Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to Tighten Clean Water Act 401 Certification Timeframes

By Chuck Sensiba & Melissa Horne on February 7, 2019
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The U.S. Department of the Army’s Assistant Secretary for Civil Works has issued a policy directive memorandum requiring the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to adhere to a “default time period” of 60 days for states to act on a request for water quality certification under Clean Water Act Section 401 with regard to USACE’s issuance of dredge and fill permits under CWA Section 404.  The policy memorandum also requires USACE to “immediately draft guidance” to establish criteria for USACE District Engineers to identify circumstances that may warrant additional time for states to decide on an application for water quality certification.

The policy directive memorandum, which was signed by Assistant Secretary of the Army R.D. James, explains that under current USACE regulations, a state has 60 days following receipt of a request for a Section 401 certification to act on the request or the state will be deemed to have waived certification.  See 33 C.F.R.§ 325.2.  The memorandum notes that despite this regulatory requirement, it is “standard practice” for District Engineers to give states an entire year (which is the maximum allowed under CWA Section 401) to act on a request for water quality certification.  While USACE regulations allow District Engineers to provide states shorter or longer time frames for states to issue Section 401 certifications when reasonable, the memo establishes a “default” time frame of 60 days unless the District Engineer determines that circumstances reasonably require a longer time frame.  USACE is directed by the memo to produce draft guidance within 45 days that establishes criteria for District Engineers to identify reasonable timeframes for states to provide their decisions on 401 certification requests.  According to the memo, reasonableness can be based on the type of proposed activity or complexity of the site, but not on state workload, resource issues, or lack of sufficient information.  Furthermore, while USACE regulations state that information provided by the state will be taken into account in determining a reasonable timeframe, the memo makes clear that the ultimate decision resides with the District Engineer.

The memorandum is intended to advance the Administration’s priority of reducing the time period for federal regulatory approvals for infrastructure and other developmental proposals and comes at a time when states’ administration of CWA Section 401 is under greater scrutiny by the courts (see Hoopa Valley Tribe v. FERC, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 2454 (D.C. Cir. 2019), Millennium Pipeline Co., LLC v. Seggos, 860 F.3d 696 (D.C. Cir. 2017), Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC, 162 FERC ¶ 61,014, reh’g denied, 164 FERC ¶ 61,029 (2018), appeal pending sub nom. Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC v. FERC, D.C. Cir. No. 18-1251 (filed Sept. 14, 2018)) [previous articles about these cases] and Congress.

Photo of Chuck Sensiba Chuck Sensiba
Read more about Chuck SensibaEmailChuck's Linkedin Profile
Photo of Melissa Horne Melissa Horne

Melissa helps industrial and utility clients understand and navigate complex environmental requirements, with a focus on real-world implications for their business. She focuses her practice heavily on Clean Air Act and climate change issues, and advises clients on environmental justice and ESG matters.

Read more about Melissa HorneEmail
  • Posted in:
    Environmental and Climate
  • Blog:
    Environmental Law & Policy Monitor
  • Organization:
    Troutman Pepper Locke
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo