Republicans author bill to further erode Clean Water Act, WOTUS

Throughout its history the US Army Corps of Engineers has had purview over water that flows into bodies that can support navigation and in 2014, through the US Environmental Protection Agency and the Clean Water Act, the Obama White House moved to identify more closely the sources of non-point pollution. Despite a judge's ruling EPA went forward with a new federal rule protecting small streams, tributaries and wetlands. 

Sackett v. EPA is in the Supreme Court of the United States today as a test of the authority of the agency to regulate wetland protection when 'significant nexus' or a scientific connection is established to downstream waters of the United States or WOTUS.

So, as a result of two years research the US Forest Service and taxpayers are buying a less poisonous ammonium phosphate-based compound from Perimeter Solutions. PHOS-CHEK LCE20-Fx is essentially a fertilizer mixed with a red dye for increased visibility from the air but because of its toxicity air tankers applying the retardant on wildfires must avoid waterways to prevent fish kills or harm to crustaceans and invertebrates.

The USFS and the other public land managers buy and apply millions of tons of chemicals every year including fire retardants so in 2022 the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics (FSEEE) sued the Service for pollution caused by the chemical dropped near streams endangering imperiled native species. So, twenty Earth haters in the House of Representatives and five in the Senate have introduced a bill intended to create an exemption to the Clean Water Act for federal, state, local, and tribal agencies to use retardants to fight wildfires. They have also requested an injunction to continue the use of retardants until the Forest Service receives a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The Forest Service and other federal agencies contend that such a permit is "not required for the use of fire retardant because the regulations specifically state that fire control is a 'non-point source silvicultural activity' and communications from EPA dating back to 1993 indicated a permit is not required."

In the past slurry bombers usually dropped two toxic PHOS-CHEK products on wildland fires. LC95A is a liquid concentrate and MVP100 is a powder mixed with water at tanker bases. 

Fact is: it’s far, far cheaper to bill the feds after a wildfire than it is to conduct fuel treatments. That’s because it's more expeditious to litigate forgiveness than to ask for permission. So, how is applying fertilizer that was developed by Monsanto in the 1960s then spraying another Bayer CropScience poison to control weeds on public lands after wildfires either conservative or sustainable? Isn't lobbyist capitalism just another reason to move the Forest Service from US Department of Agriculture into Interior? 

ip photo: dyed weed killer coats rocks near a waterway on the Black Hills National Forest.

“EPA could work with federal land management agencies—the Forest Service and agencies within the Department of the Interior—to strengthen federal coordination.” https://t.co/W1rx4hNVF6

— interested party (@larry_kurtz) March 13, 2023