Water Quality

The Hidden Risk: Why Water Quality Is the Next Big Challenge for Specialty Crops

Mon, 04 May 2026 20:12:48 GMT

In the world of specialty crops, the conversation around water has long been dominated by the urgent need for volume, with many farmers wondering if they will have enough supply to simply get through the season. However, Kilimo CEO Jairo Trad points to a more insidious threat mounting in the global supply chain. While drought remains a visible crisis, water quality — specifically the degradation caused by overfertilization and runoff — is emerging as a significant risk that many producers have yet to fully quantify.

Founded in Córdoba, Argentina, in 2014, Kilimo was born from Trad’s observations of how weather volatility could decide the fate of a family farm. Today, the climate-tech company uses artificial intelligence and machine learning to analyze satellite imagery and meteorological data, helping farmers across seven countries, including U.S. and Chile, reduce water use by up to 30%. As the company expands its footprint in high-stakes regions like California’s San Joaquin Valley, the focus is shifting toward a more holistic view of water stewardship.

The Quality Blind Spot

For high-value crops like almonds, berries and citrus, the chemistry of the water is just as vital as the volume. Poor water quality doesn’t just impact immediate yields; it creates a compounding cycle of soil degradation and increased costs. Trad notes that this is particularly dangerous in specialty crop regions where production is concentrated. When water courses become polluted, the farming activity itself begins to worsen the very conditions required for future harvests.

“Water pollution and overfertilization lead to significant problems for farmers down the line,” Trad says. “In specialty crops, there is not enough data and not enough conversation around the water quality that farmers are using and how the same farming activity keeps worsening those water conditions.”

This creates a feedback loop that threatens the sustainability of the land in the most literal sense: the ability to sustain production over the long term. If the water quality isn’t high enough for the crops, the entire economic model of the farm begins to crumble, Trad says.

Data as the New Inheritance

Kilimo is tackling this vulnerability by moving beyond simple irrigation schedules. Its platform acts as a bridge between traditional agricultural wisdom and modern climate demands. By layering water balance modeling and local climate data, it can show growers in real time the exact difference between what a crop demands and what is actually being applied.

This data-first approach does more than just save acre-feet; it reduces the need for excess pumping and helps mitigate the overapplication of fertilizers that leads to water pollution. For Trad, this technology is a way to protect the “grandfather’s wisdom” that has guided farms for decades.

“Data can become a new kind of inheritance — a tool that doesn’t replace wisdom but helps it weather a changing climate,” Trad says. “Agriculture isn’t merely the sector most exposed to water risk; it’s our strongest partner for rebuilding the commons.”

Rewarding Stewardship Through Water Credits

To bridge the financial gap, Kilimo has pioneered a first-of-its-kind water-credit marketplace. In this model, verified water savings are treated similarly to carbon credits. Global companies like Microsoft, Google and Coca-Cola — seeking to meet water-positive pledges — invest in these credits, effectively paying farmers for the water they conserve.

This mechanism ensures that the cost of protecting water quality and quantity isn’t shouldered by the farmer alone. It transforms water conservation from a regulatory burden into a verifiable asset. As Trad puts it: “Water for agriculture is essentially free … so [farmers] have very little reason to be mindful of water beyond their own ideas that they should conserve it. The challenge is to give value to water.”

A Shared Future

As climate pressures mount, the industry must recognize that specialty crops are essentially “solar panels that function on water.” If the water fueling them is compromised, either by scarcity or by pollution, the entire system fails. By prioritizing water data today, specialty crop growers can transform a hidden risk into a verified competitive advantage.

The goal is to build a system where the health of the resources is as measurable as the harvest itself. In Trad’s view, this is the only way forward.

“Technology helps, but it doesn’t lead,” Trad says. “Farmers lead. We bring the tools; they bring the wisdom. That’s the only way this works.”

Taking a Moment with the 1944 Treaty’s Minutes

Wed, 17 Dec 2025 14:33:10 GMT

While a trickle of information was coming out on the recently announced water deliveries from Mexico to Texas, the U.S. and Mexico finalized another water-related agreement dealing with the 1944 Treaty.

On Dec. 15, the International Boundary and Water Commission, the agency responsible for applying and overseeing the boundary and water treaties between the U.S. and Mexico, announced that both governments had signed Minute 333. The agreement seeks to address the long-running issue of Mexican sewage reaching San Diego via the Tijuana River. More on that below, but first: What is a Minute when it comes to the 1944 Treaty?

