The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register under docket number EPA-HQ-OW-2026-6965, would amend 40 CFR Part 122 to align EPA regulations with the statutory text Congress wrote into the Clean Water Act more than half a century ago. Public comments are due by October 19, 2026.
What the Clean Water Act Already Says
The Clean Water Act defines “discharge of a pollutant” differently depending on where the receiving water sits. For navigable waters, Section 502(12)(A) of the statute defines a discharge as “any addition of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source.” For the contiguous zone and the ocean, Section 502(12)(B) narrows that definition to “any addition of any pollutant to waters of the contiguous zone or the ocean from any point source other than a vessel or other floating craft.”
That single phrase — “other than a vessel or other floating craft” — is the legal hinge of the proposal. Congress carved vessels out of the ocean and contiguous-zone discharge definition when it wrote the statute, but EPA’s implementing regulations never fully reflected that exclusion. The agency now says its rule should “faithfully implement” the statutory text by revising the regulatory definition to match.
Under the Clean Water Act, “point source” is defined to include a vessel or other floating craft, meaning vessels are recognized as point sources in general. But for the specific geography of the contiguous zone and the ocean, the statute removes them from the discharge definition altogether. The proposed rule would make EPA’s regulations say the same thing.
Scope of the Proposed NPDES Exclusion
The practical effect of the change would be straightforward: a vessel or other floating craft that adds pollutants to the contiguous zone or the ocean — and is not secured to the seabed — would not be making a “discharge” under the Clean Water Act. Because no discharge occurs as a matter of law, no NPDES permit would be required to authorize the addition of pollutants to those waters.
The proposal also makes conforming and clarifying changes to the existing NPDES regulatory exclusion for vessels and other floating craft. EPA frames the revisions as enhancing regulatory clarity by stating more explicitly which additions of pollutants fall outside the NPDES program.
The rule does not alter the treatment of vessel discharges into navigable waters, which remain subject to NPDES permitting under Section 502(12)(A). The exclusion applies only to the contiguous zone and the ocean.
Deregulation Framework and Executive Orders
The proposal is being issued under a regulatory backdrop shaped by Executive Order 14192, “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,” and the older Executive Order 12866 on regulatory planning and review. EPA’s supplementary information lists both orders in its statutory and executive order reviews section, signaling the agency’s view that the rule fits within the current administration’s broader deregulatory posture.
EPA also addresses children’s environmental health, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, federalism under Executive Order 13132, tribal consultation under Executive Order 13175, and energy impacts under Executive Order 13211. The agency’s economic analysis and children’s health review are contained in the supporting information section of the Federal Register notice.
How to Comment and What Happens Next
Comments on the proposed rule must be received by October 19, 2026 — 45 days after publication. Submissions must include docket ID number EPA-HQ-OW-2026-6965 and can be filed through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at regulations.gov, by email to [email protected], by mail to the EPA Docket Center, or by hand delivery to the WJC West Building in Washington. All comments are public and will be posted online after EPA review.
The contact for further information is Kenda Conley of the Water Permits Division in EPA’s Office of Water, reachable at 202-564-0306 or [email protected].
After the comment period closes, EPA will review submissions and decide whether to finalize the rule as proposed, revise it in response to public input, or withdraw it. If finalized, the vessel discharge exclusion would take effect on the rule’s compliance date, removing a category of vessel operations from NPDES permitting obligations in the contiguous zone and the ocean. Environmental groups, state coastal regulators, and maritime industry stakeholders are likely to weigh in during the comment window, with potential litigation risk if advocacy organizations conclude the exclusion exceeds EPA’s statutory authority or conflicts with the Clean Water Act’s water-quality objectives.
Watch for three signals in the coming weeks: the volume and substance of public comments, whether EPA holds a public hearing as referenced in the supplementary information, and any parallel activity in Congress or the courts challenging the agency’s reading of Section 502(12)(B). The rule’s fate may ultimately turn on whether courts defer to EPA’s interpretation of the statutory vessel exclusion or read the Clean Water Act more narrowly.
— Sofia Alvarez, government desk, AXO News