EPA Withdraws Proposed Effluent Guidelines for Meat and Poultry Processors

At a Glance

• The EPA’s decision to withdraw the proposed revisions to the Clean Water Act Effluent Limitations Guidelines allows meat and poultry processing facilities to continue operating under their current discharge permits.
• Facilities should be aware that existing state and local wastewater discharge requirements remain in effect and may be subject to future modifications.
• Processors that discharge wastewater to publicly owned treatment works must monitor local pretreatment program requirements, which can be updated based on local conditions or evolving EPA guidance.

On August 28, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it will not move forward with revising the Clean Water Act Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELGs) or establishing new pretreatment standards for the Meat and Poultry Products (MPP) sector. This final action, signed by Administrator Lee Zeldin, means that no new federal wastewater discharge requirements will be imposed on meat and poultry processing facilities at this time. The EPA’s decision is grounded in its statutory discretion and analysis of the rule’s potential impacts on the sector and the broader U.S. economy.

Background

On January 23, 2024, EPA announced its intent to revise the technology-based ELGs for the MPP point source category. The proposal considered options for imposing more stringent discharge limits on pollutants such as total nitrogen and phosphorus, updating requirements for other contaminants, establishing new pretreatment standards for facilities discharging indirectly, and revising production thresholds for existing subcategories. The 2024 proposal was, in part, the result of a settlement of litigation filed by environmental groups. After receiving public comments to the 2024 proposal, EPA has now decided not to proceed with finalizing these revisions.

Why Did EPA Withdraw the Proposal?

At the heart of EPA’s decision is the recognition that the meat and poultry processing industry is critical to the nation’s food supply chain. The agency concluded that imposing additional regulatory requirements would not be appropriate under the Clean Water Act, citing the factors that follow.

Industry Economic Stressors

The sector has faced significant disruptions, including COVID-19-related supply chain issues, inflationary pressures, and disease outbreaks, including highly pathogenic avian flu and New World screwworm. Additional compliance costs risk further plant closures and reduced production capacity, which could diminish industry competitiveness and threaten the stability of the food supply chain.

Food Prices and Availability

Between 2020 and 2024, food prices rose 23.6%, outpacing general inflation. EPA’s analysis found that not imposing ELGs would prevent between $1.1 to $7.8 billion in capital costs and $315 million to $1.3 billion in annual operation and maintenance costs, some of which would likely be passed to American consumers through increased food costs.

Competitiveness

EPA acknowledged that additional regulation could disadvantage U.S. processors in global markets, especially when competing against foreign producers not subject to similar requirements. Maintaining current standards supports the sector’s ability to remain competitive internationally, which is a priority under the Trump administration’s “America First Trade Policy.”

Ongoing Regulatory Requirements and Compliance Considerations

The EPA’s decision to withdraw the proposed ELG revisions provides regulatory certainty at the federal level, allowing meat and poultry processing facilities to continue operating under their current discharge permits. However, facilities should be aware that existing state and local wastewater discharge requirements remain in effect and may be subject to future modifications. Additionally, processors that discharge wastewater to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) must monitor local pretreatment program requirements, which can be updated based on local conditions or evolving EPA guidance.

To mitigate compliance risk, facilities should regularly review their permits, maintain open communication with permitting authorities, and stay informed of any regulatory developments at the state, local or federal level that could affect their operations.