EPA, Corps request comments on ‘Waters of the U.S.’ rewrite

Error message
In order to filter by the "in queue" property, you need to add the Entityqueue: Queue relationship.-
County NewsNACo met with EPA and Army Corps on upcoming WOTUS rulemaking, substantive comments accepted until June 19EPA, Corps request comments on ‘Waters of the U.S.’ rewriteApril 28, 2017April 28, 2017, 6:30 pm
-
County News Article
EPA, Corps request comments on ‘Waters of the U.S.’ rewrite
NACo met with EPA and Army Corps on upcoming WOTUS rulemaking, substantive comments accepted until June 19
NACo and other national state and local government associations met with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regarding the agencies’ upcoming “Waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS) rulemaking. The formal consultation meeting resulted from President Trump’s Feb. 28 executive order (EO) on Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the ‘Waters of the United States’ Rule. The EO directs EPA and the Corps to revisit and rewrite the 2015 WOTUS rule.
Do More
The EPA and the Corps are accepting substantive comments from state and local governments until June 19. Please send written comments to EPA staff at CWAwotus@epa.gov. Please forward your responses to NACo staff at jufner@naco.org. View the consultation presentation here.
The EPA and the Corps briefed state and local governments on their proposed two-step process to withdraw and rewrite the rule. First, as part of the withdrawal effort, the agencies will move to reinstate pre-existing regulations and guidance that were in place prior to the 2015 WOTUS rule and currently used now due to the ongoing litigation with the 2015 rule.
Second, the agencies plan to develop a new WOTUS definition based on the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in Rapanos v. United States. Scalia’s plurality opinion stated that federal jurisdiction should only include waters with a relatively permanent flow.
During the meeting, EPA and the Corps provided a presentation that included several options under consideration, including how “relatively permanent” waters and wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” should be defined. For example, should “relatively permanent” waters include “seasonal streams” that flow three months a year? Likewise, should wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” through non-jurisdictional features be regulated?
WOTUS is a term used in the Clean Water Act to define which waters (and their tributaries) fall under federal or state jurisdiction. In 2015, the Obama Administration finalized a new definition of WOTUS, which was immediately challenged in the courts. Since the rule was originally proposed, NACo has expressed numerous concerns about the 2015 WOTUS rule’s impact on county-maintained ditches and other water infrastructure.
Background
The term “Waters of the U.S.” is derived from a law that was passed in 1899, the Rivers and Harbors Act, that had to do with interstate commerce. Any ship involved in interstate commerce on a “navigable water,” which, at the time, was a lake, river, ocean — was required to have a license for trading. The 1972 Clean Water Act first linked the term “navigable waters” with “waters of the U.S.” to define the scope of the CWA programs such as the Section 402 National Pollution Discharge Elimination Program (NPDES), Section 404 Dredge and Fill permit program, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and other water quality standards and state water quality certification programs.
In the past several decades, the term WOTUS has generally been fraught with controversy over where state jurisdiction ends and federal jurisdiction begins. In the realm of the CWA’s Section 404 permit program, the courts have generally said that “navigable waters” goes beyond traditionally navigable-in-fact waters. However, the courts also acknowledge there is a limit to jurisdiction.
In 2001, in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Corps had used the “Migratory Bird Rule”— wherever a migratory bird could land — to claim federal jurisdiction over an isolated wetland. In SWANCC, the Supreme Court ruled that the Corps exceeded its authority and infringed on states’ water and land rights.
In 2006, in Rapanos v. United States, the Corps was challenged over its intent to regulate isolated wetlands under the CWA Section 404 permit program. In a 4-1-4 split decision, the Court ruled that the Corps exceeded again exceeded its authority to regulate these isolated wetlands. Scalia’s plurality opinion states that only waters with a relatively permanent flow should be federally regulated. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s concurrent opinion stated that waters should be jurisdictional if the water has a “significant nexus” with a navigable water, either alone or with other similarly situated sites.
Since neither opinion was a majority opinion, it was unclear which opinion should be used in the field to assert jurisdiction, leading to further confusion over what waters are federally regulated under CWA.
In 2015, the EPA and the Corps finalized a new WOTUS rule based on Kennedy’s opinion. Almost immediately, more than 30 states and private parties filed suits in various district and appeals courts. While the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals claimed the case and placed a nationwide stay on the rule until it could hear the case, there are ongoing questions on whether the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals even has the authority to hear the case. This question is now ending before the U.S. Supreme Court which is expected to hear the this year and issue an opinion in 2018. The decision will strictly be on the judicial jurisdictional question and not on the basis of the 2015 rule.