Minutes are basically amendments to, or proposals of action within, the 1944 Treaty . They are also something that make the treaty “visionary” and “one of its kind in the world,” according to Rosario Sanchez, Texas A&M AgriLife Research senior research scientist at the Texas Water Resources Institute and director of the Permanent Forum for Binational Waters.

“The built in Minutes process is basically the adaptation of the treaty over the years,” she explained earlier this year . “That’s the way the treaty has evolved, and it’s pretty unique for that.”

Keeping up with the water times

So far, the treaty has been updated or amended 333 times with the signing of this most recent Minute, and it is likely there will be more soon.

While fielding press questions about the water delivery shortfall to Texas during her Dec. 10 morning address , Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said, while whole treaty might need to be renegotiated in the near future, the Minute system could prevent such a massive overhaul.

“According to all the experts, the 1944 Treaty is very favorable for Mexico,” she said. “Entering into a renegotiation process of the entire treaty might not be necessary. What does need to be done are additional agreements or Minutes, depending on the amount of water available.”

“More than renegotiating the 1944 Treaty, we need to be in constant dialogue with the United States government to address the needs of both countries, based on the rainfall cycle and how much water is actually available.”

So, what is Minute 333?

The signing of Minute 333 is not part of that dialogue as far as Texas water deliveries are concerned, but it is still part of the conversation between the U.S. and Mexico on shared water issues,” Sheinbaum added. “In this case, the Tiajuana River.

For several decades, raw sewage from Mexico has been carried by the Tiajuana River to Pacific Ocean beaches, including in San Diego. Minute 333 seeks to address this issue through a variety of means, including:

Conducting feasibility studies on adding to, expanding or repairing existing Mexican wastewater treatment facilities
Completing the building of a the new Tecolote-La Gloria Wastewater Treatment Plant by Dec. 2028
Creating new sediment management systems and finding appropriate cost-share opportunities for existing sediment and trash management projects
Creating a new account at the North American Development Bank to provide for Mexico’s ongoing operations and maintenance of sanitation infrastructure

“Thanks to the leadership of Presidents Trump and Sheinbaum, I am proud to be signing Minute 333 today,” said Chad McIntosh, U.S. Commissioner of IBWC in the group’s announcement of the agreement.

McIntosh’s Mexican counterpart, Adriana Reséndez, described the new minute as a continuation of Mexico’s commitment to “resolving the border sanitation problem at San Diego-Tijuana, pursuant to the provisions of the 1944 Water Treaty and to benefit the environment and the health of residents on both sides of the border.”

Environmental Monitoring is Key for CEA Leafy Green Safety

Thu, 09 Oct 2025 17:02:52 GMT

As the phrase goes — you can’t manage what you don’t measure. But in that same vein, how you measure something matters. When it comes to pathogen contamination in leafy greens, it really matters.

That was a key take away at the most recent Center for Produce Safety webinar, held Oct. 6. During the webinar, researchers presented the findings of a study into the food safety of leafy greens grown in different controlled environment agricultural systems. The study was partially funded by CPS.

“We were trying to identify if CEA systems are safer than open fields, and we can conclude that they are not inherently safe,” says Ana Allende, from the University of Spain’s Center for Soil Science and Applied Biology and the study’s principal investigator.

“What we can do to make it safer is not magic,” she continues. “We recommend implementation of an environmental monitoring program. It will be essential for early detection and prevention of any microbiological contamination.”

About the study

According to Allende, there is a perception among consumers that CEA-grown produce is inherently safer. However, illness as a result of CEA-grown leafy greens contaminated with salmonella has happened, and listeria is a pressing food safety concern for field-grown leafy greens. Allende says there was a knowledge gap in the CEA industry regarding risk for listeria that this study, in part, tried to address.

The research was conducted at commercial CEA growing facilities in Spain, though the facilities selected mirrored U.S. and Canadian growing practices. The study looked at three different types of CEA growing conditions — soil-based, hydroponic and substrate-based systems — growing a variety of leafy greens for listeria and salmonella contamination.

Researchers also looked at persistence of pathogens in the environment and on common surfaces such as harvesting crates after intentional inoculation. They also looked at the efficacy of crate washing systems for removing contamination.

The study’s main findings included:

Water is a primary contamination vector: Salmonella was found in the substrate-based system’s irrigation water and nutrient solutions, and listeria was found in the hydroponic system’s drainage water.
Soil or growth media can serve as pathogen reservoirs: Listeria was found in the soil-based and hydroponic systems, especially on workers’ boots.
Normal work in CEA systems can spread pathogens: Workers’ boots and cart wheels inoculated with listeria could spread the pathogen to other parts of the CEA facility, though persistence after 24 hours was low, particularly for cart wheels.
Dirty harvest crates can harbor pathogens: Insufficient cleaning of harvest crates that allows organic matter to remain can protect pathogens.

