The administration unveiled a plan to scale back which streams and wetlands fall under the Clean Water Act, part of a broader effort to loosen rules across air, water, and land. Officials say they are aiming for simpler rules for people on the ground.
"Landowners, farmers, ranchers, energy producers, developers, and small businesses deserve greater regulatory clarity and predictability from EPA, and we are committed to delivering on that while adhering to the Clean Water Act and the Supreme Court's direction," said EPA press secretary Brigit Hirsch.
Last fall, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed fresh definitions to determine which waters get federal protection. According to former EPA officials and environmental groups, finalizing that earlier plan would have significantly cut back protections relative to the framework in place under former President Joe Biden's administration. They argue the new version goes even further. "This is a humongous rollback and it's a bigger rollback than their initial proposal," said Jon Devine, who leads federal water policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The agencies also said the update would put fewer waters under federal jurisdiction than today. While the changes would be felt nationwide, they noted "the greatest impact would be in regions where intermittent streams drive much of the hydrology, particularly in the arid West."
The money story behind the headlines is usually the part that matters. Join Market Briefs free and get it every morning.
In response to the comment deluge, EPA and the Army Corps issued a supplemental proposal with alternatives. One alternative would limit coverage to waters considered "relatively permanent," meaning that under normal circumstances they hold water - either static or moving - on a year-round, daily basis, aside from narrow exceptions. Elizabeth Southerland, a former senior EPA water official who resigned during the first Trump administration, said the draft "will disallow all seasonal rivers in the West that only flow three months of the year. The new definition requires flow for 11 months of the year."
The proposal also says wetlands and other waters that stop flowing because of drought would keep protections for as long as five years. Should the drought persist beyond that period, federal protections would then lapse for those waters. Southerland said that feature would "ensure more wetlands and streams lose jurisdiction as climate change intensifies."
Where federal water rules apply shapes how people use land and plan projects. The agencies say the biggest effects would show up where intermittent streams are central to local water systems, especially in the arid West. If you live, work, or farm near seasonal waterways, watch this one closely - the final boundaries will determine which waters require federal oversight and which do not.