NACo met with EPA and Army Corps on upcoming WOTUS rulemaking, substantive comments accepted until June 192017-04-28County News Article2023-04-11
NACo met with EPA and Army Corps on upcoming WOTUS rulemaking, substantive comments accepted until June 19
NACo and other national state and local government associations met with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regarding the agencies’ upcoming “Waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS) rulemaking. The formal consultation meeting resulted from President Trump’s Feb. 28 executive order (EO) on Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the ‘Waters of the United States’ Rule. The EO directs EPA and the Corps to revisit and rewrite the 2015 WOTUS rule.
Do More
The EPA and the Corps are accepting substantive comments from state and local governments until June 19. Please send written comments to EPA staff at CWAwotus@epa.gov. Please forward your responses to NACo staff at jufner@naco.org. View the consultation presentation here.
The EPA and the Corps briefed state and local governments on their proposed two-step process to withdraw and rewrite the rule. First, as part of the withdrawal effort, the agencies will move to reinstate pre-existing regulations and guidance that were in place prior to the 2015 WOTUS rule and currently used now due to the ongoing litigation with the 2015 rule.
Second, the agencies plan to develop a new WOTUS definition based on the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in Rapanos v. United States. Scalia’s plurality opinion stated that federal jurisdiction should only include waters with a relatively permanent flow.
During the meeting, EPA and the Corps provided a presentation that included several options under consideration, including how “relatively permanent” waters and wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” should be defined. For example, should “relatively permanent” waters include “seasonal streams” that flow three months a year? Likewise, should wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” through non-jurisdictional features be regulated?
WOTUS is a term used in the Clean Water Act to define which waters (and their tributaries) fall under federal or state jurisdiction. In 2015, the Obama Administration finalized a new definition of WOTUS, which was immediately challenged in the courts. Since the rule was originally proposed, NACo has expressed numerous concerns about the 2015 WOTUS rule’s impact on county-maintained ditches and other water infrastructure.
Background
The term “Waters of the U.S.” is derived from a law that was passed in 1899, the Rivers and Harbors Act, that had to do with interstate commerce. Any ship involved in interstate commerce on a “navigable water,” which, at the time, was a lake, river, ocean — was required to have a license for trading. The 1972 Clean Water Act first linked the term “navigable waters” with “waters of the U.S.” to define the scope of the CWA programs such as the Section 402 National Pollution Discharge Elimination Program (NPDES), Section 404 Dredge and Fill permit program, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and other water quality standards and state water quality certification programs.
In the past several decades, the term WOTUS has generally been fraught with controversy over where state jurisdiction ends and federal jurisdiction begins. In the realm of the CWA’s Section 404 permit program, the courts have generally said that “navigable waters” goes beyond traditionally navigable-in-fact waters. However, the courts also acknowledge there is a limit to jurisdiction.
In 2001, in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Corps had used the “Migratory Bird Rule”— wherever a migratory bird could land — to claim federal jurisdiction over an isolated wetland. In SWANCC, the Supreme Court ruled that the Corps exceeded its authority and infringed on states’ water and land rights.
In 2006, in Rapanos v. United States, the Corps was challenged over its intent to regulate isolated wetlands under the CWA Section 404 permit program. In a 4-1-4 split decision, the Court ruled that the Corps exceeded again exceeded its authority to regulate these isolated wetlands. Scalia’s plurality opinion states that only waters with a relatively permanent flow should be federally regulated. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s concurrent opinion stated that waters should be jurisdictional if the water has a “significant nexus” with a navigable water, either alone or with other similarly situated sites.
Since neither opinion was a majority opinion, it was unclear which opinion should be used in the field to assert jurisdiction, leading to further confusion over what waters are federally regulated under CWA.
In 2015, the EPA and the Corps finalized a new WOTUS rule based on Kennedy’s opinion. Almost immediately, more than 30 states and private parties filed suits in various district and appeals courts. While the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals claimed the case and placed a nationwide stay on the rule until it could hear the case, there are ongoing questions on whether the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals even has the authority to hear the case. This question is now ending before the U.S. Supreme Court which is expected to hear the this year and issue an opinion in 2018. The decision will strictly be on the judicial jurisdictional question and not on the basis of the 2015 rule.