One of the most surprising findings according to Allende came from the portion of the study that looked at the cleaning of the harvesting crates.

The study collected swabbed samples from harvesting crates before and after being run through a commercial tunnel washing system. While the researchers didn’t find listeria on either the dirty or clean crates, they did find other bacteria. A lot of them. The study reported that “the total bacterial levels were very high” and washing did almost nothing to change the total bacterial load on the crates.

“I must say that the experiment dealing with the crates was really surprising because the growers were using these automatic systems, which seemed to be very advanced, but they are failing in the most basic task,” Allende says.

Key takeaways for growers

The researchers had a few key recommendations to CEA leafy green growers that came out of the study. The primary one was to have a rigorous environmental monitoring program that focuses on key contamination vectors, or hotspots as Allende calls them.

“We identified soil and floor surfaces as a hotspot, as well as the reusable plastic crates. Also, the water is a key risk factor for contamination, and of course the recirculating nutrient solution that is used in the hydroponic and the substrate-based systems.”

When it came to monitoring water, which the study identified as the primary contamination vector, Allende stresses you cannot do initial tests and then assume the water will stay safe.

“You have to check as the days go on,” she says.

Mabel Gil, a co-principal investigator on the study and also from the University of Spain, adds that the volume of water sampling sizes is important. The bigger the better.

“For irrigation water, our growers were surprised about the results because the labs normally have a very small sample size like 100 milliliters or something similar,” she says. “In our case it was 10 liters. When you increase the sample size, you have more possibility of finding positives.”

When it came to the apparent failure of the automatic washing systems for reducing bacterial load on the harvesting crates, Allende says there are a lot of potential advantages to automation. However, she says growers must both implement the systems properly and validate their efficacy.

Ultimately, however, both researchers stress the need to monitor for contamination and to monitor properly based on the risk factors of growers’ specific facilities and growing systems.

“If you don’t want to find, you will not find, so you really have to look,” Allende says. “If you don’t use the more sensitive sampling methods, you probably will think that you don’t have any positives in your system. But you have to look carefully to really detect the contamination points.”

How Water Sanitizers Help Reduce E. Coli on Leafy Greens

Wed, 01 Oct 2025 11:30:08 GMT

Remember the aphorism, “Perfect is the enemy of good”? It applies to water sanitizers for keeping leafy greens safe.

The Center for Produce Safety (CPS) hosted a Sept. 30 webinar presenting the findings of a study on food safety in leafy greens. The study , partially funded by CPS, looked at how effective common irrigation water sanitizers are at reducing or eliminating E. coli already present in the soil or on leafy greens. It also looked at which E. coli infection scenarios posed the biggest risk.

Generally, the researchers found both common water sanitizers used by industry reduced microbial loads on plants and in soils. They also found that the “animal intrusion” scenario — for example, deer entering fields and leaving droppings — posed the highest and most persistent contamination risk.

“Hopefully, the results of this study are helpful to industry, not only growers but also regulators, because it really helps us understand … additional positive impacts of water treatment to ultimately reduce risks for consumers,” said the study’s principal investigator, Channah Rock of the University of Arizona.

Background on the Study

The research was spawned in part because food safety attention surrounding illness-causing E. coli in leafy greens has shifted to agricultural water. Researchers found a problem, however.

“While significant progress has been made in understanding pathogen reduction within water, a critical knowledge gap remains regarding the impact of treated water on pathogens already present on plant surfaces or in soil,” the report’s abstract reads.

In an attempt to fill that gap, researchers inoculated romaine and the soil the greens grew in with different strains of E. coli. These strains included the 2006 spinach outbreak strain, the 2018 romaine outbreak strain and a generic strain. Plants were inoculated at differing concentrations of E. coli — one intended to mimic atmospheric deposition, one mimicking animal intrusion and the last replicating a treatment failure.

The plants were then treated with irrigation water containing common sanitizers — either peracetic acid (PAA) or calcium hypochlorite (chlorine) — at low and high concentrations. Researchers then looked for the level and persistence of illness-causing E. coli on the plants and in the soil.

Study’s Findings

Overall, both of the trial sanitizers reduced — but did not eliminate — illness-causing microbial loads both on plants and in the soil, regardless of contamination level.

“No sanitizer was completely effective, nor at differing concentrations,” said Kerry Cooper of the University of Arizona, one of the co-principal investigators (PI) on the study. “We see a lot of variation within the different concentrations as well as between the different strains when it comes to the efficacy of the different sanitizers and the different concentrations.”

