A $50M infrastructure project halted mid-construction due to unforeseen water quality issues? Under proposed federal rule changes, scenarios like this could become more common and more costly.
Protect your business from unnecessary risk: Submit your comment and sign the collective statement. Details below.
Clean Water Act Section 401 determines when and how water quality risks are identified in the federal permitting process. For businesses, timing matters. When risks are surfaced early, they can be addressed efficiently and at lower cost. When they are pushed aside, they tend to reappear later as delays, retrofits, litigation, or operational limits — after investments have already been made.
Why One-Size-Fits-All Doesn’t Work
Water quality impacts are not uniform. Conditions vary widely by watershed, season, existing uses, and community needs. States and Tribes apply locally appropriate standards and technical expertise to account for these differences. This place-based review is what allows national permitting decisions to work in real-world conditions on the ground.
What the Proposed Change Would Do
The proposed rule would narrow the range of impacts that can be reviewed and limit the ability of states and Tribes to address foreseeable water-quality risks. This shifts costs and regulatory uncertainty away from early planning and onto businesses and communities later in the project lifecycle – after capital is committed – when problems can cost 3-10 times more to fix.
What this Means for Businesses
For a business, this can mean discovering water-related constraints only after financing is secured and construction is underway, resulting in unexpected mitigation requirements, operational restrictions, or project delays. These outcomes raise costs and undermine the predictability that responsible project planning requires, even for well-planned projects.
What We’re Asking For
We urge federal regulators to preserve state and Tribal authority to conduct comprehensive Section 401 reviews based on local conditions. Early identification of water quality risks protects both environmental outcomes and business investments.
Take Action: Two Ways to Make Your Voice Heard
Individual Comment: Submitting your individual comment ensures your business perspective is part of the official record and documents your unique experience with water quality permitting.
Collective Statement: Signing the collective statement amplifies your voice alongside other businesses nationwide.
Taking both actions sends a clear, unified message to policymakers while maximizing your impact.
