EPA to States: Don’t Rock the Boat with Water Quality Certification Review

Jun 19, 2019

Reading Time : 3 min

The guidance follows an April 10, 2019, Executive Order from President Trump that continued the administration’s deregulatory push. The Order directed EPA to review and update interim guidance from 2010 addressing how states and tribes issue water quality certifications, then review and update its regulations by May 2020 to ensure consistency with the “federalism consideration underlying section 401” and the goal of “promot[ing] private investment in the Nation’s energy infrastructure.”2 EPA’s regulations implementing Section 401 have not been updated since 1971.

Section 401 provides states and authorized tribes with a key tool to help maintain water quality within their borders, in collaboration with federal permitting agencies. Under Section 401, a federal agency may not issue a permit or license for a project that may result in discharge to waters of the United States unless the applicable state or tribe issues a certification verifying compliance with existing water quality requirements, or waives the certification requirement.3

In recent years, however, states have stretched this authority to slow or stop major energy projects. For instance, last month the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation denied a certification for the Williams natural gas pipeline, citing greenhouse gas emissions from the project and indirect impacts to water and coastal resources, requiring mitigation.4 Similarly, in September 2017, the Washington Department of Ecology denied a certification for the proposed Millennium coal export terminal, citing impacts related to boat traffic, climate change, and air pollution, in addition to effects on water quality.5

In response to these state actions hindering large private-sector projects, EPA now warns that if a state or tribe issues a Section 401 certification that has “conditions beyond the scope of Section 401, i.e., conditions not related to water quality requirements, or has denied a water quality certification for reasons beyond the scope of Section 401,” the applicable federal permitting agencies should determine whether the state or tribe has waived its Section 401 authority or to issue the permit or license with the conditions.6

The guidance also clarifies review timing; the one-year period for states and tribes to review and act on requests for certification should begin at the “receipt of the certification request,” rather than upon receipt of a “completed application” as was provided in the outgoing guidance.7 According to EPA, waiting until an application was “complete” to begin the time period for review is inappropriate because Section 401 does not use the term, nor does it provide states or tribes with authority to determine that a request is incomplete or delay the start of the timeline on that basis. Additionally, EPA incorporated the D.C. Circuit’s recent ruling in Hoopa Valley Tribe v. FERC8 that the one-year period does not reset when a project proponent withdraws then resubmits a virtually identical certification request. Finally, EPA encouraged states and tribes not to wait for completion of review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to act on permit requests, because those reviews are broader in scope than Section 401 reviews.9

Notably, the guidance is nonbinding; EPA made clear that it does not impose any new legal requirements on states, tribes or permit applicants.10 States are therefore free to ignore the guidance without fear of legal repercussions, at least for the time being—EPA indicated that it may use parts of the guidance in its forthcoming rulemaking to update the Section 401 regulations in accordance with Executive Order 13868.

1 Clean Water Act Section 401 Guidance for Federal Agencies, States, and Authorized Tribes, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (June 7, 2019) [hereinafter “Guidance”], https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-06/documents/cwa_section_401_guidance.pdf.

2 Exec. Order No. 13868, 84 Fed. Reg. 15495 (April 10, 2019).

3 33 U.S.C. § 1341(a)(1).

4 Letter from Daniel Whitehead, Director, Division of Environmental Permits of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, to Joseph Dean, Manager, Environmental Health and Safety Department of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (May 15, 2019), https://www.law360.com/articles/1160360/attachments/0.

5 Letter from Maia Bellon, Director, State of Washington Department of Ecology, to Kristin Gaines, Millennium Bulk Terminals-Longview, LLC (September 26, 2017), http://blogs2.law.columbia.edu/climate-change-litigation/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/case-documents/2018/20180906_docket-18-2-00994-08_petition-for-review.pdf.

6 Guidance, at 4.

7 Id. at 3.

8 913 F.3d 1099 (D.C. Cir. 2019).

9 Guidance, at 5.

10 Id. at 2.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

February 13, 2025

Oil & gas companies continue to identify and capitalize on opportunities related to the deployment of new energy technologies, with their approaches broadly maturing and coalescing around maximizing synergies, leveraging available subsidies and responding to regulatory drivers.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 11, 2025

On January 30, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) approved a Stipulation and Consent Agreement (Agreement) between the Office of Enforcement (OE) and Stronghold Digital Mining Inc. (Stronghold) resolving an investigation into whether Stronghold had violated the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) tariff and Commission regulations by limiting the quantity of energy made available to the market to serve a co-located Bitcoin mining operation.1 This order appears to be the first instance of a public enforcement action involving co-located load and generation and comes at a time when both FERC and market operators2 are scrutinizing the treatment of co-located load due to the rapid increase in demand associated with data center development.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 5, 2025

2024 was about post-consolidation deal flow and a steady uptick in activity across the oil & gas market. This year, mergers & acquisitions (M&A) activity looks set to take on a different tone as major consolidation plays bed down.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 30, 2025

The oil & gas industry is experiencing a capital resurgence, driven by stabilizing interest rates and renewed attention from institutional investors. Private equity is leading the charge with private credit filling the void in traditional energy finance and hybrid capital instruments gaining in popularity. Family offices are also playing a crucial role, providing long-term, flexible investments.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 23, 2025

Under a second Trump presidency, the U.S. is expected to consider reversal of many of the Biden administration’s climate and environmental policies, in addition to a markedly different approach to trade policy and oil & gas regulation. This includes expanding oil & gas development on public lands and offshore, lifting the pause on liquified natural gas (LNG) exports to non-Free Trade Agreement countries and repealing the methane fee.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 15, 2025

We are pleased to share a recording of Akin’s recently presented webinar, “Drilling Down: What Oil & Gas Companies Can Expect from Federal Agencies During Trump’s Second Administration.”

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 9, 2025

On January 6, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a Final Rule to amend its regulations governing the maximum civil monetary penalties assessable for violations of statutes, rules and orders within FERC’s jurisdiction. The Final Rule is a result of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, which requires each federal agency to issue an annual inflation adjustment by January 15 for each civil monetary penalty provided by law within the agency’s jurisdiction. The adjustments in the Final Rule represent an increase of approximately 2.6% for each covered maximum penalty. FERC’s adjusted maximum penalty amounts, which will apply at the time of assessment of a civil penalty regardless of the date on which the violation occurred, are set forth here and will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 9, 2025

Join projects & energy transition partners Ike Emehelu and Shariff Barakat as well as climate change partner Ken Markowitz at Infocast's Projects & Money, where Ike will moderate the "The State of Project Finance – View from the C-Suite" panel, and Shariff will moderate the "Capital Markets & Other Capital Sources for Project Finance & Investment" panel. Ken will moderate the “Carbon Markets Forecast for 2025” panel.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.