B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA
1                                                    
2  
DEQ Rulemaking       Wednesday, October 1, 2025        
3  
 
          Workbook Summary      
4     WQ Aquatic Life Toxics        
5     Water Quality Standards - water quality        
6     Brief description of rule proposal Worksheets Do nothing severity rating                            
7     DEQ anticipates revising aquatic life criteria for selenium and 11 pesticides to respond to EPA's Jan. 31, 2013 disapproval actions on OR's aquatic life criteria submitted in 2004. This rulemaking will also correct typographical errors related to both the aquatic life criteria and human health criteria and will consolidate the effective aquatic life criteria that are currently distributed among 3 tables into one table. DEQ considers these revisions to be mostly non-substantive in nature. 1 Warm up                            
8     2 Basics Risk rating low → high        
9     3 Stakeholders     1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
10     4 Program   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
11     5 Environmental   5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
12     6 Timing       1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
13     7 Financial   1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
14     8 Legal     7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
15     9 Technical     1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
16     10 Policy       1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
17     11 Political     1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
18     12 Implementation     1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
19                                          
20   Schedule   legislative session                                
21                  
22     2013 2014 2015            
23     Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4            
24       <Start --- --- Effective>                                      
25       <AdvCom>                                            
26         <Notice --- End>                                      
27           EQC                                        
28       Rules under this proposal require EPA approval to become effective. The effective date is unknowable and may be measured in years. The date above indicates the SOS filing date.                    
29   5 Environmental     The proposed rules involve                            
30     Alignment       Compliance   6 involved, not new or expanded        
31     Natural Step conditions 1 Penalties   0 not involved          
32     EPA Strategic Plan actions 1 Permits, certifications 6 involved, not new or expanded    
33     Reach Statewide   Fees     0 not involved                    
34     Correlation       State Implementation Plan 0 not involved                      
35     Addresses problem directly Land use rules   7 involved      
36                                                    
37     Ideal Reality Consequences          
38     What we want to happen. What we are trying to change. What will happen if we don't change.          
39     The proposed revisions to the disapproved criteria should be straight-forward and be promptly approved by EPA. Consolidating the aquatic life criteria will enable users to easily access the currently effective criteria. We are trying to correct mistakes from the 2004 aquatic life criteria adoption that led to EPA disapprovals for selenium and 11 pesticides. There are additional typographical type errors that need to be corrected as well. EPA may be compelled to promulgate criteria for OR        
40     Alternatives considered Research/data needed Models                            
41     DEQ cannot revise water quality standards without formal rulemaking. If DEQ does not adopt criteria approvable by EPA within a given timeframe, EPA has statutory obligations to promulgate criteria for OR. DEQ anticipates that the needed corrections are straight-forward and will not require extensive research. None.        
42   3 Public involvement   Affected parties                                
43     Interest in this proposal is low/medium. DEQ plans to reconvene an advisory committee and estimates we will meet 2 times. We plan to ask the committee to provide scientific, policy, rule language, technical, and implementation advice.   Business 3 affects under 100 currently regulated      
44       Manufacturing 3 affects under 100 currently regulated    
45       City/county/state 3 affects under 100 currently regulated    
46       Individuals 0 not affected                            
47       Custom entry 0 not affected                            
48       Custom entry 0 not affected                            
49         Wednesday, October 1, 2025      
50                                                    

Summary

  A B C D E F G H I
1 ⧀ Summary                
2     1 Warm up      
3                  
4                  
5       Action Object Driver      
6       support existing regulatory program EPA direction     ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
7                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
8                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
9                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
10                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
11                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
12                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
13                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
14                 ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
15       Optional discussion        
16              
17       Process improvement        
18 Go to top                
19         Wednesday, October 1, 2025    

1WarmUp

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X
1 ⧀ Summary                                              
2     2 Basics   WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
 
