News Releases

Release: Alan Wilson Issues Statement On New EPA Regulation

(COLUMBIA, S.C.) Attorney General Alan Wilson joined with sixteen governors and attorneys general in asking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to withdraw their proposed “Waters of the U.S.” rule. On April 21, 2014, the EPA and Corps jointly released a proposed rule…

(COLUMBIA, S.C.) Attorney General Alan Wilson joined with sixteen governors and attorneys general in asking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to withdraw their proposed “Waters of the U.S.” rule.

On April 21, 2014, the EPA and Corps jointly released a proposed rule called Definition of Waters of the U.S. Under the Clean Water Act. It would greatly expand the definition of waters that fall under federal jurisdiction. Under the proposal, roadside ditches, small creeks, farm ponds, flood control channels, drainage conveyances and storm water systems would be subject to federal regulation. That, in turn, would impose new hardships on county governments, farmers, developers and small businesses.

Attorney General Wilson joined fellow attorneys general in Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota and West Virginia, along with South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and the governors of Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, and North Carolina, in a joint letter formally requesting that the proposal be scrapped.

Wilson said, “If the ‘Waters of the U.S.’ rule is allowed to take effect, it could have a catastrophic impact on South Carolina’s economy. Farmers would suddenly be burdened by excessive red tape. County governments would be straddled by costly regulations. These onerous regulations would treat a simple drainage ditch the same as ‘navigable water’ such as the Mississippi River. These proposed policies are simply bad for all South Carolinians.”

A copy of the letter to the EPA and Corps is available here.

(Editor’s Note: The above communication does not necessarily reflect the editorial position of To submit your letter, news release, email blast, media advisory or issues statement for publication, click here).

Related posts


New Center To Help Victims of Abuse, Domestic Violence And Sexual Assault Opens In Colleton County

More News

SCDP Issues Statement On Ramon Schwartz

More News

Jeff Duncan: Senate Correct To Cancel Recess



really? October 16, 2014 at 3:46 pm

So, we are supposed to believe this is a devastating rule yet only 16 states oppose it?

Bible Thumper October 16, 2014 at 9:34 pm

So far!

Smirks October 17, 2014 at 10:09 am

How many of them are red?


nitrat October 17, 2014 at 10:27 am

More taxpayer subsidized lawsuits from the party of tort reform and make-the-losing-side-pay-all-court costs to make a political gesture…against a clean water supply.
It’s like they don’t get that the potentially poisonous ditch water, etc. percolates into the water table and gets spread into people’s wells and city water supplies. THAT’S why the people in Nebraska don’t want Keystone XL running over the Oglala Aquifer.
It really is the Stupid Party and it gets more stupid by the hour.

The Colonel October 17, 2014 at 10:43 am

Uhhhh, yeah, about what the “people of Nebraska want” – seems they actually support Keystone overwhelmingly:

nitrat October 17, 2014 at 11:50 am
Scratch that ‘Watchdog’ and you might just find yet another Koch money laundering operation.
If Keystone XL is so great, why don’t the Canadians want to run it through their countryside to the Pacific? After all, their product is headed TO China, not the US.

The Colonel October 17, 2014 at 12:04 pm

Okay – find “the evil Koch brother” behind this poll:

You wouldn’t have have 80% of the Nebraska State House supporting the pipeline, even with Koch money, if it meant the legislators couldn’t get re-elected.

Funny thing about oil, it tends to go where the money is and no-one would build a pipeline to the US gulf coast if they planned to ship anything to the Far East.

The Colonel October 17, 2014 at 12:35 pm
Bible Thumper October 16, 2014 at 9:34 pm

So far!

The Colonel October 17, 2014 at 10:41 am

The proposed language “comment period” doesn’t close until 14 November. The language was published in the Federal Register back in April – most thoughtful people will take a month or three to read the language of proposed changes and examine what it will really do before running around with their hair on fire.

hum_dinger October 16, 2014 at 4:01 pm

So this is publicity stunt week?

First templeton defrauding innocent hospitals and wasting staff time, and now Mr. Wilson taking on the EPA?


There has been a long standing argument as to what “Waters of the US” mean – plenty of court cases have resulted in a stalemate and a fiasco for the Corps to have to go to every single wetland and make a determination to see if its jurisdictional (aka – water of the US).

The proposal is simply to eliminate the Corps from having to investigate every single wetland.

By protecting headwaters (Ms Templeton – are you listening?) city dwellers get cleaner water. This saves them money and prevents expensive upgrades on water treatment. It also helps to prevent another Dan river disaster (

Mr Wilson is pounding the drums in a pure political move that runs foul of actual science. I guess we just chalk this up to being more election year rhetoric
Without clean water, South Carolina might as well not exist.

The proposed changes exempt farm ponds that ” are built on dry land, as well as all ditches that do not have the features of tributaries or are explicitly excluded under the proposed rule, all prior converted croplands, and tile drainage systems – are not protected under the CWA. ”

Nice try at scare tactics Mr. Wilson…but you should have maybe mentioned “ebola” or “nuclear” to make your claims more scary to the South Carolina public.

