WOTUS

 

Federal Permit Council To Expand Its Authority Over Mining. According to Politico, “An independent federal permitting council charged with fast tracking complex, expensive infrastructure projects is expected to approve a measure today that will expand its purview to non-energy mining and brownfield redevelopment projects, according to documents reviewed by POLITICO. The Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, or FPISC, will vote this afternoon to bring the new sectors under its jurisdiction. The council contends it can take such action through majority vote, citing the 2015 law that created it. Requests from Republican Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy to expedite approvals for a graphite mine, as well as from the developers of a rare earth mine in Round Top, Texas, spurred the council’s upcoming vote. The move is likely to anger environmentalists who worry massive mining projects may sidestep rigorous reviews, raising concerns they could disrupt species’ habitat, lead to water contamination and contribute to local air pollution. Greens say the scale of potential degradation and harm to the environment and public health from non-energy mining is far greater than the other sectors the council currently considers. The vote comes days after the Trump administration proposed changes to the National Environmental Policy Act — a foundational environmental permitting rule governing permitting for everything from pipelines to highways — and just ahead of the EPA’s expected weakening of water pollution rules affecting rivers and streams.” [Politico, 1/15/20 (=)]

 

Farm Groups Eager For New WOTUS Rule Ahead Of Trump Speech. According to Agri-Pulse, “The Trump administration is expected to soon release a new ‘waters of the U.S.’ rule redefining what streams and wetlands are regulated by the Clean Water Act, and some observers think an announcement could come this weekend when President Donald Trump speaks at the American Farm Bureau Federation’s annual convention. ‘That’s a pretty good bet. It looks like the timing is right,’ said Scott Yager, chief environmental counsel at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. ‘I’m sure he’s going to want to say something’ about WOTUS, said Don Parrish, senior director for regulatory relations at AFBF, which has probably been the most vocal of the trade groups in its criticism of the Obama administration’s 2015 Clean Water rule, widely known as WOTUS. The Obama rule, which expanded federal jurisdiction, was formally repealed last year and would be replaced by the new version. Trump is scheduled to speak to AFBF on Sunday, followed by EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler on Monday. Yager, Parrish and other interested parties contacted by Agri-Pulse said any predictions about what Trump might say are just educated guesses. The same goes for what changes will be made from the proposed rule, which would remove ephemeral streams from federal jurisdiction, along with ditches unless they meet certain flow criteria. ‘They’re keeping a tight lid on it,’ Yager said, which he added is a good thing for supporters of the administration’s rule replacing the 2015 Obama rule. That is because any potential violations of the administrative process, such as giving industry details in advance, could create legal problems for those trying to defend the rule. Keeping specifics close to the vest ‘is a good thing for the durability of the replacement rule,’ Yager said.” [Agri-Pulse, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

Op-Ed: Farm Local. Eat Local. Regulate Local. According to Agri-Pulse, “Over the past four years, the WOTUS rule has complicated the business and legacy that thousands of small farmers have mindfully built and preserved. Even more worrisome, I’ve seen complicated federal regulations, like the WOTUS rule, discourage younger generations from continuing the family farm business. This is why I welcomed the September repeal of the 2015 WOTUS rule by the EPA and I advocate for a new Clean Water rule that brings clarity to enforcement of the Clean Water Act. We need a new rule that will clear up the ambiguity and confusion that farmers, ranchers, manufacturers and other small businesses were forced to navigate with the 2015 rule. We support federal government authority to enforce Clean Water Act standards on actual bodies of water, like bays and lakes, but regulation of land that is sometimes wet, and areas with small bodies of water, should be left to state and local governments, because they know the areas better and are more accessible to the local community. Under the 2015 WOTUS rule, a potential EPA investigation over a small pond or puddle on my farm, for example, could take years to complete. In the meantime, we wouldn’t be able to make changes to that area of the farm and in some cases, we may be prevented from grazing animals nearby. Our farm is close to the Chesapeake Bay and less than a mile from the Patuxent River. These are important places to us because our four children play in these waters, we enjoy seafood harvested from the watershed, and our local economy depends on the businesses, industry and tourism that surround the Chesapeake Bay. Rolling hills make our farm picturesque, but it also means there’s a great deal of marshland and ditches that are sometimes dry and sometimes filled with water after a rainfall. Farmers and ranchers face enough uncertainty — weather, commodity prices, labor shortages, global trade policies, economic trends, and ever-changing consumer preferences. What is and isn’t a ‘Water of the United States’ shouldn’t be on that list.” [Agri-Pulse, 1/16/20 (-)]

 

Toxic Algae

 

