The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed rules for the nation’s water system are going to be a lot of work.

That’s because they’re being driven by a complex mix of state regulations and federal laws, and the rules could change, said Matt Cramer, senior water scientist at the NRDC, a non-profit environmental advocacy group.

“They’re going to need a lot more guidance and guidance to get this thing through,” he said.

“The rules are a little bit like a piece of legislation.

It’s not going to pass with 50 votes in the Senate, but it’s going to get through with 50 of those 50 votes.”

While the EPA is expected to release a final rule later this year, the agency is expected, at least in part, to leave room for states to adapt their rules and regulations.

The EPA has already issued two draft rules in the last year, but the rule it plans to issue in 2018 is still subject to changes, according to a document obtained by the NRD by its attorney, the Environmental Integrity Project.

The document shows that states can submit new rules at any time.

But it’s unclear how states will be able to comply with the proposed rules, which require new treatment technologies, such as chlorofluorocarbons, and a more stringent approach to water quality standards, according a new report from the environmental group.

States have a limited amount of flexibility in how they want to use the new EPA rules, said Cramer.

And it’s a huge opportunity for the industry.

“States are going be able very quickly to develop new treatments and technologies, and they’re going be incentivized to do that,” he explained.

“But they’re also going to have to work through a lot additional regulatory compliance to do it in a cost-effective way.”

States are expected to have an estimated $7 billion to $8 billion in potential tax revenue from the rules.

But they’ll also have to be responsible for the environmental costs, as the EPA has previously warned that states could be penalized for not meeting the EPA’s regulations.

“There’s going be a tremendous amount of uncertainty,” Cramer said.

While some states may be able in some cases to reduce water usage, others may not.

In New Jersey, the state will have to follow the new standards if it wants to continue using water treated with the chlorofluramines, such that the state doesn’t emit more than 10 percent of the pollutants the EPA says are emitted from the process.

New Jersey’s rate of chloroflavone emissions has been in the top 10 in the country for a while, but recent EPA data showed that state officials have been exceeding EPA guidelines.

According to the EPA, the number of New Jersey residents using chlorofloraone to treat water has increased by about 100,000 people since 2012, and there’s been an increase in the amount of water used for chloroflotion applications.

New Jersey is a leader in chloroflow treatment.

The state has made headlines recently with a report that said the state was using nearly 5,000 pounds of chlorfluoride a day to treat drinking water.

The agency said New Jersey has the highest chloroflux rate in the nation, meaning it’s emitting more than five times more chlorofliobutane (CFO) a day than the EPA.

The chemical is used in refrigeration and to treat sewage treatment plants.

New Jersey’s new rules will likely impact the use of chloro-fluoroethane, or CFO, a chemical used in many types of industrial cleaning products.

CFO is also used in a process called reverse osmosis that uses chlorine to remove solids from the water supply.

But CFO also is being used in some residential treatment plants, such a in the city of Monmouth, N.J. New York has one of the highest rates of CFO use in the United States, according the EPA data.

New Yorkers have been using more than 1,000 tons of CFP-treated water per day, according EPA data, but most of the water that gets treated is not treated with chloroffluoramine.

That means the water in the Monmouth treatment plant is still not being treated with CFO.

New York Gov.

Andrew Cuomo (D) has said that he will not sign the rule.

The governor has also said that the rules are needed because there is a shortage of chlorophylfluorocarbon (CFC) a chemical that is used to kill bacteria and viruses.

CFC is an inexpensive and easily available chemical that can be added to the water, and it is used as an alternative to chlorine to control water quality.

CFA is used widely in the treatment of wastewater and municipal solid waste.

Cuomo said that CFC has not been used in drinking water in New York.

New Yorkers can also expect the EPA to change the rules if there is enough scientific evidence to justify it