#RoaringForkRiver runs orange amid reservoir construction — #Aspen Daily News

Lincoln Creek was yellow as it flowed into Grizzly Reservoir in September 2022. A report from the Environmental Protection Agency says metals contamination in the creek and reservoir is a result of natural causes, not a nearby mine. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Aspen Daily News website (Austin Corona). Here’s an excerpt:

July 17, 2024

Ongoing construction at the Grizzly Reservoir turned the Roaring Fork River orange as it ran through Aspen on Tuesday. The discoloration had remained in the upper valley as of Tuesday afternoon, with some cloudiness visible as far downstream as Woody Creek. The river appeared clear at Old Snowmass.ย  The city of Aspen said in a Facebook post that its municipal drinking water is safe to drink. Aspen takes its drinking water from Castle and Maroon creeks, not the Roaring Fork. The only drinking water intake located directly on the Roaring Fork is in Glenwood Springs. Nonetheless, county officials have warned recreators to be cautious when playing in the river and avoid ingesting river water. The county also warned against allowing pets in the river. A county alert on Tuesday said the river could appear muddy and discolored over the next few days.ย Sediment from Grizzly Reservoir likely contains high loads of copper, aluminum, iron and other minerals. The reservoir is located on Lincoln Creek, where the Environmental Protection Agency discovered high metals contamination in 2023 (the contamination was found to be naturally occurring). After leaving Grizzly, the creek flows into the Roaring Fork River roughly 10 miles upstream of Aspen.

Ordway, Colorado-based Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Company, which maintains and operates Grizzly, is installing a liner on the reservoir dam this summer. The company is draining the reservoir as part of the project, which has apparently allowed sediment from the bottom of the reservoir to flow downstream in Lincoln Creek…Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal began draining the reservoir in late June, sending the drainage water through a tunnel under the continental divide. Toward the end of the process, the water level dropped below the tunnelโ€™s intake, causing project managers to send the remaining reservoir contents down Lincoln Creek.

Twin Lakes collection system

#NewMexico looking to recoup costs from #PFAS damages at military bases: A federal rule change means officials are seeking a judge to award monetary damages and power to compel cleanup — SourceNM.com

Contractors move equipment as part of a 2021 study of removing per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) from the aquifer under Cannon Air Force base, near Clovis, New Mexico. New Mexico asked a judge to require the federal government to pay current and future damages from PFAS in court documents filed Monday, July 8, 2024. (Courtesy U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Maxwell Daigle)

Click the link to read the article on the SourceNM.com website (Danielle Prokop):

July 10, 2024

New Mexico requested a judge order the federal government to pay the past and future costs of cleaning up โ€˜forever chemicalsโ€™ from military bases across the state, per court documents filed Monday.

The costs to remove the toxic chemicals called per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) grows into the billions and cleanup efforts stretch for years.

New Mexico officials argue the federal government needs to be accountable for PFAS contamination costs at Cannon Air Force Base, Holloman Air Force Base, Kirtland Air Force Base, White Sands Missile Range and Fort Wingate.

Now, after a federal rules change on Monday, they hope it will allow the state to recover damages and future cleanup costs for PFAS contamination left by the U.S. Department of Defense at military bases across New Mexico.

โ€œWe applaud the EPAโ€™s listing of certain PFAS, or โ€˜forever chemicals,โ€™ as hazardous substances under the Superfund statute,โ€ New Mexico Attorney General Raรบl Torrez said. โ€œThis enables us to pursue monetary damages and costs at federal facilities, as stated in our amended complaint.โ€

Torrez said the change means a federal law requiring polluters to pay to clean up contamination now applies to PFAS.

The designation of PFAS as a hazardous substance is separate from the EPAโ€™s efforts to remove the forever chemicals in drinking water.

The filing makes the federal government liable to pay for current and future costs, repair damages to water, land, air and address impacts to wildlife and the stateโ€™s economy.

โ€œThis opens the door for us to really help communities like Clovis who have been suffering for far too long with this threat, if not actuality of PFAS,โ€ New Mexico Environment Secretary James Kenney said.

He told Source New Mexico that if a judge grants the request, the timeline for payment would be uncertain, but pointed to a similar process on the Gold King Mine, which took several years.

The state has spent an estimated $8 million to $10 million on technical, legal costs and clean-up at Cannon and Holloman, Kenney said, but the estimates for cleanup at all sites will be expensive.

โ€œWe could easily be looking at up to 150 million, if not more, especially once we understand the magnitude of the damages,โ€ Kenney said.

He said itโ€™s unclear when the state will have an estimated cost of damages available.

โ€œIt depends if we have cooperation by the United States,โ€ Kenney said. โ€œI would say to be five and-a-half years in, and to be where we are today, does not scream โ€“ to me โ€“ cooperation.โ€

As part of those costs, New Mexico is looking to recoup at least $850,000 for the removal of thousands of PFAS-contaminated cow carcasses from a dairy farm next to Cannon, another $1.3 million for investigation contamination around bases, according to the complaint.

