Tomorrow I will be debating the implications of the Supreme Court's decision in Rapanos v. United States at the Vermont Law School with Professor Patrick Parenteau. Specifically, our debate and discussion will focus on the implications of the decision for federalism and environmental protection.

Last month, I testified on the implications of the Rapanos decision before the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Water, and Wildlife. The testimony is here. For some of my earlier posts on Rapanos, see here, here, and here.

The Chicago Tribune reports on the Environmental Protection Agency's efforts to develop a regulatory guidance to implement the Rapanos decision. The story is based on an Associated Press interview with Assistant EPA Administrator for Water, Ben Grumbles.

"Our overarching goal is to continue to protect wetlands under the Clean Water Act to the maximum extent allowable since the decision," Grumbles told The Associated Press in an interview. "Which tools are the best to use is a policy decision we haven't made yet." . . .

The agency soon will issue a "guidance" document that will offer the EPA's interpretation of what the Supreme Court decided, Grumbles said. The agency is working with the Justice Department to determine "how much stature to give certain pieces of the various five opinions," he said.

"We have no doubt that this interim guidance will help add clarity," he said. "We also have no doubt ... it won't be the end of the story either. We'll need to provide more details, and we're still reviewing whether or not to pursue a regulation in addition to the guidance."