Definition of “Waters of the United States”-Recodification of Pre-Existing Rules, 34899-34909 [2017-13997]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Consistent with the Act, this
document requests that interested
persons provide proposed changes to
revise or update the Manufactured
Home Construction and Safety
Standards, the Manufactured Home
Procedural and Enforcement
Regulations, the Model Manufactured
Home Installation Standards, and
Manufactured Home Installation
Program Regulations. Specifically,
recommendations are requested that
further HUD’s efforts to increase the
quality, durability, safety and
affordability of manufactured homes;
facilitate the availability of affordable
manufactured homes and increase
homeownership for all Americans; and
encourage cost-effective and innovative
construction techniques for
manufactured homes.
To permit the MHCC to fully consider
the proposed changes, commenters are
encouraged to provide at least the
following information:
• The specific section of the current
Manufactured Home Construction and
Safety Standards, Manufactured Home
Procedural and Enforcement
Regulations, Model Manufactured Home
Installation Standards, or Manufactured
Home Installation Program Regulations
that require revision or update, or
whether the recommendation would
require a new standard;
• Specific detail regarding the
recommendation including a statement
of the problem intended to be corrected
or addressed by the recommendation,
how the recommendation would resolve
or address the problem, and the basis of
the recommendation; and
• Information regarding whether the
recommendation would result in
increased costs to manufacturers or
consumers and the value of the benefits
derived from HUD’s implementation of
the recommendation, should be
provided and discussed to the extent
feasible.
The Act requires that an
administering organization administer
the process for the MHCC’s
development and interpretation of the
Manufactured Home Construction and
Safety Standards, Manufactured Home
Procedural and Enforcement
Regulations, Model Manufactured Home
Installation Standards, and
Manufactured Home Installation
Program Regulations. The administering
organization that has been selected by
HUD to administer this process is Home
Innovation Research Labs Inc. This
document requests that proposed
revisions be submitted to the MHCC for
consideration through the administering
organization, Home Innovation Research
Labs. This organization will be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
responsible for ensuring delivery of all
appropriately prepared proposed
changes to the MHCC for its review and
consideration.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements contained in this
document have been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and
assigned OMB Control Number 2535–
0116. In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, an agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information, unless the collection
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Dated: July 19, 2017.
Pamela Beck Danner,
Administrator, Office of Manufactured
Housing Programs.
[FR Doc. 2017–15574 Filed 7–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of
Engineers
33 CFR Part 328
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 122,
230, 232, 300, 302, and 401
[EPA–HQ–OW–2017–0203; FRL–9962–34–
OW]
RIN 2040–AF74
Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United
States’’—Recodification of Pre-Existing
Rules
Department of the Army, Corps
of Engineers, Department of Defense;
and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency and the Department of the Army
(‘‘the agencies’’) are publishing this
proposed rule to initiate the first step in
a comprehensive, two-step process
intended to review and revise the
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ consistent with the Executive
Order signed on February 28, 2017,
‘‘Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism,
and Economic Growth by Reviewing the
‘Waters of the United States’ Rule.’’ This
first step proposes to rescind the
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34899
States’’ in the Code of Federal
Regulations to re-codify the definition of
‘‘waters of the United States,’’ which
currently governs administration of the
Clean Water Act, pursuant to a decision
issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Sixth Circuit staying a definition of
‘‘waters of the United States’’
promulgated by the agencies in 2015.
The agencies would apply the definition
of ‘‘waters of the United States’’ as it is
currently being implemented, that is
informed by applicable agency guidance
documents and consistent with
Supreme Court decisions and
longstanding practice. Proposing to recodify the regulations that existed
before the 2015 Clean Water Rule will
provide continuity and certainty for
regulated entities, the States, agency
staff, and the public. In a second step,
the agencies will pursue notice-andcomment rulemaking in which the
agencies will conduct a substantive reevaluation of the definition of ‘‘waters
of the United States.’’
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 28, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2017–0203, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The agencies may publish any comment
received to the public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The agencies will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Donna Downing, Office of Water (4504–
T), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: (202) 566–2428; email address:
CWAwotus@epa.gov; or Ms. Stacey
Jensen, Regulatory Community of
Practice (CECW–CO–R), U.S. Army
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
34900
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Corps of Engineers, 441 G Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20314; telephone
number: (202) 761–5903; email address:
USACE_CWA_Rule@usace.army.mil.
The
regulatory definition of ‘‘waters of the
United States’’ in this proposed rule is
the same as the definition that existed
prior to promulgation of the Clean
Water Rule in 2015 and that has been in
effect nationwide since the Clean Water
Rule was stayed on October 9, 2015. The
agencies will administer the regulations
as they are currently being implemented
consistent with Supreme Court
decisions and longstanding practice as
informed by applicable agency guidance
documents.
State, tribal, and local governments
have well-defined and longstanding
relationships with the federal
government in implementing CWA
programs and these relationships are not
altered by the proposed rule. This
proposed rule will not establish any
new regulatory requirements. Rather,
the rule simply codifies the current legal
status quo while the agencies engage in
a second, substantive rulemaking to
reconsider the definition of ‘‘waters of
the United States.’’
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
A. What This Proposed Rule Does
In this proposed rule, the agencies
define the scope of ‘‘waters of the
United States’’ that are protected under
the Clean Water Act (CWA). In 2015, the
agencies published the ‘‘Clean Water
Rule: Definition of ‘Waters of the United
States’’’ (80 FR 37054, June 29, 2015),
and on October 9, 2015, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stayed
the 2015 Rule nationwide pending
further action of the court. The agencies
propose to replace the stayed 2015
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’, and re-codify the exact same
regulatory text that existed prior to the
2015 rule, which reflects the current
legal regime under which the agencies
are operating pursuant to the Sixth
Circuit’s October 9, 2015 order. The
proposed regulatory text would thus
replace the stayed rulemaking text, and
re-codify the regulatory definitions (at
33 CFR part 328 and 40 CFR parts 110;
112; 116; 117; 122; 230; 232; 300; 302;
and 401) in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) as they existed prior
to the promulgation of the stayed 2015
definition. If this proposed rule is
finalized, the agencies would continue
to implement those prior regulatory
definitions), informed by applicable
agency guidance documents and
consistent with Supreme Court
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
decisions and longstanding agency
practice.
B. History and the Purpose of This
Rulemaking
Congress enacted the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972, Public Law 92–500, 86 Stat. 816,
as amended, Public Law 95–217, 91
Stat. 1566, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
(‘‘Clean Water Act’’ or ‘‘CWA’’ or ‘‘Act’’)
‘‘to restore and maintain the chemical,
physical and biological integrity of the
Nation’s waters.’’ Section 101(a). A
primary tool in achieving that purpose
is a prohibition on the discharge of any
pollutants, including dredged or fill
material, to ‘‘navigable waters’’ except
in accordance with the Act. Section
301(a). The CWA provides that ‘‘[t]he
term ‘navigable waters’ means the
waters of the United States, including
the territorial seas.’’ Section 502(7).
The CWA also provides that States
retain their traditional role in
preventing, reducing and eliminating
pollution. The Act states that ‘‘[i]t is the
policy of the Congress to recognize,
preserve, and protect the primary
responsibilities and rights of States to
prevent, reduce, and eliminate
pollution, to plan the development and
use (including restoration, preservation,
and enhancement) of land and water
resources . . .’’ Section 101(b). States
and Tribes voluntarily may assume
responsibility for permit programs
governing discharges of pollution under
section 402 for any jurisdictional water
bodies (section 402(b)), or of dredged or
fill material discharges under section
404 (section 404(g)), with agency
approval. (Section 404(g) provides that
states may not assume permitting
authority over certain specified waters
and their adjacent wetlands.) States are
also free to establish their own programs
under state law to manage and protect
waters and wetlands independent of the
federal CWA. The statute’s introductory
purpose section thus commands the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to pursue two policy goals
simultaneously: (a) To restore and
maintain the nation’s waters; and (b) to
preserve the States’ primary
responsibility and right to prevent,
reduce, and eliminate pollution.
The regulations defining the scope of
federal CWA jurisdiction currently in
effect, which this proposed rule would
recodify, were established in large part
in 1977 (42 FR 37122, July 19, 1977).
While EPA administers most provisions
in the CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) administers the
permitting program under section 404.
During the 1980s, both of these agencies
adopted substantially similar definitions
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(51 FR 41206, Nov. 13, 1986, amending
33 CFR 328.3; 53 FR 20764, June 6,
1988, amending 40 CFR 232.2).
Federal courts have reviewed the
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ and its application to a variety
of factual circumstances. Three
Supreme Court decisions, in particular,
provide critical context and guidance in
determining the appropriate scope of
‘‘waters of the United States.’’
In United States v. Riverside Bayview
Homes, 474 U.S. 121 (1985) (Riverside),
the Court, in a unanimous opinion,
deferred to the Corps’ ecological
judgment that adjacent wetlands are
‘‘inseparably bound up’’ with the waters
to which they are adjacent, and upheld
the inclusion of adjacent wetlands in
the regulatory definition of ‘‘waters of
the United States.’’ Id. at 134.
In Solid Waste Agency of Northern
Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001)
(SWANCC), the Supreme Court held
that the use of ‘‘isolated’’ non-navigable
intrastate ponds by migratory birds was
not by itself a sufficient basis for the
exercise of federal regulatory authority
under the CWA. The SWANCC decision
created uncertainty with regard to the
jurisdiction of other isolated nonnavigable waters and wetlands. In
January 2003, EPA and the Corps issued
joint guidance interpreting the Supreme
Court decision in SWANCC (‘‘the 2003
Guidance’’). The guidance indicated
that SWANCC focused on isolated,
intrastate, non-navigable waters, and
called for field staff to coordinate with
their respective Corps or EPA
Headquarters on jurisdictional
determinations which asserted
jurisdiction for waters under 33 CFR
328.3(a)(3)(i) through (iii). Waters that
were jurisdictional pursuant to 33 CFR
328.3(a)(3) could no longer be
determined jurisdictional based solely
on their use by migratory birds.
Five years after the SWANCC
decision, in Rapanos v. United States,
547 U.S. 715 (2006) (Rapanos), a fourJustice plurality opinion in Rapanos,
authored by Justice Scalia, interpreted
the term ‘‘waters of the United States’’
as covering ‘‘relatively permanent,
standing or continuously flowing bodies
of water . . . ,’’ id. at 739, that are
connected to traditional navigable
waters, id. at 742, as well as wetlands
with a ‘‘continuous surface connection
. . .’’ to such water bodies, id. (Scalia,
J., plurality opinion). The Rapanos
plurality noted that its reference to
‘‘relatively permanent’’ waters did ‘‘not
necessarily exclude streams, rivers, or
lakes that might dry up in extraordinary
circumstances, such as drought,’’ or
‘‘seasonal rivers, which contain
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
continuous flow during some months of
the year but no flow during dry months
. . .’’ Id. at 732 n.5 (emphasis in
original). Justice Kennedy concurred
with the plurality judgment, but
concluded that the appropriate test for
the scope of jurisdictional waters is
whether a water or wetland possesses a
‘‘ ‘significant nexus’ to waters that are or
were navigable in fact or that could
reasonably be so made.’’ Id. at 759. The
four dissenting Justices in Rapanos,
who would have affirmed the court of
appeals’ application of the agencies’
regulations, also concluded that the
term ‘‘waters of the United States’’
encompasses, inter alia, all tributaries
and wetlands that satisfy ‘‘either the
plurality’s [standard] or Justice
Kennedy’s.’’ Id. at 810 & n.14 (Stevens,
J., dissenting).
While the SWANCC and Rapanos
decisions limited the way the agencies’
longstanding regulatory definition of
‘‘waters of the United States’’ was
implemented, in neither case did the
Court invalidate that definition.
