Latest news with #WOTUS
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
What is the waters rule and why should you care?
The final listening session focusing on a controversial water rule will be held Thursday in Salt Lake City to give Utah residents a chance to weigh in. Called the Waters of the United States, or WOTUS, the hotly contested issue has wrangled its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been batted around among various presidential administrations that have never been able to agree on its extent and reach. The EPA and the Department of the Army will be conducting a hybrid listening session for the public on Zoom and in-person at the Utah Department of Environmental Quality Multi-Agency State Office Building. The consecutive sessions will be offered at 2–4 p.m. and 4–6 p.m. Participants for this session will include: EPA Office of Water Acting Assistant Administrator Peggy Browne, EPA Region 8 Administrator Cyrus M. Western, and colleagues from the Department of the Army. An Obama-era rule issued in 2015 as an outgrowth of a Supreme Court decision was lauded by environmental activists and conservation groups as the most significant and impressive overhaul of the Clean Water Act in 42 years. Groups like the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership said the Obama rule clarified federal jurisdiction over seasonal streams — which involves 60% of the stream miles in the United States — and was critical for the Prairie Pothole region hosting 70% of the ducks in North America. Supporters of WOTUS say it is meant to protect the benefits of water for all people of the United States to enjoy, not just individual property owners. The rule, however, was derided by states, private property owners and ranchers as regulatory overreach that stretched the meaning of words like navigable, near or adjacent. The case of the Sacketts is one example. Mike and Chantell Sackett bought a vacant lot to build their dream home on in a mostly built-out subdivision in northern Idaho only to be told by the federal government their property was a wetland and subject to the authority of the Clean Water Act. 'The Sacketts' vacant lot is adjacent to Priest Lake, which is 300 feet away and behind two rows of houses,' said Tony Francois, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, which sued on behalf of the couple in 2008. Francois said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers have construed WOTUS to expansively extend their authority beyond what is reasonable due to an earlier 2006 Supreme Court decision (Rapanos v. United States) that gave little to no clarity on the issue. In that case, the Supreme Court was trying to answer the question of how closely connected to a navigable river or lake a body of water has to be for Clean Water Act regulations to kick in and how permanent must that water be. The Sacketts prevailed at the U.S. Supreme Court. A majority of the justices held to a plurality opinion in the 2006 case that the Clean Water Act applies to only those 'wetlands' or water which must be relatively permanent and connected to traditional interstate navigable waters. Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the concurring opinion, warned that under the EPA's interpretation of the Clean Water Act, 'nearly all waters and wetlands are potentially susceptible to regulation under this (significant nexus) test, putting a staggering array of landowners at risk of criminal prosecution for such mundane activities as moving dirt.' Utah was among an 11-state coalition that successfully got the rule put on hold with a federal injunction issued in 2018, and Utah's state Legislature has weighed in with a resolution opposing the WOTUS rule. It still remains a contentious issue, however, as the federal government tries to reach a compromise. The listening session Thursday in Salt Lake City is designed to gather more information.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
EPA, Army to hold WV listening sessions for changes to Clean Water Act impacting wetland protections
A Lesser Golden Plover sits in a section of wetland June 4, 2006 in Barrow, Alaska. (Justin Sullivan | Getty Images) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Army will hold a listening session in Charleston next week to get public input regarding proposed changes to the federal Clean Water Act that could redefine what waterways are subject to regulations and protected from certain kinds of pollution nationwide. Two listening sessions will be held on Wednesday at the Kanawha County Courthouse, the first from 2:30 to 4:15 p.m. and the second from 4:15 to ,6 p.m., according to a news release from the EPA. Attendees can participate virtually or in person by registering for the listening sessions here. The federal agencies, according to the news release, are looking to 'understand real-world perspectives and experiences' regarding how the 'Waters of the United States,' or WOTUS, are defined in the Clean Water Act. Since the 1970s, WOTUS has been used to refer to nearly all waterways in the nation, including wetlands and smaller streams and tributaries that run adjacent to them. The term, however, has