Attorney General Joins Colleagues from Six States in Opposing Executive Order Weakening Clean Water Rule

WASHINGTON, D. C. – Attorney General Karl A. Racine joined six state attorneys general in opposing an executive order issued today, which President Trump described as paving the way to eliminating the Clean Water Rule (also known as the Waters of the United States Rule, or WOTUS).

The coalition, which was led by New York and includes the attorneys general of the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, issued the following statement:

“We strongly oppose President Trump’s executive order that undermines Clean Water Act protections and the public health and environment of our states.

“The President’s order runs counter to the Clean Water Act’s, and the EPA’s, purpose -- achieving clean water. The Clean Water Rule is a measured, reasonable, and lawful application of sound and uncontroverted science to protect our nation’s upstream source waters. We rely on these waters to ensure clean drinking water, recreation, and viable commercial fishing and navigation. Abandoning the Clean Water Rule will allow uncontrolled pollution of these critical water resources. It could also harm the competitiveness of our state economies by forcing us to spend more to clean up the pollution of deregulated waters coming from upstream states that refuse to control such pollution in order to benefit their economies. Clean water is essential to life -- and the people of our states and the nation deserve the strong baseline protections established by the Rule under the Clean Water Act to ensure that the benefits of clean water are shared equally, regardless of state lines.

We won’t hesitate to protect our people and our environment—including by aggressively opposing in court President Trump’s actions that ignore both the law and the public’s paramount need for clean water.”

Attorney General Racine added, “Clean water is inextricably linked to the health and safety of District residents. In fulfilling my charge to protect District residents, I join my colleagues in promising to use all of the tools at my disposal to preserve this precious resource.”

Background on the Clean Water Rule
In April 2014, EPA and the Army Corps proposed the Clean Water Rule to define the “waters of the United States,” and made the rule available for an extended public comment period. After receiving more than a million comments, most of which supported the rule, the agencies published the final rule on June 29, 2015. The District and a coalition of seven states (New York, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Oregon, Vermont and Washington) successfully intervened to defend the rule in litigation challenging it in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

The rule clarifies the scope of waters that are protected under the Clean Water Act. Consistent with Supreme Court precedent, it protects waters with a “significant nexus” to downstream waters, such as tributary streams, wetlands, and open waters in floodplains and riparian areas. In drawing those lines, EPA and the Army Corps relied on a robust EPA science report that reviewed more than 1,200 peer-reviewed publications. The agencies also relied on an independent review of the report by EPA’s Science Advisory Board.

The rule enhances environmental protection benefits enjoyed by the District and states and the public by clearly defining the Act’s reach to include waters that significantly contribute to the quality of the nation’s waters. By clarifying the scope of the Clean Water Act, the rule also benefits both regulators and the regulated community by reducing time-consuming, inefficient and potentially inconsistent case-by-case jurisdictional determinations that have hampered effective implementation of the act for years and led to significant, time-consuming litigation across the country.