For example, PAA was more effective at reducing pathogens on the plant in the short term, but chlorine was more effective in the long term. The different strains also showed different reactions to the sanitizers, both on the plant and in the soil.

Efficacy also differed depending upon the contamination scenario. Of the three contamination scenarios tested, the animal intrusion mimicking fecal contamination posed the most risk. It had the greatest microbial load and persisted longer on both plants and in soil.

“Essentially what we’re seeing is bacteria is able to hold on for extended periods of time when we’re comparing it to the other two contamination type scenarios,” Rock said. She also reported that the animal intrusion contamination scenario had the least response to the two sanitation treatment methods.

Still, water sanitizing treatment did reduce microbial loads. And that reduces risks to consumers; an important takeaway.

“Ultimately, what we see is that applying the chemical sanitizer decreased the relative risk in all cases,” said Hunter Quon of Arizona State University. Kerry Hamilton, also of ASU and one of the study’s co-PIs, added that while there is no way to remove all risk, water sanitizer does help reduce the risks to consumers.

Advice to Growers

From the findings, researchers had some recommendations for growers. The first is to optimize their approach to using sanitizers for leafy greens.

“That ultimately is going to help maximize microbial reduction and limit some of that treatment variability,” Rock said.

Regarding the high-risk contamination potential of animal incursion, the report recommends growers “develop enhanced mitigation strategies” to deal with the potential.

“The last recommendation or take home is monitoring of your systems can really help to support confidence that they are operating as intended,” Rock said. She cited the changing requirements of the Food and Drug Administration’s Produce Safety Rule , specifically in Subpart E , backing the importance of water systems data.

“We believe that FDA and other state inspectors are going to be looking for is confidence in your water treatment system,” she added. “The only way that you can do that is to have monitoring information and data that you can present to show their efficacy and to show that they are operating as intended.”

High Iowa Water Nutrients Come Down to (and With) Rainfall

Wed, 27 Aug 2025 20:10:13 GMT

The equivalent of 70 nurse tanks of nitrogen per day and one truckload of phosphorous per hour is flowing through the confluence of the Des Moines and the Raccoon rivers in central Iowa. This represents an estimated $50 million annually in agriculturally valuable nutrients lost as water pollutants. So says the “Currents of Change” analysis recently released by Iowa’s Polk County.

“Those nutrients would be much better spent as fertilizer applied to crops that are actually helping our plants grow and producing food that feed people,” says Eliot Anderson of University of Iowa, one of the analysis’ 16 contributing scientists, who spoke at a livestreamed public event presenting the findings.

The analysis highlighted several key findings about the central-Iowa watershed that supplies drinking water to the Des Moines metro area. These included ecological issues like declining biodiversity, fish kill events and harmful algal blooms and water safety problems like antibiotic-resistant, disease-causing pathogens, PFAS and pesticides.

But excessive nutrients, namely agriculturally-sourced nitrogen and phosphorous, were a key focus.

Awash in Nutrients

According to both the analysis and the scientists who presented the findings, the watershed’s normal nitrate levels sit at around 6 to 8 milligrams per liter. While this is lower than EPA’s nitrate standards for drinking water at 10 milligrams per liter, it still ranks the rivers as having among the highest nitrate concentrations of the country. The analysis and presenters note nitrate concentrations regularly spike up to double that level, especially following rain events. Too-high nitrate concentrations in drinking water can have severe health consequences, including “blue baby syndrome” and various cancers.

Concentrations of total phosphorus in the watersheds ranged from roughly 0.2 to 0.7 milligrams per liter depending on location. These levels were above the national average for comparatively sized watersheds. High total phosphorus can result in harmful algal blooms.

Jerald Schnoor of the University of Iowa, another of the analysis’ contributing scientists who spoke at the public presentation of the findings, says stakeholders might well ask where the nutrients are coming from.

“Most of it is from agricultural land — roughly 80% — and of that, 40% of the nitrate is coming from fertilizers applied directly onto the land, about 20% is coming from manure onto the land, and another 20% from soybeans and other legumes that can fix nitrogen and make more nitrate available to run off into tile drainage,” he answers for nitrogen.

For phosphorous, roughly three-quarters of what is in the rivers came from “the state’s extensive corn and soybean production,” overwhelmingly from applied fertilizers, according to the analysis. It cites 2019 data from the U.S. Geological Survey sourced from monitoring sites across the Midwest in identifying the sources of nutrients in the waterways.

