Clean Water Act

 

TMDL

 

Chesapeake Bay Area Lawmakers Urge EPA To Enforce Pollution Standards. According to Frederick News Post, “Senators from the Chesapeake Bay region are asking the Biden administration to enforce strict water pollution standards in Pennsylvania and New York to help meet previously-agreed goals for restoring the Bay. The lawmakers, all Democrats, told new Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan in a letter last month that efforts to reduce certain Bay pollution sources by 2025 ‘are at a critical juncture.’ ‘Our concern has been the state of Pennsylvania has been falling significantly short of the goals that they need to reach in order for us to meet the overall pollution goals for the Bay in 2025,’ Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland), one of the co-authors of the letter, said in an interview with Capital News Service. The senators told Regan that Pennsylvania would only meet 75 percent of its target to cut nitrogen pollution. New York also would fall short of its nitrogen goal by 1 million pounds, they said. In addition to Van Hollen, the Democratic senators on the letter were Ben Cardin of Maryland, Tom Carper and Chris Coons of Delaware, and Mark Warner and Tim Kaine of Virginia. In 2010, the EPA established the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load for pollutants permitted without violating water quality standards. The standards applied to the bay’s surrounding states: Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Delaware, New York, and the District of Columbia.” [Frederick News Post, 5/18/21 (+)]

 

Water Pollution

 

PFAS

 

Utilities, Environmentalists Press EPA To Expand PFAS Effluent Study. According to InsideEPA, “Drinking water utilities and dozens of environmental groups are urging EPA to look beyond the chemical manufacturing sector when collecting discharge data that could lead to Clean Water Act (CWA) regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), noting several other industrial sectors use large amounts of PFAS. The central question EPA is pursuing in a recent advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) is to identify industrial sources that may warrant further study for potential regulation of PFAS through national effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs). But the ‘current effort, as pursued by the Agency, is not adequate to meet this goal,’ the American Water Works Association (AWWA), which represents a variety of drinking water utilities, tells EPA in May 17 comments, urging consideration of PFAS uses by a host of other sectors including textile production and pulp and paper manufacturers. And the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), representing 36 national and regional environmental groups, also urges the agency to take additional steps. SELC says in May 14 comments that quick action ‘is essential because PFAS contamination is widespread, harming communities throughout our country; companies responsible for releasing PFAS extend far beyond the ‘Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers Point Source Category;’ and effluent limitations guidelines can take years to finalize.’” [InsideEPA, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

EPA Eyes Proposing PFAS MCLGs This Year, Weighing Exposure Routes. According to InsideEPA, “EPA is telling states that it expects to propose health-based drinking water goals, known as maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs), for the two most studied per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and submit them to its Science Advisory Board (SAB) for review sometime this year, sources say, the first in a series of steps the agency must take before it can regulate the substances. The agency also is modeling breast milk exposure routes for the two chemicals, one state source says, noting that EPA is looking to update its health advisory support documents with the data. The source says EPA appears to be trying to find a way to quantify breast milk exposure pathways to these two PFAS as part of an updated reference dose or water concentration, which the source says the agency did not do when it crafted health effects documents for its 2016 drinking water health advisory levels. Concerns about potential breast milk exposure are heating up, the state source says, noting significant contamination fears among communities with high levels of PFAS as to whether lactating mothers should be advised not to breast feed their infants.” [InsideEPA, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

Toxic Algae

 

Martin County Businesses Don't Want Lake Okeechobee Discharges. According to WPTV-TV, “Congressman Brian Mast sent a letter to President Joe Biden on Monday asking him to get the Army Corps of Engineers to see firsthand the algae situation brewing in the area around Lake Okeechobee. The St. Lucie Lock remains closed. The Army Corps said last week they hope they don’t have to open the Lock until September keeping any potentially toxic algae from the St. Lucie Estuary. Mother nature though could force changes if the lake level stays too high for the Corps of Engineers. Meanwhile, some people whose livelihood depends on clean water are hoping things can be done without toxic discourse. In two decades of owning the Indiantown Marina, Scott Watson said he’s seen algae plenty of times. ‘The algae itself, the physical presence of algae hasn’t really caused us any problems at all. Most of the time it comes and goes,’ said Watson. As someone who owns two waterfront businesses and a waterfront home, Watson knows cool clean water is important, but he’s concerned the rhetoric surrounding algae is too hot. ‘The message being sent out to the rest of the world that the water in Florida, the water in Lake O is poison. It’s gotten to a level so high that it’s actually hurting our economy,’ said Watson.” [WPTV-TV, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

