EPA Moves To Replace Obama-Era Rule Protecting Drinking Water For 117 Million
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday inched closer to proposing a regulation to replace an Obama-era rule that clarified which bodies of water qualified for federal protection.
The proposal comes more than a year after EPA administrator Scott Pruitt signed an executive action to revoke the 2015 Clean Water Rule, also known as the Waters of the United States, or WOTUS, rule. The regulation clarified which wetlands and streams could be protected under the Clean Water Act and expanded federal authority to all “navigable” waters. That extended the federal safeguards to 2 million miles of streams and 20 million acres of wetlands, securing the drinking water of more than 117 million Americans.
But a federal judge stayed the Clean Water Rule in 2015; the rule has since bounced around the courts. In January, the Supreme Court volleyed the case back to the district court level. In the meantime, Pruitt began the process of repealing the rule outright.
On Thursday evening, Pruitt said he planned to send the new rule to the White House Office of Management and Budget. In a tweet wishing President Donald Trump a happy birthday, Pruitt said he announced the WOTUS replacement in a meeting with farm interests in Lincoln, Nebraska.
In keeping w/ @POTUS’s promise, we have stopped the 2015 #WOTUS rule & I just announced to folks in Lincoln that a much more reasonable #WOTUS rule will be sent to OMB tomorrow. Time to provide farmers & ranchers nationwide w/ regulatory certainty!
Happy birthday, Mr. President! pic.twitter.com/dtotUfFknX— Administrator Pruitt (@EPAScottPruitt) June 14, 2018
The new proposal comes amid a series of personal and professional scandals involving Pruitt. People have called for Pruitt to be investigated for public corruption and fired following revelations of his extravagant spending, bizarre requests of aides, and use of his office to enrich himself. President Donald Trump has so far defended the embattled administrator, insisting as recently as this month that the “EPA is doing really, really well.”
But conservatives began to turn on Pruitt this week. On Wednesday, a dark-money conservative group in Iowa rolled out a new TV ad calling Pruitt a “swamp monster” who is “embarrassing the president.” Later that day, conservative pundit and Trump booster Laura Ingraham said in a tweet that Pruitt had “gotta go.” Even Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who counts Pruitt as a friend and protégé, said on Ingraham’s radio program that it may be time for Pruitt to step aside.
Related Coverage
Trump Wants To Dismantle The Clean Water Rule. Here’s What’s At Stake.
EPA To Dismantle Rule That Would Protect Drinking Water For 117 Million
Scott Pruitt Just Gutted Rules To Fight The Nation’s ‘Second Biggest Toxic Pollution Threat’
Also on HuffPost
The drinking water of millions of Americans
![A repeal of the Clean Water Rule could <a href="http://www.ewg.org/release/trump-plan-gut-stream-protections-imperils-tap-water-117-million-americans" target="_blank">threaten the drinking water of 117 million Americans</a>, according to a recent nationwide analysis by the Environmental Working Group.<br /><br />More than <strong>one-third of Americans</strong> get at least some of their drinking water from small streams, according to the report. More than 72 million Americans rely on small streams for <strong>more than half</strong> <strong>of their water</strong>.<br /><br />In 21 different states, small streams were found to provide drinking water for 1 million or more people. More than 5 million people in New York, Pennsylvania and Texas get drinking water from small streams, said the EWG, as do more than 3 million people in Arizona, California, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina and Ohio.<br /><br />"Small streams are where big rivers start, and the <a href="https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=296414&CFID=75721536&CFTOKEN=90692556" target="_blank">best science</a> confirms that dirty streams means even dirtier rivers,” EWG said in a statement. “Undermining, weakening or rescinding [the Clean Water Rule] is a gift to corporate polluters and Big Ag, and a threat to public health and the environment.”](https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/I6x5.XPjC32MwC6pzwSZ.w--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MA--/https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/58be63cf1a00003700f4205d.jpeg)
More than one-third of Americans get at least some of their drinking water from small streams, according to the report. More than 72 million Americans rely on small streams for more than half of their water.
In 21 different states, small streams were found to provide drinking water for 1 million or more people. More than 5 million people in New York, Pennsylvania and Texas get drinking water from small streams, said the EWG, as do more than 3 million people in Arizona, California, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina and Ohio.
"Small streams are where big rivers start, and the best science confirms that dirty streams means even dirtier rivers,” EWG said in a statement. “Undermining, weakening or rescinding [the Clean Water Rule] is a gift to corporate polluters and Big Ag, and a threat to public health and the environment.”