However, the problem of high concentrations of nutrients in the Des Moines and the Raccoon rivers is not new. The analysis itself shows nitrate concentration rates regularly getting into current ranges going back to the early 1980s. A 1992 essay from Iowa State University’s Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture notes high nitrates was a long-running problem at the time. It points out that concentrations going back to the early 1980s were quite close to those of the mid-1940s, back before commercial fertilizer use.

A History of Nutrient Control Efforts

Agricultural efforts to curb nutrient runoff in the area isn’t new either.

Greg Wandrey, director of sustainability at the Iowa Corn Growers Association, points to the 2013 Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy as just one example.

“The Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy goal for phosphorus has been met,” he says. “Farmers have done a tremendous job reducing soil erosion with different practices like cover crops and less tillage and strip-till.”

Wandrey also describes the work of the Iowa Nitrogen Initiative , a public-private partnership run by Iowa State University. The initiative does on-farm trials to try to determine the agronomically-optimum application rate. He says the results of the hundreds of trials is the realization that application rate recommendations of a couple of decades ago — roughly 1.2 lb. of nitrogen per bushel produced — are too high for modern corn production practices and needs.

“The number of pounds of nitrogen per bushel is down to about 0.85 to 0.9,” he says. “The nitrogen use efficiency of farmers has improved dramatically over the last 15 to 20 years.”

And those improvements shouldn’t be surprising, he points out.

“[Farmers] don’t just put on a bunch of nitrogen just for the fun of it because nitrogen is, if you own your land, probably the second-highest input cost behind seed. And if you rent, it’s probably the third-highest behind rent and seed,” Wandrey says.

Iowa corn growers aren’t the only ones involved with controlling nutrient runoff into the watershed.

“Iowa pig farmers care deeply about clean water and clean air, and we always have, because we live here too,” says Pat McGonegle, CEO of the Iowa Pork Producers Association, in a public statement. “We’re constantly improving how we manage nutrients and care for the environment, from using advanced manure management practices to investing in research and conservation partnerships.”

Ag retailers also have been working on fertilizer best practices for some time. In a news release celebrating its 25^th year, the Iowa-based Agriculture’s Clean Water Alliance (ACWA) announced its official adoption of the 2025 Fertilizer Code of Practice . It describes the code as “a voluntary agreement between 12 ag retailers statewide to prohibit sales and application of nitrogen in early fall when conditions make nutrients more volatile.”

“Over the course of 25 years, we as an ag retail community have adopted numerous practices like nitrogen stabilizers, cover crops, reduced tillage, the 4R’s and many other practices to maximize the nutrients we are applying to be as efficient as possible,” says Dan Dix, ACWA board president. “The Code of Practice is just one tool we collectively implement to meet these nutrient goals.”

Dealing With Weather Problems

With these long-running efforts at reducing nutrients in the central-Iowa watershed, why do the levels continue to be so high? Wandrey points to weather when it comes to nitrogen.

“The single biggest factor in nitrate moving is rainfall,” he says, explaining nitrates are mobile in water, meaning that rain leads to more ending up downstream. “The last couple of years when we had literally no rainfall after June 15, there were no nitrate problems just because it wasn’t moving. It was staying in the soil and being used, and it wasn’t leaching down out of the fields.”

The inverse is also true, Wandrey notes.

“When we had all of this rainfall this year, way above average rainfall, you’re going to get more leeching,” he says. “Rainfall is the No. 1 factor.”

The analysis notes: “The greatest episodic nitrate events tend to occur in the days or weeks following heavy rain in the spring and summer.” It also highlights that, during the same time as improving farmer nutrient efficiency, climate change has meant more and more intense rain during that time, increasing 16% over the past 30 years. Not only can rainfall mobilize nitrates, the analysis notes it can increase erosion, a major contributor for phosphorous in the watershed.

Since rain cannot be controlled, farmers are working with what they can control. Wandrey points to shifting trends in nutrient application times as one example of farmers adapting to changing needs.

“We’re seeing farmers go to more in season [application] because during mid-May to July 1, that’s when that plant is rapidly growing,” he says. “Getting that nutrient, nitrogen in this case, applied when the plant is using it at that rapid rate has been found to be much more effective compared to just a fall application.”

Speakers Tell EPA Not To Mess With Clean Water Act 401 Rule

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 12:47:06 GMT

The EPA held its second and final listening session regarding Section 401 of the Clean Water Act on July 30. The session was part of the agency’s call for comments that it says it will use to determine if a new rulemaking on Section 401 is necessary.

For almost all of those who gave public testimony, the answer was “no.”

