Office of Wastewater Management (OWM)
| Title | Description | Key Dates | ACWA Staff Contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| NPDES Updates Rule | EPA is proposing to update the NPDES regulations in order to eliminate inconsistencies between regulations and application forms, improve permit documentation and transparency, and provide clarifications to the existing regulations. EPA has indicated the plan to divide the rule into two phases. Phase I is moving quickly and will likely include definitional updates, application requirements for vessels and pesticides, updated application forms, and revised public notice requirements to allow for web based notification. Phase II is still early in development but could include updates related to effluent limit bases--max daily/average monthly for POTWs, reasonable potential, conflicts of interest, §401 certification, antibacksliding, and antidegradation. We do not currently expect to see the proposed updates for factsheets or objection to administratively continued permits in either phase of the rulemaking. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register at: https://federalregister.gov/a/2016-11265 |
| Sean Rolland |
| Peak Flow Management Rule | Wet weather events (e.g., rain, snowmelt) can affect publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) operations when excess water enters the wastewater collection system. The increased wet weather flows can exceed the POTW treatment plant's capacity to provide the same type of treatment for all of the incoming wastewater. The treatment plant's secondary treatment units are the most likely to be adversely affected by wet weather because the biological systems can be damaged when too much water flows through them.In April 2018, Administrator Pruit announced the agency would be reaching out to states, local communities, and stakeholders as the EPA begins a new rulemaking process to provide certainty surrounding the use of “blending” by wastewater treatment plants. EPA plans to provide regulatory certainty with respect to the use of blending so that facilities can optimize wastewater treatment during wet weather, which will protect both water quality and public health in the communities they serve. Hereafter referred to as the peak wet weather flow management rule, EPA will be conducting robust stakeholder outreach during the months of October and November 2018. More information can be found at https://www.epa.gov/npdes/peak-flows-sewage-treatment-plants. |
| Sean Rolland |
| ELG Steam Electric Power Generation | In spring of 2017 EPA received petitions from the UAG and SBA requesting reconsideration and an administrative stay of provisions of the final 2015 rule. After considering the petitions, the EPA decided to move forward with a rulemaking update the Best Available Technology Economically Achievable effluent limitations and pretreatment standards for existing sources. EPA also postpones several 2015 compliance dates. More information can be found at: https://www.epa.gov/eg/steam-electric-power-generating-effluent-guidelines-2015-final-rule |
| Sean Rolland |
| Discharges of Pollutants via a Direct Hydrologic Connection to Surface Water | EPA is requesting comment on the Agency’s previous statements that pollutant discharges from point sources that reach jurisdictional surface water via groundwater or other subsurface flow may be subject to CWA permitting requirements. Specifically, EPA is seeking comment on whether subjecting such releases to CWA permitting is consistent with the text, structure, and purpose of the CWA, whether these releases would be best be addressed under NPDES or some other federal authority, and whether these releases are adequately addressed through state law. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/02/20/2018-03407/clean-water-act-coverage-of-discharges-of-pollutants-via-a-direct-hydrologic-connection-to-surface |
| Patrick McGuire |
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds (OWOW)
| Title | Description | Key Dates | ACWA Staff Contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waters of the U.S. Rule (a.k.a. Clean Water Rule) | In May 2011, EPA and the Army Corp of Engineers (Corps) released for public comment draft guidance for determining whether a waterway, waterbody, or wetland is jurisdictional as a Water of the U.S." ("WoUS") under the CWA. EPA received 230K comments on the draft “WoUS” guidance document. On 9/17/13, EPA and the Corps announced that they had withdrawn the guidance from OMB and sent to OMB a proposed rulemaking instead. Existing 2008 guidance remains in place. On 11/7/2013, a version of the draft proposed rule was leaked to the press. EPA indicated that the leaked version is not the final version sent to OMB. On 4/21/14, EPA published the proposal in the Federal Register, along with an associated "Interpretive Rule" on exemptions from CWA jurisdiction for certain agricultural conservation practices. On Jan. 9, 2015, EPA and the Corps withdrew the Interpretive Rule. The final rule was published in the Federal Register on 6/29/15 and made effective on 8/28/15. On October 9, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stayed the WoUS Rule. The EPA and Corps resumed using the previous regulations and case law defining "WoUS." On January 22 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in National Assn of Manufacturers vs Department of Defense that appeals courts are not the correct venue for challenges to the 2015 WOTUS rule and that district courts were the correct venue, and shortly after the ruling they accordingly dissolved the previously issued 6th Circuit Court of Appeals stay on the 2015 rule. As a result, district court litigation (and stays) which previously were "paused" are now resuming all over the country. |
