Freedom of Information Request Reveals EPA Plan to Rollback ELGs Affecting Electroplating, Electronic Manufacturing and Asbestos Industries

Recent documents obtained through an environmentalist nonprofit group’s Freedom of Information Act request reveal EPA’s intent to review and rollback effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs) for asbestos manufacturing, electrical and electronic component manufacturing (E&EC), and electroplating industries. ELGs are national standards promulgated under EPA’s Clean Water Act authority, which set technology-based limits on discharge of pollutants by industrial category.

Early in his term, President Trump directed agencies by executive order to identify regulations not aligning with the administration’s policy goals. EPA developed a “Unified Agenda” identifying twenty-six regulations for review. In response to the executive order, EPA submitted these regulations and nine additional previously unlisted regulations, including the ELGs identified above, to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review. Other unlisted items submitted for review include regulation of trichloroethylene (TCE) under the Toxic Substances Control Act, national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) from fossil fuel steam generating units, greenhouse gas emissions standards for certain heavy-duty vehicles, and multi-pollutant emissions standard for light- and medium-duty vehicles. On request, EPA commented the ELGs were identified in long-term regulatory planning documents preceding the Unified Agenda.

EPA states generally the ELGs “imposed undue burden on small business and impeded private enterprise,” but the rationale for each ELG review is distinct. For E&EC, deregulation directly supports the President’s goal to enhance semiconductor manufacturing in the United States by loosening environmental restrictions. EPA stated in the Unified Agenda, the ELG for asbestos manufacturing is unnecessary as asbestos is no longer made in the United States. Like E&EC, the potential rollback of the electroplating ELG likely is intended to ease burdens on manufacturers to enhance productivity.

One important note for electroplaters is EPA still intends to address PFAS in the chromium electroplating industry. However, given the newly-discovered ELG review and recent EPA studies concluding chromium electroplating is the “predominant source[]” of PFAS in the metal plating and electroplating source categories, it appears less likely EPA will regulate PFAS broadly in the electroplating ELG, opting instead for targeted regulation of chromium processes. Affected regulations include 40 CFR Pts. 413, 427 and 469.