After the Rapanos decision, the
agencies issued joint guidance in 2007
to address the waters at issue in that
decision but did not change the codified
definition. The guidance indicated that
‘‘waters of the United States’’ included
traditional navigable waters and their
adjacent wetlands, relatively permanent
waters and wetlands that abut them, and
waters with a significant nexus to a
traditional navigable water. The
guidance did not address waters not at
issue in Rapanos, such as interstate
waters and the territorial seas. The
guidance was reissued in 2008 with
minor changes (hereinafter, the ‘‘2008
guidance’’).1
After issuance of the 2008 guidance,
Members of Congress, developers,
farmers, state and local governments,
environmental organizations, energy
companies and others asked the
agencies to replace the guidance with a
regulation that would provide clarity
and certainty on the scope of the waters
protected by the CWA.
Following public notice and comment
on a proposed rule, the agencies
published a final rule defining the scope
of ‘‘waters of the United States’’ on June
29, 2015 (80 FR 37054). Thirty-one
States and a number of other parties
sought judicial review in multiple
1 The guidance expressly stated that it was not
intended to create any legally binding requirements,
and that ‘‘interested persons are free to raise
questions about the appropriateness of the
application of this guidance to a particular
situation, and EPA and/or the Corps will consider
whether or not the recommendations or
interpretations of this guidance are appropriate in
that situation based on the statutes, regulations, and
case law.’’ 2008 guidance at 4 n. 17.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
actions in Federal district courts and
Circuit Courts of Appeal, raising
concerns about the scope and legal
authority of the 2015 rule. One district
court issued an order granting a motion
for preliminary injunction on the rule’s
effective date, finding that the thirteen
State challengers were likely to succeed
on their claims, including that the rule
violated the congressional grant of
authority to the agencies under the
CWA and that it appeared likely the
EPA failed to comply with
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
requirements in promulgating the rule.
State of North Dakota et al. v. US EPA,
No. 15–00059, slip op. at 1–2 (D.N.D.
Aug. 27, 2015, as clarified by order
issued on September 4, 2015). Several
weeks later, the Sixth Circuit stayed the
2015 rule nationwide to restore the
‘‘pre-Rule regime, pending judicial
review.’’ In re U.S. Dep’t. of Def. and
U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency Final
Rule: Clean Water Rule, No. 15–3751
(lead), slip op. at 6. The Sixth Circuit
found that the petitioners had
demonstrated a substantial possibility of
success on the merits, including with
regard to claims that certain provisions
of the rule were at odds with the
Rapanos decision and that the distance
limitations in the rule were not
substantiated by scientific support.
Pursuant to the court’s order, the
agencies have implemented the statute
pursuant to the regulatory regime that
preceded the 2015 rule. On January 13,
2017, the U.S. Supreme Court granted
certiorari on the question of whether the
court of appeals has original jurisdiction
to review challenges to the 2015 rule.
The Sixth Circuit granted petitioners’
motion to hold in abeyance the briefing
schedule in the litigation challenging
the 2015 rule pending a Supreme Court
decision on the question of the court of
appeals’ jurisdiction.
On February 28, 2017, the President
of the United States issued an Executive
Order entitled ‘‘Restoring the Rule of
Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth
by Reviewing the ‘Waters of the United
States’ Rule.’’ Section 1 of the Order
states, ‘‘[i]t is in the national interest to
ensure that the Nation’s navigable
waters are kept free from pollution,
while at the same time promoting
economic growth, minimizing
regulatory uncertainty, and showing due
regard for the roles of the Congress and
the States under the Constitution.’’ It
directs the EPA and the Army to review
the 2015 rule for consistency with the
policy outlined in section 1, and to
issue a proposed rule rescinding or
revising the 2015 rule as appropriate
and consistent with law. Section 2. The
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34901
Executive Order also directs the
agencies to consider interpreting the
term ‘‘navigable waters’’ in a manner
consistent with Justice Scalia’s plurality
opinion in Rapanos. Section 3.
The agencies have the authority to
rescind and revise the regulatory
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States,’’ consistent with the guidance in
the Executive Order, so long as the
revised definition is authorized under
the law and based on a reasoned
explanation. FCC v. Fox Television
Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009)
(‘‘Fox’’). Importantly, such a revised
decision need not be based upon a
change of facts or circumstances. A
revised rulemaking based ‘‘on a reevaluation of which policy would be
better in light of the facts’’ is ‘‘well
within an agency’s discretion,’’ and ‘‘[a]
change in administration brought about
by the people casting their votes is a
perfectly reasonable basis for an
executive agency’s reappraisal’’ of its
regulations and programs. Nat’l Ass’n of
Home Builders v. EPA, 682 F.3d 1032,
1038 & 1043 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (citing Fox,
556 U.S. at 514–15 (Rehnquist, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in
part)).
The Executive Order states that it is
in the national interest to protect the
nation’s waters from pollution as well as
to allow for economic growth, ensuring
regulatory clarity, and providing due
deference to States, as well as Congress.
Executive Order section 1. These
various priorities reflect, in part the
CWA itself, which includes both the
objective to ‘‘restore and maintain’’ the
integrity of the nation’s waters, as well
as the policy to ‘‘recognize, preserve,
and protect the primary responsibilities
and right of States to prevent, reduce,
and eliminate pollution . . .’’ CWA
sections 101(a), 101(b). Re-evaluating
the best means of balancing these
statutory priorities, as called for in the
Executive Order, is well within the
scope of authority that Congress has
delegated to the agencies under the
CWA.
This rulemaking is the first step in a
two-step response to the Executive
Order, intended to ensure certainty as to
the scope of CWA jurisdiction on an
interim basis as the agencies proceed to
engage in the second step: A substantive
review of the appropriate scope of
‘‘waters of the United States.’’
C. This Proposed Rule
In this proposed rule, the agencies
would rescind the 2015 Clean Water
Rule and replace it with a recodification
of the regulatory text that governed the
legal regime prior to the 2015 Clean
Water Rule and that the agencies are
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
34902
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
currently implementing under the court
stay, informed by applicable guidance
documents (e.g., the 2003 and 2008
guidance documents, as well as relevant
memoranda and regulatory guidance
letters), and consistent with the
SWANCC and Rapanos Supreme Court
decisions, applicable case law, and
longstanding agency practice. The
proposal retains exclusions from the
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ for prior converted cropland and
waste treatment systems, both of which
existed before the 2015 regulations were
issued. Nothing in this proposed rule
restricts the ability of States to protect
waters within their boundaries by
defining the scope of waters regulated
under State law more broadly than the
federal law definition.
D. Rationale for This Rulemaking
This rulemaking action is consistent
with the February 28, 2017, Executive
Order and the Clean Water Act. This
action will consist of two steps. In this
first step, the agencies are proposing as
an interim action to repeal the 2015
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ and codify the legal status quo
that is being implemented now under
the Sixth Circuit stay of the 2015
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ and that was in place for
decades prior to the 2015 rule. This
regulatory text would, pending
completion of the second step in the
two-step process, continue to be
informed by the 2003 and 2008
guidance documents. In the second step,
the agencies will conduct a separate
notice and comment rulemaking that
will consider developing a new
definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ taking into consideration the
principles that Justice Scalia outlined in
the Rapanos plurality opinion.
In the 2015 rulemaking, the agencies
described their task as ‘‘interpret[ing]
the scope of the ‘waters of the United
States’ for the CWA in light of the goals,
objectives, and policies of the statute,
the Supreme Court case law, the
relevant and available science, and the
agencies’ technical expertise and
experience.’’ 80 FR 37054, 37060 (June
29, 2015). In so doing, the agencies
properly acknowledged that a regulation
defining ‘‘waters of the United States’’
in this area is not driven by any one
type or piece of information, but rather
must be the product of the evaluation
and balancing of a variety of different
types of information. That information
includes scientific data as well as the
policies articulated by Congress when it
passed the Act. For example, the
agencies recognized this construct in the
preamble to the 2015 Rule by explaining
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
that what constitutes a ‘‘significant
nexus’’ to navigable waters ‘‘is not a
purely scientific determination’’ and
that ‘‘science does not provide bright
line boundaries with respect to where
‘water ends’ for purposes of the CWA.’’
80 FR at 37060.2
The objectives, goals, and policies of
the statute are detailed in sections
101(a)–(g) of the statute, and guide the
agencies’ interpretation and application
of the Clean Water Act. Section 101(a)
of the Act states that the ‘‘objective of
this chapter is to restore and maintain
the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of the Nation’s waters,’’ and
identifies several goals and national
policies Congress believed would help
the Act achieve that objective. 33 U.S.C.
1251(a). When referring to the Act’s
objective, the 2015 rule referred
specifically to Section 101(a). 80 FR at
37056.
In addition to the objective of the Act
and the goals and policies identified to
help achieve that objective in section
101(a), in section 101(b) Congress
articulated that it is ‘‘the policy of the
Congress’’ to recognize, preserve, and
protect the primary responsibilities and
rights of States to prevent, reduce, and
eliminate pollution, to plan the
development and use (including
restoration, preservation, and
enhancement) of land and water
resources, and to consult with the
Administrator in the exercise of his or
her authority. Section 101(b) also states
that it is the policy of Congress that the
States manage the construction grant
program under this chapter and
implement the permit programs under
sections 402 and 404 of the Act. 33
U.S.C. 1251(b). Therefore, as part of the
two-step rulemaking, the agencies will
be considering the relationship of the
CWA objective and policies, and in
particular, the meaning and importance
of section 101(b).
The 2015 rule did acknowledge the
language contained in section 101(b)
and the vital role states and tribes play
in the implementation of the Act and
the effort to meet the Act’s stated
objective. See, e.g., 80 FR at 37059. In
discussing the provision, the agencies
noted that it was ‘‘[o]f particular
importance[,] [that] states and tribes
may be authorized by the EPA to
administer the permitting programs of
2 This notion was at least implicitly recognized by
the Chief Justice in his concurring opinion in
Rapanos: ‘‘[T]he Corps and the EPA would have
enjoyed plenty of room to operate in developing
some notion of an outer bound to the reach of their
authority.’’ Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715,
758 (2006) (Roberts, C.J., concurring). Ultimately,
developing ‘‘some notion of an outer bound’’ from
the full range of relevant information is the task
facing the agencies.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CWA sections 402 and 404.’’ Id. The
agencies also noted that ‘‘States and
federally-recognized tribes, consistent
with the CWA, retain full authority to
implement their own programs to more
broadly and more fully protect the
waters in their jurisdiction.’’ Id. at
37060. However, the agencies did not
include a discussion in the 2015 rule
preamble of the meaning and
importance of section 101(b) in guiding
the choices the agencies make in setting
the outer bounds of jurisdiction of the
Act, despite the recognition that the rule
must be drafted ‘‘in light of the goals,
objectives, and policies of the statute.’’
In the two-step rulemaking process
commencing with today’s notice, the
agencies will more fully consider the
policy in section 101(b) when exercising
their discretion to delineate the scope of
waters of the U.S., including the extent
to which states or tribes have protected
or may protect waters that are not
subject to CWA jurisdiction.
The scope of CWA jurisdiction is an
issue of great national importance and
therefore the agencies will allow for
robust deliberations on the ultimate
regulation. While engaging in such
deliberations, however, the agencies
recognize the need to provide as an
interim step for regulatory continuity
and clarity for the many stakeholders
affected by the definition of ‘‘waters of
the United States.’’ The pre-CWR
regulatory regime is in effect as a result
of the Sixth Circuit’s stay of the 2015
rule but that regime depends upon the
pendency of the Sixth Circuit’s order
and could be altered at any time by
factors beyond the control of the
agencies. The Supreme Court’s
resolution of the question as to which
courts have original jurisdiction over
challenges to the 2015 rule could impact
the Sixth Circuit’s exercise of
jurisdiction and its stay. If, for example,
the Supreme Court were to decide that
the Sixth Circuit lacks original
jurisdiction over challenges to the 2015
rule, the Sixth Circuit case would be
dismissed and its nationwide stay
would expire, leading to
inconsistencies, uncertainty, and
confusion as to the regulatory regime
that would be in effect pending
substantive rulemaking under the
Executive Order.
