GREEN FIELDS

Lawmaker challenges Branstad, says EPA letter written 'in private'

Donnelle Eller
deller@dmreg.com

An Iowa lawmaker is challenging whether the governor received adequate input from legislative leaders and Iowans working for improved water quality before sending a letter to the U.S. government on a proposed rule designed to clarify which waterways fall under federal oversight.

Green fields.

Rep. Chuck Isenhart, D-Dubuque, said a letter Gov. Terry Branstad and other state leaders sent this month to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on a rule that's supposed to clarify the waterways that require federal protection was "developed in private" and fails to represent the views of state lawmakers.

In the letter, Branstad said seven state agencies developed the comments "following comprehensive stakeholder input."

But Isenhart said that Branstad has been holding private meetings on the issue since April 1 -- "three weeks before the draft rule was released." Neither lawmakers nor Iowans volunteering on water quality boards were invited to attend, he wrote in a letter to the EPA.

"Neither the governor nor any of his state agency directors consulted members of the Legislature regarding Iowa's response to the proposed rule or the letter he submitted," Isenhart wrote. "The letter does not represent the views of the Iowa General Assembly.

"Likewise, neither the governor nor any of his departmental directors engaged the state's Watershed Planning Advisory Council, established by the Legislature as the mechanism to engage a broad-based representation of non-governmental organizations in state water policy," wrote Isenhart, a ranking member on the House Environmental Protection Committee and a liaison to the watershed advisory council.

Jimmy Centers, a Branstad spokesman, said a "broad group of affected parties" talked with state agency leaders over several months.

For example, a meeting organized by a coalition of agriculture, business and government officials about the proposed rule in September included members of the Watershed Planning Advisory Council, he said. The list of attendees that Centers provided, however, indicate those council members attending were industry representatives.

Isenhart said Branstad's letter "offers -- at best -- an incomplete picture of the views of relevant state government entities and appears not to be informed at all by the views of organizations which embrace clean water as a primary mission," he said.

"Personally, I have some of the same questions about the rule as those expressed in the governor's letter. But I don't share the letter's assumptions or conclusions, much less its negative political tone," Isenhart said.

Branstad's letter to the EPA on the Waters of the U.S. rule said that the "overriding concern of a diverse group of impacted stakeholders, including state leaders, is that the proposed rule will impose significant barriers to the advancement of innovative, state- and local-driven conservation and environmental practices that would actually advance our common goal of water quality."

As an example, the letter said, "too many Iowa farmers would be forced to gain federal permits to advance water quality infrastructure projects, which would discourage agricultural producers from undertaking the very projects that would improve water quality throughout the State. Small towns, cities and private sector entities, most with limited resources, would face similar challenges."

"Because the proposed rule is fatally flawed, we request that it be withdrawn and that future rulemaking be appropriately coordinated with States and relevant stakeholders. We agree that clean water requires good, clear, well-designed regulations – unfortunately, the ones currently being proposed are not."

The letter is also signed by Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds, Bill Northey, Iowa's secretary of agriculture, state agency leaders Debi Durham, Chuck Gipp, Paul Trombino and Mark Schouten, and Elizabeth Jacobs, chairwoman of the Iowa Utilities Board.

The Iowa Farm Bureau Federation and other ag groups have opposed the proposed EPA rule, saying it would extend the federal agency's authority, giving it oversight of farm field ditches, ponds and gullies created after a heavy rain.

The rule seeks to clarify waters upstream that contribute to waters that are under federal protection.

The agency has repeatedly said that the rule does not expand its authority and that all normal farming practices are still exempted under the proposal. "The bottom line is — if you didn't need a permit before this proposed rule, you likely won't need one when it's finalized," Administrator Gina McCarthy has said in defense of the rule.

Wally Taylor of Cedar Rapids, a lawyer for the Iowa chapter of the Sierra Club, said the letter from the governor and agency leaders "continue the effort by Big Ag and its supporters to misconstrue the proposed rule."

Isenhart said state leaders must go "back to the drawing board to come up with better feedback for the EPA."

"We shouldn't try to slip a fast one past Iowans or shirk our duties just because we're in the middle of a heated election campaign," he said.

The extended deadline for public comment on the rule is Nov. 14.