The filing amends a five-year old civil case before the federal District of South Carolina Court. That case combined 500 claims from across the country seeking damages from contamination caused by the use of a fire-fighting foam containing PFAS. The case has been in a discovery phase since 2020.

Specifically, New Mexico said the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force broke state law by failing to contain or โ€œaddress contaminants, hazardous wastes, and hazardous substances,โ€ listing how PFAS was found in groundwater and surrounding environment.

The original 2019 complaint only focused on Cannon and Holloman Air Force bases, but the amended complaint filed Monday expands to five sites.

New Mexico argued in their 65-page motion that while the federal government has acknowledged that PFAS poses โ€œan imminent and substantial danger,โ€ at Cannon, that they have failed to take action to clean up.

The complaint asked that the court grant the state the power to direct the federal government to โ€œto take all steps necessaryโ€ on clean-up.

The U.S. Department of Defense deferred comment to the U.S. Department of Justice Tuesday.

New Mexico is embroiled in a second, separate federal lawsuit with the U.S. Department of Defense over PFAS, which is still in mediation, and is not part of the effort to recoup damages.

Ecuador court case on the rights of the Machangara river — Eco Jurisprudence Monitor

View of Quito, Ecuador from El Panecillo. By Diego Delso, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42189280

Click the link to read the summary on the Eco Jurisprudence Monitor website:

Summary

On July 5 2024, a court in Quito, Ecuador ruled that the Machรกngara River, which runs through the city, is a subject of rights. The Machรกngara River case was filed as a Protection Action by the Kitu Karu Indigenous people to address the serious pollution of the river. The fundamental rights that have been affected by this situation include the rights of nature, the right to water, a healthy environment, sanitation and health, as well as the right to the city. The court recognized that since the river is alive, it is subject to rights under the Constitution of Ecuador, which establishes that nature possesses a right to protection, promotion, and restoration. The Constitutional Court of Ecuador previously recognized that rivers are protected under Chapter 7 of the Constitution in 2022.

The judge determined that the Municipality of Quito had breeched the rights of the Machรกngara River by failing to treat 98% of wastewater that runs into the river from the municipality. As a result of this decision, the judge ordered the implementation of a decontamination plan, following the precedents established by the Monjas River ruling in the north of the city. This plan must include specific measures to reduce the levels of contamination, in addition to considering alternative and sustainable solutions for water treatment. The Municipality of Quito will have to manage the available resources and request financial support from the central government to expand these projects. This ruling must be complied with immediately and the municipality must start implementing the necessary measures for the decontamination of the Machรกngara River without delay.

The municipality filed an appeal against this decision and the litigation will continue in the Provincial Court of Justice.

Toxic blue-green algae shuts down two Denver-area lakes indefinitely: Rocky Mountain Lake and Lake Arbor are closed due to blue-green algae that can sicken swimmers, kill pets — The #Denver Post

Graphic credit: Climate Central

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Lauren Penington). Here’s an excerpt:

Rocky Mountain Lake โ€” located at 3301 West 46th Avenue in Denver โ€” closed Thursday after recent testing found toxic levels of algae around the shoreline, theย Denver Department of Public Health and Environment said in a statementย on social media…Recent routine testing at Lake Arbor in Arvada also revealed blue-green algae was approaching toxic levels, forcing the city to close the lake indefinitely Thursday,ย Arvada officials said in a news release

Theย number of algae blooms will increase as Coloradoโ€™s climate becomes warmer, according to previous reporting. The blue-green algae found in the lakes are naturally occurring and an important part of the ecosystem, but the blooms can produce toxins if they grow big enough. Harmful algae looks like thick pea soup or spilled paint with a green, red, gold or turquoise color. They also often have foam or scum.

Toxic-algae blooms appeared in Steamboat Lake summer of 2020. The lake shut down for two weeks after harmful levels of a toxin produced by the blue-green algae were found in the water. As climate change continues, toxic blooms and summer shutdowns of lakes are predicted to become more common. Photo credit: Julie Arington/Aspen Journalism

Abandoned mines cover the West — Jonathan P. Thompson (@HighCountryNews)

Berkeley Pit and Yankee Doodle tailings pond: Butte, Montana. By NASA – http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_697.html, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20856275

Click the link to read the article on the High Country News website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

July 1, 2024

In 1953, the Anaconda Minerals Company leased nearly 8,000 acres of land in central New Mexico from the Pueblo of Laguna to mine uranium for nuclear weapons. The company gouged and blasted away at the earth, constructing the three massive holes known as the Jackpile-Paguate Mine.ย 

The Jackpile-Paguate became the worldโ€™s largest open-pit uranium mine, producing some 24 million tons of ore. It employed hundreds of Laguna Pueblo members and transformed the communityโ€™s economy. But mining companies and regulators gave little thought to the safety of miners and nearby residents. Miners were exposed to radioactive and toxic heavy metals daily, even spending their lunch breaks sitting on piles of radioactive ore. Blasting sent tremors through the puebloโ€™s adobe homes, and a cloud of poisonous dust drifted into the village of Paguate, just 2,000 feet from the mine, coating fruit trees, gardens, corn and meat that was set out to dry. 