As noted previously, prior to the
Sixth Circuit’s stay order, the District
Court for North Dakota had
preliminarily enjoined the rule in 13
States (North Dakota, Alaska, Arizona,
Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, South
Dakota, Wyoming and New Mexico).
Therefore, if the Sixth Circuit’s
nationwide stay were to expire, the 2015
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
rule would be enjoined under the North
Dakota order in States covering a large
geographic area of the country, but the
rule would be in effect in the rest of the
country pending further judicial
decision-making or substantive
rulemaking under the Executive Order.
Adding to the confusion that could be
caused if the Sixth Circuit’s nationwide
stay of the 2015 rule were to expire,
there are multiple other district court
cases pending on the 2015 rule,
including several where challengers
have filed motions for preliminary
injunctions. These cases—and the
pending preliminary injunction
motions—would likely be reactivated if
the Supreme Court were to determine
that the Sixth Circuit lacks original
jurisdiction over challenges to the 2015
rule. The proposed interim rule would
establish a clear regulatory framework
that would avoid the inconsistencies,
uncertainty and confusion that would
result from a Supreme Court ruling
affecting the Sixth Circuit’s jurisdiction
while the agencies reconsider the 2015
rule. It would ensure that, during this
interim period, the scope of CWA
jurisdiction will be administered exactly
the way it is now, and as it was for
many years prior to the promulgation of
the 2015 rule. The agencies considered
other approaches to providing stability
while they work to finalize the revised
definition, such as simply withdrawing
or staying the Clean Water Rule, but did
not identify any options that would do
so more effectively and efficiently than
this proposed rule would do. A stable
regulatory foundation for the status quo
would facilitate the agencies’
considered re-evaluation, as
appropriate, of the definition of ‘‘waters
of the United States’’ that best
effectuates the language, structure, and
purposes of the Clean Water Act.
II. General Information
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
A. How can I get copies of this
document and related information?
1. Docket. An official public docket
for this action has been established
under Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OW–
2017–0203. The official public docket
consists of the documents specifically
referenced in this action, and other
information related to this action. The
official public docket is the collection of
materials that is available for public
viewing at the OW Docket, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20004. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The OW
Docket telephone number is 202–566–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
2426. A reasonable fee will be charged
for copies.
2. Electronic Access. You may access
this Federal Register document
electronically under the Federal
Register listings at https://
www.regulations.gov. An electronic
version of the public docket is available
through EPA’s electronic public docket
and comment system, EPA Dockets. You
may access EPA Dockets at https://
www.regulations.gov to view public
comments as they are submitted and
posted, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket,
and access those documents in the
public docket that are available
electronically. For additional
information about EPA’s public docket,
visit the EPA Docket Center homepage
at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/
dockets.htm. Although not all docket
materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any
of the publicly available docket
materials through the Docket Facility.
B. What is the agencies’ authority for
taking this action?
The authority for this action is the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33
U.S.C. 1251, et seq., including sections
301, 304, 311, 401, 402, 404 and 501.
C. What are the economic impacts of
this action?
This proposed rule is the first step in
a comprehensive, two-step process to
review and revise the 2015 definition of
‘‘waters of the United States.’’ The
agencies prepared an illustrative
economic analysis to provide the public
with information on the potential
changes to the costs and benefits of
various CWA programs that could result
if there were a change in the number of
positive jurisdictional determinations.
The economic analysis is provided
pursuant to the requirements of
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 to
provide information to the public. The
2015 CWR is used as a baseline in the
analysis in order to provide information
to the public on the estimated
differential effects of restoring pre-2015
status quo in comparison to the 2015
CWR. However, as explained
previously, the 2015 CWR has already
been stayed by the Sixth Circuit, and
this proposal would merely codify the
legal status quo, not change current
practice.
The proposed rule is a definitional
rule that affects the scope of ‘‘waters of
the United States.’’ This rule does not
establish any regulatory requirements or
directly mandate actions on its own.
However, by changing the definition of
‘‘waters of the United States,’’ the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34903
proposed rule would change the waters
where other regulatory requirements
that affect regulated entities come into
play, for example, the locations where
regulated entities would be required to
obtain certain types of permits. The
consequence of a water being deemed
non-jurisdictional is simply that CWA
provisions no longer apply to that water.
There are no avoided costs or forgone
benefits if similar state regulations exist
and continue to apply to that water. The
agencies estimated that the 2015 rule
would result in a small overall increase
in positive jurisdictional determinations
compared to those made under the prior
regulation as currently implemented,
and that there would be fewer waters
within the scope of the CWA under the
2015 rule compared to the prior
regulations. The agencies estimated the
avoided costs and forgone benefits of
repealing the 2015 rule. This analysis is
contained in the Economic Analysis for
the Proposed Definition of ‘‘Waters of
the United States’’—Recodification of
Pre-existing Rules and is available in the
docket for this action.
III. Public Comments
The agencies solicit comment as to
whether it is desirable and appropriate
to re-codify in regulation the status quo
as an interim first step pending a
substantive rulemaking to reconsider
the definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ and the best way to accomplish
it. Because the agencies propose to
simply codify the legal status quo and
because it is a temporary, interim
measure pending substantive
rulemaking, the agencies wish to make
clear that this interim rulemaking does
not undertake any substantive
reconsideration of the pre-2015 ‘‘waters
of the United States’’ definition nor are
the agencies soliciting comment on the
specific content of those longstanding
regulations. See P&V Enterprises v.
Corps of Engineers, 516 F.3d
1021,1023–24 (D.C. Cir. 2008). For the
same reason, the agencies are not at this
time soliciting comment on the scope of
the definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ that the agencies should
ultimately adopt in the second step of
this two-step process, as the agencies
will address all of those issues,
including those related to the 2015 rule,
in the second notice and comment
rulemaking to adopt a revised definition
of ‘‘waters of the United States’’ in light
of the February 28, 2017, Executive
Order. The agencies do not intend to
engage in substantive reevaluation of
the definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ until the second step of the
rulemaking. See P&V, 516 F.3d at 1025–
26.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
34904
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is a significant regulatory
action that was submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review. Any changes made in response
to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket.
In addition, the agencies prepared an
analysis of the potential avoided costs
and forgone benefits associated with
this action. This analysis is contained in
the Economic Analysis for the Proposed
Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United
States’’—Recodification of Pre-existing
Rules. A copy of the analysis is available
in the docket for this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden under the
PRA. OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities
contained in the existing regulations
and has assigned OMB control numbers
2050–0021 and 2050–0135 for the CWA
section 311 program and 2040–0004 for
the 402 program.
For the CWA section 404 regulatory
program, the current OMB approval
number for information requirements is
maintained by the Corps (OMB approval
number 0710–0003). However, there are
no new approval or application
processes required as a result of this
rulemaking that necessitate a new
Information Collection Request (ICR).
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Because this action would simply codify
the legal status quo, we have concluded
that this action will not have a
significant impact on small entities.
This analysis is contained in the
Economic Analysis for the Proposed
Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United
States’’—Recodification of Pre-existing
Rules. A copy of the analysis is available
in the docket for this action.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The definition of ‘‘waters
of the United States’’ applies broadly to
CWA programs. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local, or
tribal governments, or the private sector,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
and does not contain regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Consistent with
the agencies’ policy to promote
communications with state and local
governments, the agencies have
informed states and local governments
about this proposed rulemaking.
The agencies will appropriately
consult with States and local
governments as a subsequent
rulemaking makes changes to the
longstanding definition of ‘‘waters of the
United States.’’
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This proposed
rule maintains the legal status quo.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
Consistent with the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), the
agencies will appropriately consult with
tribal officials during the development
of a subsequent rulemaking that makes
changes to the longstanding definition
of ‘‘waters of the United States.’’ In fact,
the agencies have already initiated the
formal consultation process with respect
to the subsequent rulemaking.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because the environmental
health risks or safety risks addressed by
this action do not present a
disproportionate risk to children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ because it is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
This proposed rule does not involve
technical standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
This proposed rule maintains the
legal status quo. The agencies therefore
believe that this action does not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low-income populations,
and/or indigenous peoples, as specified
in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994).
K. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
Pursuant to Executive Order 13771
(82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) this
proposed rule is expected to be an E.O.
13771 deregulatory action.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 328
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Intergovernmental relations, Navigation,
Water pollution control, Waterways.
40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 122,
230, 232, 300, 302, and 401
Environmental protection, Water
pollution control.
Dated: June 27, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator, Environmental Protection
Agency.
Dated: June 27, 2017.
Douglas W. Lamont,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
(Project Planning and Review), performing
the duties of the Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Civil Works.
Title 33—Navigation and Navigable
Waters
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 33, chapter II of the Code
of Federal Regulations is proposed to be
amended as follows:
PART 328—DEFINITION OF WATERS
OF THE UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 328
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1344.
2. Section 328.3 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) through (d) and
adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as
follows:
■
§ 328.3
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) The term waters of the United
States means
(1) All waters which are currently
used, or were used in the past, or may
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
be susceptible to use in interstate or
foreign commerce, including all waters
which are subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide;
(2) All interstate waters including
interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or
natural ponds, the use, degradation or
destruction of which could affect
interstate or foreign commerce
including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used
for industrial purpose by industries in
interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under the definition;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this
section;
(6) The territorial seas;
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters (other
than waters that are themselves
wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (6) of this section.
(8) Waters of the United States do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of
an area’s status as prior converted
cropland by any other Federal agency,
for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,
the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with
EPA.
Waste treatment systems, including
treatment ponds or lagoons designed to
meet the requirements of CWA (other
than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR
423.11(m) which also meet the criteria
of this definition) are not waters of the
United States.
(b) The term wetlands means those
areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and
that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted for life in saturated
soil conditions. Wetlands generally
include swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas.
(c) The term adjacent means
bordering, contiguous, or neighboring.
Wetlands separated from other waters of
the United States by man-made dikes or
barriers, natural river berms, beach
dunes and the like are ‘‘adjacent
wetlands.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
(d) The term high tide line means the
line of intersection of the land with the
water’s surface at the maximum height
reached by a rising tide. The high tide
line may be determined, in the absence
of actual data, by a line of oil or scum
along shore objects, a more or less
continuous deposit of fine shell or
debris on the foreshore or berm, other
physical markings or characteristics,
vegetation lines, tidal gages, or other
suitable means that delineate the
general height reached by a rising tide.
The line encompasses spring high tides
and other high tides that occur with
periodic frequency but does not include
storm surges in which there is a
departure from the normal or predicted
reach of the tide due to the piling up of
water against a coast by strong winds
such as those accompanying a hurricane
or other intense storm.
(e) The term ordinary high water mark
means that line on the shore established
by the fluctuations of water and
indicated by physical characteristics
such as clear, natural line impressed on
the bank, shelving, changes in the
character of soil, destruction of
terrestrial vegetation, the presence of
litter and debris, or other appropriate
means that consider the characteristics
of the surrounding areas.
(f) The term tidal waters means those
waters that rise and fall in a predictable
and measurable rhythm or cycle due to
the gravitational pulls of the moon and
sun. Tidal waters end where the rise
and fall of the water surface can no
longer be practically measured in a
predictable rhythm due to masking by
hydrologic, wind, or other effects.
Title 40—Protection of Environment
For reasons set out in the preamble,
title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal
Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 110—DISCHARGE OF OIL
3. The authority citation for part 110
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(3) and (b)(4)
and 1361(a); E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR
parts 1971–1975 Comp., p. 793.
