Arkansans laud water-rule injunction

WASHINGTON -- Arkansas lawmakers and businesses on Friday praised a North Dakota federal judge's decision to temporarily block a controversial clean water rule from taking effect in the state.

In June, Arkansas and a dozen other states filed a lawsuit seeking to halt the Clean Water rule, which defines which bodies of water the Environmental Protection Agency has jurisdiction over as part of the Clean Water Act. Also called the Waters of the United States rule, it defines when the agency regulates tributaries, wetlands, streams and "other waters," most of which states had previously regulated.

U.S. District Judge Ralph Erickson said in his order Thursday that the states and other parties that brought the lawsuit "have demonstrated that they will face irreparable harm" if the rule wasn't blocked before going into effect Friday.

Erickson also wrote in the order that "the rule will irreparably diminish the states' power over their waters." He called the Obama administration's interpretation of its authority under the Clean Water Act "exceptionally expansive."

He wrote that the states are likely to succeed when their underlying lawsuit against the rule is decided. States have brought at least 10 other lawsuits in federal court challenging the rule, but other judges declined to delay the rule.

The order only blocks the rule from taking effect in the 13 states involved in the lawsuit. The changes became official in the other states Friday, and the agency said in a statement that it plans to move forward. Until a court says otherwise, Arkansas and the 12 states that sued will continue to be regulated under the previous rule.

State Attorney General Leslie Rutledge said the injunction is a victory for Arkansas.

"At the very least, until these facts can be fully litigated in court, it is important that this damaging rule not harm Arkansas's farmers and ranchers," the Republican said in a statement.

Supporters say the rule will protect the nation's drinking water and help wildlife. Opponents -- largely from agricultural states -- say it gives the federal government too much control over private property.

Opponents and proponents of the rule will be watching how it affects the 37 states where the rule is now in place, including every state touching Arkansas except Missouri.

The new Clean Water rule won't mean "immediate, tangible change," EPA spokesman Monica Lee said. "But under the new rule these citizens gain the benefits of clear protection for streams and wetlands."

Government agencies now have a better idea of what water the EPA has authority over, Lee said, and that means there should be fewer situations when it's hard to determine which agency regulates it.

Arkansas Farm Bureau spokesman Steve Eddington said the "temporary reprieve" means unaffected states can see if there is extra paperwork or if permits and projects are delayed by the new rule, as many landowners fear.

"This may be the great case study that we've been looking for," Eddington said. "I guess we're actually going to have an opportunity to see how are things different in 37 states where it applies and in 13 states where it doesn't."

Farmers and business owners are anxious because they don't know exactly how the new rule would affect them, he said.

"Any time you take something out of local or state jurisdiction and transfer it to a national entity, there's going to be some concern ... not because they know what it's going to entail, but because they don't," Eddington said.

Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce President Randy Zook said he hopes the stay indicates the court will rule with the states.

"We're delighted," Zook said. "We're hopeful that this will result in the rule being pulled down."

Arkansas Wildlife Federation outreach director Steve Filipek said allegations that the rule will harm farmers and other landowners are "baloney." The new rule upholds existing agricultural exemptions, he said.

"You've got to wonder what in the world [critics] are thinking about because, frankly, there are already exclusions for agriculture and things like that and it's not going to affect farmers and other landowners the way that they are saying it's going to," Filipek said. "It's a lot of misinformation."

Duck hunting, fishing and water recreation across the state benefit from greater monitoring, he said.

"We don't need to be keeping protection from our wetlands and our small streams, because they are the ones that filter water out for us and improve our water quality, and these smaller streams are what make up our larger stream systems," he said.

On Friday, the six members of Arkansas' congressional delegation, all Republicans, released statements praising the delay.

"Thankfully, Judge Erickson recognized that this mandate goes well beyond the scope of the Clean Water Act," U.S. Sen. John Boozman of Rogers said.

U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton of Dardanelle said, "This rule brings unprecedented new regulations that will allow the EPA to dictate everything from when Arkansas farmers can plant, to how often they can run a tractor on their farm."

And U.S. Rep. Steve Womack of Rogers called the judge's ruling "the first of many dominoes that will fall throughout the process," pointing to House legislation to stop the rule.

The delay is hopefully a sign of "the beginning of the end for President Obama's overreaching policies that have negatively impacted Arkansas and the United States these last six and a half years," U.S. Rep. Bruce Westerman of Hot Springs said.

The injunction "comes just in time for states like ours who have fought back against this type of federal overreach, but we must continue to monitor the situation closely as the rule is implemented in other states," U.S. Rep. Rick Crawford of Jonesboro said.

U.S. Rep. French Hill of Little Rock said the stay is the first step "in stopping this regulatory overreach from causing major economic harm to farmers and ranchers in Arkansas and across America."

Metro on 08/29/2015

Upcoming Events