never been clearly defined, making regulation of certain waterways more difficult. In 2023, a decision from the Supreme Court of the United States narrowed the protections and regulations for wetlands, which provide habitats for thousands of species of animals and plants and can play a crucial role in controlling floodplains in areas prone to flooding as well as naturally filtering drinking water. The Supreme Court decision led to an amendment to the federal rule from the EPA, which has since been mired in litigation and contention. Under the amendment offered in 2023, more than half of the nation's remaining wetlands have no EPA regulations or protections over them. In March, the EPA — operating under President Donald Trump's direction — issued a new interpretation of the Supreme Court's 2023 decision that further erodes protections, which experts say will disproportionately impact rural communities. Wetland conservancy groups and environmentalists from across the country have spoken out against the changes to the federal Clean Water Act. Meanwhile, the American Farm Bureau Federation — a lobbying group representing industrial farming throughout the nation — wants to see the changes made to relieve what they say is a burden for the farm industry, which is responsible for runoff and toxic pollution into thousands of tributaries and wetlands nationwide. The listening sessions in Charleston are just a few of those being held across the nation in recent and coming weeks.
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
AG Coleman, others, say KY will protect its own water resources
HENDERSON, Ky. (WEHT) – Attorney General Russell Coleman, Agriculture Commissioner Jonathan Shell and Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Commissioner Rich Storm asked the Trump Administration to end a years-long regulatory battle over Kentucky's water resources. AG Coleman says in a comment letter to the EPA, the three officials call on the federal government to respect the commonwealth's ability to protect its own waters and lands. In 2015, President Obama's EPA imposed its version of the 'Waters of the United States' or WOTUS rule, which gave 'massive' new authority to the federal government to regulate seemingly any amount of water, including on private lands. The rule immediately faced legal challenges, including from Kentucky's then-Attorney General Jack Conway. The Obama Administration's rule was eventually rescinded, only to have President Biden's EPA impose a similar rule in early 2023. AG Coleman says he has since continued the legal fight against the rule that 'over regulated' Kentuckians. Last year, the Attorney General's Solicitor General argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to preserve Kentucky's role in protecting the Commonwealth's resources. In March, President Trump's EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the EPA will revise WOTUS to 'reduce red tape,' 'cut' overall permitting costs and 'lower the cost' of doing business in communities across the country. Two chaplains join HPD for the first time in nearly 20 years 'For years, Washington climate radicals have tried to control every pond, ditch and puddle in the Commonwealth. We've taken the EPA to court to protect family farmers and property owners who don't want to be under the thumb of federal bureaucrats,' said Attorney General Coleman. 'Kentucky is fully prepared to be good stewards of our own water, land and air, and the EPA must respect our right and ability to do just that.' AG Coleman says Kentucky is at the 'heart' of America's inland waterways and has 'more commercially navigable waters' than any state except Alaska. 'Kentucky farmers are the original conservationists, and they don't need Washington bureaucrats telling them how to take care of their land. We support common-sense rules that protect our water without crippling the people who feed and fuel this nation. I'm proud to stand with Attorney General Coleman and Commissioner Storm to push back against overreach and protect Kentucky's rights,' said Commissioner Shell. Red Cross to set up disaster resource center in Henderson AG Coleman says in addition to emphasizing the 'proper division of control' over waters between the federal and state governments, the comment letter also offered practical recommendations to help make the WOTUS definition more transparent and workable for Kentucky landowners. 'As a leading steward and holder of Kentucky's public lands, Kentucky Fish and Wildlife supports the development of a carefully considered and mutually acceptable definition of WOTUS,' said Commissioner Storm. 'A clear definition will help all parties to better determine jurisdictional authority and when mitigation to offset developmental impact would or would not be required.' The comment letter can be viewed below. WOTUS-Comment_FinalDownload 'Eyewitness News. Everywhere you are.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Associated Press
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Redefining WOTUS: What Businesses Need to Know