| Julian Gonzalez |
| “Waters of the United States” – Recodification of Pre-existing Rules (aka "Step 1" of WOTUS Revision) | In February 2017, the White House released and Executive Order titled "Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the 'Waters of the United States' Rule", expressing the intent (and reasoning) for initiating an EPA rulemaking to review, repeal, and replace the existing Waters of the U.S. Rule. This rulemaking, known as "step 1" in that process, aims to repeal the 2015 rule and recodify the pre-2015 rule status quo. On 6/27/17 EPA proposed the rule. On 8/22/17, EPA extended the comment deadline 30 days to 9/27/17, and is now posting comments to the public docket. On 7/12/18, EPA and the Corps published a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking additional comments on the July 2015 rule proposing to repeal the 2015 rule. |
| Julian Gonzalez |
| Waters of the United States (aka “Step 2” rule) | According to EPA’s Fall 2018 Regulatory Agenda, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for “Step 2”, which will redefine Waters of the United States, is due at some point in October 2018. | TBD | Julian Gonzalez |
| Definition of “Waters of the United States” – Addition of Applicability Date to 2015 Clean Water Rule (aka "Step 0" rule) | In November 2017, EPA and the US ACE issued a proposed rule which would add an applicability date to the 2015 Clean Water Rule, which would make the rule inactive in event that the Supreme Court ruled that the nationwide stay by the 6th Circuit was to be dissolved, hoping to prevent a situation where the 2015 rule is the law in certain states and stayed by district courts in other states. In February 2018, EPA and US ACE issued a Final rule, on the heels of the SCOTUS decision in NAM vs Dept of Defense where they did indeed dissolve the 6th Circuit nation-wide stay on the 2015 rule, aiming to create regulatory certainty while EPA considers options for a new WOTUS rule. On August 16th, Judge David C. Norton of the US District Court for the District of South Carolina struck down the aforementioned applicability date rule as arbitrary and capricious in South Carolina Coastal Conservation League et al., v. Andrew Wheeler, et al. ACWA will continue monitoring this rule as the SCCCL et al v. Andrew Wheeler et al decision is appealed. |
| Julian Gonzalez |
| Clean Water Act Section 404(c) Regulatory Revision (aka "404 Veto Rule") | Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act authorizes the Administrator "to prohibit the specification (including withdrawal of the specification) of any defined area as a disposal site" as well as to "deny or restrict the use of any defined area for specification (including the withdrawal of specification) as a disposal site . . . whenever he determines, after notice and opportunity for public hearings, that the discharge of such materials into such area will have an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas (including spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or recreational areas." This rulemaking will consider, at minimum, changes to EPA's 404(c) review process that would govern the future use of EPA's section 404(c) authority. |
| Julian Gonzalez |
| Long Term Action: Clean Water Act 404 Assumption Update Regulation | The Federal Regulatory Agenda also provides updates on "Long Term Actions", which are items under development but for which an agency does not expect to have a regulatory action within the 12 months after publication of this edition of the Unified Agenda. EPA's efforts to potentially develop regulations (or guidance) providing information on the pathway for States to assume 404 permitting program authority from EPA fall under this category. CWA Section 404(g) provides for States and Tribes to assume administration of the dredged and fill permitting program for certain waters, and addresses the requirements for implementation and EPA oversight. This potential rule is intended to provide general updates to the 1988 regulations and provide clarity on specific issue(s) requested by the States and Tribes. Specifically, states and tribes requested that the EPA clarify those waters for which State/Tribe may assume CWA section 404 permit responsibilities, and those waters for which the USACE retains CWA 404 permit responsibility, under an approved state/tribal program. In 2015, EPA convened a Federal Advisory Committee (FACA), comprised of State, Tribal and other stakeholder representatives charging them with providing recommendations as to how EPA could provide clarity on this issue. This rule would be intended to provide clarity on the issue of which waters are assumable following EPA's consideration of the FACA recommendations and to provide needed technical corrections and updates to the 1988 regulations. | TBD (According to the Long Term Actions page of the Fall 2018 Regulatory Agenda, there will be no formal rule-making on this item until early 2020) | Julian Gonzalez |
