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 The EPA and Army subsequently rescinded the 2015 rule and proposed a new definition of WOTUS.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.

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

Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Author: Graham Staton

Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe
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!