Members of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee got into the WOTUS debate this month as well, holding a May 19 hearing on legislation that would require EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to begin the rulemaking process again after engaging in additional discussions with stakeholder groups.
Introduced at the end of April, the “Federal Water Quality Protection Act” (S. 1140) would require EPA and the Army Corps to conduct additional consultation with state and local government officials over options for protecting water bodies before issuing a revised WOTUS proposal that specifically excludes isolated water bodies and water supply systems from coverage. Sponsored by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wy.), the bill currently has 30 cosponsors (including three Democrats) and could go to the Senate floor this summer.
EPW’s hearing featured what have become familiar arguments from lawmakers for and against the WOTUS proposal. Republican James Inhofe (R-Okla.) alleged EPA wrote the rule “behind closed doors” and bypassed opportunities for public input. Conversely, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) defended the WOTUS plan as necessary to protect upstream sources of drinking water from pollution.
Among the witnesses delivering testimony during the hearing was Mark Pifher of Colorado Springs Utilities, testifying on behalf of the National Water Resources Association. Pifher argued that EPA and the Corps failed to initiate timely consultations with state and local governments as the rule proposal was developed, and warned that the proposal could hinder future water infrastructure projects in the Mountain West “by unnecessarily erecting costly and time consuming permitting barriers that yield no significant water quality benefits.”