Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: February 4, 2022
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.com
On December 7, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army announced a proposed rule to revise the definition of “waters of the United States.” The agencies are proposing to reinstate the pre-2015 definition, with updates to reflect consideration of Supreme Court decisions. These Supreme Court decisions have not provided clarity on this issue and therefore much litigation has ensued regarding this term.
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 described in greater detail in prior articles, the WOTUS Rule has been the subject of protracted litigation over 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 Donald Trump made it a priority to repeal the Obama-era rule and create a more restrictive WOTUS definition. The EPA and Army subsequently rescinded the 2015 rule and proposed a new definition of WOTUS. The Trump Administration’s Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR ) also prompted legal challenges.
Following a federal district court decision vacating the NWPR on August 30, 2021, the agencies halted implementation of the NWPR and began interpreting “waters of the United States” consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime. According to the EPA, its current rule proposal is intended to bring greater legal certainty by largely returning to the familiar pre-2015 definition.
On June 9, 2021, EPA and the Department of the Army announced their intent to revise the definition of WOTUS. Upon review of the NWPR, the agencies determined that it did not appropriately consider the water quality impacts of its approach to defining “waters of the United States,” in contravention of Congress’s objective in the Clean Water Act “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters,” and that the rule’s reduction in the scope of protected waters could have a potentially extensive and adverse impact on the nation’s waters.
The agencies’ Proposed Rule establishes a revised WOTUS definition that would interpret “waters of the United States” to mean the waters defined by the longstanding 1986 regulations, with amendments to certain parts of those rules to reflect the agencies’ interpretation of the statutory limits on the scope of the “waters of the United States” and informed by Supreme Court case law. Specifically, the agencies interpret the term “waters of the United States” to include:
As explained in the Proposed Rule, the “relatively permanent standard” means waters that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing and waters with a continuous surface connection to such waters. Meanwhile, the “significant nexus standard” means waters that either alone or in combination with similarly situated waters in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, or the territorial seas (the “foundational waters”).
The public comment period will close on February 7, 2022. According to the Rule Proposal, the agencies will consider all public comments on the proposed rule including changes that improve clarity, implementation and long-term durability of the definition. The agencies will also consider changes through a second rulemaking that they anticipate proposing in the future, which would build upon the foundation of this proposed rule.
The proposed WOTUS Rule while trying to provide clarity to the definition of navigable waters, still falls short in providing a roadmap to the regulated community. As such, litigation on what WOTUS means will likely continue. Members of the regulated community should, therefore, stay informed regarding WOTUS Rule developments and participate in the notice and comment process.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Monica Schroeck, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Few situations create more uncertainty than learning that an employee has filed a whistleblower complaint. Questions arise immediately: Is the allegation legitimate? Should the employee be placed on leave? Do we need to notify our insurance carrier? Are we now prevented from disciplining the employee if there are unrelated ongoing work related issues? There is […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

When a business reaches the point where it can no longer service its debts or otherwise resolve its liabilities, management is often faced with a difficult question: is a bankruptcy filing necessary or is there another way to perform an orderly liquidation or sale of the business assets? While Chapters 7 and 11 of the […]
Author: John D. Giampolo

For many years, the New Jersey Mansion Tax has been a significant consideration in high-value real estate transactions. Recent legislative changes, however, have substantially altered how the tax operates, including who is responsible for paying it and the amount owed in certain transactions. Whether you are purchasing, selling, or investing in New Jersey real estate, […]
Author: George McGowan

As our personal and financial lives increasingly move online, estate planning must evolve to address a new category of property: digital assets. From email accounts and social media profiles to cryptocurrency and cloud-stored business records, these assets often carry both financial and sentimental value. Yet, without proper planning, they can become inaccessible—or even lost—upon incapacity […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

In today’s mergers and acquisitions market, representation and warranty (R&W) insurance has become a common feature of deal negotiations. Once used primarily in larger transactions, R&W insurance is now frequently incorporated into middle-market deals as buyers and sellers look for efficient ways to allocate risk and close deals. When structured properly, R&W insurance can help […]
Author: George McGowan

Receiving a federal grand jury subpoena is not something most businesses or individuals anticipate. While it can be concerning, a federal grand jury subpoena does not necessarily mean that you are being accused of wrongdoing. It does, however, mean that a federal criminal investigation is underway and that federal prosecutors believe you may possess information […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
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!