• Comment Deadline: February 17, 2026, via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, email (OW-Docket@epa.gov), or mail. Comments must be submitted in writing and identified with Docket ID No. EPA‑HQ‑OW‑2025‑2929.
  • Adoption: Expected in Spring 2026 (subject to comments received).

On January 13, 2026, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a proposed rule, to be codified as 40 C.F.R. Part 121, “Updating the Water Quality Certification Regulations,” that proposes to narrow the scope of state and tribal review under Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. § 1341, and tighten timelines intended to expedite federal permitting (Proposed Rule).

What is CWA Section 401?

CWA Section 401 specifies that a federal permit or license for any activity that may result in a discharge to waters of the United States (WOTUS) cannot issue unless the state or authorized tribe where the discharge will occur certifies that the discharge will comply with CWA Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, and 307, which includes prescribed effluent limitations, or the state or authorized tribe waives certification. Section 401 requires states and tribes to act on certification requests “within a reasonable period of time (which shall not to exceed one year) after receipt” of the request. The certifying authority must decide to grant, grant with conditions, or deny the certification. Major federal licenses and permits subject to CWA Section 401 certification include:

  • CWA Section 402 NPDES permits issued by EPA in jurisdictions where the EPA administers the NPDES permitting program.
  • CWA Section 404 permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material issued by the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
  • Bridge permits issued by the Coast Guard under the General Bridge Act of 1946.
  • Hydropower and interstate natural gas pipeline licenses issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
  • Rivers and Harbors Act Sections 9 and 10 permits issued by the Corps.

Key Takeaways of Proposed Rule & Impacts on States and Tribes

EPA frames the proposed changes as restoring “clear statutory boundaries” and streamlining permitting for nationally important infrastructure while protecting water quality.

  • Rule Reversal: The Proposed Rule would reverse many of the changes made during the Biden Administration in 2023 and return major elements of the rule adopted during the first Trump Administration in 2020.
  • Narrowed Authority: The scope of a CWA Section 401 certification and any imposed conditions are limited to point source discharges to WOTUS, disavowing the 2023 rule’s “activity as a whole” approach and limiting broader project‑level conditions that States have used in the past. This item is likely to generate substantial comment.
  • Predictable Timelines: The Proposed Rule removes the option for the certifying authority to unilaterally extend the “reasonable period,” and curbs tools previously used by certifying authorities to extend the one‑year issuance period (e.g., withdraw‑and‑resubmit practices), aiming to accelerate decisions for linear energy and infrastructure projects.
  • Standardized Applications: EPA proposes a fixed content list needed for all certification requests, which may reduce back‑and‑forth with certifying authorities, but also limits states’ ability to require additional information at the intake stage.
  • Mutually Agreed Upon Modifications: The Proposed Rule requires all modifications to certification decisions and conditions to be approved by both the applicant and the federal permitting agency.
  • Timely Action on Objections: The Proposed Rule requires the federal permitting agency to act on another state’s objection to a certification within ninety (90) days, and allows EPA to make either categorical or case-by-case determinations regarding whether the discharge may affect another state’s waters.
  • Policy Alignment: States and tribes may need to revise Section 401 policies, forms, and guidance, and federal agencies will need to align permit processes with updated Section 401 triggers and timelines.

Conclusion and Next Steps

Regulated entities, project developers, and other interested parties should evaluate whether to suggest further adjustments to streamline the CWA Section 401 certification process by the comment deadline of February 17, 2026. If the Proposed Rule is adopted, we recommend tracking whether litigation is filed, and what effect, if any, such litigation has on implementation (e.g., if an injunction is issued). Ultimately, regulated entities should consider the impacts of the changes on current and future certification applications, and evaluate opportunities to conform certifications to the updated scope and procedures.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Nicole Granquist Nicole Granquist

Nicole Granquist is among a select group of attorneys in California who specializes exclusively in water quality regulatory compliance, enforcement defense, and litigation. Described by clients as a “powerhouse” who has a “tremendous grasp of the complex scientific, legal, and political issues” involved…

Nicole Granquist is among a select group of attorneys in California who specializes exclusively in water quality regulatory compliance, enforcement defense, and litigation. Described by clients as a “powerhouse” who has a “tremendous grasp of the complex scientific, legal, and political issues” involved in California water quality regulation and litigation, Nicole’s tenacity, creativity, and pragmatic approach have consistently delivered exceptional results for her statewide municipal and industrial clients, earning her respect and credibility with both regulators and opposing counsel.

Nicole routinely negotiates NPDES Permits, waste discharge requirements (WDRs), and water reclamation requirements with the state board and regional water boards for municipal wastewater, industrial process water, and all types of stormwater discharges, as well as reclamation projects. Her involvement in these matters consistently results in more favorable and reasonable permit provisions. She also is deeply involved in the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and all aspects of Basin Planning and has positively contributed to and influenced important statewide policies. A recent example involves Nicole’s testimony before the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), which beneficially influenced the terms of the SWRCB’s compliance schedule policy.

Photo of Andrew Perez Andrew Perez

Andrew (Andy) Perez assists public and private clients in navigating complex environmental litigation and regulatory compliance matters to find innovative solutions. He handles a wide range of environmental cases in both state and federal courts, including those involving the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation…

Andrew (Andy) Perez assists public and private clients in navigating complex environmental litigation and regulatory compliance matters to find innovative solutions. He handles a wide range of environmental cases in both state and federal courts, including those involving the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); the Clean Water Act (CWA); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); the Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL); and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Andy frequently deals with regulatory enforcement and compliance issues that involve federal, state, and local environmental agencies.

Click here to continue reading Andrew Perez’s full bio.

Photo of Melissa Thorme Melissa Thorme

Melissa Thorme counsels industrial and municipal clients in addressing their environmental compliance challenges and negotiating or litigating their regulatory enforcement actions. With nearly 35 years’ experience, Melissa advises business entities, including food processors, lumber companies, agricultural companies, contractors, marinas and boat yards, auto…

Melissa Thorme counsels industrial and municipal clients in addressing their environmental compliance challenges and negotiating or litigating their regulatory enforcement actions. With nearly 35 years’ experience, Melissa advises business entities, including food processors, lumber companies, agricultural companies, contractors, marinas and boat yards, auto dismantlers, small manufacturing companies, and oil field waste-produced water facilities, in addition to sanitation districts, counties, and cities throughout California on matters related to NPDES, wastewater, and recycled water discharge permitting and waivers, TMDLs, and enforcement actions brought by regulatory agencies or in Clean Water Act/Proposition 65 citizen suits.

Continue reading Melissa Thorme’s bio.