The definition of 'waters of the United States' (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act ( CWA ) has long been a point of legal contention and regulatory complexity. The CWA establishes federal jurisdiction over 'navigable waters,' which it defines as '…waters of the United States (WOTUS), including the territorial seas' (Section 502(7). Recent court decisions—most notably Sackett v. U.S. EPA —and subsequent agency actions have significantly shifted how WOTUS is interpreted and enforced. These changes are poised to influence permitting requirements, compliance expectations, and environmental planning for a range of industries. Below is a summary of the key developments and what they could mean for businesses and environmental professionals moving forward. WOTUS Before 2025 Sackett v. U.S. EPA (2023) concluded that the U.S. EPA's definitions and utilization of 'adjacent' and 'significant nexus' in the CWA was inconsistent with the structure of the Act. The court affirmed that the Rapanos v. United States (2006) plurality was correct - 'use of 'waters' encompasses only those relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water forming geographical features that are described in ordinary parlance as streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes.' The court agreed with narrowing non-navigable wetland coverage under the CWA to apply 'when wetlands have 'a continuous surface connection to bodies that are 'waters of the United States' in their own right, so that there is no clear demarcation between 'waters' and wetlands.'' In summary, the CWA gives the U.S. EPA authority over the navigable waters of the U.S. To be considered WOTUS, they must be permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water and have a continuous surface connection; and wetlands must be indistinguishable from adjacent, traditional WOTUS. The U.S. EPA no longer has authority over WOTUS/wetlands under the CWA through previous definitions of 'adjacent' or 'significant nexus'. What's Changing: March 2025 EPA Announcement Building on the Sackett decision, the U.S. EPA and the Department of the Army announced on March 12, 2025, that they will review the definition of WOTUS and written recommendations from the public. The CWA does not directly provide a definition for WOTUS; instead, it relies on the definition of 'navigable waters.'. The U.S. EPA committed to defining WOTUS in accordance with the Sackett v U.S. EPA ruling that 'waters' encompasses only those relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water forming streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes. U.S. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin stated, 'The previous Administration's definition of 'waters of the United States' placed unfair burdens on the American people and drove up the cost of doing business. Our goal is to protect America's water resources consistent with the law of the land while empowering American farmers, landowners, entrepreneurs, and families to help Power the Great American Comeback.' Stakeholders who care about how WOTUS is defined—particularly those whose operations intersect with wetlands, waterways, or regulated water use—should pay close attention to the public comment period. This is a key opportunity to provide input that could shape the final definition and influence future permitting and compliance requirements. What This Means for Clients While we can only speculate about client impacts until the U.S. EPA releases an initial draft of their WOTUS definition for comment, based on Zeldin's statements and the Sackett v U.S. EPA ruling, this will likely be a win for clients and reduce their overall permitting, compliance costs, and risk. However, as responsible environmental stewards, we should advise our clients to continue implementing all possible measures to protect sensitive receptors such as wetlands and waterways from environmental impacts, regardless of federal oversight Long-term environmental performance and public perception are still driven by broader sustainability goals and local regulatory frameworks. What Businesses Should Expect Business impacts have most likely already been realized, given that these decisions stem from the Sackett v U.S. EPA (2023) ruling. The primary services affected would be limited and primarily centralized around ecological assessments, audits, and construction planning and permitting. Any additional regulatory impacts are expected to be minimal for most businesses or may be balanced by new opportunities created by this ruling, especially since many compliance obligations are still driven by state and other federal regulations. Key Takeaways and Next Steps The evolving definition of WOTUS continues to reshape the regulatory landscape for water and wetland protections in the United States. While recent developments point toward reduced federal oversight, this does not eliminate the need for careful planning, sound environmental practices, and awareness of local requirements. Staying ahead of these regulatory shifts ensures that clients can manage risk effectively while continuing to meet sustainability goals. As more guidance is released, we'll continue to monitor the situation and help our clients navigate the path forward with confidence. In the meantime, we encourage clients to stay informed and participate in the public comment process, especially if proposed changes could directly impact their operations or development plans. Questions? Our team is happy to help. Reach out today to get answers! Visit 3BL Media to see more multimedia and stories from Antea Group
