SALT LAKE CITY - The American public will have 30 days to comment on the Trump administration's plan to repeal and replace the 2015 Clean Water Rule, once it's published in the federal register.

Jan Goldman-Carter, wetlands and water resources director for the National Wildlife Federation, said the move would remove pollution limits from streams and wetlands that supply a third of the nation's drinking water and which also are home to countless fish and wildlife species.

"The American public has long thought - since the 1972 act - that their water is protected, their wetlands are protected, their streams are protected from pollution," she said. "None of us can really take that for granted anymore."

The Clean Water Rule restored protections under the Clean Water Act for headwaters, streams and wetland habitat that had been left uncertain because of convoluted U.S. Supreme Court rulings. Current Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt has argued that rolling back the measure will provide certainty to farmers and other businesses by returning regulatory authority to states.

Carter said western states rely on clean water to fuel their multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industries. She pointed to polls that show nearly 80 percent of hunters and anglers favor Clean Water Act protections. Dozens of craft brewers also have come out in support of the 2015 measure. Carter said a majority of the nation's stream miles and wetland acres are at stake.

"All of those smaller streams are at significant risk, and then would literally be removed from Clean Water Act protections under the proposal that the administration is headed toward," she said.

According to the Environment America Research and Policy Center, the Clean Water Rule, supported by more than 80 percent of small-business owners, was expected to generate more than $400 million annually in economic benefits. Public comments can be submitted at Regulations.gov.

The EPA plan is online at epa.gov/wotus-rule, and the Environment America brief is at environmentamericacenter.org.


get more stories like this via email

The Blackwater River, which flows more than 30 miles through West Virginia's Allegheny Mountains, ranks among the top 10 most endangered rivers in the nation, according to a new report.

The river is threatened by a proposed four-lane highway construction project which would cross all of its headwater streams.

Judy Rodd, executive director of the group Friends of Blackwater, said Corridor H would involve building a bridge in an area honeycombed with old mines and explains the construction could compromise decades-old work to actively treat the water in the North Fork of the Blackwater impacted by acid mine drainage.

She is worried the highway could be a major environmental setback for the region.

"We expect in the next year to really clean up this river and bring back a trout fishery that used to be there," Rodd explained. "However, if they start building this bridge, they could be opening up old coal mines, old tunnels, which are filled with acid pollution."

Rodd noted a draft environmental impact review of the proposed project, required under federal rules, is expected to be released in the coming months.

Small businesses and the local outdoor recreation economy depend on the scenic views and wilderness surrounding the towns of Thomas and Davis. Rodd argued a four-lane highway, with accompanying construction, light and noise pollution, would drastically alter the landscape.

"It's tranquil, it's dramatic," Rodd observed. "You got bald eagles soaring overhead, you got rushing water, you got fishermen in the Blackwater Falls State Park area."

Olivia Miller, program director for the Highlands Conservancy, said the highway could be rerouted to avoid the Blackwater Falls area, and pointed to an online petition which will allow concerned residents to voice their support for a Northern route to the Federal Highway Administration.

"Right now, we are asking folks to go to the American Rivers website and fill out the action alert to send a letter to highway officials," Miller stressed.

The Blackwater River is home to the endangered Cheat Mountain salamander, eastern brook trout and many other native species.

A new, high-tech wastewater treatment incinerator, used in only a few states, is on the wish list for one Michigan city.

Former state Representative - now Mayor of Warren - Lori Stone is asking her former colleagues in the Environment, Great Lakes and Energy Subcommittee for up to $100 million to upgrade her city's wastewater treatment system.

Warren's current plant was built in 1957 and serves over 137,000 residents. The new incinerator would oxidize organic matter contained in the sludge.

Warren Wastewater Treatment Plant Director Donna Dordeski said the old system is failing.

"One of the hearths of the furnace collapsed and failed, and we couldn't use it any longer until repairs had been completed," said Dordeski. "So, from the beginning - and all the waiting, getting the contractors and repairs completed - it took four months."

Dordeski said they're approaching the final steps of getting permits for the project. And they're still seeking funds, at the state and federal levels - including infrastructure grants that may be available.

The city has around 500 miles of sanitary sewer pipes to ensure its wastewater is treated and disposed of properly. Dordeski said when the current system breaks down, it affects local residents. Trucks have to pick up and carry sludge back and forth through their neighborhoods to nearby landfills.

"That's a 24-hour operation," said Dordeski. "We usually have several trucks. Its a continuous process, five days a week, where we process the sludge and those trucks have to be nearby, available, be loaded, exchanged for a new one. So, that's what has to happen when our incinerator is not operational."

Michigan has 95 wastewater treatment plants.

Warren's mayor believes if the new incinerator is approved, the city will have the opportunity to be the proving ground as a pilot program for this technology.




get more stories like this via email

As Wyoming and other states grapple with shrinking Colorado River water levels - new research pinpoints how much water is being diverted to feed cattle, to sprawling desert cities, and the river's 40 million other stakeholders.

The stakes are high in a time of persistent and widespread drought.

Brian Richter - president of Sustainable Waters - said if Upper Basin states can't deliver the volume of water required under a century-old agreement, Lower Basin states could force the issue with what's known as a compact call.

"The likely result would be that the Upper Basin states, including Wyoming, would be forced to use less water," said Richter, "so that more water could be flowing into Lake Powell and downstream into the Lower Basin."

Researchers found that in Upper Basin states, cattle-feed crops soak up 90% of all irrigation water - which is three times the amount that goes to all cities, towns, commercial and industrial uses combined.

Just 19% of the Colorado River feeds the wetlands and riparian areas wildlife depend on.

Richter noted that cities in Utah and along Colorado's Front Range are at risk because they have very low priority for accessing water under the 1922 Colorado River Compact.

Despite calls for closing off spigots used exclusively for cattle feed, Richter said blaming any single user is counter-productive.

"Farmers and ranchers are growing the things that people want, and are willing to pay a necessary price for," said Richter. "So they are just responding to consumer demands."

He said he believes the new data could be an important tool for Colorado River stakeholders as they work to build a long term plan to bring the total use of water back in balance with what nature provides.

Richter said right now, water use is at least 10% to 15% over that limit.

"We need a long range plan that says how much water do we want to use in the cities? How much water do we want to use on the irrigated farms? How much are the industries going to need?" said Richter. "And until we do that long range plan, we are just going to be reacting to these water shortages on a year-by-year basis."




get more stories like this via email