business for some rich fake rich person, funding their get rich destroy the world oil scheme, that they dont care to blow up other countries over.  i dont know. 

i seen that under places to prospect that, lower coker creek above unicoia lakes, tellico river, johns creek, natty creek, tobe creek, are listed as off limits.  to some thing like this. 

but they aren't going to let you have anything.  disgusting sickening epa.  us waterways are the boundaries of the water around the usa for war definitions, defining, meaning.  this is what this is all about.  pollution the new war.  its this bad think about cigarettes.  same thing same deal. 

all they done was declared areas that are us waterways and not ocean for war means.  these same mechanisms now are being used for pollution another war scheme, like the war on drugs, and everything else i mentioned.  now its your local ditch.  its your local swimming hole, but they cant have bad image.  but you watch your gpaa property, will get pounded, then theyll shut you down, cause htey dont want you havign that.  i cant think of no other reason to say people cant go to tellico.  noones tearing it up.  its big.  or even johns creek.  i dont know what else is listed, cuase i only seen the list of places to prospect with some moved to another section of the forum.

and i cant think of why upper coker creek above unicoia lakes road is closed.

even if i got the definitions wrong and its closed for some other reason, these places besides this, i dont see where's left to go to.  pretty much everythign on wildcat road is shut down.  including all of tellico river
« Last Edit: July 23, 2015, 07:05:51 PM by ranc4 »