This website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more.
This Website Uses Cookies By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to our cookie policy. Learn MoreThis website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more.
Justices ruled unanimously that two Idaho landowners, in their second appeal before the court, should not be fined for building near wetlands that did not appear to have a direct surface connection to a larger body of water—but four cautioned in a separate opinion that the majority went too far in reducing federally protected areas.
EPA and Corps of Engineers seek clarity in rule release, but some industry groups question the move with a key related US Supreme Court case decision still ahead.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plan to continue to press forward with new rules defining the types of rivers, streams and wetlands that fall under Clean Water Act protections.
The Biden Administration is set to issue its own draft version of protected waters by year end, but court ruling was not sought by feds and industry groups are likely to appeal it
The review—which includes modified Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permits, the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, and several energy efficiency standards—is par for the course, say industry officials.