3                                              
4    
Brief description of rule proposal                                  
5       DEQ anticipates revising aquatic life criteria for selenium and 11 pesticides to respond to EPA's Jan. 31, 2013 disapproval actions on OR's aquatic life criteria submitted in 2004. This rulemaking will also correct typographical errors related to both the aquatic life criteria and human health criteria and will consolidate the effective aquatic life criteria that are currently distributed among 3 tables into one table. DEQ considers these revisions to be mostly non-substantive in nature.        
6                                                
7         Rulemaking type permanent Chapter 340 divisions 040 and 041     ï drop down Rulemaking type
8       Strengths/weaknesses going into rulemaking                                
9         The proposed rule… Risk option     Riskometer            
10         Had prior public input somewhat true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
11         Is backed by science definitely true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
12         Is backed by data definitely true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
13         Supports sustainability does not apply   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
14         Supports strategic directions definitely true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
15         Furthers DEQ priorities definitely true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
16         Would make DEQ's work easier definitely true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
17         Would reduce DEQ costs somewhat true   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down to select options
18                                                
19                                                
20             Risk average   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10      
21       Ideal - What do we envision?        
22       Short The proposed revisions to the disapproved criteria should be straight-forward and be promptly approved by EPA. Consolidating the aquatic life criteria will enable users to easily access the currently effective criteria.        
23       Long blank        
24       Reality - What are we trying to change?        
25       Short We are trying to correct mistakes from the 2004 aquatic life criteria adoption that led to EPA disapprovals for selenium and 11 pesticides. There are additional typographical type errors that need to be corrected as well.        
26       Long DEQ needs to provide clarifications to 11 pesticides and selenium criteria that led to EPA disapproval in Jan 2013. These corrections should be straight-forward. In addition, DEQ inadvertently removed aquatic life criteria for arsenic and chromium VI in subsequent rulemakings following their original EQC adoption in 2004. These criteria must be re-adopted into state regulations. As part of this rulemaking, DEQ intends to consolidate the 3 toxics tables containing the effective aquatic life criteria into one table. Finally, DEQ will correct typos associated with the aquatic life and human health toxics rule.        
27       Consequences - What will happen if we do nothing?        
28       Short EPA may be compelled to promulgate criteria for OR        
29       Long blank        
30       Alternatives to rulemaking already considered or to explore        
31       Short DEQ cannot revise water quality standards without formal rulemaking. If DEQ does not adopt criteria approvable by EPA within a given timeframe, EPA has statutory obligations to promulgate criteria for OR.        
32       Long                                        
33       Research or data needed to develop proposal        
34       Short DEQ anticipates that the needed corrections are straight-forward and will not require extensive research.        
35       Long                                        
36       Models that could be leveraged for this proposal        
37       Short None.        
38       Long blank        
39             Land Use/SIP        
40             Land use rules   Y                         ï drop down to select Land Use/ SIP boxes
41                                                
42             State Implementation Plan                           ï drop down to select Land Use/ SIP boxes
43       Out of the scope for this proposal        
44       Topic   Reasoning                          
45       Other EPA disapproved criteria for ammonia, aluminium, cadmium, and copper. Substantive--will be done in a following rulemaking        
46       Adoption of new national recommended criteria for toxics pollutants Substantive        
47       Potentially other complex toxics issues/criteria Substantive        
48                                                
49       Compliance, penalties, permits, certifications, registrations and licensing        
50           Extent that proposal addresses listed items        
51        
                                     
52       Compliance                                      
53       Penalties                                      
54                                                
55       Water quality                                   ï drop down to select program
56                                                
57       NPDES permit                                      
58       Sewage Disposal Service Business Licensing                                      
59       Stormwater Discharge permit                                      
60       UIC Registration/Permits                                      
61       WastewaterSystem Operator Certification                                      
62       Water Pollution Control Facilities Permit                                      
63       Water Quality Permit Program                                      
64       Enter custom item here                                      
65       Enter custom item here                                      
66       Enter custom item here                                      
67                                                
68       Optional discussion                                    
69                
70       Reminders                                    
71                
72       Process improvement                                    
73 Go to top                                              
74               Wednesday, October 1, 2025      

2Basics

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V
1 ⧀ Summary                                          
2     3 Stakeholders and public involvement WQ Aquatic Life Toxics        
3                                          
4       "The Legislative Assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that whenever possible the public be involved in the development of public policy by agencies and in the drafting of rules. The Legislative Assembly encourages agencies to seek public input to the maximum extent possible before giving notice of intent to adopt a rule. The agency may appoint an advisory committee that will represent the interests of persons likely to be affected by the rule, or use any other means of obtaining public views that will assist the agency in drafting the rule." ORS 183.333        
5       Affected parties                                  
6             Previously   Number affected          
7         Not affected Affected unregulated   10s 100s 1,000s          
8       Business         X                   ï drop down to X boxes  
9       Manufacturing         X                   ï drop down to X boxes  
10       City/county/state         X                   ï drop down to X boxes  
11       Individuals                                 ï drop down to X boxes  
12       Custom entry                                 ï drop down to X boxes  
13       Custom entry                                
ï drop down to X boxes		  
14       Stakeholder complexity                                
15      
                                   
