The trend to overturn, modify, and change the environmental regulations from the previous administration continues with proposed changes to the Clean Water Act (CWA)-Facility Response Plan (FRP) and the Risk Management Plan (RMP).
Clean Water Act Facility Response Plan
In our July 1, 2025, blog, we reported that the CWA-FRP compliance deadline appeared to be headed toward a delay. The rule was developed in response to a 2019 lawsuit by Natural Resources Defense Council et. al. that was settled on March 13, 2020.
On March 3, 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a prepublication notice stating that the EPA is proposing to delay the compliance date for the FRP requirements, as well as to make language modifications to align with the administration’s climate change and environmental justice (EJ) policies in Executive Order 14148 of January 20, 2025. This action proposes a three-year delay of the compliance date by which a regulated facility is required to prepare and submit its CWA hazardous substance FRP to June 1, 2030.
On March 3, 2026, the EPA issued a prepublication notice stating that the EPA is proposing to delay the compliance date for the CWA-FRP
Removing Environmental Justice and Climate Change Language
As you may recall, originally, the regulation allowed the EPA regional administrators to identify facilities and require the development of an FRP even if other criteria in the rule were not met.
According to the EPA, “An independent reason for this proposed action is that, upon reconsideration, EPA is concerned that undue focus on particular communities rather than on the risks posed to the community by any CWA hazardous substance release could lead to improper planning. Indeed, comprehensive substantial harm criteria should protect all communities.”
The Biden administration not only considered giving special consideration to EJ communities but also factored climate change into environmental policy considerations. In the March 3, 2026, notice, the EPA states, “Similarly, disproportionate focus on climate-related hazards may result in uneven applicability determinations, which could skew planning away from a risk-based approach. This unintended consequence could lead to planning based upon highly unlikely events, rather than more common scenarios.”
Risk Management Program
Our March 22, 2024, blog discussed the Risk Management Plan (RMP) Rule titled “Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under the Clean Air Act; Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention.”
On February 24, 2026, the EPA published the Common Sense Approach to Chemical Accident Prevention rule, which proposes revisions to the Risk Management Program.
These proposed changes would, according to the announcement:
- reduce regulatory burden by ensuring regulatory consistency,
- avoid duplicative requirements, and
- eliminate unnecessary burdens placed on facilities where there is no specific data available to show that the current RMP rule would reduce or has reduced accidental releases.
Support For the Change
Nick Breslin, senior regulatory affairs manager at the Alliance for Chemical Distribution (ACD), applauded the rule as one that “would establish greater consistency within the program by averting many requirements to align with what was in place before the 2024 final rule.” He also said, “This new proposal makes several improvements to the 2024 rule. This includes a shift and focus of [Safer Technology Alternatives Analysis (STAA)] requirements on new processes, which will help ensure new processes are safe without forcing retroactive changes that could be prohibitively costly for facilities or for retrofitting that could ultimately make them less safe.” (Source: Inside EPA).
Opposition to the Change
Environmental groups have expressed their displeasure over the change. EarthJustice released a statement that said, in part, “Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it will launch a rulemaking process after corporate lobbyists pressed the agency to dismantle safeguards against chemical disasters. This move targets nearly 12,000 chemical facilities operating under the Risk Management Program (RMP), and puts in the crosshairs safeguards to protect workers, first responders, and fenceline communities from chemical releases, fires, and explosions.”
For additional information on environmental compliance, see our Environmental Compliance Tips and Insights.
Environmental Compliance Assistance
Dragun can assist you with environmental compliance matters, including a compliance assessment. However, if you have not completed a compliance assessment in several years, you might want to first contact your legal counsel to advise you on the legal protections available through state and federal audit privilege programs.
For more information or assistance, contact our office at 248-932-0228.
Alan Hahn drafted this blog. Alan has an undergraduate degree in Environmental Studies and completed a graduate program in Environmental Management. He has worked in environmental management for more than 45 years. He has written hundreds of blogs and articles. His published work includes Michigan Lawyers Weekly, Detroiter, Michigan Forward, GreenStone Partners, Manure Manager Magazine, Progressive Dairy, and HazMat Magazine.
Jeffrey Bolin, M.S., reviewed this blog. Jeff is a partner and senior scientist at Dragun Corporation. He is a published author, a frequent speaker, and an expert witness. His expertise in environmental due diligence, PFAS, vapor intrusion, and site assessments has led to projects in the US, Canada, and overseas. See Jeff’s Bio.
Follow Dragun Corporation on LinkedIn, X, or Facebook.
Sign up for our monthly environmental newsletter.
Principled Foundation | Thoughtful Advice | Smart Solutions
Established in 1988