Office of Science and Technology
| Title | Description | Key Dates | ACWA Staff Contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Updated Aluminum Criteria | EPA requested scientific view for the draft updated aquatic life ambient water water quality criteria for aluminum in freshwater. Due to state interest, EPA and ACWA set up a Aluminum Criteria Working Group in January of 2018. This working group is working on implementation guidance for the updated criteria. EPA has not defined a target publishing date. |
| Frances Bothfeld |
| Recreational Ambient Water Quality Criteria/Swimming Advisories for Cyanotoxins | EPA proposed a recreational ambient water quality criteria for cyanotoxins, which was later changed to a criteria or an advisory. This criteria/advisory focuses on microcystin and cylindrospermopsin concentration in fresh waters. The criteria/advisory, originally intended to be published in time for the 2017 swimming season has been delayed. |
| Frances Bothfeld |
| Clean Water Act Methods Update Rule for the Analysis of Effluent | EPA proposed a rule to amend "Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants" at 40 CFR part 136 to approve test procedures (analytical methods) for use by testing laboratories and others for water monitoring. The regulation would also revise, clarify, and correct errors and ambiguities in existing methods and the water monitoring regulations. | Frances Bothfeld and Sean Rolland |
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR)
| Title | Description | Key Dates | ACWA Staff Contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals Rule | This rule finalized national regulations to provide a comprehensive set of requirements for the safe disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCRs), commonly known as coal ash, from coal-fired power plants. These regulations address the risks from coal ash disposal -- leaking of contaminants into ground water, blowing of contaminants into the air as dust, and the catastrophic failure of coal ash surface impoundments. New Proposal: The Agency is proposing four changes associated with the judicial remand and the settlement agreement entered April 18, 2016. The proposed revisions would: 1) clarify the type and magnitude of non-groundwater releases that would require a facility to comply with some or all of the corrective action procedures set forth in 40 CFR §§ 257.96-257.98 in meeting their obligation to clean up the release; 2) add boron to the list of constituents in Appendix IV of part 257 that trigger corrective action and potentially the requirement to retrofit or close the CCR unit; 3) determine the requirement for proper height of woody and grassy vegetation for slope protection; and 4) modify the alternative closure provisions. |
| Sean Rolland |
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW)
| Title | Description | Key Dates | ACWA Staff Contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead and Copper Rule | EPA opened a docket to collect public comments from state and local government officials on proposed regulatory revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule (“LCR”). EPA promulgated the LCR in 1991 to reduce exposure to lead and copper through drinking water. The LCR applies to community water systems and non-transient non-community water systems as defined by the Safe Drinking Water Act. A copy of the Lean and Copper Rule Revisions White Paper can be found here: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-10/documents/508_lcr_revisions_white_paper_final_10.26.16.pdf Implementation of the LCR over the past twenty-five years has resulted in major improvements in public health, the lead crises in Washington, DC, and in Flint, Michigan, and the subsequent national attention focused on lead in drinking water in other communities, have underscored significant challenges in the implementation of the current rule. Key challenges include the rule’s complexity, the degree of discretion it affords with regard to optimization of corrosion control treatment and compliance sampling practices that in some cases, may not adequately protect from lead exposure, and limited specific focus on key areas of concern such as schools. There is a compelling need to modernize and strengthen implementation of the rule – to strengthen its public health protections and to clarify its implementation requirements to make it more effective and more readily enforceable. The federal consultation link can be found here. |
