Duis ac lorem sit amet nibh gravida malesuada rutrum ac velit.
Feel free to call us:

 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) published the final rule in the Federal Register for the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR), which codifies the definition of waters of the United States (WOUS) subject to federal regulation under the Clean Water Act (CWA). This final rule comes after numerous Supreme Court decisions over the last few decades; the publishing and eventual revocation of an Obama-era rule defining WOUS, and the publication and comment period of the draft rule of the NWPR. The rule will go into effect June 22, 2020; however, there is a high likelihood the rule will be litigated and may not go into effect on the stated date with litigation likely extending into the next presidential term.

According to the NWPR, “as a baseline concept, this final rule recognizes that waters of the United States are waters within the ordinary meaning of the term, such as oceans, rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands, and that not all waters are waters of the United States.” The NWPR defines WOUS in four different categories:

  1. Territorial Seas and Traditional Navigable Waters;
  2. Perennial and Intermittent Tributaries
  3. Certain Lakes, Ponds, and Impoundments of Jurisdictional Waters; and
  4. Wetlands Adjacent to other Jurisdictional Waters

The NWPR also defines “Waters and Features That are Not Waters of the United States.”

Summaries of the four different categories for WOUS as defined in the NWPR are summarized below. Please note that these summaries are not exhaustive and certain details have not been included for brevity:

Territorial Seas and Traditional Navigable Waters

The territorial seas, and waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. The boundary of these waters extends to the lateral extent of the ordinary high water mark or high tide line.

The ordinary high water mark is defined as “that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a 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.”

Perennial and Intermittent Tributaries

Perennial tributaries are defined as tributaries (e.g. rivers, streams, or similarly naturally occurring surface water channels) having surface water flowing continuously year-round. Intermittent tributaries are defined as having surface water flowing continuously during certain times of the year and more than in direct response to precipitation. These tributaries must contribute surface flow to the territorial seas or traditionally navigable waters in a typical year either through one or more tributaries, lakes, ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters, or adjacent wetlands. The boundary of these waters extends to the lateral extent of the ordinary high water mark or high tide line.

These tributaries do not lose jurisdiction if modified or if they contribute surface water flow to a downstream jurisdictional water in a typical year through channelized non-jurisdictional water features, through a subterranean river, culvert, dam, tunnel, or similar artificial feature, or through a debris pile, boulder field, or similar natural features. A typical year is defined as when precipitation and other climatic variables are within the normal periodic range (e.g., seasonally, annually) for the geographic area of the applicable aquatic resource based on a rolling thirty-year period.

Certain Lakes, Ponds, and Impoundments of Jurisdictional Waters

A lake, pond, or impoundment of jurisdictional waters is a WOUS if it is a traditional navigable water; contributes surface flow to the territorial seas or a traditionally navigable water in a typical year either directly or through one or more jurisdictional waters; or is inundated by flooding from the territorial seas or traditionally navigable waters, perennial or intermittent tributaries, or lakes and ponds and impoundments of jurisdictional waters in a typical year. These waters do not lose their jurisdictional status if they contribute surface water flow to a downstream jurisdictional water in a typical year through a channelized non-jurisdictional surface water feature, through a culvert, dike, spillway, or similar artificial feature, or through a debris pile, boulder field, or similar natural feature.

Wetlands Adjacent to other Jurisdictional Waters

Wetlands continue to be defined as “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.” Wetlands continue to be identified by using the 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual and its regional supplements.

Wetlands are considered jurisdictional when they are adjacent to any of the three previously described types of WOUS. Wetlands are considered adjacent to those WOUS when they abut, meaning to touch at least one point or side of a WOUS; are inundated by flooding from a previously described WOUS in a typical year; are physically separated from a WOUS only by a natural berm, bank, dune, or similar natural features; or are physically separated from a previously described WOUS in a typical year by a dike, barrier, or similar artificial feature as long as that structure allows for a direct hydrologic connection between the previously described WOUS in a typical year, such as a culvert, flood or tide gate, pump, or similar artificial feature. An adjacent wetland is jurisdictional in its entirety when a road or similar artificial structure divides the wetland, as long as the structure allows for a direct hydrologic surface connection through or over that structure in a typical year.

Waters and Features That are Not Waters of the United States.

