CRS-79 



determinations concerning whether the area in dispute fell within the bound- 

 aries of waters that Congress intended to regulate. These decisions did not 

 yield general guidelines to delineate the scope of the Corps' enlarged juris- 

 diction. 88 / 



The most significant case in the series which tested the Corps' actions 

 was brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the National Wildlife 

 Federation. The court decision in this case, NRDC v. Callaway , 89 / required 

 the Corps to revoke its dredge and fill permitting regulations and issue new 

 rules conforming to the broader statutory mandate of the FWPCA. The effect of 

 this judicial order was to make the application of Section 404 consistent with 

 the remainder of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, by bringing together 

 the definition of "waters of the United States" for water quality purposes with 

 the Corps' definition of waters for the purpose of regulating dredge and fill 

 activities. Environmentalists and others applauded the court's order and claimed 

 that it "transformed the 404 program from a convenient exemption from EPA's 

 [general] permit requirements into a vehicle for wetlands protection." 90 / 



Responses 



Following the Callaway order, the Corps began the process of revising 

 its regulations by issuing four alternative regulatory proposals, which were 

 accompanied by a press release suggesting that the expanded jurisdiction of 

 Section 404 could result in permit requirements for ranchers' and farmers' 

 routine activities, such as enlarging stock ponds, plowing fields, or 



88 / Frasca, Federal Control of Wetlands, p. 511. 



89/ 392 F. Supp. 685 (D.D.C. 1975). 



90 / Blumm, The Clean Water Act's Section 404 Permit Program, p. 417, 

 (footnote omitted from quotation). 