“We encourage EPA not to introduce a new rulemaking associated with section 401 of the Clean Water Act,” said Julie MacNamara, national water projects coordinator for Clean Water Action and Clean Water Fund. “We do not believe a new rulemaking is necessary, and we strongly oppose any regulatory changes that would limit the ability of states and tribes to protect their own water resources.”

The CWA’s Section 401 outlines states’ and tribes’ role in certifying, denying or limiting federal projects that could impact federal waters in their jurisdiction. Examples of when a Section 401 certification process might happen include the Army Corps of Engineers issuing a Section 404 discharge of dredge or fill material permit or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issuing a natural gas pipeline license.

Over 230 remote participants joined the Section 401 listening session, and more than a dozen people gave prepared testimony. Most who spoke represented environmental- or water quality-focused nonprofits, though there were also a couple state-level officials, lawyers, representatives from industry, and even private citizens.

Section 401 Rules: 2020 vs. 2023

The focus for many commenters boiled down to the so-called 2020 Rule versus the 2023 Rule for Section 401.

In her introductory overview, Lauren Kasparek — Section 401 team lead and biologist in the EPA’s Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds — explained the 2020 Rule was the first amendment to Section 401 since it was enacted in 1972. The 2023 Rule represented revisions to the 2020 Rule that generally realigned Section 401 implementation with earlier interpretations.

“If you want regulatory certainty, I encourage you not to whipsaw the country back to the 2020 Rule,” advised Kelly Wood, senior counsel with the Washington state attorney general’s office. He urged EPA to look back at the feedback the agency received in lead up to both the 2020 Rule and the 2023 Rule. “People around the country that actually implement Section 401 are almost universally opposed to making sweeping changes. That is for the simple reason that the interpretation of Section 401 that had successfully governed that work without problem or controversy for 50 years prior to the 2020 rule, and was restored in the 2023 rule, simply works. Almost all Section 401 certifications are granted on time, without controversy, without fanfare.”

A common complaint about the 2020 Rule voiced by many commenters was that it limited the role of states and tribes in safeguarding water quality.

“It’s that role specifically granted to states and tribes that’s threatened by the EPA rulemaking contemplated by this administration, just as it was by a similar attempt to limit state and tribal authority in a previous rulemaking by the first Trump administration,” said Nancy Stoner, senior attorney at the nonprofit Environmental Law and Policy Center, in reference to the events that led up to the 2020 Rule.

“At that time, 19 states and D.C. challenged that rule, alleging that it could upend 50 years of cooperative federalism by arbitrarily rewriting EPA’s existing water quality certification regulations to unlawfully curtail state authority under the Clean Water Act,” she added.

Jon Devine, director of freshwater ecosystems at the Natural Resources Defense Council, also described the 2020 Rule as “grossly illegal” and as having “dramatically weakened state and tribal authority.”

Concerned About States Rights

Many commenters framed potential changes to Section 401 away from the 2023 Rule as a likely states’ rights issue. Jaimie Sigaran, associate director of American Rivers, called it “a bedrock principle of cooperative federalism ,” for example.

“This authority is not just a bureaucratic hurdle; it reflects the delicate constitutional balance between state sovereignty and federal oversight,” he said. “We’ve heard from [EPA Administrator Lee] Zeldin that he emphasizes the importance of state primacy in water issues. He’s advocated for joint federal and state solutions, not federal preemption. So, we need to support this cooperative federalism model.”

Jim Murphy, legal counsel for National Wildlife Federation, also referenced Zeldin and the Trump administration’s stated goals.

“This administration and administrator Zeldin have repeatedly promised that they will provide the cleanest water,” Murphy said. “They have also expressed a desire to return more power to the states to protect their own resources. Leaving the current rule in place will help advance both of these goals.”

Critical Comments on CWA Changes

In addition to offering their recommendations to the EPA, several commenters offered criticism. For some, the stated motivation for the call for comments is a non-issue.

Wood, referencing the nearly five years of litigation following the 2020 rule, said that he has “been struck by what industry has not been able to show here, and that’s any actual harm from the well-established scope of Section 401.”

Stoner offered a similar observation.

“Having read this administration’s criticisms of the 2023 Section 401 rule, I was surprised to see that it doesn’t actually talk about traffic or climate or noise or any of the other broad readings that this administration claims it is used to address,” she said.

For Devine, the whole comment solicitation effort was suspect, characterizing it as disingenuous and a waste of time.

“EPA’s current notice practically begs the polluting industries to give it an excuse to undo the law by submitting any examples of specific legal vulnerabilities, implementation challenges or regulatory uncertainty. This is essentially an admission that the agency has no basis to change the regulation,” he said. “Anyone can see where this is going. No matter how weak the examples industry lobby groups put forward, EPA will likely say that the input it solicited shows that there are concerns with the rule that justify weakening the regulation.”