Judge Tosses U.S. Sugar Lawsuit Over Lake Okeechobee, But Now Stuart’s Considering Filing Suit. According to The Palm Beach Post, “A federal judge tossed out a high-profile lawsuit by U.S. Sugar over water levels in Lake Okeechobee last month, but another legal challenge from the Treasure Coast appears imminent as the war over the wellspring of the Everglades continues. Despite the dismissal of the suit, which accused the Army Corps of Engineers of overstepping its authority by lowering Lake O water levels, the Clewiston-based sugar producer is claiming victory in the legal action. In a statement released after the Dec. 18 order by U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks, company officials said they won’t appeal the dismissal because ‘we accomplished what we set out to do: rein in the Army Corps rogue operations outside the existing, publicly-approved Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule.’ The Corps, which oversees the water depth in Lake Okeechobee, temporarily changed its management strategy last year by lowering water levels ahead of the rainy season in an effort to avoid harmful discharges to the northern estuaries in the warm summer months when they contribute to the growth of toxic blue-green algae. It was also an opportunity to give aquatic vegetation a chance to regrow after years of high water levels. But farmers, West Palm Beach and Palm Beach County raised concerns about whether there would be water shortages if a drought occurred and the lake was too low to supply water for crops and to combat saltwater intrusion in wells. Lake Okeechobee is also the backup water supply for West Palm Beach and Palm Beach. Water levels hit 10.99 feet by May, stranding boats in backyard canals and the Pahokee Marina, and forcing the closure of some locks around the lake. In December, the Corps reversed its stance, announcing it would focus on retaining water in the lake during the dry season instead of trying to get to lower levels. Guidelines enacted in 2008 recommend the lake be kept between 12.5 and 15.5 feet above sea level.” [The Palm Beach Post, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

Blue-Green Algae Found To Produce Greenhouse Gas Methane. According to Phys.org, “An international team of researchers has found that cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) produce the greenhouse gas methane. In their paper published in the journal Science Advances, the group describes tests they carried out with blue-green algae in their lab and what they found. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and anthropogenic emissions are partly responsible for climate change. Less well known is that there are other greenhouse gases that also contribute to global warming. One of those gases is methane, which is released into the atmosphere in a variety of ways, some natural, some from human activities. Research over the past decade has shown that methane is approximately 60 times more efficient at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, making it a major concern. In this new effort, the researchers studied blue-green algae to find out if it emits methane. … The findings by the researchers show that not only does blue-green algae produce methane, but it does so in both dark and light conditions, and in both oxygen-rich and oxygen-poor environments. However, they note that the emission of methane was lower under dark conditions. They also note that it is not currently possible to estimate the amount of methane being produced by blue-green algae globally, but suggest it should be a topic of research.” [Phys.org, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

Marco Island Brings In Company To Conduct Study To Prevent Another Algae Crisis. According to WINK-TV, “Getting ahead of another algae crisis. Marco Island is bringing in a company from Orlando to study where the nutrients that get into our water come from. Those nutrients could potentially fuel blue-green algae and red tide. People come to Marco Island for the beautiful water, which is why the city is determined to find the source of the problem in those waters. Neighbors feel it’s gotten worse. ‘The waterways aren’t quite as clean as they used to be,’ said Marco Island homeowner, Kim Park. Park has lived on the intracoastal waters on Marco Island for more than 30 years. ‘We’re seeing a lot of debris get dumped from, I’m assuming, landscapers,’ she said. ‘A lot of times, it looks like it might be some sewage from somewhere,’ said Dawn Gouley who also lives on the island. To get to the bottom of the mystery, the city has budgeted $130,000 to figure it out. The project will test the bottoms of the canals, the open waters in and around the island and more. ‘We will be installing stormwater collectors and collecting runoff from different land uses and areas with and without reuse irrigation,’ said President of ERD, Dr. Harvey Harper. The project director says these tests will help them analyze what are called stable isotopes. ‘The isotopes can distinguish the source of nitrogen, whether it came from wastewater or sewage or fertilizer or atmospheric deposition or runoff,’ Harper said.” [WINK-TV, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

PFAS

 

Judge Rejects PFAS Monitoring Case Over Lack Of ‘Hazardous’ Designation. According to Inside EPA, “A federal judge has granted the Navy’s request to dismiss a landmark citizen suit seeking payment for medical monitoring to detect health concerns that may develop after exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), finding that regulators’ failure to designate the chemicals as ‘hazardous substances’ precluded the plaintiffs from filing suit under state law. The ruling could intensify efforts by environmentalists and others who have pressured EPA and Congress -- so far unsuccessfully -- to quickly designate PFAS as ‘hazardous substances’ under the federal Superfund law. The plaintiffs in the case, Kristen Giovanni, et al. v. Navy, live near two Navy facilities in Pennsylvania that contaminated groundwater with two PFAS -- perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) -- and sought to obtain payments for medical monitoring under the Pennsylvania Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (HSCA). But in his Jan. 15 ruling, Judge Gerald J. Pappert of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania found that to qualify for medical monitoring, HSCA says citizens must have been exposed to a ‘hazardous substance,’ a designation that PFOA and PFOS lack under either federal or state law. ‘After studying the parties’ briefing and holding oral argument, the Court grants the Navy’s Motion on that ground,’ the ruling says. The ruling is not a surprise as plaintiffs attorneys at a Jan. 9 hearing struggled to convince Pappert that they had a valid claim.” [Inside EPA, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

