Fact Checker: Fiorina says 96 percent of Iowa water under EPA control

Introduction

'You know who put these EPA regulations in place? Who are these EPA regulators? They are nameless, faceless bureaucrats who have decided they can control 96 percent of water in the state of Iowa. Really, let's roll that back.”

Source of claim

Carly Fiorina, former Hewlett-Packard chief executive and GOP presidential candidate, made the statement at Norwalk Fire Station on July 24.

Analysis

We're examining whether 96 percent of Iowa water is now under EPA control. Fiorina appears to reference the White House's new Clean Water Rule, also called Waters of The United States.

The rule clarifies the Clean Water Act of 1972 to say waters, such as streams and wetlands, that feed into protected bodies of water, are also protected. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers finalized the rule this spring and it takes effect Aug. 28.

When asked for attribution, Fiorina's spokeswoman said only: 'Carly was repeating something that one of the attendees had just told her at the Ag Roundtable with Rep. Mike Sexton (R-Rockwell City) at the New Co-Op Offices in Fort Dodge, IA last Thursday.”

Rockwell City farmer Jason Folsom made the statement, Sexton said. Folsom did not respond to phone messages.

A likely source is The Iowa Farm Bureau, which opposes the new rule. Farm Bureau reports 96.7 percent of Iowa's land 'would potentially be covered by the rule,” spokeswoman Laurie Johns said.

Bureau research analysts used tributary locations defined in the U.S. Geological Survey's hydrologic data set, which the bureau said the EPA used in preparing the rule, Johns said.

'Under one part of the rule, EPA can determine any water located within 4,000 feet of a tributary to have a 'significant nexus” and thus be defined as a water of the U.S.,” she wrote in an email.

Significant nexus means a link between two bodies of water.

She said the data set does not include all of the tributaries included under the rule, and prairie potholes, which are now defined as waters, are likely located on land beyond the 4,000 feet.

The EPA could not say how much water in Iowa or the U.S. is now protected.

'The Clean Water Act does not control any waters in Iowa - or anywhere else in the U.S.,” the EPA said in a statement. 'Instead, the Clean Water Act requires a permit if a waterbody is going to be polluted or destroyed.”

Landowners would need to request the permit, but the Corps of Engineers would determine if it falls under the jurisdiction of the new rule, according to the EPA.

A fact sheet for the rule states the EPA expects 'a very small number of additional waters - 3.2 percent - will be found jurisdictional compared to current practice.” In order to be protected by the EPA rule 'a tributary must show physical features of flowing water - a bed, bank, and ordinary high watermark.”

Among what's not protected are most ditches, farm ponds, ground water, tile drains, ground swales and any types of waters that have not historically been covered by the Clean Water Act, according to the agency.

The New York Times reported the rule would apply to 60 percent of the nation's water, but the paper didn't identify a source and the EPA would not corroborate the numbers.

An EPA fact sheet states the rule protects 'the 60 percent of streams and millions of acres of wetlands that were vulnerable to pollution and destruction.”

Matthew Dvorak, an environmental specialist with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, said there's no good way to quantify what's under EPA jurisdiction.

'There are approximately 26,000 miles of perennial streams in the state, and all of these should fall under the category of a Water of the U.S.,” he said. 'However, there are many additional miles of non-perennial waterways that may be Waters of the U.S. An assessment would need to be done to determine if these waters met the qualifications of a Water of the U.S.”

Conclusion

Fiorina regurgitating an unsubstantiated comment heard at a campaign stop as fact is irresponsible, but not necessarily wrong. The problem is the new rule is unclear at this point. Even the EPA can't say how much water is covered.

The 75-page Clean Water Rule makes 391 references to a 'significant nexus,” mainly detailing circumstances in which a case-specific analysis would be needed to determine jurisdiction. As the Iowa DNR's Dvorak describes it, much of what is not clearly protected would need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

Even if the water ultimately is not protected, the potential most of the water in Iowa could be protected gives the appearance it is under EPA control, and forces landowners to take steps to comply.

We score this claim a B.

Criteria

The Fact Checker team checks statements made by an Iowa political candidate/office holder or by a national candidate/office holder about Iowa, or in advertisements that appear in our local market. Claims must be independently verifiable. We give statements grades from A to F based on the accuracy and context.

If you spot a claim you think needs checking, email us at factchecker@sourcemedia.net.