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A controversial water rule is being revamped by the EPA
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency once again will revisit a controversial rule to define streams and wetlands protected by the Clean Water Act. Administrator Lee Zeldin announced this month that EPA will work with the United States Army Corps of Engineers to review the definition of 'waters of the United States.' Called WOTUS, the rule has been batted back and forth amid controversy entrenched in wetlands protection versus private property rights. 'We want clean water for all Americans supported by clear and consistent rules for all states, farmers, and small businesses,' said Zeldin. 'The previous administration's definition of 'waters of the United States' placed unfair burdens on the American people and drove up the cost of doing business. Our goal is to protect America's water resources consistent with the law of the land while empowering American farmers, landowners, entrepreneurs, and families to help Power the Great American Comeback.' The EPA said it will move quickly in coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers to streamline the definition of what constitutes 'water' to protect clean water standards and also provide farmers, landowners, businesses, and states with clear and simplified direction. Mike and Chantell Sackett bought a vacant lot to build their dream home on in a mostly built-out subdivision in northern Idaho, only to be told by the federal government their property was a wetland and subject to the authority of the Clean Water Act. The Sacketts' vacant lot was near Priest Lake, 'which is 300 feet away and behind two rows of houses,' said Tony Francois, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, which sued on behalf of the couple in 2008. Francois said the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers have construed the rule to expansively extend their authority beyond what is reasonable due to an earlier 2006 Supreme Court decision that gave little to no clarity on the issue. In that case, the Supreme Court was trying to answer the question of how closely connected to a navigable river or lake a body of water has to be for Clean Water Act regulations to kick in and how permanent must that water be. The Sacketts prevailed and won their case, to the dismay of conservation organizations. 'This will be the fourth rule attempting to define the Waters of the United States in a decade. We need to stop playing political pingpong with this vital issue,' said Jim Murphy, the National Wildlife Federation's director of legal advocacy. 'A 2023 Supreme Court decision greatly narrowed the scope of streams and wetlands that can be protected by the law and that narrowing is already reflected in the current rule. With the likelihood of a skeletal workforce at EPA, this move will put even more pressure and expense on states and localities to ensure our water is safe.' 'All of our waters are connected. This rule should not put drinking water unnecessarily at risk nor should it increase flood risks for communities in a time when insurance costs are already skyrocketing. We encourage the administration to include downstream communities and water suppliers in their conversations about this rule,' Murphy added. But advocates of revisiting the rule said it has nothing to do with clean water but protecting property rights and taking a balanced approach. In 2017, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt visited Utah as part of multistate tour to get input on how the agency can be more responsive to states' needs in general and in specific how the controversial Waters of the United States rule should be retooled. During his tour of Utah, Pruitt stopped off at the Bitner Ranch and Conservatory in Park City to get a firsthand look at a small pool of water that falls under federal regulation due to the rule, as well as a subdivision development hampered by permitting requirements. EPA's review will be guided by the Supreme Court's Sackett decision, which stated that the Clean Water Act's use of 'waters' encompasses only those relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water forming streams, oceans, rivers and lakes. The Sackett decision also clarified that wetlands would only be covered when having a continuous surface connection to waterbodies that are 'waters of the United States' in their own right. But EarthJustice says there are dire consequences in this matter of what is subject to federal jurisdiction. The group said in these states, more than 75% of their streams are classified as ephemeral or intermittent streams by the U.S. Geological Survey. After Sackett, ephemeral and intermittent streams are likely more vulnerable to being targeted for development and pollution without strong state protections. That includes Utah.
