Tag Archives: Clean Water Act

Pres. Obama has brought back Clean Water Act protections

Crater Lake, deepest lake in the US
Crater Lake, deepest lake in the United States
For decades, conservatives who support profitable development over natural resource protections have been chipping away at the vital protections of the Clean Water Act. But thanks to President Obama, this is no longer the case. The New York Times reports:

President Obama on Wednesday announced a sweeping new clean water regulation meant to restore the federal government’s authority to limit pollution in the nation’s rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands.

The Clean Water Rule, which would apply to about 60 percent of the nation’s water bodies, comes as part of a broader effort by Mr. Obama to use his executive authority to build a major environmental legacy, without requiring new legislation from the Republican-controlled Congress.

In an historic step for the protection of clean water, the Clean Water Rule was finalized today by the US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Army to clearly protect from pollution and degradation the streams and wetlands that form the foundation of our nation’s water resources. The rule is grounded in law and the latest science, and was shaped by public input. It does not create any new permitting requirements for agriculture and maintains all previous exemptions and exclusions.

Jennifer Peters, Water Programs Director for Clean Water Action , writes:

Earlier today I stood on the Anacostia River in Washington, DC with dozens of other clean water supporters to watch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy and Assistant Secretary of the Army Jo-Ellen Darcy sign the final Clean Water Rule. With this historic action, the Obama administration is restoring protection for critical water resources including the drinking water sources for one in three Americans.

For more than 12 years Clean Water Action has been leading the fight to close loopholes in the Clean Water Act that left more than half of our nation’s streams and more than 20 million acres of wetlands vulnerable to polluters and developers. Now these vital water resources are once again clearly protected by the Clean Water Act.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy explains how important this rule is:

For the water in the rivers and lakes in our communities that flow to our drinking water to be clean, the streams and wetlands that feed them need to be clean too. Protecting our water sources is a critical component of adapting to climate change impacts like drought, sea level rise, stronger storms, and warmer temperatures – which is why EPA and the Army have finalized the Clean Water Rule to protect these important waters, so we can strengthen our economy and provide certainty to American businesses.

Background

The health of our rivers, lakes, bays, and coastal waters are impacted by the streams and wetlands where they begin. And, people need clean water for their health too: About 117 million Americans – one in three people – get drinking water from streams that lacked clear protection before the Clean Water Rule.

Protection for many of the nation’s streams and wetlands has been confusing, complex, and time-consuming as the result of Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006. EPA and the Army are taking this action today to provide clarity on protections under the Clean Water Act after receiving requests for over a decade from members of Congress, state and local officials, industry, agriculture, environmental groups, scientists, and the public for a rulemaking.

In developing the rule, the agencies held more than 400 meetings with stakeholders across the country, reviewed over one million public comments, and listened carefully to perspectives from all sides. EPA and the Army also utilized the latest science, including a report summarizing more than 1,200 peer-reviewed, published scientific studies which showed that small streams and wetlands play an integral role in the health of larger downstream water bodies.

Specifically, the Clean Water Rule:

  • Clearly defines and protects tributaries that impact the health of downstream waters. The Clean Water Act protects navigable waterways and their tributaries. The rule says that a tributary must show physical features of flowing water – a bed, bank, and ordinary high water mark – to warrant protection. The rule provides protection for headwaters that have these features and science shows can have a significant connection to downstream waters.
  • Provides certainty in how far safeguards extend to nearby waters. The rule protects waters that are next to rivers and lakes and their tributaries because science shows that they impact downstream waters. The rule sets boundaries on covering nearby waters for the first time that are physical and measurable.
  • Protects the nation’s regional water treasures. Science shows that specific water features can function like a system and impact the health of downstream waters. The rule protects prairie potholes, Carolina and Delmarva bays, pocosins, western vernal pools in California, and Texas coastal prairie wetlands when they impact downstream waters.
  • Focuses on streams, not ditches. The rule limits protection to ditches that are constructed out of streams or function like streams and can carry pollution downstream. So ditches that are not constructed in streams and that flow only when it rains are not covered.
  • Maintains the status of waters within Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems. The rule does not change how those waters are treated and encourages the use of green infrastructure.
  • Reduces the use of case-specific analysis of waters. Previously, almost any water could be put through a lengthy case-specific analysis, even if it would not be subject to the Clean Water Act. The rule significantly limits the use of case-specific analysis by creating clarity and certainty on protected waters and limiting the number of similarly situated water features.

Please sign on to thank President Obama for standing up for clean water!

