Clean Water Act & WOTUS

 

Industry Groups Ask Judge To Strike WOTUS. According to E&E News, “A judge’s rejection of the Obama-era rule identifying which wetlands and waterways get automatic Clean Water Act protection didn’t go far enough, attorneys for industry groups told a federal court last week. Instead of handing the Waters of the U.S., or WOTUS, rule back to EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia Judge Lisa Godbey Wood should have wiped it from the books, the groups argued. ‘Vacatur is warranted because the WOTUS Rule is unlawful and the problems that this Court identified with the WOTUS Rule, as well as the agencies’ ongoing proceedings to repeal and replace that Rule, establish that there is no likelihood that the Rule will be reissued in remotely similar substantive form,’ counsel for the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Petroleum Institute and other organizations wrote in a Friday filing. Wood, a George W. Bush appointee, last month ruled that the Obama administration exceeded its authority with its 2015 Clean Water Rule and also found it violated the Administrative Procedure Act (Greenwire, Aug. 22). Although the Obama-era rule is not in effect in the states that initiated the lawsuit in Wood’s court, the industry groups argued Friday that her decision perpetuates a ‘patchwork regulatory environment’ for their operations in the rest of the country. ‘Vacatur ensures that the Rule’s inapplicability is consistent nationwide; failure to vacate leaves inconsistent application across the country,’ they wrote.” [E&E News, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

Judge Misread Clean Water Act’s Exception For Ag Irrigation – 9th Circuit. According to Reuters, “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has revived a lawsuit by commercial fishermen, conservation organizations and other groups over pollutants allegedly discharged by the Central Valley Project, the massive irrigation system in central California. The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations and its fellow challengers say the Clean Water Act requires the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to obtain a discharge permit for pollutants in the project’s drainage system, which flows into Mud Slough, the San Joaquin River and the Bay-Delta Estuary.” [Reuters, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

Coal Ash

 

Santee Cooper: Former Coal Ash Pond Breached, No Environmental Impacts Are Expected. According to WCBD-TV, “Santee Cooper crews say they found a breach in a former coal ash pond early Sunday morning at the former Grainer Generating Station in Conway. Officials say a dike breached and water from the swollen Waccamaw River filled pond one. Santee Cooper is working around the clock to keep an eye on things as the river level drops. No environmental impacts are expected since ash is no longer in that pond. Santee Cooper started excavating the ponds in 2014.” [WCBD-TV, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

Toxic Algae

 

Toxic Algae: Will The Rain Help Or Hurt? Scientists Are Watching Closely. According to KXAN, “With rain in the forecast over the next two days, scientists are watching closely to see what kind of impact the weather will have on toxic algae blooms that popped up in Austin waterways earlier this summer. Several dogs died after swimming in Lady Bird Lake and near red Bud Isle. Analysts suspect toxins produced by blue-green algae blooms may be the cause. The city closed Red Bud Isle and has been warning dog owners not to let their pets swim in the lake since early August. City scientists with the Watershed Protection Department are collecting water sample to test for toxins every week. Rain could have both positive and negative impacts on algae growth, said John Higley, CEO of Austin-based research company EQO. On the positive side, more water flow and cooler water temperatures are bad for algae, and with the most widespread rain chances the area has seen in 10 weeks, rain would improve both of those elements. In the short-term, it could mean a decrease in the number and size of algae blooms in the water. In the longer-term, though, the negative can start to outweigh any momentary benefits. As water flows through the landscape, the rain runoff picks up nutrients from fertilizer and other sources. Those nutrients can feed algae, causing more and bigger blooms to form. … In other words, don’t expect to take your dogs swimming this weekend, even if you don’t see any more algae.” [KXAN, 9/10/19 (=)]

 

Drinking Water

 

Senate Passes Lead Contamination Legislation. According to E&E News, “The Senate last night approved legislation by voice vote to help fund community efforts to remove lead from drinking water. The chamber approved New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker’s S. 1689, which would allow states to transfer some money from their Clean Water State Revolving Fund to their Drinking Water State Revolving Fund for lead removal efforts. ‘The lead crisis facing our country is a threat to our public health and an issue of environmental justice,’ Booker said when the Environment and Public Works Committee approved the bill in June. ‘Many communities don’t have access to clean drinking water, and disproportionately, those communities are home to low-income individuals and people of color,’ he said. ‘This legislation would help make it easier for communities to address this pressing crisis and protect our children from the devastating harm caused by lead-contaminated drinking water.’ Newark, N.J., where Booker used to be mayor, is seeing high levels of lead in drinking water, and the senator has called for major federal spending to address the problem nationwide (Greenwire, Aug. 26). Separately, the Senate also approved S. 349, from Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the ‘Reviving America’s Scenic Byways Act.’” [E&E News, 9/10/19 (=)]

