President Trump wasted little time in taking on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during his first week in office, including targeting the contentious Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule that has drawn the ire of the fertilizer and agriculture industries.
WOTUS was promulgated by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 2015 to more broadly define the scope of surface waters covered by the Clean Water Act. In one of his first acts as president within minutes of taking the oath of office, Trump’s team updated the White House website to provide policy specifics for his “America First Energy Plan,” including eliminating WOTUS and the Obama administration’s Climate Action Plan.
“For too long, we’ve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry,” the administration said. “President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.”
Trump also said he would “revive America’s coal industry,” and focus the nation’s energy policy on the “vast untapped domestic energy reserves right here in America,” including “embrac(ing) the shale oil and gas revolution.” The policy directive said the Trump administration “will refocus the EPA on its essential mission of protecting our air and water.”
It was unclear what specific action the administration would take to address WOTUS, as the rule is currently locked in a legal battle involving 13 states who have sued over the rule in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a national stay on the rule in October 2015, and the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 13, 2017, agreed to resolve the issue of which federal court should hear challenges to WOTUS.
“Continuing with costly and burdensome briefing and appendix preparation while the Supreme Court considers whether this court has jurisdiction over the petitions is especially unnecessary in light of the new administration’s repeated promises to reconsider the WOTUS rule,” the plaintiffs in the case, the Sixth Circuit Court, said in a court motion filed on Jan. 23. “The new administration’s statements raise the possibility that, even assuming the Supreme Court holds that this court has jurisdiction, this court will never need to address the current rule in the current procedural posture.”
Trump also signed executive orders on Jan. 24 to revive the Dakota Access and Keystone XL oil pipelines, and to expedite environmental reviews of other infrastructure projects. Policy experts were uncertain what impact these orders would have, however, as many of the environmental reviews are statutory and cannot be overturned by executive order. And, as with the WOTUS rule, the pipeline projects are currently embroiled in legal fights.
Trump said his order for the Keystone XL pipeline project essentially invites the company to re-submit its application, and that both pipeline projects would be subject to renegotiation.
In another action targeting EPA, the Trump administration placed a gag order on the agency, barring its staff from awarding contracts or grants and also preventing EPA staffers from issuing news releases, blog updates, or posts to EPA’s social media accounts. In addition, the administration has ordered a “temporary suspension” of all new business activities at EPA, including issuing task orders or work assignments to EPA contractors.
And on Jan. 26, Myron Ebell, the former head of Trump’s transition team at EPA, told the Associated Press that Trump may cut $1 billion from EPA’s $8 billion annual budget, and seek to make significant cuts to EPA’s 15,000-member nationwide workforce.
EPA was not the only federal agency in the new administration’s crosshairs. Trump on Jan. 24 issued an executive order imposing a hiring freeze on the federal workforce, excluding military personnel. Trump also ordered the USDA to refrain from making policy-related statements to the press or members of Congress unless approved by the agriculture secretary, the Office of the General Counsel sub-cabinet office, and the Office of Budget and Program Analysis.
The order also requires USDA staff to get explicit permission for a range of other activities, including audit responses, ongoing litigation, advisory committees, contract awards, correspondence, and agreements with other federal agencies.