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

August 07, 2024

*Thank you to JaKell Larson, 2024 Akin Summer Associate, for her valuable collaboration on this article.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 31, 2024

Interstate oil, liquid and refined products pipelines regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will soon be able to raise their transportation rates (provided they were set using FERC’s popular Index rate methodology) in the wake of a significant new decision by the District of Columbia Circuit (the D.C. Circuit) in Liquid Energy Pipeline Association v. FERC (LEPA).

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 29, 2024

On Wednesday, July 24, 2024, the U.S. House of Representative Committee on Energy and Commerce held a Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security hearing to review the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Request. Members of the Subcommittee had the opportunity to hear testimony from all five Commissioners, including FERC Chairman Willie Phillips and Commissioner Mark Christie, as well as the three recently confirmed commissioners, David Rosner, Lindsay See and Judy Chang. In addition to their prepared remarks, the five commissioners answered questions on FERC’s mandate to provide affordable and reliable electricity and natural gas services nationwide, while also ensuring it fulfills its primary mission of maintaining just and reasonable rates.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 29, 2024

On July 9, 2024, the U.S. Court of the Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) erred in ordering refunds for certain bilateral spot market transactions in the Western Energy Coordinating Council (WECC) region that exceeded the $1,000/megawatt-hour (MWh) “soft” price cap for such sales.1 Finding FERC failed to conduct a “Mobile-Sierra public-interest analysis” before “altering” those contracts by ordering refunds, the court vacated FERC’s orders and remanded the case to FERC for further proceedings.2

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 8, 2024

On June 28, 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which for 40 years required court deference to reasonable agency interpretations of federal statutes in certain circumstances, even when the reviewing court would read the statute differently. The Court ended “Chevron deference” and held that courts “must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.” In doing so, the Court upended a longstanding principle of administrative law that is likely to make agency decisions more susceptible to challenge in the courts.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 3, 2024

We are pleased to share a recording of Akin and ICF’s recently presented “Powering Progress: Decoding FERC Order No. 1920” webinar, along with the program materials.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

June 12, 2024

Join projects & energy transition partner Ben Reiter at Infocast's Transmission & Interconnection Summit, where he will moderate the “Dealing with the Impacts of Increased Interconnection Request Requirements and Costs” panel.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

June 4, 2024

Join projects & energy transition partners Hayden Harms and Vanessa Wilson at Infocast's RNG & SAF Capital Markets Summit, where Hayden will moderate the "Investor Perspectives: Private Equity, Infrastructure Funds, & Strategies" panel, and Vanessa will moderate the "Opportunities in Other Biogas/Fuels Markets" panel.

...

Read More

© 2024 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.