The following are not WOUS:

  1. Waters or water features not previously identified as WOUS;
  2. Groundwater, including groundwater drained through subsurface drainage systems;
  3. Ephemeral features, including ephemeral stream, swales, gullies, rills, and pools, where ephemeral is defined as surface water flowing of pooling only in direct response to precipitation;
  4. Diffuse stormwater run-off and directional sheet flow over upland;
  5. Ditches that are not territorial seas, traditionally navigable waters, or perennial or ephemeral tributaries, or constructed in non-adjacent wetlands. Ditches are defined as a constructed or excavated channel used to convey water;
  6. Prior converted cropland, where prior converted cropland mean any area that, prior to December 23, 1985, was drained or otherwise manipulated for the purpose, or having the effect, or making production of an agricultural product possible, as long as the area has not been abandoned and returned to a wetland condition, which can occur in five years;
  7. Artificially irrigated areas; including fields flooded for agricultural production, that would revert to upland should application of irrigation water to that area cease;
  8. Artificial lakes and ponds, including water storage reservoirs and farm, irrigation, stock watering, and log cleaning ponds, constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters, so long as those artificial lakes and ponds are not impoundments of WOUS;
  9. Water-filled depressions constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters incidental to mining or construction activity, and pits excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel;
  10. Stormwater control features constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters to convey, treat, infiltrate, or store stormwater run-off;
  11. Groundwater recharge, water reuse, and wastewater recycling structures, including detention, retention, and infiltration basins and ponds, constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters; and
  12. Waste treatment systems.

Uplands are non-jurisdictional and are defined as any land area that under normal circumstances does not satisfy all three wetland factors (i.e., hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils) required to classify an area as wetland, and, does not lie below the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line of a jurisdictional water.

The image below has been provided by the EPA as examples of aquatic features that no longer qualify as Waters of the U.S.

 

 

 

The Texas special legislative session has ended, and a bill regarding a state wide standard for tree removal has been signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott.  Prior tree removal standards have been administered by municipalities, such as Austin’s Protected Tree Ordinance and Heritage Tree Ordinance, to determine protection and mitigation measures for trees on private property.  These standards resulted in a variety of size limits and mitigation fees for tree removal from city to city, whereas the new law will set a requirement  of trees with a trunk diameter of 10 inches or greater to pay a removal mitigation fee which can be offset with the on-site planting of new trees.  Fees can only be offset with on-site plantings by 40% on commercial properties, and by 50% for residential developers.  Residential homeowners can completely eliminate tree removal fees by planting trees on-site.

Governor Abbott had vetoed a similar tree removal bill that addressed mitigation measures to offset municipal fees associated with tree removals during the regular session because he did not believe it went far enough to protect private property rights.  He encouraged lawmakers to draft a bill that gave property owners more flexibility to remove trees and streamline the tree removal process statewide during the special session.  The Texas House and Senate made efforts to advance multiple bills before compromising on House Bill 7 that was signed into law on August 16, 2017.

The more than 90 tree removal municipal ordinances throughout the state will be replaced by the new statewide law on December 1, 2017, until then current municipal standards will stay in place.  While tree removal and mitigation vary throughout the state, most require that a tree survey be conducted by a Certified Arborist to determine the size and type of trees on a property.  aci performs tree surveys and can assist with tree assessments and permitting procedures throughout Texas under current and upcoming standards.

Read House Bill 7

wolverine-feature-photoThe U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announced Tuesday that they are re-opening the comment period for the Proposed Rule to list the North American wolverine as threatened. This announcement comes after the District Court for the District of Montana vacated the Service’s withdrawal of their proposed rule to list the distinct population segment of wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus). The North American wolverine is known to inhabit areas of California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The Comment Period is open until November 17, 2016.

A Brief History:
61 FR 4722      Detailed Evaluation Detailed Population Segment
73 FR 12929    12-month Finding on Petition to List as Endangered or Threatened
75 FR 19591     Initiation of Status Review
75 FR 78030    12-month Finding on Petition to List as Endangered or Threatened
78 FR 7864      Proposed Listing as Threatened
78 FR 7890      Establishment of Nonessential Experimental Population
78 FR 65248   Comment Period on the Proposed Listing Re-Opened
79 FR 6874      6-month Extension of Final Determination
79 FR 47522    Withdrawal of Proposed Rule to List as Threatened
81 FR 71670    Comment Period Re-Opened

Read the Federal Register Announcement

The US Fish and Wildlife Service has officially removed the Lesser Prairie-Chicken from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. This decision comes after years of data evaluation regarding this species which is found in Kansas, Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico.

“The storied prairie landscape of the Southwest is of tremendous economic and cultural importance. It is also a critical area for the birds, mammals, reptiles and other animals that rely on this unique habitat,” Service Director Dan Ashe said in a statement. “Responding to this court ruling by removing the bird from the federal list does not mean we are walking away from efforts to conserve the lesser prairie chicken. Far from it. We are undertaking a new status review to determine whether listing is again warranted, and we will continue to work with our state partners and others on efforts to protect vital habitat and ensure this flagship of the prairies survives well into the future.”

