Scholten Leads 50 Representatives In Condemning Trump Administration Plan To Dramatically Reduce Wetland Protection

WASHINGTON, D.C - Congresswoman Hillary Scholten (D-MI-03) is leading a group of 50 Representatives in condemning a Trump Administration planto dramatically reduce Clean Water Act (CWA) protections across the country. A recent proposed rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) would allow the federal government to regulate wetlands only if they meet a two-part test: They would need to contain surface water throughout the "wet season," and they would need to be abutting and touching a river, stream or other waterbody that also flows throughout the wet season. This definition would drastically limit the waters that can be regulated by the federal government, worsening pollution nationwide.

The proposed rule's public comment period closes on January 5, 2025. The members are calling for the comment period to be extended in order to understand the significant harm this rule will have on everything from pollution exposure to water bills to summer vacations.

"We write to express our deep concerns about the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) recently proposed rule defining 'Waters of the United States' (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act (CWA)," wrote the members. "If finalized, this rule will threaten Americans' public health and stifle economic prosperity. Limiting protections over rivers, streams, and wetlands will increase the possibility of pollution exposure for families. In addition to making our families sicker, the proposal would boost the threat of flooding, further risking lives and damage to communities. The proposal further weakens states' ability to protect locally important waterbodies or shared drinking water sources from their upstream neighbors who might have competing priorities for the same resources. This rulemaking will have significant impacts on Americans' everyday lives-from their water bills to their summer vacations-and it is incumbent on the Agencies to provide sufficient time and opportunity for the public to delineate these impacts. We urge an extension of the comment period to 90 days to allow for robust public input."

The letter was also signed by Representatives:

The full text of the letter is available below:

Administrator Zeldin and Assistant Secretary Telle:

We write to express our deep concerns about the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) recently proposed rule defining "Waters of the United States" (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act (CWA). While we recognize that the Supreme Court of the United States significantly eroded CWA protections in its 2023 decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, this proposal uses the guise of Sackett to further restrict which water bodies are safeguarded from pollution and destruction under the CWA, while failing to provide for "clean water" or a "clear rule", as the Agencies have suggested. Our economy and families cannot afford heightened attacks on our most precious natural resource: water.

The EPA and USACE have provided only 45 days for public comment on the proposal. Given the severity of its impact, we request that the comment period for the proposed rule be extended for a period of at least 90 days. This revision of WOTUS would exacerbate the harms of the Sackett decision-which already removed federal protections over millions of acres of wetlands-by excluding unknown, further expanses of wetlands that do not meet the agencies' new and confusing wetness test. The proposal creates new, vague language that will exclude unquantified numbers of streams, including streams that are influenced by rainfall or snowmelt, as well as invites further limits on federal protections beyond those covered by Sackett-potentially excluding more rivers, streams, and wetlands essential to protect local waterbodies than at any time since the 1972 enactment of the CWA.

While the Agencies admit that they do not know the expanse of waters and wetlands that will lose federal protection under this proposal, including waterbodies already designated as impaired (polluted) by states, preliminary estimates suggest that this proposed rule will roll back federal protections from approximately tens of millions of acres of wetlands and millions of stream miles, including streams which provide nearly 55 percent of the water moving through our nation's river basins and many used in drinking water supplies. The new WOTUS definition in this rule is significant: the sheer scope of the proposed rule merits an extended public comment period to ensure that communities can appropriately provide insight on how it will impact their access to clean, safe, and reliable water.

If finalized, this rule will threaten Americans' public health and stifle economic prosperity. Limiting protections over rivers, streams, and wetlands will increase the possibility of pollution exposure for families. In addition to making our families sicker, the proposal would boost the threat of flooding, further risking lives and damage to communities. The proposal further weakens states' ability to protect locally important waterbodies or shared drinking water sources from their upstream neighbors who might have competing priorities for the same resources.

Despite these impacts, the proposed rule does not account for how increased water pollution will undercut local economies and increase prices for Americans. America's tourism and outdoor recreation sectors rely on clean water and pristine environments to support local jobs and bolster main streets throughout the nation. Unmitigated pollution in our waterways will increase clean-up costs for local water treatment facilities, which will ultimately be passed down to ratepayers, many of whom are already struggling to pay their utility bills. The EPA and USACE's proposed rule will have far-reaching implications on our nation's public health, economy, and environment. We believe this proposal is contrary to the goals and objectives of the Clean Water Act and uses the pretext of Sackett to reward polluters at the expense of a safe, reliable, and affordable clean water for everyday American families.

This rulemaking will have significant impacts on Americans' everyday lives-from their water bills to their summer vacations-and it is incumbent on the Agencies to provide sufficient time and opportunity for the public to delineate these impacts. We urge an extension of the comment period to 90 days to allow for robust public input. Thank you for your time and attention to this pressing matter.

Sincerely,

Hillary Scholten

1. Beyer, Donald
2. Brownley, Julia
3. Carson, André
4. Cohen, Steve
5. Courtney, Joe
6. Deluzio, Christopher
7. DeSaulnier, Mark
8. Dingell, Debbie
9. Evans, Dwight
10. Fields, Cleo
11. Foster, Bill
12. Foushee, Valerie
13. Friedman, Laura
14. Frost, Maxwell
15. Garamendi, John
16. García, Jesús
17. Garcia, Robert
18. Garcia, Sylvia
19. Goldman, Daniel
20. Grijalva, Adelita
21. Huffman, Jared
22. Jacobs, Sara
23. Jayapal, Pramila
24. Johnson, Henry
25. Kennedy, Timothy
26. Krishnamoorthi, Raja
27. Larsen, Rick
28. Larson, John
29. Latimer, George
30. Lieu, Ted
31. McCollum, Betty
32. McGarvey, Morgan
33. McGovern, James
34. Moore, Gwen
35. Moulton, Seth
36. Nadler, Jerrold
37. Norton, Eleanor
38. Pappas, Chris
39. Pou, Nellie
40. Quigley, Mike
41. Randall, Emily
42. Ryan, Patrick
43. Schakowsky, Janice
44. Schneider, Bradley
45. Scholten, Hillary
46. Simon, Lateefah
47. Stevens, Haley
48. Tlaib, Rashida
49. Tonko, Paul
50. Waters, Maxine
51. Wilson, Frederica

###