An Arizona federal court has vacated the Trump Administration’s Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). In the case of Pasqua Yaqui Tribe v. EPA, No. CV-20-00266 , the Court ruled that the Trump Administration’s regulatory effort to define the scope of the Clean Water Act (i.e. which rivers, streams and lakes are federally regulated) had “fundamental,
Biden EPA Rescinds Trump Guidance on Clean Water Act “Functional Equivalent Test”
In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in County of Maui V. Hawaii Wildlife Fund addressed when a permit is required under the Clean Water Act for discharges to groundwater. Prior to Maui, it was a long standing debate as to when the Clean Water Act (CWA) in order to discharge to groundwater. Traditionally,
States Scramble to Respond to Navigable Waters Protection Rule
The Trump Administration’s Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) went into effect on June 21, 2020. The NWPR greatly reduces federal jurisdiction over both streams and wetlands. Most significantly has been the impact to ephemeral streams (i.e. streams that have water only when it rains or there is snow fall).
However, even intermittent streams have less
Trump Administration’s Navigable Waters Protection Rule and Its Impact on Ohio
What action was taken to define the scope of federal jurisdiction?
On January 23, 2020, the Trump Administration released the final version of the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR), which defines which waters and wetlands are protected under the Clean Water Act. The NWPR replaces the Obama Administration’s “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule.
Trump Administration Redefines Federally Protected Waters
What action was taken?
On January 23rd, the Trump Administration released the final version of the rule which defines which waters are protected under the Clean Water Act. The new rule is called the Navigable Waters Protection. It replaces the prior Obama Administration rule referred to as WOTUS- “Waters of the United States.”
Back on
Long Saga of Defining Federally Protected Waters Continues With Trump Administration Redefinition of WOTUS
There has been multiple blog posts over the history of this site tracking the long and arduous processing of defining federally protected waters under the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Supreme Court has taken up the issue on multiple occasions, perhaps most significantly in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006) where Justice Kennedy
Pruitt Memo Centralizes Veto Power on Waters of the U.S.
On March 30, 2018, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt issued a memorandum eliminating the authority of Regional Administrators to veto decisions by the Army Corps of Engineers to grant a permit for impacts to streams or wetlands. The veto authority has been re-delegated to the U.S. EPA Administrator.
Any project that results in a discharge of
New Rule Delays Implementation of the 2015 WOTUS Rule
On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in National Assoc. of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense that federal district courts have original jurisdiction to hear challenges to the 2015 Obama Administration Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule which defined the extent of federal jurisdiction over streams and wetlands under the Clean Water Act. After
Supreme Court Ruling Creates Even More Uncertainty on Waters of the U.S.
This week the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. Dep’t of Def., No. 16-299 that district courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges to any rule that attempts to define "Waters of the United States" for purposes of determining the scope of coverage of the Clean Water Act. As detailed on this
Unwind of WOTUS Gets Us Back to the Beginning
The Trump Administration has promised massive deregulation, in particular reductions in environmental regulations. A major target of the Trump Administration’s deregulation agenda is the Obama Administration’s Waters of the U.S. Rule (WOTUS) which defines which wetlands and streams are federally regulated.
However, as described in this post, despite the controversy, all of the regulatory activity