You lie October 16, 2014 at 4:23 pm

Anything Alan Wilson and/or Nikki Haley supports is complete and utter bullshit. That is all.

Limbaughsaphatkhunt October 16, 2014 at 8:32 pm

Translation…big polluters and livestock producers want to keep dumping PCBs and hog shit/piss into our waterways free of charge.

No better place to do it than in S.C. “It’s a great day….”

Bible Thumper October 16, 2014 at 10:14 pm

This an attempt by EPA to regulate where Congress gave them no authority. The 1972 Clean Water Act gives the EPA or The Corps of Engineers (depending on the pollutant) the right to issue permits for any discharge that would end up in “Navigable waters”. This can include eroded soil.
Roadside ditches are not “Navigable waters” the states have the power and do regulate such discharges.
If the Federal government wishes the EPA or Corps to regulate discharges into ditches, then Congress can pass legislation granting that authority.
If you can get in a boat and float down stream, then it is navigable. That is following the law as Congress passed it.
By allowing this new rule by the EPA, they are essentially writing the law.

hum_dinger October 16, 2014 at 10:58 pm

EPA is eliminating ambiguity.
Read the epa guidelines and research case law.
“waters of the US” was undefined. This change is simply to define that term.
While you are educating yourself, read up on a few disasters that have happened around the country because many corporate interests don’t give a crap about your need for clean water – in many instances, corporate interests were putting hazardous waste on the riverbanks upstream from major population centers.
Then go study the PCB discharge problem in South Carolina where farmers were duped by the waste industry, spreading PCB laced sludge on their farm fields, once again, near creeks and streams where people fish.

Bible Thumper October 16, 2014 at 11:21 pm

If the CWA is inadequate, the law can be changed by elected officials. The Law refers to navigable waters.
The end does not justify the means.

hum_dinger October 17, 2014 at 10:51 am

Funny – have you seen anything useful come out of the federal government lately? They cant agree if water is wet let alone what “waters of US” might mean.

Supreme court has done the best they can, but case law required “case-by-case” assessment – which is a complete waste of time, no matter what side of this issue you are on.

This leaves the government agency – namely the EPA – to fend for themselves to eliminate ambiguity.

And yes, when we finally get a functioning government (I highly recommend firing any incumbent in US House), maybe they can define it then.

Nice try bro, but no, your argument fails yet again.

Smirks October 17, 2014 at 10:12 am

read up on a few disasters that have happened around the country because many corporate interests don’t give a crap about your need for clean water

Dude, that’s Republican taboo. Just look at Keystone XL, if you bring up anything about spills poisoning groundwater they’re trained to immediately respond “BUT MUH JERBS!” If they stop to ponder that an entity that is tasked with representing the people just might have a tiny bit more vested interest in protecting us than an entity that is tasked with reaping maximum profits, they’re unpatriotic, socialist traitors who want America to fail.

nitrat October 16, 2014 at 10:34 pm

ALEC sent an email and they all jumped to attention.
Clean water be damned!

FastEddy23 October 16, 2014 at 11:40 pm

EPA + Army Corp = Exactly what the UN / Agenda 21 prescribes. The seizure of all Wet real estate is, of course, UnConstitutional … But the Feds know that and that’s why they are doing this with environmental rules changes … and because they can under this administration’s anti-private property efforts.

I say: Clean and lubricate your Second Amendment Right.

Beartrkkr October 17, 2014 at 12:17 am

Yet Kim Murphy et al tried to claim filling a dry ditch to expand Chapin HS was the same as polluting our nation’s water supply. Interesting how this wetland stuff is twisted to fit an agenda.

The Colonel October 17, 2014 at 12:06 pm

Shhh, don’t poke the envrionazis

Wedontneednostinkingwater October 17, 2014 at 9:52 am

You think it’s a coincidence that these seventeen states have the lowest literacy rates in the country? Come to think if it, has anyone ever actually witnessed Alan Wilson read anything?

nitrat October 17, 2014 at 10:32 am

It never ceases to boggle my mind that the party that says it cares so much about the debt on their grandchildren (which came from starting wars and cutting taxes on the rich at the same time instead of instituting a war tax) does not give a rat’s patooty if those grandchildren have a drop of non-poisonous liquid to drink and keep them alive.

The Colonel October 17, 2014 at 10:35 am

An excellent review of the proposed changes entitled “If It’s Wet, The EPA Wants To Regulate It”.

This is a typical overreach by an out of control government. Congress will complain, EPA and COE will back off a little – but they’ll get the key provisions they wanted and Congress can claim they “dealt with evil nasty bureaucrats”

Manray October 17, 2014 at 11:18 am

More Republican politics masquerading as policy. I read the rule. It doesn’t say a simple drainage ditch is the same as navigable waters. Note the governors and attorneys general in opposition — all Republicans.

Read it at:

RogueElephant October 17, 2014 at 8:28 pm

Once again the Employment Prevention Administration is trying to take even more of our property rights from US. This Dept. should be cut out of about 90% of it’s funding. This should make it do what we need and stop the over regulation of our lives.


Leave a Comment