Citing Regulatory Void, Court Nixes PFAS Case Against Navy. According to E&E News, “A federal judge said he could not weigh in on a challenge concerning the presence of ‘forever chemicals’ in Pennsylvania landowners’ water supply because the substances are not regulated under state law. The yearslong legal saga is one of many battles over per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, playing out in courts across the country. Legislators and regulators have been grappling with how the chemicals, which have been linked to cancer and other human health impacts, should be controlled (Greenwire, Jan. 9). Residents Kristen Giovanni and Dorothy Palmer have argued that the Navy broke Pennsylvania law when it disposed of waste containing two types of PFAS at two bases. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Jerry Pappert said yesterday that his hands were tied in the case because the chemicals are not considered hazardous substances under the state’s Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act. ‘The issue is whether the Plaintiffs can state a claim for relief under the current law; indeed, it is the Court’s duty to decide cases based on what the law is, not what the law may be at some point in the future,’ Pappert, an Obama appointee, wrote in his opinion.” [E&E News, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

Navy Environment Pick Talks PFAS, The Changing 'Weather'. According to E&E News, “President Trump’s pick for Navy assistant secretary for energy, installations and environment declared housing and the cleanup of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, as his top priorities during his confirmation hearing yesterday. When asked about concerns related to climate change, Charles ‘Chuck’ Williams responded by citing the changing weather. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) urged Williams to make climate-related disasters a ‘high concern.’ ‘It’s still a concern that we have that weather is ravishing a lot of our infrastructure, and the cost is prohibitive if we don’t make the necessary changes,’ Manchin said. Williams agreed that impacts from extreme weather are affecting military bases such as Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia. ‘I believe weather is changing, and it’s having an impact on our forces,’ Williams said. Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) also addressed energy resilience plans for the Navy and to keep making facilities independent from local electric grids. Williams said he was ‘relatively new to this’ but that he understood resilience is a big priority from his discussions with staff. ‘I want to get involved in that and learn more about that,’ Williams said. ‘There are plans for backup generation, and some of the initiatives have been proven.’” [E&E News, 1/17/20 (=)]

 

Misc. Waterways

 

Newsom Forges Ahead On Delta Tunnel. According to E&E News, “California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) yesterday launched an environmental review of a tunnel that would re-plumb the state’s water infrastructure, reigniting a long-simmering feud between water interests and environmentalists. Newsom is proposing to build a single tunnel under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta east of San Francisco. The delta is California’s water hub. Its water is shuttled via canals and aqueducts to cities and farms across the state. Newsom’s single tunnel is a departure from his predecessor’s plan; former Gov. Jerry Brown (D), who tried for decades to build a new conveyance system through the delta, had called for two 35-mile tunnels (Greenwire, July 10, 2017). Yesterday’s notice signals that the state considers it a new proposal, separate from Brown’s twin tunnels. Department of Water Resources Director Karla Nemeth said the plan is critical to the state’s future, including the delta’s 738,000-acre ecosystem. ‘Gov. Newsom directed state agencies to pursue a single tunnel solution to modernize our water infrastructure,’ she said in a statement, ‘and when combined with the broader, statewide Portfolio approach, this project would help safeguard a vital source of affordable water for millions of Californians.’” [E&E News, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

New York Lawmakers Want To Outlaw Cigarette Butts. According to New York Daily News, “A group of New York lawmakers introduced legislation Thursday that would outlaw cigarette filters, known colloquially as ‘butts,’ along with single-use electronic cigarettes. The Tobacco Product Waste Reduction Act would effectively ban the sale of filtered cigarettes as well as attachable single-use filters, and single use e-cigarettes, starting in 2022. ‘Cigarette butts are everywhere — littering our streets, our parks, and our waterways, and spreading plastic pollution and toxic chemicals into our environment and our food supply,’ said Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan). Cigarette filters are typically made of about 12,000 strands of cellulose acetate, the same plastic used in sunglasses, and can take decades to biodegrade. They eventually break down into small particles that end up in waterways, in the bodies of fish and other animals, and still contain many of the chemicals, toxins and contaminants trapped from the smoking process. The common sidewalk sight is a worldwide environmental nuisance as the vast majority of the 5.6 trillion cigarettes manufactured worldwide each year come with filters. As many as two-thirds of those butts are dumped irresponsibly and reach either the ocean or other natural habitats each year, according the Cigarette Butt Pollution Project. … Single use e-cigs would also get the boot under the bill as the cartridges contain components such as lithium-ion batteries, as well as toxic chemicals and liquid nicotine that together qualify them as electronic, toxic, and hazardous waste.” [New York Daily News, 1/16/20 (=)]

 

 

Please do not respond to this email.

If you have questions or comments please contact mitch@beehivedc.com