He added his perspective that, if the 2023 Rule changes or reverts to the 2020 version, the future would also be foreseeable.

“The kinds of changes the EPA’s notice suggests it is considering would make the rule unlawful,” he said. “The final regulations will inevitably be challenged in court, and I fully expect they will be struck down. In the meantime, a bunch of damaging projects will likely barrel forward without adequate protections for state and tribal waters.”

Sen. Ernst Introduces Bill to Bring WOTUS Certainty

Tue, 29 Jul 2025 19:52:50 GMT

On July 23, Senator Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, introduced SB 2421, titled the Clarifying Legal Exclusions Around Regulated (CLEAR) Waters Act . The short bill was cosponsored by six other senate Republicans and seeks to categorically exclude certain types of water bodies from regulation under the Clean Water Act. Given the focus, the bill overlaps with the Waters of the U.S., which is currently being reworked by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers.

“I am making it CLEAR that the federal government has no businesses regulating cooling ponds, municipal treatment plants, groundwater and streams that only flow after rainfall under WOTUS,” Ernst says.

The bill , which was referred to the Senate’s Environment and Public Works committee, would make the following exclusions to the definition of “navigable waters” within the Clean Water Act:

Any element of a waste treatment system, such as settling lagoons or treatment ponds.
Ephemeral water bodies that flow only after rain.
Groundwater.
“Any other features determined to be excluded by the Administrator and the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.’’

The bill in context

The bill is redundant to many elements of the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett decision , which is directing EPA’s on-going WOTUS rework effort. For example, the 2023 Sacket decision already excludes waste treatment system features like lagoons and treatment ponds.

Though groundwater has not been regulated as navigable waters, EPA notes groundwater “ is often hydrologically connected to navigable waters ” as it relates to carrying pollutants. Under the 2023 Sackett decision, however, groundwater would only count as navigable waters if a groundwater-fed wetland connected to a traditionally navigable water.

Still, agricultural voices have praised the bill. Iowa’s Secretary of Agriculture, Mike Naig, praised Ernst for championing the state’s farmers and businesses for instance.

“This legislation will provide much-needed clarity and consistency when it comes to WOTUS, helping end the constant policy whiplash that changes with each new administration. It’s a common-sense approach that brings certainty to those who are working every day to responsibly manage our land and water.”

WOTUS rework recent action

Agricultural stakeholders have long demanded regulatory certainty around WOTUS and its implementation. This was a resounding theme of listening sessions held by EPA earlier this year .

“By making federal regulation consistent, clear and by leaving room for state primacy in regulating other streams, lakes, wetlands and water features, EPA and the Corps can implement a rule that is both consistent with the Supreme Court’s decisions and with Congress’s intent in the Clean Water Act,” said Laura Campbell of Michigan Farm Bureau in the May 1 listening session held for agricultural stakeholders.

EPA has said it expects to release a proposed final WOTUS rule this summer , updating it to correspond with the 2023 Sackett decision. Once released, the rule will be available to the public for comment. The agency expects the new rule will go into effect by the end of 2025.

Though not directly connected to the WOTUS rework effort, EPA has recently put out a call for public comment on challenges stakeholders have had with CWA Section 401 implementation. This deals with individual states’ ability to put limits on certain types of federal action that might impact water quality within their jurisdiction. Interested stakeholders have until 11:59 p.m. EDT on Aug. 6 to submit comments on Regulations.gov or the Federal Register .

EPA Wants to Hear About Section 401 Challenges

Thu, 24 Jul 2025 03:32:56 GMT

The Environmental Protection Agency wants to hear from stakeholders about regulatory uncertainty or challenges associated with the certification process under the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401.

In its call for comments , EPA says it will use the feedback to determine if an additional guidance or rulemaking is necessary.

The agency is asking specific questions and will accept written comments online through the end of Aug. 6. It will also be holding an online public listening session July 30 where interested stakeholders can give verbal testimony.

CWA’s Section 401 provides for cooperative federalism , allowing states and recognized tribes to certify, deny or put limitations on federal projects that might impact federal waters in their jurisdiction. The call for comments listed Section 404 discharge of dredge or fill material permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and natural gas pipeline licenses issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as the most common examples of federal projects where Section 401 certification might be in play.

