
Daniel T. McKillop
Partner
201-896-7115 dmckillop@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
Date: March 6, 2020

Partner
201-896-7115 dmckillop@sh-law.comOn January 23, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) finalized the Navigable Waters Protection Rule. The controversial rule redefines “waters of the United States” and narrows federal regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA).

“EPA and the Army are providing much needed regulatory certainty and predictability for American farmers, landowners and businesses to support the economy and accelerate critical infrastructure projects,” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a press statement. “After decades of landowners relying on expensive attorneys to determine what water on their land may or may not fall under federal regulations, our new Navigable Waters Protection Rule strikes the proper balance between Washington and the states in managing land and water resources while protecting our nation’s navigable waters, and it does so within the authority Congress provided.”
Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), a permit must be obtained prior to the discharge of any pollutants into “navigable waters.” The CWA defines the term “navigable waters” as “waters of the United States, including the territorial seas.” As discussed in greater detail in prior articles, the definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) has been the subject of intense debate for the past several years.
In 2015, the Obama Administration promulgated the “Clean Water Rule: Definition of ‘Waters of the United States,’” which broadly defined the scope of jurisdictional waters as whether a water or wetland possesses a “significant nexus” to waters that are or were navigable. The 2015 WOTUS Rule prompted significant litigation, which prevented it from being implemented in more than half of the country. Upon taking office, President Trump made it a priority to repeal the Obama-era rule and create a more restrictive WOTUS definition. The EPA and USACE subsequently conducted a two-step rulemaking process that rescinded the 2015 rule and proposed a new definition of WOTUS.
Under the final Navigable Waters Protection Rule, four categories of waters are federally regulated:
The final rule also details 12 categories of exclusions. The list includes ephemeral features that contain water only during or in response to rainfall; groundwater; prior converted cropland; waste treatment systems; and stormwater control features excavated or constructed in upland to convey, treat, infiltrate, or store stormwater run-off.
The EPA and USACE made several changes in response to public comments on its proposed rule. Notably, ditches and impoundments are no longer separate categories of jurisdictional waters. Under the final rule, perennial and intermittent tributaries upstream of ephemeral reaches are jurisdictional when they have a surface water connection to downstream jurisdictional water in a typical year.
The final rule expands and clarifies the factors that determine whether wetlands are considered adjacent and thereby subject to the CWA. Under the proposal, wetlands physically separated by a natural or artificial barrier from another jurisdictional water would not have been subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction. Many of these wetlands will be covered by the final rule.
While the Navigable Waters Protection Rule aims to provide regulatory certainty, environmental groups have already announced that they plan to challenge the rule. “So much for the ‘crystal clear’ water President Trump promised,” said Natural Resources Defense Council President and CEO Gina McCarthy, who previously served as EPA Administrator under President Obama. “This effort neglects established science and poses substantial new risks to people’s health and the environment. We will do all we can to fight this attack on clean water. We will not let it stand.”
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Dan McKillop, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

For battery energy storage system (BESS) developers, securing equipment and site control is only part of the development equation. A project must also connect to the electric grid, and increasingly, BESS interconnection is one of the biggest sources of schedule, cost, and contractual risk. Key Takeaways This article is Part 3 of our Battery Storage […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

Director and officer liability increases sharply when a company is in financial distress. Decisions that would draw little attention in a healthy business can later be challenged by creditors, shareholders, bankruptcy trustees, and regulators as breaches of fiduciary duty, fraudulent transfers, or oversight failures. Understanding where that exposure comes from, and how to manage it, […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For developers pursuing battery energy storage system (BESS) projects, finding the right property is only the beginning. BESS site selection is as much a legal and transactional exercise as a real estate decision, with risk analysis central to the project’s ultimate success. Key Takeaways The core questions for BESS site selection in New York and […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!