EPA Releases Draft Sixth Contaminant Candidate List Including Microplastics for Public Comment
Summary
The EPA and HHS released a draft Sixth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 6) on April 2, 2026, adding microplastics among other contaminants for public comment through June 5th. The listing is required under the Safe Drinking Water Act every five years but imposes no regulatory requirements. If microplastics are later included in the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 6, public water systems would need to sample and report during 2027-2031. California already requires statewide microplastics monitoring under SB 1422.
What changed
The EPA released a draft Sixth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 6) for public comment, including microplastics alongside pharmaceuticals, PFAS compounds, and disinfectants. This draft is part of the EPA's five-year obligation under the Safe Drinking Water Act to identify unregulated contaminants that may warrant future regulation.
Water suppliers should note that inclusion on CCL 6 and potential inclusion in UCMR 6 does not create enforceable compliance obligations. However, if microplastics are selected for UCMR 6 monitoring, public water systems would need to sample, analyze, and report during the 2027-2031 compliance period. California water suppliers face additional complexity as their existing microplastics monitoring requirements under SB 1422 may overlap with potential federal requirements. The EPA may finalize the contaminant list following the public comment period.
What to do next
- Monitor for updates on EPA CCL 6 and UCMR 6 developments
- Submit comments to EPA by June 5, 2026 if interested
- Review California Phase Two microplastics monitoring requirements for applicability
Archived snapshot
Apr 15, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
April 14, 2026
EPA Releases Plan That May Require That Drinking Water Suppliers Begin Monitoring Microplastics
Michael C. Gasbarro, Sean Herman Hanson Bridgett + Follow Contact LinkedIn Facebook X Send Embed
Key Points
- On April 2, 2026, the EPA added microplastics to its Sixth Contaminant Candidate List for identifying which contaminants it may monitor under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 6.
- While listing microplastics imposes no regulatory requirements, it signals that the EPA is considering whether it should regulate microplastics under federal laws like the Safe Drinking Water Act.
- This federal action follows California, which already requires that certain large water suppliers monitor microplastics in drinking water. On April 2, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Health & Human Services released a draft Sixth Contaminant Candidate List, or “CCL 6,” for public comment. On this latest list, the EPA and HHS have included microplastics and certain pharmaceuticals, PFAS compounds, and disinfectants, among others.
The Contaminant Candidate List is a product of the Safe Drinking Water Act, which requires that the EPA publish every five years a list of unregulated contaminants that may warrant future regulation. The EPA may then select any of the contaminant candidates for monitoring under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 6, or “UCMR 6.” Neither placing a contaminant on CCL 6 nor subjecting a contaminant to UCMR 6 is regulatory, meaning their presence in the water supply would not trigger notification and treatment requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Instead, UCMR 6 would only allow the EPA to monitor and better understand a contaminant’s prevalence in water supplies. With more data, the EPA can better prioritize research and data collection and unlock related funding opportunities. From there, the EPA can better determine whether to regulate the contaminant under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
If the EPA includes microplastics in UCMR 6, then public water systems must sample, analyze, and report monitoring results during the 2027–2031 compliance period. Whether and when UCMR 6 will lead to enforceable limits remains uncertain. Contaminants may—and often do—progress through the CCL and UCMR processes without resulting in enforceable regulatory standards. Even when they do, as discussed in our September 2025 alert on PFAS drinking water standards, those standards can be repealed.
There is an added layer of uncertainty with how these federal efforts affect California water suppliers. California is the only state that requires statewide microplastics monitoring. Under Senate Bill 1422, the State Water Resources Control Board has defined “microplastics” and directed large public water systems to test for and disclose microplastics data under its statewide monitoring program. Phase One required monitoring for microplastics in untreated water from the state’s largest systems between 2023 and 2025. Phase Two will require monitoring in treated drinking water from the state’s largest systems beginning Fall 2026.
The timing of California’s Phase Two monitoring may coincide with the EPA’s UCMR 6 monitoring. But for many California water suppliers, how this federal rule may affect existing monitoring requirements is uncertain. The EPA, for instance, may require testing methodologies or reporting requirements that differ from California’s requirements. Whether UCMR 6 is consistent with, redundant to, or divergent from California’s program will depend on the final federal rule.
Public comments on the draft CCL 6 are due by June 5, 2026. And the EPA is expected to finalize the rule in November 2026.
[View source.]
Related Posts
Latest Posts
- EPA Releases Plan That May Require That Drinking Water Suppliers Begin Monitoring Microplastics
- Takeaways From California High Court’s Public Records Decision
- LWDA Proposed PAGA Regulations – Comment Period Closes March 23, 2026
- The ULA Ordinance and Recent Updates See more »
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
Attorney Advertising.
©
Hanson Bridgett
Written by:
Hanson Bridgett Contact + Follow Michael C. Gasbarro + Follow Sean Herman + Follow more less
PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA
- ✔ Increased readership
- ✔ Actionable analytics
- ✔ Ongoing writing guidance Join more than 70,000 authors publishing their insights on JD Supra
Published In:
California + Follow Comment Period + Follow Contamination + Follow Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) + Follow Drinking Water + Follow Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) + Follow Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) + Follow Plastics + Follow Proposed Rules + Follow Public Comment + Follow Public Health + Follow Regulatory Oversight + Follow Reporting Requirements + Follow Safe Drinking Water Act + Follow Water Quality + Follow Water Supplies + Follow Energy & Utilities + Follow Environmental + Follow Health + Follow more less
Hanson Bridgett on:
"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Sign Up Log in ** By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.* - hide - hide
Named provisions
Related changes
Get daily alerts for JD Supra Healthcare
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Source
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from Hanson Bridgett.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when JD Supra Healthcare publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.