Water

Subscribe to Water via RSS

Introduction

On November 30, 2023, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its Proposed Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI).[1] With this proposal, EPA aims to simplify and expand upon the 2021 Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR) and the original 1991 Lead and Copper Rule (LCR). The proposed LCRI outlines aggressive measures to achieve further reductions of lead in drinking water. This initiative brings to the forefront a critical question: Are the potential health benefits projected by EPA enough to justify the scope and extent of the rule and its related hefty price tag?

On November 20, with no fanfare at all, not even a press release, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its Draft Guidance: Applying the Supreme Court’s County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund Decision in the Clean Water Act Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Program to Discharges Through Groundwater. This draft guidance is the agency’s second effort to guide implementation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2020 decision, which extends applicability of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program to include the “functional equivalent” of point source discharges of pollutants to waters of the U.S.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finalized a new regulation to implement the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 401 water quality certification program. Continuing the recent practice of promulgating regulations and then promptly replacing them, EPA’s “CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification Improvement Rule”(the 2023 Rule) replaces the “Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification Rule” that was finalized in 2020 (the 2020 Rule). The 2023 Rule was published in the Federal Register on September 27, 2023 and will become effective on November 27, 2023. This article provides background on the CWA water quality certification program, followed by a deep dive into the 2023 Rule and how it compares to the 2020 Rule.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has formally withdrawn cybersecurity rules it promulgated in March requiring that states report cybersecurity threats to their public water systems (PWS). The reversal comes in the wake of lawsuits filed in the Eighth Circuit in July by Missouri, Arkansas, and Iowa (the states), along with intervenors American Water Works Association and National Rural Water Association (the water associations). As a result of the withdrawal, the states and water associations filed to dismiss their suits.

Michigan Attorney General (AG) Dana Nessel has filed suit against the Gerald R. Ford International Airport Authority to enforce demands by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) related to alleged per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) contamination of the regional drinking water supply caused by the airport authority.

On July 25, Missouri, Arkansas, and Iowa (the states), along with intervenors American Water Works Association and National Rural Water Association (the water associations), petitioned the Eighth Circuit to review the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new rule requiring states to review and report cybersecurity threats to their public water systems (PWS).

Public water utilities and 3M have until August 28 to respond to the bipartisan coalition of 22 state attorneys general (AGs) that opposes their proposed $12.5 billion class action settlement over alleged per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) contamination and is seeking to intervene in their litigation.

A bipartisan coalition of attorneys general (AGs) from 22 states is urging the federal district court in South Carolina to reject a proposed $12.5 billion settlement between 3M and a group of public water utilities, who are suing the company over alleged per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) contamination.

A filing in a California federal court indicates that EPA is planning to apply its new Clean Water Act section 401 certification rule to all certification requests, including those that are currently pending and that were submitted in accordance with the 2020 Certification Rule. If EPA attempts to retroactively apply its new rule to pending certification requests, it will guarantee immediate litigation and the challengers will have a strong likelihood of success.

EPA has proposed to establish “baseline” water quality standards that would apply to all Indian reservation waters where the tribe has not received “treatment as a state” (TAS) authority, the state does not have authority, and the federal government has not already promulgated water quality standards. Under the proposal, tribes will have a limited opportunity to request that certain waters be excluded from the federal baseline standards, but that decision will ultimately be made by the EPA regional administrator. If a tribe receives TAS, promulgates its own water quality standards, and obtains EPA approval of those standards, the federal baseline standards would no longer apply.