Beth Brelje writes for the Federalist about a significant federal environmental rule change.
The Trump administration is about to curb an overzealous Obama-era environmental regulation by revising the definition of “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin and Adam Telle, assistant secretary of the Army for Civil Works, introduced a proposed WOTUS rule change Monday that is meant to establish a clear, durable definition of the rule that won’t be changed every time a new administration comes in. There will be 45 days of public comment on the proposed rule once it is published.
A rule change was ordered in 2023 after the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Sackett v. EPA. The Biden administration issued an amended WOTUS rule that year, but that action did not allow for public input and failed to fully implement the court’s direction to conform to the court’s new, limited interpretation of WOTUS, according to an EPA press release.
To understand how all this relates to land use and puddles of water that develop during heavy rains, it helps to go back to 2015, when the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers promulgated the Clean Water Rule, which included the “significant nexus” standard. It called for protection of all waters with a significant nexus to “downstream traditional navigable waters.” The result was that a lot of land that was usable before the rule became useless. …
… The definition of WOTUS has been unclear, and the consequences for landowners were immense, especially in agriculture.
“For too long there’s been a great deal of uncertainty about this term, Waters of the United States Rule. Unfortunately, it left many people holding the bag — farmers, contractors, small business owners — guessing whether their ephemeral stream or a backyard ditch was going to be classified as a Waters of the United States Rule, and potentially subject them to significant penalties,” West Virginia Gov. Patrick James Morrisey said Monday in Washington, D.C., during an event promoting the proposed rule. He called the old rule a “textbook example of federal overreach.”
