A final rule amending the definition of “waters of the U.S.” to conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in a case involving federal jurisdiction of wetlands has been issued by regulators.

The case, Sackett v. EPA, centered on which wetlands should be regulated as waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act.

In 2017, EPA sent Chantell and Michael Sackett a compliance order asserting the property they had purchased near Priest Lake in northern Idaho to build a home was subject to the Clean Water Act based on its “significant nexus” to Priest Lake.

EPA asserted the Sacketts had illegally placed fill material into jurisdictional wetlands and prohibited them from constructing their home, demanded costly restoration work and threatened hefty daily fines if they didn’t obey the order.

The Sacketts sued, arguing the government’s regulatory powers extend only to wetlands with a continuous surface connection to navigable waters.

In May, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed, ruling the significant nexus test was a violation of the Clean Water Act and the constitutional right to due process.

The significant nexus test was the backbone of the Biden administration’s WOTUS definition finalized in January, and EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers announced they would amend the definition.

The amended rule:

• Removes the significant nexus standard from tributaries of navigable waters and adjacent wetlands.

• Revises the definition of adjacent to mean having a continuous surface connection to navigable waters.

• Deletes the definition of “significant effect.”

While the amended rule eliminates the significant nexus test, some agriculture groups contend it misses the mark and the agencies missed an opportunity to correct a deeply flawed rule.