Iowa pollution enforcement could lose big under Trump EPA cuts, critics warn

Iowa would lose millions of dollars it uses to help enforce pollution rules that protect its air, water and land if the Trump administration goes through with its plan to slash the federal Environmental Protection Agency budget, critics of the spending cuts warn.

The federal money helps Iowa's work to inspect large animal feeding operations, monitor air pollution from factories, test for harmful bacteria and microcystins that cause toxic algae in public lakes and restore wetlands, among other services.

"Iowa DNR already has a shoestring budget for oversight and enforcement of the factory farm industry," said Jess Mazour, a farm and environmental organizer at Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, a grassroots activist group.

President Donald Trump, seeking to funnel $54 billion more into military spending next fiscal year, wants to cut about a quarter of EPA's $8 billion budget next fiscal year, half of which goes to Iowa and other states that have agreed to enforce federal rules and regulations.

The proposal, leaked to environmental groups, seeks to cut by 30 percent state grants for pollution control. It also would chop funding for brownfield redevelopment, money that's played a key role in some downtown Des Moines projects.

Altogether, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources expects to receive about $19.5 million this fiscal year through EPA programs, about 15 percent of the total budget.

"Any federal cuts to state-implemented programs like the Clean Water Act would allow the already polluting industry to further go unchecked," Mazour said.

Gov. Terry Branstad signed a bill cutting $118 million in spending this fiscal year because state revenue is lower than projections. Branstad proposed covering added budget shortfalls with cash reserves.

Budgets this fiscal year and next are expected to inch 2-3 percent higher.

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources declined to comment on possible federal cuts until the Trump administration releases details.

Broad federal budget guidance is expected Thursday, but a detailed budget proposal that outlines specific cuts might not be available until May.

"States cannot tolerate additional cuts. We've seen the federal share has been slowly declining for a long time," said Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, executive director of the Environmental Council of the States, a non-partisan group representing state environmental agency leaders.

"States rely on it (funding) to do work for the federal government," Dunn said. "Everything will be touched."

The cuts are similar to taking "cops off the beat," said David Goldston, director of government affairs at the National Resources Defense Council. "At the level of cuts being contemplated, you would see significant degradation in the ability to protect the environment everywhere."

The impact on waterways

Iowa environmental leaders worry the cuts could especially hurt the state's efforts to clean lakes, streams and rivers.

"The cuts will result in our state retreating and regressing" in its clean water efforts, said Ralph Rosenberg, executive director of the Iowa Environmental Council.

Iowa's work could get hit in several ways: Cutting about 30 percent in state grants hits work on wetlands, safe drinking water, pollution control and efforts to reduce pollution runoff from rural and urban areas.

Some of that funding helps support 12 state watershed projects — money used to match farmer investments in adding conservation practices and pay for watershed coordinators, the Iowa Department of Agriculture said. Those projects also get other federal and state funding.

The ag agency said it's premature to talk about possible cuts.

"We have no indication what those cuts would be and how they would be implemented," said Dustin Vande Hoef, a spokesman for the ag department.

The Trump administration also proposes to cut nearly 80 percent of spending to national restoration projects that include the Gulf of Mexico, Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes.

Iowa has proposed cutting nitrogen and phosphorus levels by 45 percent that contribute to the Gulf of Mexico's dead zone each summer, an area about the size of Connecticut that's unable to support aquatic life. Iowa Agriculture Secretary Bill Northey co-chairs the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force.

Susan Heathcote, the Environmental Council's water program director, said Iowa and other ag-heavy states have lagged in implementing its nutrient reduction plan that can reduce natural and man-made pollutants. She's part of a group that recently criticized the EPA for not pushing states to take stronger action.

"This will really set back EPA’s efforts to help states move forward," she said.

Vande Hoef said Iowa gets no federal funding through the Gulf hypoxia program. Implementing Iowa's Nutrient Reduction Strategy has been "state-led and state funded," he said.

In recent years, the state also has landed large U.S. Department of Agriculture grants to help farmers, cities and towns build conservation practices that can cut the loss of nitrogen and phosphorus.

Gov. Terry Branstad and lawmakers say creating dedicated funding to implementing the state nutrient reduction strategy is a priority. Several bills have been introduced this legislative session to provide funding, but none has gained traction so far.

Drinking water funding at risk

Also on the federal chopping block is funding for popular loan programs that cities and towns use to upgrade drinking water and wastewater treatment systems, grants to redevelop brownfield sites, and basic support for protecting residents against water and air pollution, say state and national environmental leaders.

Already, Scott Pruitt, EPA's new administrator, is pushing back on Trump's plan, saying he wants to protect infrastructure spending through highly popular revolving loan programs.

Iowa's drinking and wastewater revolving-loan programs have pumped $2.7 billion to upgrade and rebuild aging plants and pipes over nearly three decades, the most recent report shows.

For example, Montezuma will use a $400,000 loan to replace 7,000 feet of aging clay tile that backs up sewage into some basements and blows off manhole covers during intense rains.

The nation's crumbling water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure systems are expected to need $600 billion invested over 20 years; Iowa needs an estimated $10 billion, reports show.

Iowa has about $3 million in water projects ready to be bid or built; nationally, it's about $18 billion, said Dunn, director of the Environmental Council of the States.

The fight for brownfields

States also are concerned about possibly significant cuts to brownfield programs, ranging from about 40 percent to 100 percent. It's another initiative Pruitt reportedly is fighting to retain.

Rita Conner, a Des Moines economic development coordinator, said EPA's help with brownfield redevelopment in downtown has been important, especially given the city's age.

"So much of the time, we don’t know what’s going on under the surface — and it can really increase redevelopment costs," especially in old industrial areas, Conner said, adding that EPA grants and loans, combined with state tax credits, can help close financing gaps.

"Developers in cities like Des Moines — older cities with a lot of work to be done — bring conventional borrowing to the table, but those tools can help us get significant projects get done," Conner said.

The city doesn't have a current application pending, but it is working closely with EPA and owners of the former Dico manufacturing plant. It's a Superfund site that officials hope to move toward redevelopment after years of work.