16                                          
17       External stakeholder interest                                  
18       Selecting an interest level indicates the group to the left is a stakeholder.          
19       Group   Interest Riskometer          
20       Regulated community moderate interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
21       Business and industry moderate interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
22       Environmental groups minor interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
23       Public no interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
24       State legislators minor interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
25       Federal environmental regulators considerable interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
26       Other state and federal agencies no interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
27       Local governments minor interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
28       Tribal nations moderate interest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
29       Custom entry does not apply 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
30       Custom entry does not apply 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down interest options  
31                                            
32                                            
33           Interest average 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
34       Optional stakeholder information                                  
35                
36       Advisory committee appointment
Type of committee (check all that apply)		        
37       No advisory committee   Fiscal     Scientific        
38       Use a standing committee   Policy     Rule language        
39       Reconvene a committee   Technical     Legally required    
 
40       Convene a new committee   Implementation   Custom entry        
41       No. of meetings                                
42         2                                  
43       Describe appointment strategy                                  
44       DEQ will likely reconvene the advisory committee that was appointed in early 2013. DEQ had earlier planned on proceeding with the rulemaking proposed here, but was subsequently delayed due to concerns of several of the stakeholders related to the unresolved temperature litigation. This committee is comprised of the regulated community, including industry, cities, and environmental groups.        
45       Describe how DEQ will use their input                                  
46       DEQ will use the advisory committee to review proposed changes to minor rule language, consolidating aquatic life criteria, and any potential fiscal impacts based on proposed changes.        
47                                            
48 Advisory Committee Guide                                        
49 ORS 183.333     Information meetings/hearings during public notice                              
50       Information meetings/hearings Public notice        
51       Portland area     No public notice                            
52       Regional     Public notice, no hearing                  
53         No. of meetings   Public notice with hearing                
54         1   Re-notice        
55       Optional hearing information          
56                                            
57       Reminders                            
58                                            
59       Process improvement                                  
60 Go to Top     Can we/should we really distinguish between "businesses" and "manufacturing"? At least in the water quality standards program, we wouldn't make this distinction.        
61           October 1, 2025      

3Stakeholders

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W
1 ⧀ Summary                                            
2     4 Program WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
 
3                                              
4       Program name Water Quality Standards          
5                                              
6       Media water                               ï drop down Media list  
7       Program consequences of doing nothing   does not apply       ï drop down Severity list  
8             Severity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10        
9       Loss of delegation                            
 
10       Failure to keep commitment                                
11       Failure to respond to legislature                                
12       Increased difficulty doing business                                
13       Unclear administrative rules                                
14       Loss of reputation                                
15       EPA Action        
16       Enter custom consequences here                                
17       Subject program considerations                                
18                
19       Other DEQ program considerations                                
20                
21       Dependencies    
                           
22      
                                     
23                                          
24       Optional dependency information                                
25                                              
26                                              
27       Include program considerations in:   does not apply     ï drop down Complexity list  
28       Complexity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10      
29       Committee charter                                   ï drop down charter/map/proposal
30       Message map                                      
31       Proposal                                      
32       Reminders                                      
33                
34       Process Improvement                                  
35 Go to top              
36             Wednesday, October 1, 2025      

4Program

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W AA
1 ⧀ Summary                                        
   
2     5 Environmental WQ Aquatic Life Toxics          
3                                                
4     The proposed rules address an environmental problem directly.                 ï drop down environmental correlation
5                                                
6       Environmental consequences of doing nothing   medium            
7             Severity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     ï drop down Severity list    
8       Science does not apply to Oregon                                  
9       Delay in public health protection                                  
10       Adverse effect on vulnerable populations                                  
11 DEQ - EJ     Adverse effect on environmental justice communities                              
12       Lack of clarity                                
13       Enter custom environmental consequence here                                
14       Describe environmental considerations                              
15       This rulemaking will remedy EPA's disapproval action for 11 pesticides and selenium. It will also correct typographical errors and consolidate the aquatic toxics criteria. Since 2004 there has been confusion amongst DEQ staff and the regulated community regarding the aquatic life toxics criteria because our rules contain multiple criteria tables with various effective dates. This rulemaking intends to provide clarity to what toxics criteria are effective.          
16       Environmental reach                                    
17       Select the most expansive environmental reach of this proposed rule.                                
18      
                 