| Sean Rolland |
Select Non Rulemaking Efforts and Other Developments
| Title | Description | Key Dates | ACWA Staff Contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan | In May 2018, EPA released the Final 2016 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan. To learn more about the Plan, go here. |
| Patrick McGuire |
| National Water Program Guidance FY2018-2019 | EPA OW released the Draft National Water Program Guidance FY 2018-2019 on July 5, 2017. ACWA submitted comments on the Guidance on July 28, 2017. EPA issued the final document in October 2017. EPA intends to develop FY2019 Addendums to address any significant changes identified after the release of the final FY 2018-2019 NPM Guidances. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-09/documents/fy18-19-ow-npm-guidance.pdf. |
| Patrick McGuire |
| EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD) Hydraulic Fracturing Study | EPA ORD has been developing a study on the potential environmental and human health implications of hydraulic fracturing with special emphasis on the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water resources. On June 4, 2015, a draft assessment was released by the agency. The study will be finalized after review by the Science Advisory Board and public review and comment. The Federal Register Notice with information on the SAB review and how to comment on the draft assessment was published on June 5, 2015: https://federalregister.gov/a/2015-13674. The Final Report, as well as companion statements and summaries, was published in December 2016 and is available here. |
| Julian Gonzalez |
| Increasing Transparency in Considering Costs and Benefits in the Rulemaking Process – Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking | EPA is considering developing implementing regulations that would increase consistency across EPA divisions and offices, increase reliability to affected stakeholders, and increase transparency during the development of regulatory actions. Many EPA statutes, including the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, provide language on the consideration of benefits and costs, but these have historically been interpreted differently by the EPA depending on the office promulgating the regulatory action. This has led to EPA choosing different standards under the same provision of the statute, the regulatory community not being able to rely on consistent application of the statute, and EPA developing internal policies on the consideration of benefits and costs through non-transparent actions. EPA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in June 2018. The Agency is now reviewing comments received to determine if developing implementing regulations through a notice-and-comment rulemaking process or other action could provide the public with a better understanding on how EPA weighs benefits and costs when developing a regulatory action and allow the public to provide better feedback to EPA on potential future proposed rules. |
| Patrick McGuire |
| Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science | This action is intended to strengthen the transparency of EPA regulatory science and ensure the appropriate science underlying its actions is publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation. This rule would increase transparency of the assumptions underlying dose-response data and models that support EPA regulatory decisions. The federal register notice can be found here: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-transparency-in-regulatory-science. |
| Sean Rolland |
| Study of Oil and Gas Wastewater Management | The focus of the Agency’s study will be to engage with states, tribes and stakeholders to consider available approaches to manage wastewater from both conventional and unconventional oil and gas extraction at onshore facilities. EPA’s study will address questions such as how existing federal approaches to produced water management under the Clean Water Act can interact more effectively with state and tribal regulations, requirements or policy needs, and whether potential federal regulations that may allow for broader discharge of treated produced water to surface waters are supported. EPA is particularly interested in working with its regulatory partners at the state level, who are at the forefront of the changing industry, and often manage complex water allocation programs under state law. EPA is consulting with states, tribes and stakeholders this summer, including industry and NGOs. The Agency is planning to hold a public meeting in Washington, D.C. to report on what we have learned and to allow stakeholders to provide additional input. EPA then plans to prepare a white paper that it can use to inform next steps. Following this study, EPA will determine if future Agency actions are appropriate to further address oil and gas extraction wastewater. |
| Patrick McGuire |
