 
 
October 18, 2016
Recent EPA Actions to Protect Tribal Water Quality
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has 
applications by requiring tribes to demonstrate on a case-
recently taken several actions intended to strengthen water 
by-case basis their inherent authority under principles of 
quality protection within Indian reservations. Three 
Indian law that the tribe has jurisdiction to regulate under 
actions—(1) issuance of an interpretive rule in May 2016, 
the CWA, especially inherent tribal authority over non-
(2) promulgation of another rule in September, and (3) 
member activities within a reservation. Inherent authority, 
request for comment on another possible rule also in 
or sovereignty, refers to the principle that powers lawfully 
September—are described by EPA as part of a broad effort 
vested in tribes, such as self-government, are not in general 
to narrow gaps in water quality protection in Indian 
delegated powers granted by express acts of Congress.  
country.  While these initiatives are widely supported by 
tribal interests, they raise concerns with some states, local 
In May 2016 EPA issued an interpretive rule that revised its 
governments, and industries. States have primary 
long-standing interpretation requiring TAS applicants to 
responsibility for protecting water quality within their 
demonstrate their inherent authority to regulate under the 
borders except in Indian country where civil regulatory 
CWA (see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
authority generally lies with the federal government and the 
“Revised Interpretation of Clean Water Act Tribal 
relevant tribe, not with the states. 
Provision,” 81
 Federal Register 30183-30198, May 16, 
2016). Under its reinterpretation, EPA concluded that CWA 
Recognizing Indian Tribes in a Similar 
Section 518 includes an express delegation of authority by 
Manner as a State 
Congress to Indian tribes to administer CWA regulatory 
Section 518(e) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 
programs over their entire reservations, subject to the 
1377(e)) authorizes EPA to treat eligible federally 
eligibility requirements in Section 518, and that a 
recognized Indian tribes in a similar manner as a state (i.e., 
demonstration of inherent authority is not required. 
“treatment as a state,” or TAS) for the purposes of receiving 
grants under several funding authorities and administering 
EPA had concluded that demonstrating inherent authority 
certain regulatory programs of the act. Section 518(h) 
over non-member activities on a reservation creates an 
defines “Indian tribe” to mean any Indian tribe, band, 
unintended administrative burden on applicant tribes and 
group, or community recognized by the Secretary of the 
requires substantial commitments of tribal and federal 
Interior and exercising governmental authority over a 
resources. The agency has long viewed Section 518(e) as 
federal Indian reservation. It also defines “federal Indian 
expressing Congress’s preference for tribal regulation of 
reservation” to mean all land within the limits of any 
reservation waters. EPA believes that the May 2016 
reservation under the jurisdiction of the U.S. government, 
interpretive rule will streamline the process of applying for 
notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and including 
TAS status, and it estimates that 12 tribes per year would 
rights-of-way running through the reservation (33 U.S.C. 
apply under the rule. The rule was based in part on the 
1377(h)). According to EPA, tribes can seek TAS with 
agency’s interpretation of similar Clean Air Act provisions 
respect to water resources over all land within a reservation, 
(42 U.S.C. 4201(d)) that, according to EPA, federal courts 
including, for example, land held in trust by the United 
have held provide an express congressional delegation of 
States for a tribe, land owned by or held in trust for a 
authority to eligible tribes to protect environmental 
member of the tribe, and land owned by non-tribal 
resources (see 81 
Federal Register 30186-30187). 
members. 
TAS for Purposes of TMDLs 
The federal government has recognized 567 tribes. Over 
As described previously, EPA has issued rules establishing 
300 of these tribes have reservation lands such as formal 
a process for federally recognized tribes that have TAS 
reservations, Pueblos, and informal reservations (i.e., lands 
status to then obtain TAS for regulatory provisions of the 
held in trust by the United States for tribal governments that 
CWA, such as developing water quality standards (40 
are not designated as formal reservations), but less than 
C.F.R. 131.8), issuing water quality certification (40 C.F.R. 
25% have sought TAS status. 
131.4(c)), and issuing discharge permits (40 C.F.R. 123.31-
34). In September 2016, EPA finalized a companion to 
CWA Section 518(e) establishes eligibility criteria for TAS, 
these procedural rules with a regulation enabling eligible 
including that the tribe has a governing body carrying out 
tribes to obtain authority to identify impaired waters on 
substantial governmental duties and powers and that it has 
their reservations and to establish total maximum daily 
jurisdiction over the media or objects sought to be 
loads (TMDLs), as states routinely do for non-Indian land 
regulated. EPA promulgated several rules establishing TAS 
waters (See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
criteria and procedures for Indian tribes interested in 
“Treatment of Indian Tribes in a Similar Manner as States 
administering CWA programs, beginning in 1991. 
for Purposes of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act,” 81
 