4. Section 110.1 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Navigable
waters’’ and adding the definition of
‘‘Wetlands’’ in alphabetical order to
read as follows:
■
§ 110.1
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Navigable waters means the waters of
the United States, including the
territorial seas. The term includes:
(a) All waters that are currently used,
were used in the past, or may be
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34905
susceptible to use in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters that are
subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(b) Interstate waters, including
interstate wetlands;
(c) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, and wetlands, the use,
degradation, or destruction of which
would affect or could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such
waters:
(1) That are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce;
(3) That are used or could be used for
industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(d) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as navigable waters
under this section;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
section, including adjacent wetlands;
and
(f) Wetlands adjacent to waters
identified in paragraphs (a) through (e)
of this section: Provided, That waste
treatment systems (other than cooling
ponds meeting the criteria of this
paragraph) are not waters of the United
States;
Navigable waters do not include prior
converted cropland. Notwithstanding
the determination of an area’s status as
prior converted cropland by any other
federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority
regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction
remains with EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
Wetlands means those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency or duration
sufficient to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas such as sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, prairie river
overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.
PART 112—OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
5. The authority citation for part 112
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C.
2720; E.O. 12777 (October 18, 1991), 3 CFR,
1991 Comp., p. 351.
6. Section 112.2 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Navigable
waters’’ and adding the definition of
■
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
34906
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
‘‘Wetlands’’ in alphabetical order to
read as follows:
§ 112.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Navigable waters of the United States
means ‘‘navigable waters’’ as defined in
section 502(7) of the FWPCA, and
includes:
(1) All navigable waters of the United
States, as defined in judicial decisions
prior to passage of the 1972
Amendments to the FWPCA (Pub. L.
92–500), and tributaries of such waters;
(2) Interstate waters;
(3) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams
which are utilized by interstate travelers
for recreational or other purposes; and
(4) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams
from which fish or shellfish are taken
and sold in interstate commerce.
*
*
*
*
*
Wetlands means those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater at a frequency or duration
sufficient to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas such as sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, prairie river
overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 116—DESIGNATION OF
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
7. The authority citation for part 116
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 311(b)(2)(A) and 501(a),
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
8. Section 116.3 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Navigable
waters’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 116.3
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
Navigable waters is defined in section
502(7) of the Act to mean ‘‘waters of the
United States, including the territorial
seas,’’ and includes, but is not limited
to:
(1) All waters which are presently
used, or were used in the past, or may
be susceptible to use as a means to
transport interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters which
are subject to the ebb and flow of the
tide, and including adjacent wetlands;
the term wetlands as used in this
regulation shall include those areas that
are inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support,
a prevelance of vegetation typically
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
PART 117—DETERMINATION OF
REPORTABLE QUANTITIES FOR
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
9. The authority citation for part 117
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 311 and 501(a), Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251
et seq.), (‘‘the Act’’) and Executive Order
11735, superseded by Executive Order 12777,
56 FR 54757.
Definitions.
*
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs and similar
areas; the term adjacent means
bordering, contiguous or neighboring;
(2) Tributaries of navigable waters of
the United States, including adjacent
wetlands;
(3) Interstate waters, including
wetlands; and
(4) All other waters of the United
States such as intrastate lakes, rivers,
streams, mudflats, sandflats and
wetlands, the use, degradation or
destruction of which affect interstate
commerce including, but not limited to:
(i) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and
wetlands which are utilized by
interstate travelers for recreational or
other purposes; and
(ii) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams,
and wetlands from which fish or
shellfish are or could be taken and sold
in interstate commerce; and
(iii) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams,
and wetlands which are utilized for
industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce.
Navigable waters do not include prior
converted cropland. Notwithstanding
the determination of an area’s status as
prior converted cropland by any other
federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority
regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction
remains with EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
10. Section 117.1 is amended by
revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
■
§ 117.1
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Navigable waters means ‘‘waters of
the United States, including the
territorial seas.’’ This term includes:
(1) All waters which are currently
used, were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to use in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters which
are subject to the ebb and flow of the
tide;
(2) Interstate waters, including
interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams, (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, and wetlands, the use,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
degradation or destruction of which
would affect or could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such
waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes;
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce;
(iii) Which are used or could be used
for industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as navigable waters
under this paragraph;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (i)(1) through (4) of this
section, including adjacent wetlands;
and
(6) Wetlands adjacent to waters
identified in paragraphs (i)(1) through
(5) of this section (‘‘Wetlands’’ means
those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or ground water at
a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life
in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands
generally included playa lakes, swamps,
marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows,
prairie river overflows, mudflats, and
natural ponds): Provided, That waste
treatment systems (other than cooling
ponds meeting the criteria of this
paragraph) are not waters of the United
States.
Navigable waters do not include prior
converted cropland. Notwithstanding
the determination of an area’s status as
prior converted cropland by any other
federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority
regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction
remains with EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 122—EPA ADMINISTERED
PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM
11. The authority citation for part 122
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.
1251 et seq.
12. Section 122.2 is amended by:
a. Lifting the suspension of the last
sentence of the definition of ‘‘Waters of
the United States’’ published July 21,
1980 (45 FR 48620).
■ b. Revising the definition of ‘‘Waters
of the United States’’.
■ c. Suspending the last sentence of the
definition of ‘‘Waters of the United
States’’ published July 21, 1980 (45 FR
48620).
■
■
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
d. Adding the definition of
‘‘Wetlands’’.
The revision and addition read as
follows:
■
§ 122.2
Definitions.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
Waters of the United States or waters
of the U.S. means:
(a) All waters which are currently
used, were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to use in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters which
are subject to the ebb and flow of the
tide;
(b) All interstate waters, including
interstate ‘‘wetlands;’’
(c) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, ‘‘wetlands,’’ sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or
natural ponds the use, degradation, or
destruction of which would affect or
could affect interstate or foreign
commerce including any such waters:
(1) Which are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce; or
(3) Which are used or could be used
for industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(d) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this definition;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
definition;
(f) The territorial sea; and
(g) ‘‘Wetlands’’ adjacent to waters
(other than waters that are themselves
wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a)
through (f) of this definition.
Waste treatment systems, including
treatment ponds or lagoons designed to
meet the requirements of CWA (other
than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR
423.11(m) which also meet the criteria
of this definition) are not waters of the
United States. This exclusion applies
only to manmade bodies of water which
neither were originally created in waters
of the United States (such as disposal
area in wetlands) nor resulted from the
impoundment of waters of the United
States. [See Note 1 of this section.]
Waters of the United States do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of
an area’s status as prior converted
cropland by any other federal agency,
for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,
the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with
EPA.
Note: At 45 FR 48620, July 21, 1980,
the Environmental Protection Agency
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
suspended until further notice in
§ 122.2, the last sentence, beginning
‘‘This exclusion applies . . .’’ in the
definition of ‘‘Waters of the United
States.’’ This revision continues that
suspension.
Wetlands means those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support,
a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar
areas.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 230—SECTION 404(b)(1)
GUIDELINES FOR SPECIFICATION OF
DISPOSAL SITES FOR DREDGED OR
FILL MATERIAL
13. The authority citation for part 230
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 404(b) and 501(a) of the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 1344(b)
and 1361(a)).
14. Section 230.3 is amended by:
a. Redesignating paragraph (o) as
paragraph (s).
■ b. Revising newly redesignated
paragraph (s).
■ c. Redesignating paragraph (n) as
paragraph (r).
■ d. Redesignating paragraph (m) as
paragraph (q–1).
■ e. Redesignating paragraphs (h)
through (l) as paragraphs (m) through
(q).
■ f. Redesignating paragraphs (e) and (f)
as paragraphs (h) and (i).
■ g. Redesignating paragraph (g) as
paragraph (k).
■ h. Redesignating paragraphs (b)
through (d) as paragraphs (c) through
(e).
■ i. Adding reserved paragraphs (f), (g),
(j), and (l).
■ j. Adding paragraphs (b) and (t).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 230.3
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The term adjacent means
bordering, contiguous, or neighboring.
Wetlands separated from other waters of
the United States by man-made dikes or
barriers, natural river berms, beach
dunes, and the like are ‘‘adjacent
wetlands.’’
*
*
*
*
*
(s) The term waters of the United
States means:
(1) All waters which are currently
used, or were used in the past, or may
be susceptible to use in interstate or
foreign commerce, including all waters
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34907
which are subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide;
(2) All interstate waters including
interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or
natural ponds, the use, degradation or
destruction of which could affect
interstate or foreign commerce
including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used
for industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this definition;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (s)(1) through (4) of this
section;
(6) The territorial sea;
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters (other
than waters that are themselves
wetlands) identified in paragraphs (s)(1)
through (6) of this section; waste
treatment systems, including treatment
ponds or lagoons designed to meet the
requirements of CWA (other than
cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR
423.11(m) which also meet the criteria
of this definition) are not waters of the
United States.
Waters of the United States do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of
an area’s status as prior converted
cropland by any other federal agency,
for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,
the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with
EPA.
(t) The term wetlands means those
areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and
that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted for life in saturated
soil conditions. Wetlands generally
include swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas.
PART 232—404 PROGRAMS
DEFINITIONS; EXEMPT ACTIVITIES
NOT REQUIRING 404 PERMITS
15. The authority citation for part 232
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1344.
16. Section 232.2 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Waters of the
■
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
34908
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
United States’’ and adding the
definition of ‘‘Wetlands’’ to read as
follows:
PART 300—NATIONAL OIL AND
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN
§ 232.2
■
Definitions.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
Waters of the United States means:
All waters which are currently used,
were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to us in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters which
are subject to the ebb and flow of the
tide.
All interstate waters including
interstate wetlands.
All other waters, such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or
natural ponds, the use, degradation, or
destruction of which would or could
affect interstate or foreign commerce
including any such waters:
Which are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes; or
From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce; or
Which are used or could be used for
industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce.
All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this definition;
Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (g)(1)–(4) of this section;
The territorial sea; and
Wetlands adjacent to waters (other
than waters that are themselves
wetlands) identified in paragraphs
(q)(1)–(6) of this section.
Waste treatment systems, including
treatment ponds or lagoons designed to
meet the requirements of the Act (other
than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR
123.11(m) which also meet the criteria
of this definition) are not waters of the
United States.
Waters of the United States do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of
an area’s status as prior converted
cropland by any other federal agency,
for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,
the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with
EPA.
Wetlands means those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support,
a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar
areas.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
17. The authority citation for part 300
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR,
2013 Comp., p.306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757,
3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.193.
18. Section 300.5 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Navigable
waters’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 300.5
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Navigable waters as defined by 40
CFR 110.1, means the waters of the
United States, including the territorial
seas. The term includes:
(1) All waters that are currently used,
were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to use in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters that are
subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) Interstate waters, including
interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, and wetlands, the use,
degradation, or destruction of which
would affect or could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such
waters;
(i) That are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes;
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce;
(iii) That are used or could be used for
industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as navigable waters
under this section;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
definition, including adjacent wetlands;
and
(6) Wetlands adjacent to waters
identified in paragraphs (a) through (e)
of this definition: Provided, that waste
treatment systems (other than cooling
ponds meeting the criteria of this
paragraph) are not waters of the United
States.
(7) Waters of the United States do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of
an area’s status as prior converted
cropland by any other federal agency,
for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,
the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with
EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
19. In appendix E to part 300, section
1.5 is amended by revising the
definition of ‘‘Navigable waters’’ to read
as follows:
■
Appendix E to Part 300—Oil Spill
Response
*
*
*
*
*
1.5 Definitions * * *
Navigable waters as defined by 40 CFR
110.1 means the waters of the United States,
including the territorial seas. The term
includes:
(a) All waters that are currently used, were
used in the past, or may be susceptible to use
in interstate or foreign commerce, including
all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow
of the tide;
(b) Interstate waters, including interstate
wetlands;
(c) All other waters such as intrastate lakes,
rivers, streams (including intermittent
streams), mudflats, sandflats, and wetlands,
the use, degradation, or destruction of which
would affect or could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such waters:
(1) That are or could be used by interstate
or foreign travelers for recreational or other
purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce; and
(3) That are used or could be used for
industrial purposes by industries in interstate
commerce.