19    
                                         
20       Links                                        
21       2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan                                  
22       The proposed rules align with actions in the EPA Strategic Plan:          
23       Taking Action on Climate Change/Improving AQ              
24       Protecting America's Waters          
25       Ensuring Safety of Chemicals/Preventing Pollution          
26       Enforcing Environmental Laws          
27       Cleaning Up Communities/Advancing Sustainable Development          
28                                                
29       the Natural Step                                  
30       The proposed rules support the elimination of Oregon's contribution to:                            
31       The progressive buildup of substances extracted from the Earth's crust (for example, heavy metals and fossil fuels)          
32       The progressive buildup of chemicals and compounds produced by society (for example, dioxins, PCBs, and DDT)          
33       The progressive physical degradation and destruction of nature and natural processes (for example, over harvesting forests and paving over critical wildlife habitat)          
34       Conditions that undermine people’s capacity to meet their basic human needs (for example, unsafe working conditions and not enough pay to live on)          
35       Environmental data                                    
36    
                     
37                                          
38                                                
39       Include environmental consideration in:     does not apply     ï drop down Complexity list    
40       Committee charter       Complexity   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down charter/map/proposal  
41       Message map                                        
42       Proposal                                        
43       Reminders                                        
44                  
45       Process Improvement                                    
46 Go to top                
47             Wednesday, October 1, 2025        

5Environmental

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X
1 ⧀ Summary                                              
2     6 Timing WQ Aquatic Life Toxics        
3                                                
4       Rationale for developing proposal now - drivers        
5       EPA disapproved a number of OR's aquatic life criteria submitted in 2004. OR must act in a timely manner to address deficiencies EPA identified in its action and adopt acceptable criteria within a reasonable time period, or EPA may be compelled to promulgate water quality standards for OR.        
6                                            
 
7           Consider any challenges to the rulemaking for each activity below that may occurs during a legislative session (Q1 of even years, Q1 and Q2 of odd years.)        
8                  
9           START END                              
10           Year Qtr Year Qtr                              
11       Start 2013 2                               ï drop down Year and Qtr  
12       Advisory committee 2013 2 2013 2                           ï drop down Year and Qtr  
13       Rulemaking notice 2013 3 2014 1                           ï drop down Year and Qtr  
14       EQC Action 2013 4                               ï drop down Year and Qtr  
15       Effective1 2014 1                               ï drop down Year and Qtr  
16           1 Rules under this proposal require EPA approval to become effective. The effective date is unknowable and may be measured in years. The date above indicates the SOS filing date.          
17       Timing challenges                                    
18       No challenge in meeting rule adoption   Compressed or extended timeframe for rule adoption     Difficult schedule, no contingencies allowed, uncontrolled changes to deadline likely        
19                                            
20                                                
21       Include timing rationale above in:       potential for major complexity     ï drop down Complexity list  
22       Committee charter Y     Complexity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down charter/map/proposal  
23       Message map Y                                      
24       Proposal Y                                      
25       Reminders                                        
26                
27       Process Improvement                                    
28 Go to Top     Some WQ rules require EPA approval to become effective. Include the an option to toggle between "effective" date and "filing" date. mcv        
29               Wednesday, October 1, 2025      

6Timing

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W
1 ⧀ Summary                                            
2     7 Financial WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
 
3                                              
4       Funding source                                      
5       Rulemaking lottery, general fund                                
6       Implementation lottery, general fund                                
7       Financial consequences of doing nothing     low     ï drop down Severity list  
8       Severity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10      
9               Optional notes                            
10       Loss of program funding                                
11       Failure to address costs                                
12       Loss of federal funding                                
13       Insufficient funding                                
14       Failure to address undue burden                                
15       Enter custom financial consequence here          
16       Enter custom financial consequence here                                
17       Fees                                      
18 ORS 291.055 (2)(d)   Action   DAS Fee Approval        
19       Establish new fees       Does not apply        
20       Increase existing fees       Exempt under ORS 291.55(2)(d)        
21       Decrease existing fees     Exempt under ORS 291.55(2)(m)        
22                                              
23       Authority to adopt, amend or repeal fees: ORS        
24       Fiscal impact on:   Impact     Riskometer        
25       Regulated community no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
26       Small business (50 emp or less) no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
27       Business and industry no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
28       Local governments no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
29       Other state or federal agencies no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
30       Public no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
31       DEQ no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
32       Program -Air Quality no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
33       Custom entry no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
34       Custom entry no fiscal impacts   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down Impact list  
35                                              
36                                              
37             Fiscal impact average   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10      
38       Optional fiscal discussion        
39       There will not likely be a fiscal impact based on proposed revisions in this rulemaking. Generally, this rulemaking is correcting typographical errors and making simple clarifications to address EPA's disapproval of 11 pesticides and selenium.        
40       Invoicing system                                      
41       Develop new     CHRIS     TRAACS                  
42       Access database     HazWaste Invoicing   UST Invoice.new          
43       Access template     SWIFT     WQSIS                    
44       Custom entry     Custom entry     Custom entry        
45                                              
46       Description        
47                
48       Include description above in:                                  
49       Committee charter         does not apply     ï drop down Complexity list  
50       Message map       Complexity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10      
51       Proposal                                      
52       Reminders                                      
53                
54       Process improvement                                  
55 Go to Top     Would rather have the term "negligible fiscal impact" or something similar, rather than "no fiscal impact"        
56             Wednesday, October 1, 2025      
57                                              