 

AP | Tap Water Turns Pink In Capital. According to E&E News, “That’s not rosé flowing from your faucet. The tap water in parts of New York’s capital is turning pink, but officials say it’s perfectly safe to drink. The Albany Water Department says the coloration seen Saturday is the result of a pass-through of sodium permanganate, a chemical used in the treatment process. The water department says the pink water is also safe to use for cooking and bathing, but laundry should be avoided. Sodium permanganate is used to control the taste and odor of tap water. It’s also used to remove color and impurities. The water department says the chemical is normally removed during the filtration process, but recent maintenance to the system caused some to pass through the filters.” [E&E News, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

PFAS

 

White House Objects To Senate’s Bipartisan PFAS Provisions. According to Inside EPA, “The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is ‘strongly’ objecting to numerous provisions in Senate-passed defense legislation that would require EPA to craft a series of new drinking water, toxics and reporting rules for perfluorinated chemicals and mandate that the Defense Department (DOD) mitigate its past use of the chemicals. Since the White House has already threatened to veto the House-passed defense bill, in part due to its PFAS provisions, the new warning raises new doubts about prospects for any PFAS legislation advancing. In Sept. 4 letters sent to the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate and House military committees, Acting OMB Director Russell T. Vought details objections the Trump administration has to a host of provisions in the Senate version of the fiscal year 2020 defense authorization bill, including several sections dealing with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The Senate PFAS provisions were carefully negotiated in a bipartisan agreement among members of the Environment and Public Works Committee, which approved them by voice vote ahead of the full Senate floor vote June 27. Among the PFAS-related actions in the Senate bill are sections mandating EPA to take actions under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); prohibiting DOD from using PFAS-containing aqueous film-forming firefighting foam after Oct. 1, 2023; and giving DOD authority to treat water sources or provide replacement water for agricultural purposes when the water is contaminated with two of the most-well known PFAS.” [Inside EPA, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

PFAS Manufacturers Testify. According to Politico, “Executives from the three biggest U.S. manufacturers of PFAS are due on Capitol Hill this afternoon to testify for the first time about what they knew about the dangers of the toxic chemicals, when they knew it, and what they did about it. But before representatives from 3M, DuPont and Chemours speak, a pair of lawyers who brought lawsuits against manufacturers on behalf of the state of Minnesota and residents of Parkersburg, W.Va., will lay out for lawmakers what documents made public by their litigation show the companies knew. Here’s ME’s guide to what to watch for: The legislation: Today’s hearing comes as leaders in the House and Senate seek a final deal for regulating the widely used chemicals as part of conference negotiations on the 2020 defense bill. While heavy hitters in the chemicals industry have been pushing back on efforts to force EPA regulations, DuPont’s Chief Operating and Engineering Officer Daryl Roberts will call for lawmakers to enact specific provisions, including those requiring EPA to set a drinking water standard within two years, to require public disclosures of releases under the Toxics Release Inventory and ‘to list PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA within one year,’ according to excerpts of the testimony shared with POLITICO.” [Politico, 9/10/19 (=)]

 

EPA Calls PFAS Sampling Priority, But Rejects Jersey Push On Draft Levels. According to Inside EPA, “EPA Region 2 is effectively agreeing with New Jersey regulators that sampling for emerging contaminants, such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), at Superfund sites in the state ‘is a priority,’ prompting concern from at least one industry attorney who questions whether EPA is requiring more sampling than is necessary. However, the region is generally dismissing a push by the state to apply as a remediation requirement the state’s strict proposed groundwater standards and criteria, reiterating past policy statements that these will only be ‘considered’ in cleanups given they are not final. ‘We agree that sampling for emerging contaminants at all National Priorities List (NPL) sites in New Jersey is a priority,’ Pat Evangelista, acting director for Region 2’s Superfund and Emergency Management Division, says in a June 19 letter to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), obtained by Inside EPA. EPA ‘has been evaluating NPL sites for emerging contaminants for some time now and will continue to do so in consideration of the recommendations provided in your letter,’ Evangelista says. The letters respond to requests from a NJDEP official who earlier this year had pressed the regional office to test for PFAS and other emerging contaminants at EPA-led Superfund sites in New Jersey and during remedy reviews at private sites, and asked the region to support state proposed groundwater criteria as applicable at cleanup sites.” [Inside EPA, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