(d) All impoundments of waters otherwise
defined as navigable waters under this
section;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this definition,
including adjacent wetlands; and
(f) Wetlands adjacent to waters identified
in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
definition: Provided, that waste treatment
systems (other than cooling ponds meeting
the criteria of this paragraph) are not waters
of the United States.
(g) Waters of the United States do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of an
area’s status as prior converted cropland by
any other federal agency, for the purposes of
the Clean Water Act, the final authority
regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction
remains with EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 302—DESIGNATION,
REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND
NOTIFICATION
20. The authority citation for part 302
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602, 9603, and 9604;
33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361.
21. Section 302.3 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Navigable
waters’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 302.3
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Navigable waters or navigable waters
of the United States means waters of the
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
United States, including the territorial
seas;
*
*
*
*
*
PART 401—GENERAL PROVISIONS
22. The authority citation for part 401
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 301, 304 (b) and (c), 306
(b) and (c), 307 (b) and (c) and 316(b) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (the ‘‘Act’’), 33 U.S.C. 1251, 1311,
1314 (b) and (c), 1316 (b) and (c), 1317 (b)
and (c) and 1326(c); 86 Stat. 816 et seq.; Pub.
L. 92–500.
23. Section 401.11 is amended by
revising paragraph (l) to read as follows:
■
§ 401.11
General definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) The term navigable waters
includes: All navigable waters of the
United States; tributaries of navigable
waters of the United States; interstate
waters; intrastate lakes, rivers, and
streams which are utilized by interstate
travelers for recreational or other
purposes; intrastate lakes, rivers, and
streams from which fish or shellfish are
taken and sold in interstate commerce;
and intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams
which are utilized for industrial
purposes by industries in interstate
commerce. Navigable waters do not
include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of
an area’s status as prior converted
cropland by any other federal agency,
for the purposes of the Clean Water Act,
the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with
EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–13997 Filed 7–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Chapter 1
46 CFR Chapters 1 and III
49 CFR Chapter IV
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
[Docket No. USCG–2017–0658]
Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory
Committee—Input To Support
Regulatory Reform of Coast Guard
Regulations—New Task
U.S. Coast Guard, Department
of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Announcement of new task
assignment for the Great Lakes Pilotage
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
Advisory Committee (GLPAC);
teleconference meeting.
The U.S. Coast Guard is
issuing a new task to the Great Lakes
Pilotage Advisory Committee (GLPAC).
The U.S. Coast Guard is asking GLPAC
to help the agency identify existing
regulations, guidance, and collections of
information (that fall within the scope
of the Committee’s charter) for possible
repeal, replacement, or modification.
This tasking is in response to the
issuance of Executive Orders 13771,
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs; 13777, ‘‘Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda;’’ and 13783,
‘‘Promoting Energy Independence and
Economic Growth.’’ The full Committee
is scheduled to meet by teleconference
on August 23, 2017, to discuss this
tasking. This teleconference will be
open to the public. The U.S. Coast
Guard will consider GLPAC
recommendations as part of the process
of identifying regulations, guidance, and
collections of information to be
repealed, replaced, or modified
pursuant to the three Executive Orders
discussed above.
DATES: The full Committee is scheduled
to meet by teleconference on August 23,
2017, from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. EDT.
Please note that this teleconference may
adjourn early if the Committee has
completed its business.
ADDRESSES: To join the teleconference
or to request special accommodations,
contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
no later than 1 p.m. on August 16, 2017.
The number of teleconference lines is
limited and will be available on a firstcome, first-served basis.
Instructions: Submit comments on the
task statement at any time, including
orally at the teleconference, but if you
want Committee members to review
your comments before the
teleconference, please submit your
comments no later than August 16,
2017. You must include the words
‘‘Department of Homeland Security’’
and the docket number for this action.
Written comments may also be
submitted using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If you encounter
technical difficulties with comment
submission, contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this notice.
Comments received will be posted
without alteration at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. You
may review Regulations.gov’s Privacy
and Security Notice at https://
www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34909
Docket Search: For access to the
docket or to read documents or
comments related to this notice, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, insert
‘‘USCG–2017–0658’’ in the Search box,
press Enter, and then click on the item
you wish to view.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Michelle Birchfield, Alternate
Designated Federal Officer of the Great
Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee,
telephone (202) 372–1533, or email
michelle.r.birchfield@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
New Task to the Committee
The U.S. Coast Guard is issuing a new
task to GLPAC to provide
recommendations on whether existing
regulations, guidance, and information
collections (that fall within the scope of
the Committee’s charter) should be
repealed, replaced, or modified. GLPAC
will then provide advice and
recommendations on the assigned task
and submit a final recommendation
report to the U.S. Coast Guard.
Background
On January 30, 2017, President Trump
issued Executive Order 13771,
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs.’’ Under that Executive
Order, for every one new regulation
issued, at least two prior regulations
must be identified for elimination, and
the cost of planned regulations must be
prudently managed and controlled
through a budgeting process. On
February 24, 2017, the President issued
Executive Order 13777, ‘‘Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda.’’ That
Executive Order directs agencies to take
specific steps to identify and alleviate
unnecessary regulatory burdens placed
on the American people. On March 28,
2017, the President issued Executive
Order 13783, ‘‘Promoting Energy
Independence and Economic Growth.’’
Executive Order 13783 promotes the
clean and safe development of our
Nation’s vast energy resources, while at
the same time avoiding agency actions
that unnecessarily encumber energy
production.
When implementing the regulatory
offsets required by Executive Order
13771, each agency head is directed to
prioritize, to the extent permitted by
law, those regulations that the agency’s
Regulatory Reform Task Force identifies
as outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective
in accordance with Executive Order
13777. As part of this process to comply
with all three Executive Orders, the U.S.
Coast Guard is reaching out through
multiple avenues to interested
individuals to gather their input about
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 143 (Thursday, July 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34899-34909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13997]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
33 CFR Part 328
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 122, 230, 232, 300, 302, and 401
[EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0203; FRL-9962-34-OW]
RIN 2040-AF74
Definition of ``Waters of the United States''--Recodification of
Pre-Existing Rules
AGENCY: Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Department of
Defense; and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the
Army (``the agencies'') are publishing this proposed rule to initiate
the first step in a comprehensive, two-step process intended to review
and revise the definition of ``waters of the United States'' consistent
with the Executive Order signed on February 28, 2017, ``Restoring the
Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the `Waters
of the United States' Rule.'' This first step proposes to rescind the
definition of ``waters of the United States'' in the Code of Federal
Regulations to re-codify the definition of ``waters of the United
States,'' which currently governs administration of the Clean Water
Act, pursuant to a decision issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Sixth Circuit staying a definition of ``waters of the United States''
promulgated by the agencies in 2015. The agencies would apply the
definition of ``waters of the United States'' as it is currently being
implemented, that is informed by applicable agency guidance documents
and consistent with Supreme Court decisions and longstanding practice.
Proposing to re-codify the regulations that existed before the 2015
Clean Water Rule will provide continuity and certainty for regulated
entities, the States, agency staff, and the public. In a second step,
the agencies will pursue notice-and-comment rulemaking in which the
agencies will conduct a substantive re-evaluation of the definition of
``waters of the United States.''
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 28, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2017-0203, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The agencies may publish any
comment received to the public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The
agencies will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Donna Downing, Office of Water
(4504-T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 566-2428; email
address: CWAwotus@epa.gov; or Ms. Stacey Jensen, Regulatory Community
of Practice (CECW-CO-R), U.S. Army
[[Page 34900]]
Corps of Engineers, 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314; telephone
number: (202) 761-5903; email address: USACE_CWA_Rule@usace.army.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The regulatory definition of ``waters of the
United States'' in this proposed rule is the same as the definition
that existed prior to promulgation of the Clean Water Rule in 2015 and
that has been in effect nationwide since the Clean Water Rule was
stayed on October 9, 2015. The agencies will administer the regulations
as they are currently being implemented consistent with Supreme Court
decisions and longstanding practice as informed by applicable agency
guidance documents.
State, tribal, and local governments have well-defined and
longstanding relationships with the federal government in implementing
CWA programs and these relationships are not altered by the proposed
rule. This proposed rule will not establish any new regulatory
requirements. Rather, the rule simply codifies the current legal status
quo while the agencies engage in a second, substantive rulemaking to
reconsider the definition of ``waters of the United States.''
I. Executive Summary
A. What This Proposed Rule Does
In this proposed rule, the agencies define the scope of ``waters of
the United States'' that are protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
In 2015, the agencies published the ``Clean Water Rule: Definition of
`Waters of the United States''' (80 FR 37054, June 29, 2015), and on
October 9, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stayed
the 2015 Rule nationwide pending further action of the court. The
agencies propose to replace the stayed 2015 definition of ``waters of
the United States'', and re-codify the exact same regulatory text that
existed prior to the 2015 rule, which reflects the current legal regime
under which the agencies are operating pursuant to the Sixth Circuit's
October 9, 2015 order. The proposed regulatory text would thus replace
the stayed rulemaking text, and re-codify the regulatory definitions
(at 33 CFR part 328 and 40 CFR parts 110; 112; 116; 117; 122; 230; 232;
300; 302; and 401) in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as they
existed prior to the promulgation of the stayed 2015 definition. If
this proposed rule is finalized, the agencies would continue to
implement those prior regulatory definitions), informed by applicable
agency guidance documents and consistent with Supreme Court decisions
and longstanding agency practice.
B. History and the Purpose of This Rulemaking
Congress enacted the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972, Public Law 92-500, 86 Stat. 816, as amended, Public Law 95-
217, 91 Stat. 1566, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. (``Clean Water Act'' or
``CWA'' or ``Act'') ``to restore and maintain the chemical, physical
and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.'' Section 101(a). A
primary tool in achieving that purpose is a prohibition on the
discharge of any pollutants, including dredged or fill material, to
``navigable waters'' except in accordance with the Act. Section 301(a).
The CWA provides that ``[t]he term `navigable waters' means the waters
of the United States, including the territorial seas.'' Section 502(7).
The CWA also provides that States retain their traditional role in
preventing, reducing and eliminating pollution. The Act states that
``[i]t is the policy of the Congress to recognize, preserve, and
protect the primary responsibilities and rights of States to prevent,
reduce, and eliminate pollution, to plan the development and use
(including restoration, preservation, and enhancement) of land and
water resources . . .'' Section 101(b). States and Tribes voluntarily
may assume responsibility for permit programs governing discharges of
pollution under section 402 for any jurisdictional water bodies
(section 402(b)), or of dredged or fill material discharges under
section 404 (section 404(g)), with agency approval. (Section 404(g)
provides that states may not assume permitting authority over certain
specified waters and their adjacent wetlands.) States are also free to
establish their own programs under state law to manage and protect
waters and wetlands independent of the federal CWA. The statute's
introductory purpose section thus commands the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to pursue two policy goals simultaneously: (a) To restore
and maintain the nation's waters; and (b) to preserve the States'
primary responsibility and right to prevent, reduce, and eliminate
pollution.
The regulations defining the scope of federal CWA jurisdiction
currently in effect, which this proposed rule would recodify, were
established in large part in 1977 (42 FR 37122, July 19, 1977). While
EPA administers most provisions in the CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) administers the permitting program under section 404.
During the 1980s, both of these agencies adopted substantially similar
definitions (51 FR 41206, Nov. 13, 1986, amending 33 CFR 328.3; 53 FR
20764, June 6, 1988, amending 40 CFR 232.2).