Terrible destruction: Appalachian mountaintop removal mining

While residents of New Jersey and Pennsylvania deal with the health threat presented by fracking, people in the Appalachias continue to wage their long and mighty struggle to preserve their health and economy in the face of the ongoing destruction visited upon them by mountaintop mining, a practice scientists have called, “pervasive and irreversable.”

The New York times describes mountaintop removal as

…a radical form of strip mining that has left over 2,000 miles of streams buried and over 500 mountains destroyed. According to several recent studies, people living near surface mining sites have a 50 percent greater risk of fatal cancer and a 42 percent greater risk of birth defects than the general population.

Foto by Damon Winter/The New York Times
Ryan Massey, 7, shows his caps. Dentists near Charleston, W.Va., say pollutants in drinking water have damaged residents’ teeth. Nationwide, polluters have violated the Clean Water Act more than 500,000 times.

When Robert Kennedy, Jr. came to Bergen Community College in Paramus, New Jersey and spoke about his fight to halt this practice, my younger son, Ari, a high school junior and I were there to hear him. Kennedy is an environmental lawyer, and years ago he fought to stop mountaintop removal mining on the premise that it violates the Clean Water Act. Kennedy won his court battle, but lawyers for the opposition filed a lawsuit disputing the meaning of the word “fill” relative to the practice of dumping left-over sludge into streams and rivers in that region, claiming that the sludge did not “fill” up the waterways since there was still water in them after the dumping occurred, and got permission to resume their destruction of nature and of people’s lives.

The Obama Administration is working to improved the lives of Appalachia’s residents by establishing a ban on mountaintop mining, but, big monied interests have the sympathy of the courts. On July 31, a judge overthrew new protections put in place by the federal Environmental Protection Agency, and ruled that mountaintop mining operations they had blocked, could resume. This type of favoritism is not new.

Robert Kennedy Jr.’s fight agains the devastation

The Appalachian Center reviews The Last Mountain, a documentary featuring Kennedy which addresses this issue

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – the best national advocate the anti-mountaintop removal movement has – is an effective narrator and driving force throughout the film. He puts the destruction and willful violation of laws meant to curb such environmental destruction into passionate, thoughtful words.

For instance, standing atop a “reclaimed” mountain with mine safety consultant Jack Spadaro, Kennedy looks around at a “forest” that is nothing but scrub grass and picks up a chunk of rock that’s supposed to count as topsoil. He says, “The extraordinary thing about this is how many lies they have to tell to make this whole fiction work. They have to say this is a forest. They have to say this is soil. And the amazing thing is how many people believe them.”

Kennedy was also powerful when addressing one of the key areas of conflict among the residents of Appalachia: the notion that protecting the environment must come at the sacrifice of jobs. As Kennedy says in a discussion with Coal Association President Bill Raney, most of the coal jobs in Appalachia have been lost to mechanization, not to environmental regulations. Coal companies are extracting as much coal as ever with a fraction of the work force.

His explanation of idea of “the commons” and how the notion that America’s water and environment are owned by us all has been eroded is also very compelling.

Congressional Bills and The Law

Congressman Steve Rothman wrote to me about bills in Congress on both sides of the mountaintop mining issue. Democrats want to stop it, but Republicans want to prohibit any regulations of the coal mining industry. When people tell you there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans, remember this fact. Rothman writes,
Like you, I believe that communities need to be protected from hazardous emissions and destructive practices that jeopardize their health and that of the surrounding ecosystem. As you know, H.R. 5959 was introduced by Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) on June 19, 2012. If enacted, this legislation would require a study of the potential harm of mountaintop removal coal mining on the health of individuals in surrounding communities. If mountaintop mining is found to be harmful to health, a moratorium would be placed on mountaintop mining until it was deemed to be safe. This bill is currently pending before the House Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce. The environment and the people of the Appalachians need to be protected from careless mining practices.

You may also be interested to know that, H.R. 3049, the so-called “Coal Miner Employment and Domestic Energy Infrastructure Protection Act,” was introduced by Representative Bill Johnson (R-OH) on November 14, 2011. If enacted, this irresponsible bill would amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act to prohibit the Department of Interior from regulating the coal mining industry, overturning 35 years of established precedent and putting our health and waterways at risk. I strongly oppose H.R. 3049 and any other legislation that would work to weaken the ability of federal agencies to regulate polluting energy industries and toxic run off into our rivers and lakes. This legislation is pending before the House Committee on Natural Resources.