WASHINGTON —It’s a story almost as old as alcohol itself. A fight starts about one thing and, once beer gets involved, things escalate quickly. In this case, the underlying issue is a proposal by the Obama administration to expand the authority of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers under the landmark Clean Water Act of 1972.
Although the process sounds arcane — more suited to a pub quiz than a barstool conversation — brewers and farmers are paying close attention because the issue could affect beer price and quality.
Last spring, the two agencies put forward a plan that would guarantee their right to regulate waterways that don’t fall neatly under the Clean Water Act, such as “rain-dependent streams” or “wetlands near rivers.”
The goal is to ensure the cleanliness of drinking water, but the proposal has come under attack from farmers and other agricultural interests, who have criticized the plan as overly broad.
They worry that this new authority would force farmers to cut through more red tape when dealing with lands that fall under the agencies’ new oversight. One example cited by opponents is potential restrictions on fertilizer and pesticide use.
“This rule affects virtually everyone. It has as much to do with land-use and land-use planning as (it does) navigable waters,” said Dale Moore of the American Farm Bureau Federation.
A worry for beer drinkers, he added, is that new federal oversight could drive up the cost for farmers who grow crops critical to the brewing process, namely grains and hops.
“Those farmers will be impacted in some form or fashion,” he said.
But opposition to the plan is not universal in the beermaking world.
Several brewmasters — including New Belgium Brewing Company in Fort Collins — support the EPA’s new authority and have taken the position that better water means better beer.
“Without clean water, you can’t have great beer,” said Andrew Lemley, who handles government affairs for New Belgium.
Lemley appeared last summer before a U.S. House committee to talk about the water issue and noted that his company, which makes brands such as Fat Tire ale, is part of an alliance called “Brewers for Clean Water” that is tied to the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group.
“Our aim is to ensure a clean and abundant water supply for the future,” he said. “We do what we can to honor the environment in our own process, and that starts with standing up for healthy watersheds and sound environmental regulation.”
A spokesman for the EPA said a final decision on its authority is expected in the spring. No matter the outcome, it probably will not be the final word on the topic.
The EPA and Army Corps received nearly 800,000 comments this year in response to the proposal. Congress took notice as well.
In September, the House passed legislation meant to block the rule. Colorado’s delegation split its support along party lines, with Republicans in favor of blocking the measure.
The measure stalled in the Senate, but Republicans are set to take control of the upper chamber next year. Their resurgence increases the odds of Congress taking a firm stance against the rule.
Meanwhile, industry groups such as the Brewers Association are left trying to manage a fight within their ranks.
Spokesman Bart Watson said the group declined to take an official position on the matter partly because of a lack of consensus.
“I’ll add that many of our brewery members have taken formal positions on the rule,” Watson wrote in an e-mail. “But with 2,400 member breweries, we’re always trying to make sure any position is supported by a large majority of our members.”
Mark K. Matthews: 202-662-8907, mmatthews@ denverpost.com or twitter.com/mkmatthews