The health of flora, fauna and habitats
![“Repeal of the [Clean Water Rule] could have a particular negative effect on certain species because the small and intermittent waters that are the target of the repeal are often significant ecological habitat,” said Michael Gerrard, an environmental law professor at Columbia University.<br /><br />Some of the nation’s birds, for example, could be at risk. According to the National Audubon Society, many of the water features covered by the Clean Water Rule are “<a href="http://www.audubon.org/news/the-waters-united-states-wotus-rule-what-it-and-why-its-important" target="_blank">crucially important for birds</a>.”<br /><br />Take <a href="http://www.audubon.org/magazine/may-june-2014/farm-bill-will-yield-benefits-birds-and-other" target="_blank">prairie potholes</a>, a type of wetland found mostly in the Upper Midwest. Millions of waterbirds flock to those bodies to “take advantage of the buffet available” there, said Alison Holloran, executive director of Audubon Rockies, in a recent statement.<br /><br />Fish, including salmon and trout, could also be threatened.<br /><br />“Salmon and trout don’t just live in big rivers and lakes, they often spawn in small streams, some of which go completely dry during the summer, and those same streams act as nurseries for young fish during the wet months,” <a href="http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2017/feb/28/trump-rollback-clean-water-rule-could-impact-pacific-northwest-salmon-steelhead/" target="_blank">said</a> Rob Masonis, Trout Unlimited’s vice president of Western conservation<i>. “</i>If we don’t protect small headwater streams and the wetlands that feed them, we imperil our fisheries and undermine the enormous investments we have made to recover salmon and steelhead in the Pacific Northwest.”<br /><br />If the Clean Water Rule is repealed, millions of acres of wetlands would no longer be under the protection of the Clean Water Act. Wetlands are <a href="https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/why-are-wetlands-important" target="_blank">among the most productive ecosystems on Earth</a>. <strong>One-third of the country’s threatened and endangered species</strong> live only in wetlands, according to the EPA.](https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/QGRnS9m_ZVtd30BYPTHB7w--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MA--/https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/58b92a1a1900003600bd6884.jpeg)
Some of the nation’s birds, for example, could be at risk. According to the National Audubon Society, many of the water features covered by the Clean Water Rule are “crucially important for birds.”
Take prairie potholes, a type of wetland found mostly in the Upper Midwest. Millions of waterbirds flock to those bodies to “take advantage of the buffet available” there, said Alison Holloran, executive director of Audubon Rockies, in a recent statement.
Fish, including salmon and trout, could also be threatened.
“Salmon and trout don’t just live in big rivers and lakes, they often spawn in small streams, some of which go completely dry during the summer, and those same streams act as nurseries for young fish during the wet months,” said Rob Masonis, Trout Unlimited’s vice president of Western conservation. “If we don’t protect small headwater streams and the wetlands that feed them, we imperil our fisheries and undermine the enormous investments we have made to recover salmon and steelhead in the Pacific Northwest.”
If the Clean Water Rule is repealed, millions of acres of wetlands would no longer be under the protection of the Clean Water Act. Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems on Earth. One-third of the country’s threatened and endangered species live only in wetlands, according to the EPA.
Food safety
![“The cheapest and most effective way to enhance water availability and ensure environmental health is source protection and preventing our water resources from further pollution and contamination,” Newsha Ajami, a hydrologist and researcher at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, told HuffPost in an email. “Water pollution can directly impact public health both in short-term and long-term. <strong>It can also ultimately <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412015000021" target="_blank">impact our food chain</a></strong>.” <br /><br />Water pollutants can affect <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/other/agricultural/contamination.html" target="_blank">crop production and the health of seafood and livestock</a>. Troublingly, persistent pollutants -- those that remain active for a long time, like heavy metals and pesticides -- accumulate as they move up the food chain, Ajami explained. “This is important to us human beings since we are at the top of the food chain and bioaccumulation can ultimately impact our health and wellbeing. That is why source protection is extremely important, because it can be very hard to [get] rid of some of these chemicals and pollutants.”](https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/4GZ.MbyUmzbDCIrvXfOLrA--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MA--/https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/58b930141a00003400f4164f.jpeg)
Water pollutants can affect crop production and the health of seafood and livestock. Troublingly, persistent pollutants -- those that remain active for a long time, like heavy metals and pesticides -- accumulate as they move up the food chain, Ajami explained. “This is important to us human beings since we are at the top of the food chain and bioaccumulation can ultimately impact our health and wellbeing. That is why source protection is extremely important, because it can be very hard to [get] rid of some of these chemicals and pollutants.”
Industries from farming to recreation
The EPA, under the Obama administration, has said that clean water is necessary for business. "Tourism, fishing, recreation, energy production, manufacturing and other industries that depend on clean water add billions of dollars to our economy every year,” the agency says in a promotional poster on its website. "Farms depend on clean water for irrigation, crops and livestock."
Despite opposition from some agricultural groups, former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said the Clean Water Rule is a boon to farmers and ranchers, not a burden. “We will protect clean water without getting in the way of farming and ranching,” McCarthy told the National Farmers Union in 2015. “Normal agriculture practices like plowing, planting, and harvesting a field have always been exempt from Clean Water Act regulation; this rule won’t change that at all.”
Recreational industries, like hunting and sport fishing, could be especially hard-hit by a Clean Water Rule repeal.
“The health of fish and wildlife habitat is the infrastructure of an outdoor recreation industry that fuels $646 billion in annual spending and supports more than 6 million American jobs,” said the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership in a statement supporting the Clean Water Rule.
"Sportsmen will not settle for watered down protections or negligence for the habitat that supports the fish and wildlife we love to pursue,” said the group's president, Whit Fosburgh.
According to the EPA, water sports like paddling could also be imperiled. Paddling is a sport enjoyed by almost 20 million people annually in the United States. Nearly $90 billion is spent on the sport each year.
Love HuffPost? Become a founding member of HuffPost Plus today.
This article originally appeared on HuffPost.