Blue-Green Algae Concerns Mount On Caloosahatchee Amid Rainy Season. According to WINK-TV, “Blue-green algae has become a problem recently on the Caloosahatchee River, and it’s taking over some areas of it such as at W.P. Franklin Lock and Dam in Olga. Green and slimy blue-green algae is something many in Southwest Florida have seen in abundance in the past, and what is being seen now might not clear up soon because rainy season is underway. A lot of rain could mean bad news for water quality. We are at a crossroads in May: On one hand, we desperately need the rain, but on the other, rain means more runoff and potentially more Lake Okeechobee discharges, which could pollute our waterways. We spoke to Jay Zaleski at the Davis Boat Ramp in Fort Myers Shores, where he was testing a couple of boats. ‘Just water testing boats and doing some mile-an-hour runs,’ Zaleski explained. Zaleski could see algae lingering in the water there. ‘As soon as I got here, I’ve seen green film on the water,’ Zaleski said. ‘So I asked right away what it was.’” [WINK-TV, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

Water Infrastructure

 

House Republicans Introduce Drinking Water Infrastructure Bill. According to InsideEPA, “Key Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have introduced drinking water infrastructure legislation that includes reauthorization of EPA drinking water programs at existing levels and includes targeted funding for lead service line replacement and other high-profile drinking water infrastructure needs. While the bill’s sponsors are touting the legislation as meeting important infrastructure needs, the authorized funding levels are significantly lower than House Democrats are seeking and are lower for the drinking water state revolving fund (SRF) than a bipartisan bill the Senate approved in April. ‘The Drinking Water Funding for the Future Act will help bring safe drinking water to communities. It supports programs at both the state and federal level to modernize our drinking water infrastructure, protect public health, and target resources to disadvantaged and rural areas,’ Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) the top Republican on the House energy panel’s Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee, said a May 17 statement. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), the top Republican on the full energy committee, added, ‘It will strengthen access to safe drinking water and support America’s ability to modernize our drinking water infrastructure. To win the future, this must be a priority in any real bipartisan infrastructure plan.’” [InsideEPA, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

Flooding

 

Climate Change Added $8B To Superstorm Sandy Damages. According to E&E News, “Climate change made one of the costliest disasters in American history even more expensive, according to new research. Superstorm Sandy caused more than $62 billion in damages across New York, New Jersey and Connecticut in 2012. Around $8 billion of that can be attributed to human-caused sea-level rise, which worsened the storm’s catastrophic floods. That means at least 13% of the storm’s total damages are the direct result of climate change. And that’s the bare minimum, according to lead study author Benjamin Strauss, CEO and chief scientist at the nonprofit Climate Central. The study examines only the added influence of sea-level rise — but ‘there could have been a lot of other ways climate change influenced the storm,’ he noted. The study, published yesterday in the journal Nature Communications, represents a relatively new kind of climate research. These studies link individual weather events to climate change, a science known as event attribution, and then extend that research into the costs of damages associated with those events. Event attribution itself is a rapidly growing sphere of climate science. Attribution studies typically use models to simulate the world with climate change and a hypothetical world without it — a way of understanding how certain kinds of weather events might have been influenced by global warming. Over the past two decades, attribution studies have investigated a wide variety of weather events, from heat waves to wildfires to hurricanes. Dozens of these studies have found that certain events would have been much less severe — or even impossible — in a world without climate change.” [E&E News, 5/19/21 (=)]

 

Study: Climate Change To Blame For $8 Billion Of Hurricane Sandy Damages. According to Grist, “There is a universe in which Hurricane Sandy didn’t create quite so much devastation back in 2012; where the waters, which surged deep into subway tunnels and left parts of New York City in the dark for days, left some parts of the tri-state area unscathed. And that universe, according to scientists, is one without climate change. Superstorm Sandy destroyed half a million homes, killed 159 people, and caused $62.5 billion in damages. And, according to a new study out Tuesday in Nature Communications, 13 percent of its costs can be attributed to human-caused sea-level rise. In other words, without warming temperatures and rising seas, tens of thousands of homes would have gone untouched, and $8.1 billion of damages would not have occurred. ‘Climate change is already hurting us much more than we realize,’ said Benjamin Strauss, chief scientist at the research and communications nonprofit Climate Central and one of the study’s authors. (Strauss was also once a member of Grist’s board of directors.) Linking climate change to disastrous weather events like droughts, hurricanes, or floods is always tricky: Terrible storms happened before people started mucking with the global thermostat, and they’ll continue even if countries start to get their emissions under control. But scientists have long said that warming temperatures can make certain types of weather — heat waves, severe droughts, and floods — more likely or more severe.” [Grist, 5/18/21 (+)]

