Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Regulations in Relation to Small Businesses (view source)
Revision as of 18:01, 10 February 2016
, 18:01, 10 February 2016→EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act
Key Points:
[http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/09/waters_of_the_united_states_epa_s_proposed_update_to_the_clean_water_act.html Slate]
*The main concerns with redefining the "waters of the United States" to include wetlands and streams is that the EPA could force small business owners, specifically farmers, would face expensive permit costs if they wish to expand their facilities/business or clear vegetation.
*The EPA argues that the redefinition was necessary as before the language of the regulation was too vague, and a large proportion of the pollution is attributed to agricultural runoff (approximately 12,000,000 tons).
*Farmers, legislators, and small business owners are very skeptical of the redefinition and regulation, as they are frightened the EPA could vastly their operating costs, even operations as simple as watering their own crops
*The EPA argues that this is a deliberate misinterpretation of the rule to undermine their efforts to lower pollution (promise they are not trying to hike up costs for farmers/small business owners)
Possible solutions to this issue b/w small business and EPA:
*Clarify more specifically what would require a permit (if you promise you are not hiking up costs, then explicitly write what practices would require the purchase of permit)
*Create subsidies for farmers to cope with increased operating costs (if you are declaring their property, land of the United States, help them come up with ways to clear vegetation without polluting the streams/wetlands
*Law states "A Clean Water Act permit is only needed if a water is going to be polluted or destroyed." (what does this mean for farmers?)
*"Does not regulate most ditches and does not regulate groundwater, shallow subsurface flows, or tile drains. It does not make changes to current policies on irrigation or water transfers or apply to erosion in a field. The Clean Water Rule addresses the pollution and destruction of waterways – not land use or private property rights."
*Intent of law seems well-meaning, main ways to improve regulation would to increase cooperation/transparency/trust between EPA and farmers, so fears of misinterpretations of rhetoric are not misconstrue,
more clear/concise language when crafting the law, rather than lengthy pages of contingencies
===Complexity Costs Money===
