• Home
    • Watersheds
  • About Us
    • LWV UMRR Board
    • Background
    • Contact Us
  • Blog
  • Upcoming Events
    • LWV UMRR Calendar
    • Past Meeting Materials
  • Membership
  • Donate
  • Past Program Videos
  • Mississippi River Agreement
  LWV Upper Mississippi River Region

UMRR blog

Comments on Changes to WOTUS Decision

12/14/2025

 
A team of scientist's from LWV Upper Mississippi River Region reviewed the draft changes to the definition of Waters of the US, and has drafted comments that were submitted to LWV US for review.  LWV US's approval was necessary before the comments can be submitted because it's a federal issue.   The approval was granted on  December 17, 2025, and the letter was submitted to US EPA on January 4, 2026.

This is the comment letter in its entirety.  
umrr_wotus_rule_response_12-15-25_as_amended.pdf
File Size: 307 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

​The comments are based on the LWV position on Environmental Protection and Pollution Control (Impact on Issues 2024-26, page 110.
Picture

Summary of the Comment Letter:

What is the proposed 2025 USEPA WOTUS Rule?
  • It is the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers’ (ACE) effort to develop regulations to implement the 2023 Supreme Court Sackett decision to change the WOTUS, found to be too broad, too vague, and exceeded the authority granted by the Clean Water Act (CWA) concerning the traditional balance between federal and state power over private property, without clear language to implement this.
 
  • The “nexus” approach implemented in 2015 attempted to account for protection of the physical, chemical, and biological aspects of water and connectivity, was found to be inconsistent with the CWA's text and structure and a source of regulatory uncertainty for landowners.
 
What’s included in the proposed EPA 2025 WOTUS Rule?
Revisions to key definitions:
  • “Relatively permanent waters”: only includes bodies of surface water that are standing and continuously flowing
  • “Continuous surface connection” for wetlands: wetlands must physically touch a regulated water body to qualify
  • “Tributaries”: must connect to a navigable water body, directly or through other connected features
New and clarified exclusions proposed:
  • Intrastate lakes or ponds or interstate waters, unless otherwise jurisdictional
  • Groundwater
  • Waste treatment systems
  • “Prior converted” farmland and certain ditches
Comment Letter Comments
  1. Role and Significance of EPA to the Clean Water Act
This was provided in previous testimony, and we have indicated that in the letter.
      2 .Failure to Rely on the Significance of Connectivity and Ecosystem Function
  • proposed rule only recognizes physical connectivity of the hydrologic systems, ignoring chemical and biological
  • fails to follow the mandate of the Clean Water Act to the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of US waters.
  • removes water bodies from jurisdiction that continue to play a role in filtering pollutants, aquifer recharge, flood control, habitat and diversity, and other functions. Even if they don’t have a connection as defined in the proposed WOTUS, they are a part of the hydrologic system.  Ephemeral streams and intermittent streams act as natural buffers to prevent flooding.
  • the proposed definition of WOTUS focuses on permanence and what you can see with the naked eye of a farmer or developer
  • removal of protections from upstream waters in states that have no water protections now can negatively impact downstream waters with contaminants, our example is the dead zone in the Gulf of America
2. Consequences of Narrowing the Definition of WOTUS on the Upper Mississippi River Region
  • Losses and impacts due to the implementation of the amended WOTUS definition in the UMMR are discussed in this section. 
 
  • These include wetland quantity, water quality, drinking water, habitats and biota, extreme weather, geological complexity, agricultural concerns, increased mining pressure, increasing number of data centers, and impacts to states that rely on federal protection for waters in their states, Iowa and Missouri.
 
3, Alternatives Regarding the Proposed 2025 WOTUS Rule
  • Congress amend the CWA and with a statutory definition of WOTUS that explicitly includes wetlands and streams based on their physical, chemical, and biological connection to navigable waters, regardless of a continuous surface connection. 
 
  • legislation could 1) clarify that EPA and ACE have discretion to use the best available science, including connectivity of waters that are not permanent, when specifying jurisdiction, and 2) recognize state authority over land and water resources.
 
  • other alternatives include various ways to amend the CWA, including adding definitions of the significant nexus standard and continuous surface connection, and including rather than excluding ephemeral and intermittent waters.
 
  • All of these alternatives would address the clarity of scope and specificity of authority found lacking by the Supreme Court in the Sackett decision.
 