 

Coastal Lawmakers In Both Parties Condemn Flood Rate Hikes. According to E&E News, “Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) was angry as a Louisiana catfish. He excoriated the Federal Emergency Management Agency yesterday for its plan to raise some flood insurance premiums, asking at a hearing, ‘Have you lost your frigging minds?’ ‘Why are you trying to ram it down everyone’s throat?’ Kennedy said in opening remarks at a virtual hearing of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. ‘You can pretty this up all you want to,’ Kennedy added later. ‘But it just looks to me like a massive rate increase that they don’t want to explain to the policyholders.’ The issue is FEMA’s plan to restructure the premiums it charges 5 million policyholders within the National Flood Insurance Program. It’s an effort to make rates reflect each property’s flood risk. The restructuring, called Risk Rating 2.0, will cause sharp premium increases next year for about 200,000 policyholders, moderate increases for 3.7 million policyholders, and decreases for 1 million policyholders. FEMA’s plan also drew praise yesterday. Floodplain managers, taxpayer groups and flood policy experts all said it would deter risky development by charging higher insurance rates in flood zones. They also said it would end decades of inequitable pricing that penalizes policyholders who own inexpensive homes. ‘Risk Rating 2.0 in some respects helps those people who have policies now and have been paying too much in order to cross-subsidize the higher-priced homes,’ said Velma Smith, a flood policy expert at the Pew Charitable Trusts.” [E&E News, 5/19/21 (=)]

 

New York City Official Blasts FEMA Over Flood Insurance Revamp. According to Politico, “A New York City official on Tuesday warned of potentially grave economic consequences from a planned FEMA overhaul of the National Flood Insurance Program, alerting Washington lawmakers that the agency is failing to consult local governments about looming rate hikes facing homeowners. In testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, New York City director of federal affairs Rebecca Kagan Sternhell said ‘we are very, very concerned’ about the FEMA plan, known as Risk Rating 2.0. She said it could trigger a ‘government-made foreclosure crisis’ in communities where many are struggling financially in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. ‘These rapidly rising premiums will force thousands to make the impossible choice between abandoning their insurance policies or cutting back on household necessities like food, utility payments and school supplies, or even abandoning their homes altogether,’ she said. Why it matters: The FEMA plan at issue would be the biggest change to the government-run flood insurance program in decades. At its heart is an attempt by the agency to more accurately assess specific flood risks for individual properties, rather than setting rates simply based on where a home sits in a broad ‘flood zone.’ The program protects about 5 million policyholders. The changes would mean that hundreds of thousands of policyholders will see their rates increase. FEMA says it would make the program more equitable by ending a dynamic where low-value homes subsidize policies for high-value homes. But the threat of rate increases has triggered fierce criticism from coastal lawmakers who say the agency has failed to be transparent about plans for the revamp, which is set to take effect in October.” [Politico, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

AP | Mich. Flood Victims May Have To Wait For Accountability. According to E&E News, “A lawsuit that accuses the state of Michigan of failing to regulate and enforce safety regulations on a dam that failed, causing an estimated $200 million in damages and destroying 2,500 structures, may not be resolved soon, an attorney representing nearly 300 clients said yesterday. Attorney Ven Johnson joined affected residents for an update on litigation over the Edenville Dam in Midland County days before the anniversary of its failure. That dam’s failure caused another dam to fail just two hours later, and damage was widespread. No lives were lost, but the small village of Sanford lost 10% of its residents and 78% of its businesses, Village Councilman Carl Hamann said. ‘Some of them are coming back and some of them aren’t,’ Hamann said. ‘It’s been very passionate for me because I’ve got a lot of people that I see that went through some real horrendous situations, and I just want people to know that we’re coming back, and we’ll have a celebration this week to commemorate the losses we’ve seen from one year ago.’ Johnson’s law firm in June 2020 sued the ownership of the Edenville Dam, which had a history of safety violations, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Owner Boyce Hydro’s license for the nearly century-old dam was revoked in 2018 for continued failure to address safety regulations, including some measures to withstand floods. The state then took over regulation of the dam. Boyce Hydro was fined $15 million for safety violations by FERC in April, but Boyce was approved for bankruptcy earlier this year. Johnson said he isn’t hopeful for much of a payout from Boyce.” [E&E News, 5/18/21 (=)]

 

 

Please do not respond to this email.

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