New! Find available capacity in seconds.

Learn more

3 min read

Recent Changes to Waters of the United States (WOTUS) Regulations: Navigating Regulatory Uncertainty

Featured Image

Sackett v. EPA leaves nearly half of the nation’s prior protected waters outside of the jurisdiction of the CWA. Recent regulation changes regarding WOTUS have led to uncertainty amongst land developers and environmentalists alike.

In recent years, the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) regulations have been a subject of contention and debate. These regulations, established under the Clean Water Act (CWA), play a crucial role in defining which water bodies are protected by federal law. Last week, new changes to the WOTUS regulations were unveiled, ushering in a wave of uncertainty and concern among various stakeholders.

This wave of amendments followed a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Sackett v EPA. This Supreme Court decision, as outlined by Justice Alito, is just the latest installment of changes to WOTUS. The Biden administration, Trump administration, and Obama administration all saw their own interpretations of WOTUS.

Changes to WOTUS have the potential to significantly impact federal permitting for protected waterways and wetlands in each state. Let’s delve into the recent modifications, their potential consequences, and what it means for the future of environmental protection in the United States.


Understanding WOTUS


Before diving into the recent changes, it's essential to understand what WOTUS entails. Waters of the United States refers to those water bodies that fall under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. This includes navigable waters, tributaries, wetlands, and other bodies of water that have a significant impact on the health of larger water systems.

The WOTUS regulations are enforced by federal agencies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). These agencies help determine the extent of federal protection for the nation's waters, affecting everything from permitting requirements for development projects to pollution control measures. The issue has been particularly contentious because it involves finding the right balance between environmental protection and economic development.


Recent Changes to WOTUS Regulations


The recent changes to the WOTUS regulations have introduced several key modifications:

  • Narrower Definition of WOTUS: One of the most significant changes is a narrower definition of WOTUS, which reduces the scope of federal protection. This means that certain bodies of water that were previously covered by the regulations may no longer be considered protected, potentially leaving them vulnerable to pollution and development.

  • Increased Regulatory Uncertainty: The new regulations have introduced ambiguity regarding which water bodies are covered under federal jurisdiction, making it challenging for developers, landowners, and regulators to determine whether they need federal permits for various projects. Additionally, regulatory authority over waters exists at the state level, meaning some states may still choose to protect specific water bodies that the federal government does not. This increased uncertainty can lead to delays and legal disputes.

  • Reinterpretation of Key Terms: The changes also reinterpret key terms such as "adjacent wetlands" and "significant nexus," which determine whether a water body falls under WOTUS protection. These reinterpretations may lead to different outcomes in permitting decisions compared to previous administrations. Due to these changes, we may see withdrawals of or changes in processes, such as the significant nexus test.

  • Potential Impact on the Environment: Critics argue that these changes could have adverse environmental consequences. By reducing the number of protected water bodies, there is a risk of increased pollution, habitat loss, and potential threats to drinking water sources.

EPA WOTUS state application             Source: EPA

Implications and Concerns

The recent changes to WOTUS regulations have raised several concerns among environmentalists, regulators, and industry stakeholders:

  • Inconsistent Enforcement: Implementation of the the rules may vary by administration, creating the potential for inconsistent enforcement of environmental protections from state to state, leading to uncertainty and legal battles.

  • Impact on Development Projects: Developers may face challenges in obtaining federal permits for their projects due to the uncertainty surrounding which water bodies are protected. This can lead to delays and increased project costs.

  • Environmental Consequences: Reduced protection for certain water bodies could have long-term environmental consequences, impacting ecosystems and potentially harming public health if water quality is compromised.

  • Legal Challenges: The changes have already and are likely to face additional legal challenges from environmental advocacy groups, which could further prolong the uncertainty surrounding WOTUS regulations.

The Sackett decision and recent changes to WOTUS regulations have ignited a debate about the balance between environmental protection and economic development. While proponents argue that these changes provide regulatory relief and promote economic growth, critics contend that they could lead to environmental degradation and uncertainty in federal permitting.

As these rulemakings continue to evolve and face legal challenges, it is essential for all stakeholders to stay informed and engage in the public discourse surrounding WOTUS regulations. Ultimately, finding a middle ground that protects both the environment and economic interests is crucial for the well-being of our nation and its natural resources. The future of WOTUS regulations will undoubtedly shape the landscape of environmental protection in America for years to come.

Ready to learn more about Transect? Book a time with one of our specialists.