Some states don't have strong state environmental agencies, said Deputy Administrator David Gaskin, of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) (water division). Nevada, however, has strong environmental protection laws and a very active and effective Division of Environmental Protection, he said.
A check of NDEP's website shows the division's programs and services deal with air quality protection, mining regulation and reclamation, solid waste management, recycling, water quality regulation, including drinking water protection and waste water regulation.
NDEP includes the State Environmental Commission and both function in conjunction with the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.
Because the state has taken such an active role in protecting its water, changes proposed to the "Waters of the U.S." rule that bring more of the state's waters under federal control are not particularly welcome, Gaskin said.
In June of this year, Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval was elected chairman of the Western Governor's Association and has been working with other states on a response to the EPA's proposed rule change.
"We're having challenges even getting other western states to work with us on this," said Gaskin. He added that some other states don't have strong state water quality programs and are fine with having the federal government be their regulator of water quality.
In addition to state and federal jurisdictional concerns, Gaskin said there is a lack of clarity when it comes to the meaning of the proposed definition change.
Nevada belongs to the Environmental Council of States, he pointed out. That council appealed for guidance and legal opinion from the American College of Environmental Lawyers as to the meaning and limitations of EPA's proposed guidance and rule making regarding 'Waters of the U.S.'. Gaskin said the requested help didn't come because the environmental lawyers weren't able to agree the meaning or limitations of the proposed rule.
Although any local government, private individual or organization has been given the opportunity to send in comments on the proposed rule change, Gaskin said, "It's difficult to do when no one really understands the proposed rule or how it will be applied."
"Comments often amount to expressed fears over what the EPA may do with the new regulatory authority," Gaskin said. "People do fear it. EPA has not worked well with the states; their track record is not good. If EPA has jurisdiction over all the water, anyone who wants to do anything will have to get a federal permit and the difficulty of trying to get a federal permit as opposed to a state permit is much greater. We have a very effective state water quality program. It's just ignored. The EPA says if the state's water isn't protected by the federal Clean Water Act, it's unprotected."
[[In-content Ad]]
