Myths and Facts About The Clean Water Restoration Act

On June 5, 2007, the U.S. EPA briefed environmental organizations on a new "Guidance" to its staff and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on how to interpret Clean Water Act protections in light of two U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The "Guidance" is final despite a six month public comment period being established.

Regrettably, this "Guidance" will continue the Bush Administration's policy of weakening protections provided by the Clean Water Act, and will make it more difficult for both federal and state agencies to protect huge areas of the nation's waters. Passage of the Clean Water Restoration Act^*, H.R. 2421, is more important than ever to restore the full protections originally intended by Congress.

Here's why the new "Guidance" is off-track:

• Although the Supreme Court has not struck down existing agency regulations that protect tributaries, creeks and rivers, the Guidance will effectively eliminate protections for some tributary streams, lakes, wetlands and other water resources.
• The "Guidance" will leave many valuable waters unprotected because it does not instruct field staff to fully protect the nation's surface water resources. Consequently, it will leave important questions unanswered about whether and when water resources can be protected, relying largely on case-by-case determinations, which will result in further litigation, administrative delays and confusion among regulated industries and the public.
• There is no analysis of what the impacts of the "Guidance" will be in waterways lost when it is implemented, and how this will affect the nation's water quality.

Agency bureaucrats should not be allowed to weaken the Clean Water Act. The only way to prevent that is by passing the Clean Water Restoration Act to assure protection of all of the nation's waters.

^*Although this legislation was formerly called the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act or CWARA, the 2007 bill is known as the Clean Water Restoration Act or CWRA.