Yes, we all want clean water. Will anyone in Iowa do it?

Iowa’s goal should not be to convince the EPA, judges or anyone else who analyzes such things that the state’s actions barely meet the criteria for “adequate” under the Clean Water Act.

Editorial article of the Register
| Des Moines Register

Iowa DNR does not protect clean water
A previous request to the Environmental Protection Agency yielded slow and mediocre results
Iowa has the opportunity to make a clean water breakthrough

Who will clean up Iowa’s water? This mystery can get lost in the sarcastic comments about who really he cares about clean water.

“We all want clean water” is a nonsensical statement that people like U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, Iowa business representative Debi Durham and private industry leaders have repeated often enough that it was derisively adopted as the title of a podcast detailing the state’s environmental problems.

But “who” it can and will be “Making clean water happen” is what we should be focused on. And that’s the focus of the Sierra Club’s formal request this summer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to rule that the Iowa Department of Natural Resources has failed in its mission to independently uphold the federal Clean Water Act.

The Sierra Club is seeking federal support for more aggressive regulations to reduce and eliminate pollution in waterways because the DNR has repeatedly failed to meet its obligations under the Clean Water Act. It will take years to sort out the legal portions of the petition. But the evidence is everywhere that the collective efforts of government, nonprofits, businesses and individuals in Iowa have failed to deliver safe drinking water, safe beaches or safe wildlife.

Who can keep water clean and who will do it?

Iowa DNR does not protect clean water

Seeking EPA’s help required the Sierra Club to focus on the DNR’s shortcomings. But the DNR’s actions and the choices of its leaders don’t happen in a vacuum.

DNR Director Kayla Lyon, who has served for five years, ran for reconfirmation in the Iowa Senate last spring. Nine of the chamber’s 16 Democrats voted against it, but some said Lyon could only do so much to avoid conflict with her boss, Gov. Kim Reynolds. Reynolds has close ties to agribusiness and a history of executive actions to remove obstacles to ethanol and meat interests. Like many state agencies, the DNR has not sought or received any new resources that would make headlines since Reynolds became governor.

It’s not as if the DNR has been inactive when it comes to enforcing the law, including ethanol plants and confined hog operations, or CAFOs. In addition to imposing fines of up to $10,000 in lesser-known cases, the DNR can refer alleged violations to the attorney general’s office for more severe penalties. Eleven such cases are currently pending, including four to the attorney general this year.

Harder to document is how often the DNR refuses to use its authority to regulate potential CAFOs or other facilities or to penalize polluters. Critics may attribute these choices to timidity, insufficient budgets, a diabolical bias in favor of corporate profit, or a mix-up. But nitrate measurements and beach closures are just two ways we know that, whatever the reason, its efforts have not been enough.

Who can keep water clean and who will do it?

A previous request to the Environmental Protection Agency yielded slow and mediocre results

This isn’t the first time the Sierra Club and other activist groups have fed up with the DNR and turned to the EPA. They filed a similar petition in 2007 — when Democrats controlled all the levers of Iowa state government. The outcome of that petition sheds light on what to expect now.

Five years later, the EPA said it had determined that the DNR’s CAFO permitting processes had “correctable deficiencies.” It took the players months to negotiate what those corrections should look like. Then, in 2017, the DNR discovered 5,000 previously unknown CAFOs, about a quarter of which potentially required state oversight. But by 2019, the EPA decided Iowa had made enough progress to formally reject a 12-year-old petition for further federal intervention.

The EPA won’t be riding in as the cavalry tomorrow. It may not even make a decision this decade on what to do.

Who can keep water clean and who will do it?

Iowa has the opportunity to make a clean water breakthrough

Iowa could overturn the petition and decide to try new strategies. Lawmakers could give the DNR more authority to punish offenders. They could allocate more staff to clear the backlog of permits and conduct more inspections. The goal of these steps would not be to punish farmers but simply to say that it is a requirement of doing business in this state to manage byproducts, rather than leave the consequences to the rest of us.

Earlier this year, the editorial board encouraged Congress to take a similar approach with the still-pending farm bill, backing away from a long-standing trend of encouraging environmental practices rather than requiring them. Even with that approach, the government could still use some carrots and put more money into making helpful land uses more attractive.

Iowa’s goal should not be to convince the EPA, judges, or anyone else who analyzes such things that the state’s actions barely exceed the level of “adequate” under the Clean Water Act. The Iowa Legislature and Executive should prove to their constituents and the EPA that Iowa can and will provide clean water.

Lucas Grundmeier, on behalf of the editorial board of the Register