Federal courts have reviewed the definition of ``waters of the
United States'' and its application to a variety of factual
circumstances. Three Supreme Court decisions, in particular, provide
critical context and guidance in determining the appropriate scope of
``waters of the United States.''
In United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, 474 U.S. 121 (1985)
(Riverside), the Court, in a unanimous opinion, deferred to the Corps'
ecological judgment that adjacent wetlands are ``inseparably bound up''
with the waters to which they are adjacent, and upheld the inclusion of
adjacent wetlands in the regulatory definition of ``waters of the
United States.'' Id. at 134.
In Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001) (SWANCC), the Supreme Court held that
the use of ``isolated'' non-navigable intrastate ponds by migratory
birds was not by itself a sufficient basis for the exercise of federal
regulatory authority under the CWA. The SWANCC decision created
uncertainty with regard to the jurisdiction of other isolated non-
navigable waters and wetlands. In January 2003, EPA and the Corps
issued joint guidance interpreting the Supreme Court decision in SWANCC
(``the 2003 Guidance''). The guidance indicated that SWANCC focused on
isolated, intrastate, non-navigable waters, and called for field staff
to coordinate with their respective Corps or EPA Headquarters on
jurisdictional determinations which asserted jurisdiction for waters
under 33 CFR 328.3(a)(3)(i) through (iii). Waters that were
jurisdictional pursuant to 33 CFR 328.3(a)(3) could no longer be
determined jurisdictional based solely on their use by migratory birds.
Five years after the SWANCC decision, in Rapanos v. United States,
547 U.S. 715 (2006) (Rapanos), a four-Justice plurality opinion in
Rapanos, authored by Justice Scalia, interpreted the term ``waters of
the United States'' as covering ``relatively permanent, standing or
continuously flowing bodies of water . . . ,'' id. at 739, that are
connected to traditional navigable waters, id. at 742, as well as
wetlands with a ``continuous surface connection . . .'' to such water
bodies, id. (Scalia, J., plurality opinion). The Rapanos plurality
noted that its reference to ``relatively permanent'' waters did ``not
necessarily exclude streams, rivers, or lakes that might dry up in
extraordinary circumstances, such as drought,'' or ``seasonal rivers,
which contain
[[Page 34901]]
continuous flow during some months of the year but no flow during dry
months . . .'' Id. at 732 n.5 (emphasis in original). Justice Kennedy
concurred with the plurality judgment, but concluded that the
appropriate test for the scope of jurisdictional waters is whether a
water or wetland possesses a `` `significant nexus' to waters that are
or were navigable in fact or that could reasonably be so made.'' Id. at
759. The four dissenting Justices in Rapanos, who would have affirmed
the court of appeals' application of the agencies' regulations, also
concluded that the term ``waters of the United States'' encompasses,
inter alia, all tributaries and wetlands that satisfy ``either the
plurality's [standard] or Justice Kennedy's.'' Id. at 810 & n.14
(Stevens, J., dissenting).
While the SWANCC and Rapanos decisions limited the way the
agencies' longstanding regulatory definition of ``waters of the United
States'' was implemented, in neither case did the Court invalidate that
definition.
After the Rapanos decision, the agencies issued joint guidance in
2007 to address the waters at issue in that decision but did not change
the codified definition. The guidance indicated that ``waters of the
United States'' included traditional navigable waters and their
adjacent wetlands, relatively permanent waters and wetlands that abut
them, and waters with a significant nexus to a traditional navigable
water. The guidance did not address waters not at issue in Rapanos,
such as interstate waters and the territorial seas. The guidance was
reissued in 2008 with minor changes (hereinafter, the ``2008
guidance'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The guidance expressly stated that it was not intended to
create any legally binding requirements, and that ``interested
persons are free to raise questions about the appropriateness of the
application of this guidance to a particular situation, and EPA and/
or the Corps will consider whether or not the recommendations or
interpretations of this guidance are appropriate in that situation
based on the statutes, regulations, and case law.'' 2008 guidance at
4 n. 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After issuance of the 2008 guidance, Members of Congress,
developers, farmers, state and local governments, environmental
organizations, energy companies and others asked the agencies to
replace the guidance with a regulation that would provide clarity and
certainty on the scope of the waters protected by the CWA.
Following public notice and comment on a proposed rule, the
agencies published a final rule defining the scope of ``waters of the
United States'' on June 29, 2015 (80 FR 37054). Thirty-one States and a
number of other parties sought judicial review in multiple actions in
Federal district courts and Circuit Courts of Appeal, raising concerns
about the scope and legal authority of the 2015 rule. One district
court issued an order granting a motion for preliminary injunction on
the rule's effective date, finding that the thirteen State challengers
were likely to succeed on their claims, including that the rule
violated the congressional grant of authority to the agencies under the
CWA and that it appeared likely the EPA failed to comply with
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requirements in promulgating the
rule. State of North Dakota et al. v. US EPA, No. 15-00059, slip op. at
1-2 (D.N.D. Aug. 27, 2015, as clarified by order issued on September 4,
2015). Several weeks later, the Sixth Circuit stayed the 2015 rule
nationwide to restore the ``pre-Rule regime, pending judicial review.''
In re U.S. Dep't. of Def. and U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency Final Rule:
Clean Water Rule, No. 15-3751 (lead), slip op. at 6. The Sixth Circuit
found that the petitioners had demonstrated a substantial possibility
of success on the merits, including with regard to claims that certain
provisions of the rule were at odds with the Rapanos decision and that
the distance limitations in the rule were not substantiated by
scientific support. Pursuant to the court's order, the agencies have
implemented the statute pursuant to the regulatory regime that preceded
the 2015 rule. On January 13, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court granted
certiorari on the question of whether the court of appeals has original
jurisdiction to review challenges to the 2015 rule. The Sixth Circuit
granted petitioners' motion to hold in abeyance the briefing schedule
in the litigation challenging the 2015 rule pending a Supreme Court
decision on the question of the court of appeals' jurisdiction.
On February 28, 2017, the President of the United States issued an
Executive Order entitled ``Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and
Economic Growth by Reviewing the `Waters of the United States' Rule.''
Section 1 of the Order states, ``[i]t is in the national interest to
ensure that the Nation's navigable waters are kept free from pollution,
while at the same time promoting economic growth, minimizing regulatory
uncertainty, and showing due regard for the roles of the Congress and
the States under the Constitution.'' It directs the EPA and the Army to
review the 2015 rule for consistency with the policy outlined in
section 1, and to issue a proposed rule rescinding or revising the 2015
rule as appropriate and consistent with law. Section 2. The Executive
Order also directs the agencies to consider interpreting the term
``navigable waters'' in a manner consistent with Justice Scalia's
plurality opinion in Rapanos. Section 3.
The agencies have the authority to rescind and revise the
regulatory definition of ``waters of the United States,'' consistent
with the guidance in the Executive Order, so long as the revised
definition is authorized under the law and based on a reasoned
explanation. FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515
(2009) (``Fox''). Importantly, such a revised decision need not be
based upon a change of facts or circumstances. A revised rulemaking
based ``on a re-evaluation of which policy would be better in light of
the facts'' is ``well within an agency's discretion,'' and ``[a] change
in administration brought about by the people casting their votes is a
perfectly reasonable basis for an executive agency's reappraisal'' of
its regulations and programs. Nat'l Ass'n of Home Builders v. EPA, 682
F.3d 1032, 1038 & 1043 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (citing Fox, 556 U.S. at 514-15
(Rehnquist, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)).
The Executive Order states that it is in the national interest to
protect the nation's waters from pollution as well as to allow for
economic growth, ensuring regulatory clarity, and providing due
deference to States, as well as Congress. Executive Order section 1.
These various priorities reflect, in part the CWA itself, which
includes both the objective to ``restore and maintain'' the integrity
of the nation's waters, as well as the policy to ``recognize, preserve,
and protect the primary responsibilities and right of States to
prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution . . .'' CWA sections 101(a),
101(b). Re-evaluating the best means of balancing these statutory
priorities, as called for in the Executive Order, is well within the
scope of authority that Congress has delegated to the agencies under
the CWA.
This rulemaking is the first step in a two-step response to the
Executive Order, intended to ensure certainty as to the scope of CWA
jurisdiction on an interim basis as the agencies proceed to engage in
the second step: A substantive review of the appropriate scope of
``waters of the United States.''
C. This Proposed Rule
In this proposed rule, the agencies would rescind the 2015 Clean
Water Rule and replace it with a recodification of the regulatory text
that governed the legal regime prior to the 2015 Clean Water Rule and
that the agencies are
[[Page 34902]]
currently implementing under the court stay, informed by applicable
guidance documents (e.g., the 2003 and 2008 guidance documents, as well
as relevant memoranda and regulatory guidance letters), and consistent
with the SWANCC and Rapanos Supreme Court decisions, applicable case
law, and longstanding agency practice. The proposal retains exclusions
from the definition of ``waters of the United States'' for prior
converted cropland and waste treatment systems, both of which existed
before the 2015 regulations were issued. Nothing in this proposed rule
restricts the ability of States to protect waters within their
boundaries by defining the scope of waters regulated under State law
more broadly than the federal law definition.
D. Rationale for This Rulemaking
This rulemaking action is consistent with the February 28, 2017,
Executive Order and the Clean Water Act. This action will consist of
two steps. In this first step, the agencies are proposing as an interim
action to repeal the 2015 definition of ``waters of the United States''
and codify the legal status quo that is being implemented now under the
Sixth Circuit stay of the 2015 definition of ``waters of the United
States'' and that was in place for decades prior to the 2015 rule. This
regulatory text would, pending completion of the second step in the
two-step process, continue to be informed by the 2003 and 2008 guidance
documents. In the second step, the agencies will conduct a separate
notice and comment rulemaking that will consider developing a new
definition of ``waters of the United States'' taking into consideration
the principles that Justice Scalia outlined in the Rapanos plurality
opinion.
In the 2015 rulemaking, the agencies described their task as
``interpret[ing] the scope of the `waters of the United States' for the
CWA in light of the goals, objectives, and policies of the statute, the
Supreme Court case law, the relevant and available science, and the
agencies' technical expertise and experience.'' 80 FR 37054, 37060
(June 29, 2015). In so doing, the agencies properly acknowledged that a
regulation defining ``waters of the United States'' in this area is not
driven by any one type or piece of information, but rather must be the
product of the evaluation and balancing of a variety of different types
of information. That information includes scientific data as well as
the policies articulated by Congress when it passed the Act. For
example, the agencies recognized this construct in the preamble to the
2015 Rule by explaining that what constitutes a ``significant nexus''
to navigable waters ``is not a purely scientific determination'' and
that ``science does not provide bright line boundaries with respect to
where `water ends' for purposes of the CWA.'' 80 FR at 37060.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This notion was at least implicitly recognized by the Chief
Justice in his concurring opinion in Rapanos: ``[T]he Corps and the
EPA would have enjoyed plenty of room to operate in developing some
notion of an outer bound to the reach of their authority.'' Rapanos
v. United States, 547 U.S. 715, 758 (2006) (Roberts, C.J.,
concurring). Ultimately, developing ``some notion of an outer
bound'' from the full range of relevant information is the task
facing the agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The objectives, goals, and policies of the statute are detailed in
sections 101(a)-(g) of the statute, and guide the agencies'
interpretation and application of the Clean Water Act. Section 101(a)
of the Act states that the ``objective of this chapter is to restore
and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
Nation's waters,'' and identifies several goals and national policies
Congress believed would help the Act achieve that objective. 33 U.S.C.
1251(a). When referring to the Act's objective, the 2015 rule referred
specifically to Section 101(a). 80 FR at 37056.