The Lesser Prairie-Chicken was listed on April 10, 2014. The move comes after a 2015 court challenge by the oil and gas industry requested the agency remove the bird from the list. Read the Federal Register

Posted by: In: Lesser Prairie-Chicken 11 Nov 2015 0 comments

Lesser Prairie ChickenOn November 9, 2015, the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) re-opened the Range-wide Oil and Gas Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA) with approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). This re-opening follows the September 1, 2015 decision of the U.S. District Court to vacate the listing of the lesser prairie-chicken (LPC) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

The CCAA is now open for new enrollments of oil and gas leases, pipelines, and transfers of properties from the WAFWA Conservation Agreement (WCA) to the CCAA. WAFWA has stated that participation in the CCAA will “result in conservation to support the vacatur and evidence to refute future appeals and listing proposals.” It is uncertain how long the CCAA will be open for new enrollments.

The legal assurances provided to participants of the WCA were derived from Section 4(d) of the ESA and are only applicable to species listed as threatened under the ESA. The CCAA’s legal assurances are based on an ESA Section 10 permit and remain applicable whether a species is listed under the ESA as threatened or endangered. The USFWS filed a motion on September 29, 2015, for reconsideration of the Federal Judge’s decision with oral arguments scheduled for November 12, 2015.

If you have questions regarding the decision or how any state- or federally-listed species may affect your project, please contact aci consulting’s WAFWA-approved LPC Technical Service providers at our Austin office.

IMG_0715-1After failing to repeal the new Clean Water Rule on Tuesday, the Senate voted (53-44) to overturn the Rule on Wednesday under the Congressional Review Act. The White House has indicated legislation blocking the Rule will likely be vetoed.

On May 27, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) published the Clean Water Rule: Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United States;’’ further defining the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA). Numerous lawsuits were brought challenging the controversial Rule by states, business, agricultural, and development groups; and on October 9, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit temporarily suspended the Rule pending judicial review. A copy of the published rule can be found here.

If you have questions regarding the new Rule or how it may affect a current or proposed project, please contact aci consulting’s Austin office.

Posted by: In: TXRAM 14 Oct 2015 0 comments

Beautiful_landscape_of_green_swamp_with_calm_watersOn October 14, 2015, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a public notice announcing the availability of an updated version of the Texas Rapid Assessment Method (TXRAM). TXRAM was developed as a tool to evaluate the integrity and health of wetlands and streams. Since its initial publication in 2011, TXRAM is used within the USACE Fort Worth District to calculate impacts to jurisdictional waters and corresponding mitigation, and as a monitoring tool.

A copy of TXRAM 2.0 can be found here.

A copy of the public notice can be found here.

If you have questions regarding TXRAM or its applicability to a project, please contact aci consulting’s Austin office at (512) 347-9000.

Federal Judge Vacates Listing of Lesser Prairie-ChickenLesser Prairie Chicken

On September 1, 2015, the U.S. District Court: Western District of Texas: Midland-Odessa Division vacated the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Final Rule listing the lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus; LPC) as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Senior United States District Judge Robert Junell granted summary judgement to the plaintiffs (Permian Basin Petroleum Association; Chaves County, New Mexico (NM); Roosevelt County, NM; Eddy County, NM; and Lea County, NM) that the, “[US]FWS failed to properly apply [Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions] PECE to its evaluation of the [Range-wide Plan] RWP resulting in material error. This caused [US]FWS to arbitrarily and capriciously list the LPC as a threatened species.” A copy of the Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgement can be found here.

If you have questions regarding the decision or how any state- or federally-listed species may affect your project, please contact aci consulting’s Austin office.

 

Posted by: In: Clean Water Act 28 Aug 2015 0 comments

A North Dakota federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) new Clean Water Rule from taking effect. The new rule, which further defines the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA), was to take effect today, August 28, 2015. The injunction is based on lawsuits brought by 13 states arguing the rule will diminish the states’ authority over waters. In all, 29 states, along with various other groups have filed suits to block the rule.

The EPA issued a statement shortly after the ruling declaring the new Clean Water Rule to be effective in all states but the 13 that filed for the injunction: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.

If you have questions regarding the new rule or how it may affect a current or proposed project, please contact aci consulting’s Austin office.

Posted by: In: Clean Water Act 25 Aug 2015 0 comments

IMG_0715-1

New Clean Water Rule in Effect August 28, 2015

On May 27, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) published the Clean Water Rule: Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United States.’’ This rule further defines the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA), such as adjacent waters, waters considered to have a significant nexus to jurisdictional waters, and otherwise isolated waters that occur within a floodplain. This rule goes into effect on Friday, August 28, 2015. A copy of the published rule can be found here.

If you have questions regarding the new rule or how it may affect a current or proposed project, please contact aci consulting’s Austin office.