
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 The EPA and USACE subsequently conducted a two-step rulemaking process that rescinded the 2015 rule and proposed a new definition of WOTUS.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.

The application of traditional federal securities laws to crypto assets continues to evolve. In some cases, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) considers tokens and other digital assets to be securities. This makes them subject to federal securities law, including the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This classification has […]
Author: Bryce S. Robins

While the New York City real estate market can be extremely competitive, moving too quickly often backfires. Before purchasing a condominium or cooperative in New York City, it is important to do you homework. Purchasing property in NYC can involve a dizzying number of legal issues. These include condo and co-op rules, rent restrictions, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro

Smart contracts feature a unique blend of legal agreement and technical code. This innovation has the potential to reshape how business is conducted. At the same time, smart contract legal issues around enforceability, jurisdiction, identity, and compliance are common. The legal framework for these self-executing agreements is still evolving. What Are Smart Contracts? Smart contracts, […]
Author: Bryce S. Robins

Retaining top talent continues to be one of the greatest challenges facing employers today. Even in an employer’s market, the loss of a key employee can disrupt operations and result in significant costs. While compensation plays a role, long-term retention often depends on workplace culture, communication, and employee engagement. One increasingly popular strategy for improving […]
Author: Angela A. Turiano

Secured transactions form the backbone of a wide range of business dealings, including business loans, mortgages, and inventory financing. Because the stakes are often high and relatively minor oversights can have drastic consequences, lenders and borrowers should thoroughly understand how to form an enforceable security agreement that protects their legal rights. What Is a Secured […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Cashing a check marked “paid in full” can be a risky endeavor, particularly if you don’t fully understanding the legal implications. If you are owed more than the amount of the check you accept and deposit, you may waive your right to collect the full disputed amount. That is why you should consider either rejecting […]
Author: Dan Brecher
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!