In addition to the objective of the Act and the goals and policies
identified to help achieve that objective in section 101(a), in section
101(b) Congress articulated that it is ``the policy of the Congress''
to recognize, preserve, and protect the primary responsibilities and
rights of States to prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution, to plan
the development and use (including restoration, preservation, and
enhancement) of land and water resources, and to consult with the
Administrator in the exercise of his or her authority. Section 101(b)
also states that it is the policy of Congress that the States manage
the construction grant program under this chapter and implement the
permit programs under sections 402 and 404 of the Act. 33 U.S.C.
1251(b). Therefore, as part of the two-step rulemaking, the agencies
will be considering the relationship of the CWA objective and policies,
and in particular, the meaning and importance of section 101(b).
The 2015 rule did acknowledge the language contained in section
101(b) and the vital role states and tribes play in the implementation
of the Act and the effort to meet the Act's stated objective. See,
e.g., 80 FR at 37059. In discussing the provision, the agencies noted
that it was ``[o]f particular importance[,] [that] states and tribes
may be authorized by the EPA to administer the permitting programs of
CWA sections 402 and 404.'' Id. The agencies also noted that ``States
and federally-recognized tribes, consistent with the CWA, retain full
authority to implement their own programs to more broadly and more
fully protect the waters in their jurisdiction.'' Id. at 37060.
However, the agencies did not include a discussion in the 2015 rule
preamble of the meaning and importance of section 101(b) in guiding the
choices the agencies make in setting the outer bounds of jurisdiction
of the Act, despite the recognition that the rule must be drafted ``in
light of the goals, objectives, and policies of the statute.'' In the
two-step rulemaking process commencing with today's notice, the
agencies will more fully consider the policy in section 101(b) when
exercising their discretion to delineate the scope of waters of the
U.S., including the extent to which states or tribes have protected or
may protect waters that are not subject to CWA jurisdiction.
The scope of CWA jurisdiction is an issue of great national
importance and therefore the agencies will allow for robust
deliberations on the ultimate regulation. While engaging in such
deliberations, however, the agencies recognize the need to provide as
an interim step for regulatory continuity and clarity for the many
stakeholders affected by the definition of ``waters of the United
States.'' The pre-CWR regulatory regime is in effect as a result of the
Sixth Circuit's stay of the 2015 rule but that regime depends upon the
pendency of the Sixth Circuit's order and could be altered at any time
by factors beyond the control of the agencies. The Supreme Court's
resolution of the question as to which courts have original
jurisdiction over challenges to the 2015 rule could impact the Sixth
Circuit's exercise of jurisdiction and its stay. If, for example, the
Supreme Court were to decide that the Sixth Circuit lacks original
jurisdiction over challenges to the 2015 rule, the Sixth Circuit case
would be dismissed and its nationwide stay would expire, leading to
inconsistencies, uncertainty, and confusion as to the regulatory regime
that would be in effect pending substantive rulemaking under the
Executive Order.
As noted previously, prior to the Sixth Circuit's stay order, the
District Court for North Dakota had preliminarily enjoined the rule in
13 States (North Dakota, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho,
Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Wyoming and New
Mexico). Therefore, if the Sixth Circuit's nationwide stay were to
expire, the 2015
[[Page 34903]]
rule would be enjoined under the North Dakota order in States covering
a large geographic area of the country, but the rule would be in effect
in the rest of the country pending further judicial decision-making or
substantive rulemaking under the Executive Order.
Adding to the confusion that could be caused if the Sixth Circuit's
nationwide stay of the 2015 rule were to expire, there are multiple
other district court cases pending on the 2015 rule, including several
where challengers have filed motions for preliminary injunctions. These
cases--and the pending preliminary injunction motions--would likely be
reactivated if the Supreme Court were to determine that the Sixth
Circuit lacks original jurisdiction over challenges to the 2015 rule.
The proposed interim rule would establish a clear regulatory framework
that would avoid the inconsistencies, uncertainty and confusion that
would result from a Supreme Court ruling affecting the Sixth Circuit's
jurisdiction while the agencies reconsider the 2015 rule. It would
ensure that, during this interim period, the scope of CWA jurisdiction
will be administered exactly the way it is now, and as it was for many
years prior to the promulgation of the 2015 rule. The agencies
considered other approaches to providing stability while they work to
finalize the revised definition, such as simply withdrawing or staying
the Clean Water Rule, but did not identify any options that would do so
more effectively and efficiently than this proposed rule would do. A
stable regulatory foundation for the status quo would facilitate the
agencies' considered re-evaluation, as appropriate, of the definition
of ``waters of the United States'' that best effectuates the language,
structure, and purposes of the Clean Water Act.
II. General Information
A. How can I get copies of this document and related information?
1. Docket. An official public docket for this action has been
established under Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0203. The official
public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this
action, and other information related to this action. The official
public docket is the collection of materials that is available for
public viewing at the OW Docket, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
OW Docket telephone number is 202-566-2426. A reasonable fee will be
charged for copies.
2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically under the Federal Register listings at https://www.regulations.gov. An electronic version of the public docket is
available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system,
EPA Dockets. You may access EPA Dockets at https://www.regulations.gov
to view public comments as they are submitted and posted, access the
index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access
those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.
For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the Docket Facility.
B. What is the agencies' authority for taking this action?
The authority for this action is the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq., including sections 301, 304, 311,
401, 402, 404 and 501.
C. What are the economic impacts of this action?
This proposed rule is the first step in a comprehensive, two-step
process to review and revise the 2015 definition of ``waters of the
United States.'' The agencies prepared an illustrative economic
analysis to provide the public with information on the potential
changes to the costs and benefits of various CWA programs that could
result if there were a change in the number of positive jurisdictional
determinations. The economic analysis is provided pursuant to the
requirements of Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 to provide information
to the public. The 2015 CWR is used as a baseline in the analysis in
order to provide information to the public on the estimated
differential effects of restoring pre-2015 status quo in comparison to
the 2015 CWR. However, as explained previously, the 2015 CWR has
already been stayed by the Sixth Circuit, and this proposal would
merely codify the legal status quo, not change current practice.
The proposed rule is a definitional rule that affects the scope of
``waters of the United States.'' This rule does not establish any
regulatory requirements or directly mandate actions on its own.
However, by changing the definition of ``waters of the United States,''
the proposed rule would change the waters where other regulatory
requirements that affect regulated entities come into play, for
example, the locations where regulated entities would be required to
obtain certain types of permits. The consequence of a water being
deemed non-jurisdictional is simply that CWA provisions no longer apply
to that water. There are no avoided costs or forgone benefits if
similar state regulations exist and continue to apply to that water.
The agencies estimated that the 2015 rule would result in a small
overall increase in positive jurisdictional determinations compared to
those made under the prior regulation as currently implemented, and
that there would be fewer waters within the scope of the CWA under the
2015 rule compared to the prior regulations. The agencies estimated the
avoided costs and forgone benefits of repealing the 2015 rule. This
analysis is contained in the Economic Analysis for the Proposed
Definition of ``Waters of the United States''--Recodification of Pre-
existing Rules and is available in the docket for this action.
III. Public Comments
The agencies solicit comment as to whether it is desirable and
appropriate to re-codify in regulation the status quo as an interim
first step pending a substantive rulemaking to reconsider the
definition of ``waters of the United States'' and the best way to
accomplish it. Because the agencies propose to simply codify the legal
status quo and because it is a temporary, interim measure pending
substantive rulemaking, the agencies wish to make clear that this
interim rulemaking does not undertake any substantive reconsideration
of the pre-2015 ``waters of the United States'' definition nor are the
agencies soliciting comment on the specific content of those
longstanding regulations. See P&V Enterprises v. Corps of Engineers,
516 F.3d 1021,1023-24 (D.C. Cir. 2008). For the same reason, the
agencies are not at this time soliciting comment on the scope of the
definition of ``waters of the United States'' that the agencies should
ultimately adopt in the second step of this two-step process, as the
agencies will address all of those issues, including those related to
the 2015 rule, in the second notice and comment rulemaking to adopt a
revised definition of ``waters of the United States'' in light of the
February 28, 2017, Executive Order. The agencies do not intend to
engage in substantive reevaluation of the definition of ``waters of the
United States'' until the second step of the rulemaking. See P&V, 516
F.3d at 1025-26.
[[Page 34904]]
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the
docket.
In addition, the agencies prepared an analysis of the potential
avoided costs and forgone benefits associated with this action. This
analysis is contained in the Economic Analysis for the Proposed
Definition of ``Waters of the United States''--Recodification of Pre-
existing Rules. A copy of the analysis is available in the docket for
this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB
control numbers 2050-0021 and 2050-0135 for the CWA section 311 program
and 2040-0004 for the 402 program.
For the CWA section 404 regulatory program, the current OMB
approval number for information requirements is maintained by the Corps
(OMB approval number 0710-0003). However, there are no new approval or
application processes required as a result of this rulemaking that
necessitate a new Information Collection Request (ICR).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because this action
would simply codify the legal status quo, we have concluded that this
action will not have a significant impact on small entities. This
analysis is contained in the Economic Analysis for the Proposed
Definition of ``Waters of the United States''--Recodification of Pre-
existing Rules. A copy of the analysis is available in the docket for
this action.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The definition of ``waters of the United States''
applies broadly to CWA programs. The action imposes no enforceable duty
on any state, local, or tribal governments, or the private sector, and
does not contain regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Consistent
with the agencies' policy to promote communications with state and
local governments, the agencies have informed states and local
governments about this proposed rulemaking.
The agencies will appropriately consult with States and local
governments as a subsequent rulemaking makes changes to the
longstanding definition of ``waters of the United States.''
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications as specified
in Executive Order 13175. This proposed rule maintains the legal status
quo. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
Consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), the agencies will appropriately
consult with tribal officials during the development of a subsequent
rulemaking that makes changes to the longstanding definition of
``waters of the United States.'' In fact, the agencies have already
initiated the formal consultation process with respect to the
subsequent rulemaking.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the
environmental health risks or safety risks addressed by this action do
not present a disproportionate risk to children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This proposed rule does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
This proposed rule maintains the legal status quo. The agencies
therefore believe that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority,
low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994).
K. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
Pursuant to Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017)
this proposed rule is expected to be an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 328
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Intergovernmental relations, Navigation, Water pollution control,
Waterways.
40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 122, 230, 232, 300, 302, and 401
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
Dated: June 27, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency.
Dated: June 27, 2017.
Douglas W. Lamont,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Project Planning and Review),
performing the duties of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
Works.
Title 33--Navigation and Navigable Waters
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 33, chapter II of
the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 328--DEFINITION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
0
1. The authority citation for part 328 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1344.
0
2. Section 328.3 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) through (d) and
adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 328.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
(a) The term waters of the United States means
(1) All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past,
or may
[[Page 34905]]
be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all
waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands,
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds,
the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by
industries in interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under the definition;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(4) of this section;
(6) The territorial seas;
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are
themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of
this section.
(8) Waters of the United States do not include prior converted
cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as
prior converted cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes
of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons
designed to meet the requirements of CWA (other than cooling ponds as
defined in 40 CFR 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this
definition) are not waters of the United States.
(b) The term wetlands means those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support,
a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas.
(c) The term adjacent means bordering, contiguous, or neighboring.
Wetlands separated from other waters of the United States by man-made
dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes and the like are
``adjacent wetlands.''
(d) The term high tide line means the line of intersection of the
land with the water's surface at the maximum height reached by a rising
tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual
data, by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, a more or less
continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm,
other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal
gages, or other suitable means that delineate the general height
reached by a rising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and
other high tides that occur with periodic frequency but does not
include storm surges in which there is a departure from the normal or
predicted reach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a
coast by strong winds such as those accompanying a hurricane or other
intense storm.
(e) The term ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore
established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical
characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank,
shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial
vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate
means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.
(f) The term tidal waters means those waters that rise and fall in
a predictable and measurable rhythm or cycle due to the gravitational
pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of
the water surface can no longer be practically measured in a
predictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other
effects.