  • Use of a more integrated method with scientific data to confirm the hydrologic connection and state legislation that accounts for all aspects of connectivity to support waste and wetlands functions are two other alternatives

US EPA proposes new definition of Waters of the US - omitting wetlands and small streams

11/18/2025

 
On November 15, the US Environmental Protection Agency proposed new rules clarifying the definition of Waters of the United States.  These proposed rules are based on the altered definition of the Clean Water Act in the Sackett decision.   US EPA states that the proposed rule will "play a key role in EPA's Powering the Great American Comeback initiative"... 
From the US EPA WOTUS webpage:
Updated Definition of Waters of the United States
On November 17, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army (“the agencies”) announced the signing of a proposed rule to revise the definition of “waters of the United States.” This proposal implements the Supreme Court's decision in Sackett v. EPA. The proposed rule will play a key role in EPA’s Powering the Great American Comeback initiative by protecting water resources, strengthening cooperative federalism, and supporting American industry, energy producers, the technology sector, farmers, ranchers, developers, businesses, and landowners.

In developing the proposed rule, EPA and the Army reviewed and considered the extensive feedback and recommendations the agencies received from States, Tribes, local governments, and stakeholders throughout consultations and the pre-proposal recommendations docket and listening sessions. 

Here is the proposed rule 

Proposed Rule: Updated Definition of "Waters of the United States" (Pre-publication Version) (pdf) (1.12 MB)
These rules go further in removing Clean Water Act protections than was necessary under the Sackett decision, including fully excluding groundwater from the Clean Water Act and requiring that wetlands are only protected if they abut a jurisdictional water and have surface water at least during the wet season.    The excerpt to the right is from an US EPA factsheet prepared for the proposed rule release.

The current federal definition of Waters of the US, adopted on August 9, 2023, fully implemented the Sackett requirements.   

Picture
The League of Women Voters supported the Clean Water Act's passage 50+ years ago - the following excerpt is from the LWV US Impact on Issues, page 108:
Picture

LWV UMRR has covered the Sackett decision in meetings and blog posts: 

The Clean Water Act implementation after Sackett

What does the Sackett decision mean for our waters

Healthy Communities  - our water and watersheds

Sackett vs EPA Supreme Court decision limits extent of clean water act jurisdiction

And from the Mississippi River Ag and Water Desk:
Down the Drain - Wetlands in the Mississippi Basin


The Clean Water Act Implementation after Sackett

10/4/2023

 
What does the Sackett decision mean for the Clean Water Act, and the streams and wetlands that are no longer protected?  In LWV UMRR's November 6 educational event, we discussed the implications of the Sackett vs EPA decision that restricted implementation of the Clean Water Act.   

The video at the right, 1.12 hours long, includes detailed information on the history leading up to the Sackett decision , and where we go from here.

Our guest speaker was Rob Lee, staff attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates (bio below).  Rob provided a brief history of the Clean Water Act (CWA) prior to 2015 regulations defining Water of the US (WOTUS), and the 2020 Navigable Water Protection Rule.  He followed this up discussing the May 2023 Supreme Court Ruling and the now revised regulations just issued by US EPA and the Corps of Engineers with a final revised definition of Waters of the US.  

Following Rob's remarks, LWV UMRR's Gretchen Sabel presented information on the status of wetland regulation in the UMRR states based on a 2022 analysis by the Environmental Law Institute, followed by a look at LWV positions that relate to actions supporting strong implementation of the CWA.   The program wrapped up with a discussion period led by  LWV UMRR Chair Mary Ellen Miller.  
Picture
Priest Lake in Idaho; photo NBC News

You'll find more information 
on the Sackett decision here and here on the LWV UMRR blog.  Here's a link to an excelllent blog article by Jared Mott of the Izaak Walton League that also provides background.  
​

Picture

    Categories

    All
    Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness
    Climate Change
    Data Centers
    Drinking Water
    Event
    Farm Bill
    Government Policy
    Groundwater
    LWV
    Mining
    Mississippi River Governance
    MRRRI
    Nutrient Pollution
    Outreach And Engagement
    Pipelines
    Plastics
    Salt
    Soil Health
    Wetlands
    WOTUS

    RSS Feed

    DONATE
  • Home
    • Watersheds
  • About Us
    • LWV UMRR Board
    • Background
    • Contact Us
  • Blog
  • Upcoming Events
    • LWV UMRR Calendar
    • Past Meeting Materials
  • Membership
  • Donate
  • Past Program Videos
  • Mississippi River Agreement