In a major regulatory reversal, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has officially withdrawn its 2024 proposal to strengthen wastewater discharge limits for meat and poultry processing facilities. The agency cited potential disruptions to the U.S. meat supply, facility closures, and significant job losses as key reasons behind the decision.

Originally developed under the Biden administration, the proposal would have required facilities to adopt new wastewater treatment technologies, a move environmental groups hailed as long overdue. But industry stakeholders, led by the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), warned the rule would impose crippling costs on meat processors and threaten plant viability nationwide.

"The EPA's withdrawal reduces future compliance costs for this vital American industry and helps support affordable food prices and cost of living," the agency noted in a summary statement, aligning the move with President Donald Trump's deregulatory priorities and his broader campaign to combat the "cost-of-living crisis."

Job Losses and Supply Chain Disruption Weighed Heavily
EPA's original analysis projected that up to 16 plants could close under the preferred regulatory scenario. In the final action document signed by Administrator Lee Zeldin, the agency estimated the no-rule option avoids the closure of between 10 and 93 plants, potentially preventing the loss of 3,199 to 26,657 American jobs.

The agency emphasized lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, when processing disruptions led to severe meat shortages and price spikes. "Even impacts considered economically achievable could pose serious threats to the nation's food supply," the EPA warned.

Industry Applauds ‘Common-Sense' Decision
The NPPC welcomed the rollback, calling it a victory for science-based, economically viable regulation.

"The National Pork Producers Council applauds the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Zeldin for taking a common-sense approach," said NPPC President Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio.

The group stated that stringent permitting changes under the Clean Water Act (CWA) would have forced sweeping upgrades and costly compliance burdens across the meat sector, reducing capacity and driving up prices for consumers.

Environmental Groups Decry Missed Opportunity
Conversely, environmental advocates criticized the decision, arguing it favors short-term economics over long-term sustainability. Groups that had sued EPA to act on slaughterhouse discharges said even the proposed rule's preferred option would have cut nitrogen by just 10% and phosphorus by 37%-while a more ambitious alternative could have reduced those discharges by 83% and 94%, respectively.

The decision effectively ends a two-year public comment process, during which environmental and industry groups clashed over how to balance environmental justice, clean water goals, and the economic realities of meat processing in the U.S.

What's Next for EPA and the Meat Sector?
The decision signals a continued pivot away from aggressive environmental enforcement in favor of economic resilience and supply chain stability, a hallmark of the Trump administration's policy framework.

Yet critics warn that without stronger safeguards, rural waterways and low-income communities near processing plants will continue to bear the brunt of pollution from the $200 billion U.S. meat industry.