According to EPA, since that time, it has taken what it 
Federal Register 65901-65917, September 26, 2016.)  
characterizes as a cautious approach to approving TAS 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Recent EPA Actions to Protect Tribal Water Quality 
CWA Section 303(d) requires states and approved tribes to 
EPA contends that there is a gap in water quality protection 
identify waters that are impaired by pollution, even after 
under the CWA for waters on Indian reservations. Thus, in 
application of technology-based controls (33 U.S.C. 
a September 2016 
Federal Register Notice, the agency 
1313(d)). For those waters, states and approved tribes must 
sought the public’s views on whether and how it should 
establish a TMDL to ensure that water quality standards can 
initiate a rulemaking to establish federal baseline water 
be attained. A TMDL is both a quantitative assessment of 
quality standards for Indian reservation waters that do not 
pollution sources and pollutant reductions needed to restore 
have EPA-approved standards. (See U.S. Environmental 
and protect U.S. waters and a planning process for attaining 
Protection Agency, “Federal Baseline Water Quality 
water quality standards. A TMDL can result in imposition 
Standards for Indian Reservations, Advance notice of 
of additional pollutant discharge limits on sources. (For 
proposed rulemaking,” 81
 Federal Register 66900-66911, 
information, see CRS Report R42752, 
Clean Water Act and 
September 29, 2016.) The Notice did not provide details of 
Pollutant Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)). By 
a proposed rule. Rather, EPA requested comment on 
obtaining TAS status for Section 303(d), tribes can take the 
questions such as (1) should EPA establish one set of water 
lead role in identifying impaired waters on their 
quality standards that apply universally to reservation 
reservations and in establishing TMDLs. In the absence of 
waters or offer limited tailoring opportunities; (2) what 
TAS approval under this rule, EPA or a state would have 
designated uses should be established in any federal 
this responsibility for such waters. 
baseline standards; and (3) what pollutant criteria limits 
should be included to protect aquatic life and human 
The 2016 rule does not require anything of tribes that are 
health? The comment deadline is December 28, 2016. EPA 
not interested in seeking TAS status for the 303(d) program, 
will then decide whether to proceed with a rulemaking. 
and EPA acknowledges that not all tribes will be interested 
in doing so. The rule also does not require tribes seeking 
Concerns of States, Localities, Industries 
TAS eligibility for the 303(d) program to have previously 
EPA’s recent actions and announcements concerning tribal 
obtained EPA approval for TAS to develop water quality 
water quality protection likely intensify long-standing 
standards or require tribes to have EPA-approved standards 
jurisdictional tensions and conflicts between some tribes 
for their reservation waters in place. 
and states, local governments, and industries. When tribes 
obtain TAS status, they can adopt more protective water 
Federal Baseline Water Quality 
quality standards than states may have set for adjacent 
Standards for Indian Reservations 
waters, potentially affecting common waterbodies and non-
Water quality standards are the fundamental building 
members with activities on reservation lands. Further, 
blocks of the CWA. Established by states or authorized 
because the CWA allows states to adopt water quality 
tribes and approved by EPA, they define a state’s water 
requirements such as discharge permit limits more stringent 
quality goals and are the basis of enforceable discharge 
than federal rules, a tribe that has TAS status for permitting 
permits. They also provide the benchmark against which 
could similarly do so (however, no tribe has such authority 
impaired waters are identified and TMDLs are developed. 
now; EPA issues CWA permits in Indian country). 
Water quality standards consist of designated uses or goals 
for protection of the waterbody (such as fishing, swimming, 
These situations can create challenges for industry, by 
or public water supply), narrative and numeric limits on 
expanding tribal control over non-tribal persons and lands, 
pollutants, and antidegradation policy to maintain and 
and raise concerns regarding impact on state CWA 
protect existing uses and high-quality waters. 
programs. But tribes say that some states strongly oppose 
tribal authority as an infringement on state sovereignty. 
Since Congress enacted Section 518(e) in 1987, EPA has 
Several states, localities, and industries did oppose the May 
authorized 53 of the over 300 tribes with reservation lands 
2016 interpretive rule and the September TMDL regulation 
to administer a water quality standards program. Of the 53 
described above. For example, several states disagreed with 
approved tribes, 42 tribes have had their standards approved 
EPA’s position in the TMDL rule that tribes need not have 
by EPA. One Washington State tribe has EPA-promulgated 
applicable water quality standards as a prerequisite for 
standards, and EPA has approved Washington, South 
administering the 303(d) program; they asserted that 
Carolina, and Maine to administer state water quality 
standards should be required because lists of impaired 
standards on reservations or parts of reservations of six 
waters must be based on applicable standards. EPA 
tribes. In the absence of applicable state or federal 
responded that doing so would establish an unnecessary 
standards, the main mechanism for establishing water 
burden for tribes seeking TAS eligibility for the program. 
quality standards on Indian reservations has been through 
the TAS authority of CWA Section 518. Further, it is EPA 
EPA’s view is that the best way to protect water quality in 
policy that, in the absence of approved standards for 
Indian country is for tribes to obtain TAS authority, and its 
reservation waters, state water quality standards are used as 
recent actions are intended to encourage tribes to do so. 
a reference point for EPA-issued discharge permit limits. 
Nevertheless, tensions between tribes and others over water 
EPA says that for reasons such as lack of resources or 
quality protection on reservation lands are likely to persist. 
governmental infrastructure to implement environmental 
programs, many tribes with reservation lands have been 
Claudia Copeland, Specialist in Resources and 
unable to apply or have chosen not to apply for TAS to 
Environmental Policy   
administer a water quality standards program. 
IF10488
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Recent EPA Actions to Protect Tribal Water Quality 
 
 
Disclaimer This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10488 · VERSION 2 · NEW