Sure. Thank you.
It's hard to assess how a project impacts navigation when a lot of the lakes and rivers aren't being included in the act. As you know, the schedule focuses on a very small number of lakes and rivers. I just don't think that assessment is happening, because so many of the lakes and rivers are not under the purview of the act.
Related to the previous question and some of the points that have been raised, I think it's important to flag that with regard to the navigable waters protection program, one of their original goals was environmental protection. I'll read from the previous website, and this is a quote: “The Navigable Waters Protection Program...is responsible for the protection of the public right to navigation and the protection of the environment through the administration of the Navigable Waters Protection Act.” That language has been scaled back since the changes in 2012, but it does say that the program still considers the safety of navigation, access to waterways, recreational and traditional use of navigable waters, and environmental effects when reviewing a project for approval.
I just want to highlight that. People are talking about how this act doesn't have anything to do with environmental protection, but on the website it clearly did state that, and it still does. So if that's not the case, the language on that website needs to be changed, because that's the public's understanding right now.