7Financial

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W AC
1 ⧀ Summary                                              
2     8 Legal   WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
   
3                                                
4 Go to ORS     Current authority   links links          
5       ORS, EQC                                    
6                                          
7       Requirement                                        
8                                            
9                                          
10       Dependencies                                        
11       EPA Action expected Nov. 2012                                    
12                                          
13                                                
14       Legal consequences of doing nothing   medium to high       ï drop down Severity list    
15             Severity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10          
16               Optional notes                          
17       Rules will not align with the law Toxics rules and tables will not align with effective criteria based on EPA's action          
18       Risks noncompliance                                  
19       Failure to comply with Clean Water Act If DEQ does not adopt approvable criteria, EPA may promulgate criteria for OR          
20       Failure to comply with Clean Air Act                                  
21       Failure to comply with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act                                  
22       Enter custom legal consequence here            
23       Enter custom legal consequence here                                  
24       Describe legal consideration                                  
25                  
26                                                
27       Include description above in:   potential for minor complexity       ï drop down Complexity list    
28       Committee charter Y   Complexity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10          
29       Message map Y                                 ï drop down charter/map/proposal  
30       Proposal Y                                      
31       Reminders                                        
32                  
33       Process improvement                                    
34 Go to Top                
35             Wednesday, October 1, 2025        

8Legal

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V
1 ⧀ Summary                                          
2     9 Technical   WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
 
3       Describe technical considerations                                
4       There are very few technical considerations in this rulemaking.        
5      
Innovation		                                
6                                            
7                                          
8      
Infrastructure		                                
9                                            
10                                          
11                                            
12       Include technical considerations below in: definitely not complex     ï drop down Complexity list  
13       Committee charter   Complexity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ï drop down charter/map/proposal
14       Message map                                    
15       Proposal                                    
16       Reminders                                    
17              
18       Process improvement                                
19 Go to Top              
20           Wednesday, October 1, 2025      

9Technical

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ
1 ⧀ Summary                                      
                           
2     10 Policy   WQ Aquatic Life Toxics                                  
3       Describe policy considerations                                
4       This rulemaking is supported by many stakeholders and DEQ because it will clarify existing toxics rules and criteria and provide straight-forward remedies for a number of EPA criteria disapprovals. Once final, DEQ can begin rulemaking to address the more complex disapproval actions from EPA.                                  
5    
Policy risks
                                                       
6          
                                                         
7                                                                    
8                                                                      
9       Include policy consideraion below in:     potential for major complexity     ï drop down Complexity list                            
10       Committee charter Y   Complexity   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10                                
11       Message map Y                               ï drop down charter/map/proposal                          
12       Proposal Y                                                            
13       Reminders                                                              
14                                        
15       Process improvement                                                          
16 Go to Top                                        
17           Wednesday, October 1, 2025                                

10Policy

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ
1 ⧀ Summary                                                                    
2     11 Political   WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
                           
3       Describe political considerations                              
4       There was considerable legislative concern and interest during the rulemaking to revise human health criteria for toxics pollutants based on a higher fish consumption rate. It is unknown whether that heightened interest will translate to concern based on this rulemaking which only proposes to make fairly straight-forward corrections and clarifications to the toxics criteria.                                  
5                                                                      
6       Include political consideration below in:     definitely not complex     ï drop down Complexity list                            
7       Complexity   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10                                
8                                   ï drop down charter/map/proposal                          
9       Committee charter                                                              
10       Message map                                                              
11       Proposal                                                              
12       Reminders                                                              
13                                          
14       Process improvement                                                          
15 Go to Top                                        
16           Wednesday, October 1, 2025                                

11Political

  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ
1 ⧀ Summary                                                                    
2     12 Implementation WQ Aquatic Life Toxics    
                           
3       Describe implementation considerations                                                        
4       Do not foresee major implementation actions as a result of this rulemaking.        
5                                                                      
6                 definitely not complex     ï drop down Complexity list                            
7       Include description below in: Complexity   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10                                
8       Committee charter                                 ï drop down charter/map/proposal                          
9       Message map                                                              
10       Proposal                                                              
11       Reminders                                
                           
12                                          
13       Process improvement                                                          
14                                          
15 Go to Top         Wednesday, October 1, 2025                                
16                                                                      

12Implementation