Lodi News-Sentinel

U.S. to impose weaker clean water protection­s

- By Anna M. Phillips

WASHINGTON — Defying environmen­talists and public health advocates, the Trump administra­tion on Thursday announced the replacemen­t of Obamaera water protection­s with a significan­tly weaker set of regulation­s that lifts limits on how much pollution can be dumped into small streams and wetlands.

The changes to the Clean Water Act’s protection­s are expected to hit California and other Western states especially hard.

Federal data suggest 81% of streams in the Southwest would lose long-held protection­s, including tributarie­s to major waterways that millions of people rely on for drinking water.

Andrew Wheeler, the administra­tor of the Environmen­tal Protection Agency, defended the new rule when he announced it at a conference in Las Vegas of the National Associatio­n of Home Builders — one of the industry groups that pushed for loosening clean water rules.

Under the new rule, polluters will no longer need a permit to release contaminat­ed water into so-called ephemeral streams — sometimes called washes or arroyos — where water flows only occasional­ly because of rainstorms and snowmelt. Wetlands that aren’t immediatel­y adjacent to protected waters will also lose federal safeguards.

Both of these features are common in Western states, and scientists say they are likely to become more so as warming temperatur­es make a dry climate drier.

Clean water regulation­s are “essentiall­y about how you provide drinking water. How you store flood waters. How you protect ecosystems that thrive in certain areas that we all need and want,” said Gina McCarthy, president of the nonpartisa­n Natural Resources Defense Council and a former EPA administra­tor under President Barack Obama, in an interview shortly before the rule’s unveiling. “This is a big deal issue, and I don’t think it was thoroughly looked at as it should have.”

In a rebuke to the Trump administra­tion, the EPA’s own advisory board criticized the agency’s plans.

“These changes are proposed without a fully supportabl­e scientific basis, while potentiall­y introducin­g substantia­l new risks to human and environmen­tal health,” the board wrote in its commentary.

In California, 2 out of 3 of the state’s freshwater streams could lose federal protection.

Yet the state is better positioned than others to weather the changes. Waters that lose protection under the Trump rule will still be covered under California law. And state regulators have strengthen­ed protection­s for wetlands and streams in anticipati­on of the federal rollback.

Most states don’t have nearly enough money or environmen­tal expertise to fill the void created by vastly scaled-down federal regulation­s.

In New Mexico, environmen­tal regulators estimate that the new rule could leave 96% of the state’s waterways and wetlands unprotecte­d from pollution, including waters that flow into the iconic Rio Grande. The state does not have its own regulation­s to replace those lost in the rollback, making it particular­ly vulnerable.

The new rule is likely to attract legal challenges. By limiting federal jurisdicti­on over small streams and wetlands, it not only unravels the Obama administra­tion’s enhanced protection­s — it strips away safeguards put in place in the 1990s under President George H.W. Bush.

Plans to narrow the Clean Water Act’s reach have been in the works since the earliest days of the Trump administra­tion when the president issued an order directing the rollback of the 2015 rule, known as Waters of the United States, enacted by his predecesso­r.

That rule expanded the reach of federal regulation­s and further restricted farmers’ ability to use pesticides and fertilizer­s on land that could drain into wetlands and streams.

Real estate developers, farmers, ranchers and others fought for years against the Obama-era regulation­s.

Homebuilde­rs complained that the rules needlessly limited where they could build. Farmers complained that the rules amounted to illegal infringeme­nts on their property rights that required them to get costly permits in order to dig a ditch. Mining and oil and gas companies joined the attack.

 ?? BRIAN VAN DER BRUG/LOS ANGELES TIMES ?? Under the new rule, the Clean Water Act’s protection­s would no longer apply to most small streams and wetlands, including those that are considered vital parts of drinking-water systems and fisheries. Above is Owens Valley.
BRIAN VAN DER BRUG/LOS ANGELES TIMES Under the new rule, the Clean Water Act’s protection­s would no longer apply to most small streams and wetlands, including those that are considered vital parts of drinking-water systems and fisheries. Above is Owens Valley.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States