Hero 1
-
Blog
U.S. Supreme Court issues decisions in cases impacting property tax forfeiture laws and definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS)
On May 25, the U.S. Supreme Court released its decisions in two major cases impacting county governments. -
Webinar
Crafted by Communities: A Framework for Economic Transition
May. 25, 2023 , 3:00 pm – 4:00 pmThis BRECC National Network session, entitled Crafted by Communities: A Framework for Economic Transition, will present three pillars for coal community revitalization and share resources from the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE). -
Blog
Lower Basin States strike agreement to preserve water supply in Colorado River Basin
On May 22, the state governments of Arizona, California and Nevada, in conjunction with the Biden Administration, announced a breakthrough deal that will protect the Colorado River’s water supply through 2026. -
Blog
EPA Announces New Funding for 17 Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Technical Assistance Centers
On April 13, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced $117 million in funding for 17 technical assistance centers across the country for communities with environmental justice (EJ) challenges. -
Blog
Pima County leans into innovation to enhance sustainability
This blog post is sponsored by NACo partner American Gas Association. Unlock the potential of wastewater facilities: Transform waste into clean, renewable energy and contribute to your county's sustainability goals. -
County News
Winter snows bring spring flows for Western counties
All winter and spring, it’s been looming on mountaintops throughout the West. Like a frozen volcano, above-average snowpack has been accumulating and threatening to overwhelm streams and rivers when the temperatures rise, and county officials have braced for what will eventually rush downhill. It’s deferred precipitation.
-
Webinar
Exploring Outdoor Recreation as a Component of Economic Diversification
July 27, 2023 , 3:00 pm – 4:00 pmJoin the BRECC National Network for a conversation on outdoor recreation as a viable component to build a robust, diverse local economy. Learn more about research trends linked to outdoor recreation economic development, small business ecosystems and resources that could support coal communities.07273:00 pm<p>Join the BRECC National Network for a conversation on outdoor recreation as a viable component to build a robust, diverse local economy.
-
Basic page
Environment, Energy & Land Use Steering Committee
Responsible for all matters pertaining to air, water, energy, and land use, including water resources/management, stormwater, pesticides, air quality standards, solid, hazardous, and nuclear waste handling, transport, and disposal, national energy policy, renewable/alternative energy, alternative fuel vehicles, energy facility siting, electricity utility restructuring, pipeline safety, oil spills, superfund/brownfields, eminent domain, land use, coastal management, oceans, parks and recreation.pagepagepage<p>Responsible for all matters pertaining to air, water, energy, and land use, including water resources/management, stormwater, pesticides, air quality standards, solid, hazardous, and nuclear waste handling, transport, and disposal,
-
Reports & Toolkits
Implementing Infrastructure Investments at the County Level: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (P.L. 117-58)
As intergovernmental partners, counties play a key role in ensuring the successful interpretation and implementation of the BILReports & Toolkitsdocument100710:00 amReports & Toolkits<table border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style="width:100%" summary="call-out transparent jump">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
Related Resources
-
Blog
U.S. Supreme Court issues decisions in cases impacting property tax forfeiture laws and definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS)
On May 25, the U.S. Supreme Court released its decisions in two major cases impacting county governments. -
Blog
Lower Basin States strike agreement to preserve water supply in Colorado River Basin
On May 22, the state governments of Arizona, California and Nevada, in conjunction with the Biden Administration, announced a breakthrough deal that will protect the Colorado River’s water supply through 2026. -
Blog
EPA Announces New Funding for 17 Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Technical Assistance Centers
On April 13, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced $117 million in funding for 17 technical assistance centers across the country for communities with environmental justice (EJ) challenges.
-
Press Release
National Association of Counties Responds to Congressional Challenge to WOTUS Rule
NACo today issued a statement in response to the U.S. House of Representatives passing a Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution of disapproval challenging the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule issued in December 2022. -
Reports & Toolkits
Legislative Analysis for Counties: The Inflation Reduction Act
The IRA offers counties the opportunity to pursue clean energy initiatives and reduce emissions through new competitive grant programs, local resiliency investments and clean energy tax credits. -
Policy Brief
Urge Congress and EPA to Consult with Counties on any Future Regulations on PFAS
Advocate for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal agencies to study the health and environmental impacts of PFAS compounds and to work closely with state and local governments throughout the rule-making process.
Related Events
-
27Jul2023Webinar
Exploring Outdoor Recreation as a Component of Economic Diversification
Jul. 27, 2023 , 3:00 pm – 4:00 pm
More From
-
Legislative Analysis for Counties: The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023
This analysis includes funding highlights for key programs impacting counties.
Learn More