Title 40--Protection of Environment
For reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 110--DISCHARGE OF OIL
0
3. The authority citation for part 110 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(3) and (b)(4) and 1361(a); E.O.
11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR parts 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793.
0
4. Section 110.1 is amended by revising the definition of ``Navigable
waters'' and adding the definition of ``Wetlands'' in alphabetical
order to read as follows:
Sec. 110.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Navigable waters means the waters of the United States, including
the territorial seas. The term includes:
(a) All waters that are currently used, were used in the past, or
may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including
all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(b) Interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
(c) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, and wetlands,
the use, degradation, or destruction of which would affect or could
affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
(1) That are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce;
(3) That are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce;
(d) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as navigable
waters under this section;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a) through (d)
of this section, including adjacent wetlands; and
(f) Wetlands adjacent to waters identified in paragraphs (a)
through (e) of this section: Provided, That waste treatment systems
(other than cooling ponds meeting the criteria of this paragraph) are
not waters of the United States;
Navigable waters do not include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior
converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
* * * * *
Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency or duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas such as sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, prairie
river overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.
PART 112--OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION
0
5. The authority citation for part 112 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 2720; E.O. 12777
(October 18, 1991), 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351.
0
6. Section 112.2 is amended by revising the definition of ``Navigable
waters'' and adding the definition of
[[Page 34906]]
``Wetlands'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 112.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Navigable waters of the United States means ``navigable waters'' as
defined in section 502(7) of the FWPCA, and includes:
(1) All navigable waters of the United States, as defined in
judicial decisions prior to passage of the 1972 Amendments to the FWPCA
(Pub. L. 92-500), and tributaries of such waters;
(2) Interstate waters;
(3) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are utilized by
interstate travelers for recreational or other purposes; and
(4) Intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or
shellfish are taken and sold in interstate commerce.
* * * * *
Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or groundwater at a frequency or duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas such as sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, prairie
river overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.
* * * * *
PART 116--DESIGNATION OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
0
7. The authority citation for part 116 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 311(b)(2)(A) and 501(a), Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
0
8. Section 116.3 is amended by revising the definition of ``Navigable
waters'' to read as follows:
Sec. 116.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Navigable waters is defined in section 502(7) of the Act to mean
``waters of the United States, including the territorial seas,'' and
includes, but is not limited to:
(1) All waters which are presently used, or were used in the past,
or may be susceptible to use as a means to transport interstate or
foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and
flow of the tide, and including adjacent wetlands; the term wetlands as
used in this regulation shall include those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support,
a prevelance of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas; the term adjacent means bordering, contiguous or
neighboring;
(2) Tributaries of navigable waters of the United States, including
adjacent wetlands;
(3) Interstate waters, including wetlands; and
(4) All other waters of the United States such as intrastate lakes,
rivers, streams, mudflats, sandflats and wetlands, the use, degradation
or destruction of which affect interstate commerce including, but not
limited to:
(i) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands which are
utilized by interstate travelers for recreational or other purposes;
and
(ii) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands from which
fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate
commerce; and
(iii) Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands which are
utilized for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Navigable waters do not include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior
converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
* * * * *
PART 117--DETERMINATION OF REPORTABLE QUANTITIES FOR HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES
0
9. The authority citation for part 117 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 311 and 501(a), Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), (``the Act'') and Executive Order
11735, superseded by Executive Order 12777, 56 FR 54757.
0
10. Section 117.1 is amended by revising paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 117.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
(i) Navigable waters means ``waters of the United States, including
the territorial seas.'' This term includes:
(1) All waters which are currently used, were used in the past, or
may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including
all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) Interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams,
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, and wetlands,
the use, degradation or destruction of which would affect or could
affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes;
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce;
(iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as navigable
waters under this paragraph;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (i)(1) through
(4) of this section, including adjacent wetlands; and
(6) Wetlands adjacent to waters identified in paragraphs (i)(1)
through (5) of this section (``Wetlands'' means those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally included playa lakes,
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, prairie river overflows, mudflats, and natural
ponds): Provided, That waste treatment systems (other than cooling
ponds meeting the criteria of this paragraph) are not waters of the
United States.
Navigable waters do not include prior converted cropland.
Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior
converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
* * * * *
PART 122--EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
0
11. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows:
Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
0
12. Section 122.2 is amended by:
0
a. Lifting the suspension of the last sentence of the definition of
``Waters of the United States'' published July 21, 1980 (45 FR 48620).
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Waters of the United States''.
0
c. Suspending the last sentence of the definition of ``Waters of the
United States'' published July 21, 1980 (45 FR 48620).
[[Page 34907]]
0
d. Adding the definition of ``Wetlands''.
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 122.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Waters of the United States or waters of the U.S. means:
(a) All waters which are currently used, were used in the past, or
may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including
all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(b) All interstate waters, including interstate ``wetlands;''
(c) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, ``wetlands,''
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds
the use, degradation, or destruction of which would affect or could
affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
(1) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce; or
(3) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce;
(d) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this definition;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a) through (d)
of this definition;
(f) The territorial sea; and
(g) ``Wetlands'' adjacent to waters (other than waters that are
themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a) through (f) of this
definition.
Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons
designed to meet the requirements of CWA (other than cooling ponds as
defined in 40 CFR 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this
definition) are not waters of the United States. This exclusion applies
only to manmade bodies of water which neither were originally created
in waters of the United States (such as disposal area in wetlands) nor
resulted from the impoundment of waters of the United States. [See Note
1 of this section.] Waters of the United States do not include prior
converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's
status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the
purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA.
Note: At 45 FR 48620, July 21, 1980, the Environmental Protection
Agency suspended until further notice in Sec. 122.2, the last
sentence, beginning ``This exclusion applies . . .'' in the definition
of ``Waters of the United States.'' This revision continues that
suspension.
Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
* * * * *
PART 230--SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES FOR SPECIFICATION OF
DISPOSAL SITES FOR DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL
0
13. The authority citation for part 230 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 404(b) and 501(a) of the Clean Water Act of
1977 (33 U.S.C. 1344(b) and 1361(a)).
0
14. Section 230.3 is amended by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraph (o) as paragraph (s).
0
b. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (s).
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (n) as paragraph (r).
0
d. Redesignating paragraph (m) as paragraph (q-1).
0
e. Redesignating paragraphs (h) through (l) as paragraphs (m) through
(q).
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (e) and (f) as paragraphs (h) and (i).
0
g. Redesignating paragraph (g) as paragraph (k).
0
h. Redesignating paragraphs (b) through (d) as paragraphs (c) through
(e).
0
i. Adding reserved paragraphs (f), (g), (j), and (l).
0
j. Adding paragraphs (b) and (t).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 230.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
(b) The term adjacent means bordering, contiguous, or neighboring.
Wetlands separated from other waters of the United States by man-made
dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like are
``adjacent wetlands.''
* * * * *
(s) The term waters of the United States means:
(1) All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past,
or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce,
including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands,
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds,
the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this definition;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through
(4) of this section;
(6) The territorial sea;
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are
themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (6) of
this section; waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or
lagoons designed to meet the requirements of CWA (other than cooling
ponds as defined in 40 CFR 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of
this definition) are not waters of the United States.
Waters of the United States do not include prior converted
cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as
prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes
of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
(t) The term wetlands means those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support,
a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas.
PART 232--404 PROGRAMS DEFINITIONS; EXEMPT ACTIVITIES NOT REQUIRING
404 PERMITS
0
15. The authority citation for part 232 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1344.
0
16. Section 232.2 is amended by revising the definition of ``Waters of
the
[[Page 34908]]
United States'' and adding the definition of ``Wetlands'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 232.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Waters of the United States means:
All waters which are currently used, were used in the past, or may
be susceptible to us in interstate or foreign commerce, including all
waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
All interstate waters including interstate wetlands.
All other waters, such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands,
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds,
the use, degradation, or destruction of which would or could affect
interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes; or
From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce; or
Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce.
All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the
United States under this definition;
Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (g)(1)-(4) of this
section;
The territorial sea; and
Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves
wetlands) identified in paragraphs (q)(1)-(6) of this section.
Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons
designed to meet the requirements of the Act (other than cooling ponds
as defined in 40 CFR 123.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this
definition) are not waters of the United States.
Waters of the United States do not include prior converted
cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as
prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes
of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION
CONTINGENCY PLAN
0
17. The authority citation for part 300 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p.306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR
54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987
Comp., p.193.
0
18. Section 300.5 is amended by revising the definition of ``Navigable
waters'' to read as follows:
Sec. 300.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
Navigable waters as defined by 40 CFR 110.1, means the waters of
the United States, including the territorial seas. The term includes:
(1) All waters that are currently used, were used in the past, or
may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including
all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) Interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
(3) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, and wetlands,
the use, degradation, or destruction of which would affect or could
affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters;
(i) That are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes;
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce;
(iii) That are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as navigable
waters under this section;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a) through (d)
of this definition, including adjacent wetlands; and
(6) Wetlands adjacent to waters identified in paragraphs (a)
through (e) of this definition: Provided, that waste treatment systems
(other than cooling ponds meeting the criteria of this paragraph) are
not waters of the United States.
(7) Waters of the United States do not include prior converted
cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as
prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes
of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
* * * * *
0
19. In appendix E to part 300, section 1.5 is amended by revising the
definition of ``Navigable waters'' to read as follows:
Appendix E to Part 300--Oil Spill Response
* * * * *
1.5 Definitions * * *
Navigable waters as defined by 40 CFR 110.1 means the waters of
the United States, including the territorial seas. The term
includes:
(a) All waters that are currently used, were used in the past,
or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce,
including all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the
tide;
(b) Interstate waters, including interstate wetlands;
(c) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams
(including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, and wetlands,
the use, degradation, or destruction of which would affect or could
affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
(1) That are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers
for recreational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold
in interstate or foreign commerce; and
(3) That are used or could be used for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce.
(d) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as navigable
waters under this section;
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a) through
(d) of this definition, including adjacent wetlands; and
(f) Wetlands adjacent to waters identified in paragraphs (a)
through (e) of this definition: Provided, that waste treatment
systems (other than cooling ponds meeting the criteria of this
paragraph) are not waters of the United States.
(g) Waters of the United States do not include prior converted
cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as
prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the
purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean
Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA.
* * * * *
PART 302--DESIGNATION, REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND NOTIFICATION
0
20. The authority citation for part 302 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602, 9603, and 9604; 33 U.S.C. 1321 and
1361.
0
21. Section 302.3 is amended by revising the definition of ``Navigable
waters'' to read as follows:
Sec. 302.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Navigable waters or navigable waters of the United States means
waters of the
[[Page 34909]]
United States, including the territorial seas;
* * * * *
PART 401--GENERAL PROVISIONS
0
22. The authority citation for part 401 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 301, 304 (b) and (c), 306 (b) and (c), 307 (b)
and (c) and 316(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (the ``Act''), 33 U.S.C. 1251, 1311, 1314 (b) and (c), 1316
(b) and (c), 1317 (b) and (c) and 1326(c); 86 Stat. 816 et seq.;
Pub. L. 92-500.
0
23. Section 401.11 is amended by revising paragraph (l) to read as
follows:
Sec. 401.11 General definitions.
* * * * *
(l) The term navigable waters includes: All navigable waters of the
United States; tributaries of navigable waters of the United States;
interstate waters; intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are
utilized by interstate travelers for recreational or other purposes;
intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or shellfish are
taken and sold in interstate commerce; and intrastate lakes, rivers,
and streams which are utilized for industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce. Navigable waters do not include prior converted
cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as
prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes
of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act
jurisdiction remains with EPA.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-13997 Filed 7-26-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P