Definitions in the Clean Water Act could halt future development and burden property owners with additional permits and regulations.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which collaborated on the proposal, argue the changes will bring needed clarity to the Clean Water Act’s definition of streams and wetlands.
The organizations published the proposal April 21, intending to accept public comments through July 21, but an influx of concern prompted the organizations to extend the public comment period through October.
Many — like Tyler Newman, senior governmental affairs director for Business Alliance for a Sound Economy (BASE) — see the change as the biggest expansion of EPA jurisdiction since the Clean Water Act was implemented in 1972.
Newman leads an effort by BASE to educate local stakeholders about the proposal and its potential consequences.
“Our role has been one of education, helping people understand the potential rules, the impacts, and allowing people to comment on the rules before they potentially go into effect in October,” Newman said during a July 18 phone interview.
Only navigable waters and some supporting waters are included in the Clean Water Act’s current jurisdiction. Intended to prevent contamination to nationally protected waters, adjacent and neighboring areas could be added to the act’s jurisdiction.
“It’s not just wetlands and waters, things like Banks Channel that are very obviously waters of the United States. Expansion of the rule gets into areas that are near or draining to those, areas that you and I would consider dry,” Newman said. “Dry, sandy areas that have pine trees on them, under the analysis we have seen, would be considered wetlands under the new rules.”
Nick Silivanch, vice president of retail leasing and acquisition for Sun Coast Partners, is worried that most of the remaining vacant and undeveloped property he and other commercial real estate professionals deal with daily would be determined off-limits and devalued under the proposed rule changes.
“We have properties that some families have held for a long time, properties that have traded hands and have been land-banked for future development of residential or commercial properties. … Most of that would be voided from having development occur on it because of a couple small areas of wetland that would be considered a nexus point with the way water flows through fine, sandy soil,” Silivanch said during a July 18 phone interview.
Silivanch said halted development could affect banks and lending limits plus county tax revenue through slashed property value. He said he is encouraging other leaders in the business community to alert local officials about the potential consequences.
The Wilmington Regional Association of Realtors has also led a call to action to express concern to local officials. President Jody Wainio said the updated rule would affect all property owners, not just commercial developers and landowners.
The rule could affect property owners by requiring costly, time-consuming federal permits for homeowners who need to cut down a tree on their property if the land qualified as a protected area under the expanded definitions.
Of the Realtors association’s action on the proposed change, Wainio said, “It’s really about protecting property rights for all property owners.”
Public comments will be accepted through the EPA website through Oct. 21.
email [email protected]
