NCBA Discusses EPA WOTUS Rule Changes and Potential for Codifying New Language
With recent WOTUS rule changes being rolled out by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), questions remain across rural America about what the updated definition of Waters of the United States means for producers—and whether these changes could be locked in for the future. To better understand the implications, we caught up with Ethan Lane with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) to discuss the regulatory landscape and the potential for codifying the new rule language.
Lane explained that the current situation is shaped heavily by recent Supreme Court decisions that significantly narrowed federal authority compared to past administrations.
“So I think it’s more complicated than that, and actually for once, to our benefit, right? Because you have the Sackett decision in the Biden administration, it really narrowed the scope when you combine that with the Chevron deference decision, the struck down Chevron deference. Take those two things, and you look at what’s possible in a regulatory space on WOTUS, and it is a tenth of what it was in the Obama years, right, and the original sort of scope of WOTUS.”
According to NCBA, these court rulings fundamentally changed the regulatory universe surrounding WOTUS, limiting how expansive future interpretations can be.
“We’re in such a different universe now. The Biden administration was forced to accept a definition that was much less expansive than they would have liked. That Supreme Court decision ensured that.”
Lane noted that the EPA’s current efforts aim to refine and stabilize the rule, rather than expand it.
“This is really an effort by Lee Zeldin, Administrator Zeldin at EPA, to button up that last 10% and make sure that this definition works for producers everywhere, that we don’t have anybody that falls through the donut hole on congressional intent versus legal interpretation. This should bring that to a conclusion.”
One of the biggest benefits for producers, Lane said, is reduced uncertainty across future administrations.
“And I think the benefit of that is in future administrations, there’s going to be far less room for them to monkey around with it because of that Supreme Court decision.”
He added that any significant expansion of federal authority would now require congressional action.
“They’re the ones that are now going to have to go get a statutory change in order to open up more room for them to gobble up more authority over farmer’s property.”
Ultimately, NCBA views the current moment as a positive step for cattle producers nationwide.
“If the enviros want to come back in and re-litigate this thing down the road, they’re going to need to go to the United States Congress and they’re going to need a statutory change to really do much in this space. That’s good news for producers around the country.”
Audio Reporting by Dale Sandlin for Southeast AgNet.