Sources within EPA tell Guardian that proposals are threadbare and muddled – ‘they’re are just making it up as they go along’

Donald Trump has overseen an onslaught against environmental regulations while insisting, in the wake of the Flint lead crisis, that he would ensure “crystal-clean water” for Americans.

The federal government says it is currently drawing up a new plan to tackle lead contamination, which the Environmental Protection Agency says will be unveiled in June.

Flint activists still waiting as governor escapes fallout of water crisis Read more

Public details of the plans are, however, scant. And some sources inside the EPA, speaking to the Guardian anonymously, said they were skeptical about whether what was being developed could meet such a challenge. “It’s a fig leaf,” one source claimed.

Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the EPA, which is spearheading the new strategy, has vowed to eliminate lead from drinking water and banish the specter of Flint. Wednesday this week was the fourth anniversary of the decision to switch the Michigan city’s water supply to the Flint river, without lead corrosion controls, prompting the public health crisis.

In February, Pruitt met fellow Trump cabinet members, including Alex Azar, the health and human services secretary, and Ben Carson, the housing and urban development secretary, and other agencies to tout a new approach for a presidential taskforce aimed at reducing lead exposure in children. “I really believe that we can eradicate lead from our drinking supply within a decade,” said Pruitt, who has touted a “back-to-basics approach” that has steered the EPA towards toxic clean-ups and away from challenges such as climate change.

Pruitt needs a fig leaf to suggest he’s doing something for the environment and has landed on eradicating lead EPA source

The agency’s administrator warned the “mental-acuity levels of our children are being impacted adversely” by lead and called for a coordinated approach to ensure the disaster in Flint is not replicated.

One of the few concrete proposals put forward by Pruitt is to replace the millions of lead lines that funnel drinking water to Americans’ homes, a process that could cost about $45bn. A recent EPA analysis of the nation’s water utilities found that nearly half a trillion dollars of investment is required to restore crumbling drinking water systems and ensure lead and other pollutants don’t endanger the public.

Some agency staff, while pleased that the administration is raising the profile of lead poisoning, described the new plan as threadbare and muddled.

“Everyone was running around talking about a war on lead, but there was no conversation about how it will work, which is typical of this administration,” said one senior EPA official. “The lead problem is huge and multifaceted and they are just making it up as they go along,” the source said.

Asked about progress of the plan, this week an EPA spokeswoman declined to discuss details but said: “The 17 federal agencies that comprise the president’s taskforce on environmental health risks and safety risks to children is developing a new federal strategy to address childhood lead exposure and expects the strategy to be finalized and made public in mid-June.”



Pruitt has, according to staff sources, used meetings to demand a “single standard” for lead, which has caused confusion as the EPA has an actionable level of 15 parts per billion in water samples, although the agency and other health bodies concur there is no safe limit of lead exposure.



The Flint disaster came about after the city switched its drinking water supply to the Flint river on 25 April 2014 but then failed to add proper controls to prevent lead, a known neurotoxin, leeching from pipes and joints into the water.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Scott Pruitt, the embattled administrator of the EPA. Photograph: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA

Lead levels in children’s blood soared and a further dozen people died from a legionnaire’s outbreak linked to the lead contamination. A total of 15 people have been charged by the Michigan attorney general over the disaster.

Nationally, the risk of a similar outcome is vast – about 18 million Americans are served by 5,300 water systems that have violated the EPA’s lead and copper rule by, among other things, failing to properly test water for lead or neglecting to adequately treat systems to avoid lead contamination.

Many cities, as the Guardian revealed, have used techniques known to mask the true level of lead in drinking water. Lead can also be present in soil and paint, particularly in older buildings.

Lead line replacement – which Pruitt has backed – would provide an overdue upgrade on a huge tangle of ageing underground pipes, many of which were installed in the wake of the civil war.

But experts have warned that tearing up lead lines, even if funding could be found, could exacerbate the problem by dislodging lead during replacement work. Utilities only have jurisdiction over pipes up to the curbside, with residents potentially either unwilling or unable to afford to pay for their share of pipe replacement.

“It can be incredibly expensive to replace lines but also complicated because so much pipe is privately owned,” said Maura Allaire, a water resources expert at the University of California.

“The other problem is we don’t even know where the lead service lines are. You could spend a ton of money and make the problem worse. There are smarter ways of doing things rather than hodge-podge lead-line replacements.”

Pruitt promised polluters EPA will value their profits over American lives | Dana Nuccitelli Read more

Allaire said the EPA could demand improvements to lead corrosion treatments and tighten up a unusual patchwork testing regime that relies on individual utilities to get volunteer homeowners to test their own water. Another glaring problem is the EPA’s lack of data on what the vast range of water utilities, some servicing just a few hundred people, are doing.

Other uncertainties abound. Trump’s vision of repealing two federal rules for any new regulation enacted could dampen any enthusiasm for introducing new standards. And Pruitt’s own future as EPA head remains unclear because of a series of controversies over his use of taxpayer money for first-class flights, office furniture and personal security.

“I think this is likely to be an empty exercise,” said a former EPA water official, who declined to be named. “Pruitt needs a fig leaf to suggest he’s doing something protective of the environment and has landed on eradicating lead. It wouldn’t surprise me if we got to the end of the administration and there’s no significant change to the rules.”

Tim Epp, a lawyer with no prior experience in dealing with lead in water, has been handed the role within the EPA of coordinating the new plan. That move, along with the administration’s previous attempt to slash funding for lead clean-ups, has led to some cynicism about the new strategy within and outside the EPA. But staff insist that any effort to address the issue is worthwhile.

“It could’ve been handled better but it’s good it’s out there, it can build momentum,” said an EPA source. “Everyone in the building wants to work on lead, we all want progress on this. No one gives a shit about dissenting with the administration over this. If it’s lead, we’re all in.”