We encourage EPA to consider these issues during the rulemaking process, as well as the following: 1) additional uncertainty about assumable waters in response to ongoing Water of the United States proposed rulemaking; 2) limited state and tribal experience with assumption for other states and tribes to build on; 3) the possibility of allowing partial assumption; and 4) the impact of assumption on consistency with federal statutes such as the Endangered Species Act, National Historical Preservation Act, etc., considerations. Most importantly, we strongly encourage EPA to continue an engaged stakeholder process with states and tribes.
Watersheds, TMDLs and Nonpoint Sources
ACWA Chart Comparing 1986 WOTUS Jurisdiction, 2015 Obama Rule Jurisdiction, and 2019 Trump Rule Jurisdiction
This Excel chart compares the Trump Administration’s proposed rule “Redefinition of Waters of the United States”, the 2015 Obama Administration rule defining Waters of the United States, and the regulatory… Read More »
ACWA Compilation of Questions EPA Seeks Comment On for Proposed Rule Redefining WOTUS
This document compiles questions asked by EPA in the proposed rule redefining Waters of the United States. In the proposed rule, EPA poses the questions after each section which discusses… Read More »
ACWA Summary of Proposed Rule Redefining WOTUS
The following memorandum provides a brief overview of key elements within the proposed rulemaking, Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”. The summary is based on the pre-publication version… Read More »
ACOE Memo on Assumable Waters
Memo clarifying the waters the Corps will retain for permitting under section 404(g):
1. Waters that are jurisdictional under Sec. 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 provided that
a. Retained waters include tidal waters shoreward to their mean high water mark, or mean higher high water mark on the west coast, and
b. retained waters to not include those waters that qualify as “navigable” solely because they were “used in the past” to transport interstate or foreign commerce; and
2. wetlands adjacent to waters retained above, landward to an administrative boundary agreed upon by the state or tribe and the Corps.
3. For ease of implementation and to provide transparency the Corps will use the existing RHA section 10 lists of waters as a starting point, which could be amended by the Corps as appropriate consistent with applicable regulations and case law.
ACWA 2018 Farm Bill Priorities
ACWA Weekly Wrap Vol. VIII, Issue 30 (Week of August 14, 2017)
Extension of Comment Period for the Definition of “Waters of the United States” EPA and the Army are extending the comment period by 30 days for the proposed first step… Read More »
ACWA, ECOS & ASWM Waters Assumable by States/Tribes under §404
ACWA, ECOS and ASWM sent a letter to Administrator Pruitt expressing our appreciation for the support of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provided in responding to our joint request that… Read More »
Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) Resources
The scope of waters that are the subject of federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act has been the subject of long-standing confusion and uncertainty in the aftermath of several… Read More »
Watersheds, TMDLs and Nonpoint Sources
ACWA’s work in watershed management, TMDL prioritization and implementation, and nonpoint source pollution mitigation fosters state-to-state and state-EPA information sharing, advancing state water quality initiatives and EPA §303(d) and §319… Read More »
West Virginia District Court Conductivity Case Opinion
The US District Court for the Southern District of WV held that WV’s failure to develop a TMDL for state waters with high conductivity requires EPA to either approve or disapprove WVDEP’s apparent intention to not develop conductivity TMDLs.
The Unclear Definition of Water
A summary of proceedings pertaining to WoUS definitions.
