The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

EPA to ‘provide clarity’ on clean water policies

New regulation­s revert to standards adopted in 2008.

- By Steven Mufson and Juliet Eilperin Washington Post

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s administra­tion will revoke a rule that gives the Environmen­tal Protection Agency broad authority over regulating the pollution of wetlands and tributarie­s that run into the nation’s largest rivers, EPA Administra­tor Scott Pruitt said Tuesday.

Testifying before Congress, Pruitt — who earlier said he would recuse himself from working on the rule — said that the agency would “provide clarity” by “withdrawin­g” the rule and reverting standards to those adopted in 2008.

Pruitt recused himself because, as Oklahoma attorney general, he had sued EPA over the rule, saying it “usurps” state authority, “unlawfully broadens” the definition of waters of the United States and imposes “numerous and costly obligation­s” on landowners.

A withdrawal was expected, based on the executive order Trump signed in February targeting the rule. But this is the first clear signal of how the EPA will act on the president’s order.

The current rule, known as Waters of the United States (WOTUS), unambiguou­sly gives EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers authority that many think the agencies already possessed under the Clean Water Act. The 1972 law gave the agencies control over navigable rivers and interstate waterways, but a series of court rulings left the extent of that power ambiguous. The Obama administra­tion sought to end a decade of confusion by finalizing the WOTUS rule, which took effect in August 2015, triggering protests from a variety of real estate developmen­t, agricultur­al and industrial interests.

The existing regulation covers wetlands adjacent to either traditiona­l navigable waters or interstate waters, as well as streams serving as tributarie­s to navigable waters. The rule says that wetlands and tributarie­s must be “relatively permanent,” a phrase used in previous court opinions, which means they can be intermitte­nt. Defining it this way extends federal jurisdicti­on to 60 percent of the water bodies in the United States.

Trump signed an executive order in late February calling on EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to revisit the regulation, a move he described as “paving the way for the eliminatio­n of this very destructiv­e and horrible rule.”

The executive order instructed the agencies to change the interpreta­tion of a 2006 Supreme Court decision on what falls under the federal jurisdicti­on under the Clean Water Act. In the Rapanos v. United States decision, the court split three ways. Its four most conservati­ve justices at the time offered a very constraine­d view that only “navigable waters” met this test. But Justice Anthony Kennedy, who refused to join either the conservati­ves or the liberals, said in a concurring opinion that the government could intervene when there was a “significan­t nexus” between large water bodies and smaller, as well as intermitte­nt, ones.

Trump’s executive order said that federal officials should rely on the dissenting opinion of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who argued the law should only apply to “navigable waters.” No court has ever ruled that this test is the single decisive threshold for triggering Clean Water Act protection­s.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States