Trump EPA Hearts PETA? According to Politico, “Wheeler is due to make an announcement this morning on ‘animal research.’ The agency has kept tight lips about the specifics, but controversy has been quietly roiling for months among academics and public health advocates about the Trump administration’s plans to phase out the use of animals in lab tests, which they say could stymie research on toxins like PFAS, formaldehyde and chlorpyrifos. While the move may win accolades from animal welfare groups, it has also been sought by the chemicals industry, for whom animal experiments can be expensive and time-consuming. Critics of animal testing argue that computer modeling and ‘in vitro testing,’ essentially using cells in a Petri dish, can accomplish the same ends. But academics say those methods can’t capture the full range of effects a chemical can have on complex biological systems in the human body. ‘For a thorough understanding of how any chemical affects living organisms, whole animal toxicity testing is an essential piece of the process,’ Jamie DeWitt, PFAS researcher at East Carolina University, said by email. Environmental advocates argue that doing away with animal testing is ultimately designed to hamstringing EPA’s ability to regulate chemicals. ‘The Trump EPA and regulated chemical industry are rushing to eliminate foundational sources of evidence about their hazardous chemical products,’ said NRDC senior scientist Jennifer Sass.” [Politico, 9/10/19 (=)]

 

Navy Seeks To End Landmark PFAS Monitoring Cases On Immunity Grounds. According to Inside EPA, “The Navy is urging a federal district court to dismiss claims from Pennsylvania residents seeking the military’s payment for medical monitoring to detect health issues that may develop after exposure to perfluorinated chemicals, after an appellate court, in a precedential decision, last year allowed the claims to proceed. In a brief filed last month, the Navy argued that such claims are not covered by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act’s (RCRA) waiver of sovereign immunity. RCRA’s waiver permits ‘injunctive relief’ only in the context of enforcing ‘requirements’ ‘respecting control and abatement of solid waste or hazardous waste disposal and management,’ the Navy says in its Aug. 6 brief, quoting key terms in the waste law. ‘At best, this language in RCRA’s waiver is ambiguous as to whether it covers Plaintiffs’ claimed relief. The Court must construe any ambiguities, however, ‘in favor of immunity.’ Accordingly, this Court should dismiss this case,’ the Navy says. The argument is the latest effort from the military to limit the reach of litigation from people exposed to per- and polyfluoroakyl substances (PFAS) and any liability that may result following a landmark ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit that the military has argued would open the door to claims by ‘tens of thousands of plaintiffs.’” [Inside EPA, 9/9/19 (=)]

 

Plastic Pollution

 

Prime Minister Announces Phaseout Of Single-Use Plastics. According to E&E News, “India plans to enact policies aimed at ending ‘the menace of plastic waste,’ the nation’s prime minister announced today. If the plan is fulfilled, it could amount to a major blow for the global plastics industry. India is the world’s fourth-largest and fastest-growing economy. Narendra Modi, elected to serve as prime minister in 2014 and sworn in for a second term in May, told an audience in a New Delhi suburb that his government is moving forward with plans to phase out single-use plastic products in the country. Modi made the declaration at the Conference of the Parties gathering of the U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification. ‘India will put an end to single-use plastic in the coming years,’ Modi announced to resounding applause. ‘We are committed to the development of environmentally friendly substitutes and also an efficient plastic collection and disposal method.’ Prakash Javadekar, head of India’s Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, said in a press conference that India would begin implementing new plastic waste policies Oct. 2. ‘There are two movements simultaneously,’ said Javadekar. ‘One, waste collection, waste processing, waste management. And second is say no to single-use plastic.’ Modi invited the world to join the growing anti-plastics movement. ‘I believe the time has come for even the world to say goodbye to single-use plastic,’ he said.” [E&E News, 9/9/19 (=)]