The EPA is specifically asking stakeholders to comment on the following topics:

The definition of scope of certification in an addendum 2023 rule to CWA’s Section 401 , whether and how states and tribes must demonstrate that their decisions under the section are within the appropriate scope, and if further clarification is needed on the topic.
The definition of “water quality requirements” as it relates to state or tribal certification decisions under Section 401.
How EPA should consider impacts to neighboring jurisdictions’ water quality.
Specific types of activities, geographic regions, types of waterbodies or other types of circumstances that should be included in categorial determinations related to neighboring jurisdiction’s waters.
Their own experiences with the Section 401 certification process since the September 2023 passage of the 2023 rule, particularly related to challenges, areas in need of improvement or greater transparency, positives, best practices or lessons learned.
Examples of application of the 2023 Rule that stakeholders believe exceeded its scope.

Interested stakeholders have until 11:59 p.m. EDT on Aug. 6 to submit comments on Regulations.gov or the Federal Register . Those who wish to attend the virtual July 30 listening session must pre-register for the event , which will be held via Microsoft Teams.

Mango Program Helps Fund Water Infrastructure Projects

Mon, 07 Jul 2025 23:29:07 GMT

In June 2025, Continental Fresh celebrated five years of its Water for All mangoes program. The company’s signature philanthropic program donates a percentage of the proceeds from every case of mangoes sold to improving water infrastructure in Latin America. According to Albert Perez, CEO of Continental Fresh, the program started as a seasonal effort, but has since grown to be year round.

“Since its launch, Water for All has helped fund multiple clean water and sanitation projects, directly impacting more than 1,000 people,” Perez says. While projects have been built in Ecuador, Nicaragua and Colombia, most projects have been in the Dominican Republic.

“Water for All funds gravity-fed aqueduct systems that bring clean, running water directly into homes in rural Latin American communities,” he adds. “These systems are built in partnership with BLUE Missions, using natural elevation to transport water from mountain springs to villages, eliminating the need for pumps or electricity.”

The programs also eliminate the need for women and children, who are usually tasked with fetching distant water where no water infrastructure exists, to travel long distances. Perez describes this dynamic as time poverty, often resulting in children missing school and women missing out on work opportunities. Water piped into communities and homes lessens that impact.

Perez gives an example of one project.

“In 2024, Water For All helped fund an aqueduct that now serves over 80 families in the Dominican Republic,” he says. “Before the project, families had to walk long distances to fetch water from a shared source. Today, each home has access to clean, safe water — improving hygiene, reducing illness and allowing children to return to school instead of fetching water.”

He adds that lack of water infrastructure and contaminated water sources are among the top water issues facing the parts of rural Latin America that Water for All focuses on.

“We believe that access to clean water is a fundamental human right,” Perez says, “And our mangoes serve as a vehicle for change. Every purchase supports our ongoing efforts to improve lives through water infrastructure and education.”

Your Next Reads:

California company offers real-time visibility into water quality

Mon, 28 Apr 2025 18:25:31 GMT

KETOS, a San Francisco, Calif.-based automated water testing company, announced its Environmental Lab Platform (KELP), its new in-house Environmental Lab testing services for residential, commercial and agricultural clients, April 23. The testing services, which will be conducted from the company’s California facility, are designed to provide comprehensive insights into the quality of manually drawn water samples.

“KETOS’ mission has always been to empower the community with access to safe water and provide innovative solutions that simplify water quality testing, increase visibility and improve operational efficiency,” Meena Sankaran, founder of KETOS, said in a news release.

“With our new Environmental Lab testing services, we are expanding our offering to give users real-time visibility and actionable intelligence on water quality, helping businesses, municipalities, and homeowners protect one of our most precious resources.”

In Phase I, KETOS will offer non-compliance reporting services integrated with its advanced software platform and AI-driven insights. This service will be available starting May 2025. Customers will be able to submit their water samples for testing, receive reports and online data access, and gain actionable insights through KETOS’ proprietary technology.

KETOS is addressing widespread concerns with PFAS testing as part of its Environmental Lab services. Currently, testing cycles for PFAS can take up to 45 days. KETOS’ streamlined approach aims to reduce turnaround times significantly, providing quicker insights and better support for environmental compliance.

Phase II of the offering will include full compliance reporting, allowing for even more robust and regulatory-compliant testing solutions. Clients can access a comprehensive list of testable water constituents on the KETOS website, making it easy to choose and purchase testing packages tailored to their needs.

The introduction of KELP will offer both existing and new customers a unified view of their water quality data across all touchpoints, eliminating the need for fragmented reporting methods such as PDFs, spreadsheets, and outdated lab systems. In addition to lab testing, KETOS continues to lead the way with its automated onsite robotics and AI solutions, which have become vital for the industrial, agricultural, and municipal sectors.