In 1982, uranium prices plummeted, and Atlantic Richfield, Anacondaโ€™s successor, shut up shop, conducted a cursory reclamation and walked away.

Aerial view of Laguna Pueblo, Rio San Jose, and Interstate 40 in New Mexico. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

But the pollution didnโ€™t end when the Jackpile closed. A toxic plume continued to spread through groundwater aquifers, and the Rio Paguate, a Rio Grande tributary, remains contaminated more than a decade after the facility became a Superfund site, despite millions of dollars in cleanup work. And Laguna residents and former mine workers still suffer lingering health problems โ€” cancer, respiratory illnesses and kidney disease โ€”  from the mine and its pollution. 

There are at least 250,000 abandoned mining โ€œfeatures,โ€ including at least 4,000 involving uranium, scattered across the Western U.S. โ€” mines, waste piles, prospect holes and other infrastructure. Some are harmless and invisible to the untrained eye. Others continue to threaten the environment, people and wildlife, even after millions of dollars have been spent attempting to clean them up. Mining is hard โ€” but healing the earth and the health of the communities affected by it is immeasurably harder.ย  [ed. emphasis mine]

Data visualization by Jennifer Di-Majo/High Country News

Data visualization by Jennifer Di-Majo/High Country News

Data visualization by Jennifer Di-Majo/High Country News

โถ The Iron Mountain Mine operated from the 1870s until it was abandoned in the 1960s. It was listed as a Superfund site in the 1980s and cleanup continues, including round-the-clock treatment of draining, heavily contaminated water so acidic it can devour a metal shovel blade in less than 24 hours.

โท Cold War-era uranium mining companies left behind more than 100 waste piles contaminated with radium and heavy metals in and around the Navajo Nation community of Cove. This March, some 50 years after mining ended, it was designated as the Lukachukai Mountains Mining District Superfund site. 

โธ The Formosa Mine โ€” shuttered and abandoned in the early 1990s โ€” discharges millions of gallons of acid mine drainage into the Umpqua River each year. It was designated a Superfund site in 2007, and cleanup efforts received additional Infrastructure Act funding in 2021. 

โน Mining ended and groundwater pumps shut down at theย Berkeley Pitย in the early 1980s, allowing the massive hole to fill with acidic, heavy metal-laden water. More than 3,000 snow geese died in 2016 after landing on the Berkeley โ€œlake,โ€ which is part of the Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area Superfund site.

โบ The Bonita Peak Mining District Superfund site โ€” nearly 50 abandoned mines and related features โ€” was designated following the 2015 Gold King Mine blowout, when some 3 million gallons of acid mine drainage spewed into the Animas River drainage. 

โป Mining occurred at the Questa Molybdenum Mine from 1920 until 2014, contaminating soil, surface- and groundwater. A water treatment plant operates in perpetuity to keep contaminants from streams at a cost of more than $5 million annually. 

โผ Thousands of uranium mines were abandoned after the Cold War in the Lisbon Valley, White Canyon, and Uravan Mineral Belt in Utah and Colorado. (The USGS labels many of this areaโ€™s uranium sites as โ€œunknown.โ€)

Data visualization by Jennifer Di-Majo/High Country News

Hardrock mining introduces oxygen and water to sulfide-bearing rocks, and the resulting reaction forms sulfuric acid. The now-acidic water dissolves and picks up naturally occurring metals such as zinc, cadmium, lead, arsenic, mercury and even uranium, ultimately depositing these harmful minerals in streams or lakes long after mining ceases. Acid mine drainage is miningโ€™s most insidious, pervasive and persistent environmental hazard. 

Data visualization by Jennifer Di-Majo/High Country News

SOURCES: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Government Accountability Office, Congressional Research Service, University of New Mexico Native American Budget & Policy Institute, Mining and Environmental Health Disparities in Native American Communities, by Johnnye Lewis et al.

We welcome reader letters. Email High Country News at editor@hcn.org or submit a letter to the editor. See our letters to the editor policy.

This article appeared in the July 2024 print edition of the magazine with the headline โ€œAbandoned mines cover the West.โ€

Column:ย With its โ€˜Chevronโ€™ ruling, the Supreme Court claims to be smarter than scientific experts — The Los Angeles Times

The U.S. Supreme Court Building, current home of the Supreme Court, which opened in 1935. By Senate Democrats – 7W9A9324, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=92666722

Click the link to read the article on The Los Angeles Times website (Michael Hiltzik). Here’s an excerpt:

July 2, 2024

The case concerned a 40-year-old precedent known as โ€œChevron deference.โ€ That doctrine held that when a federal law is ambiguous, the courts must defer to the interpretations offered by the agencies the law covers โ€” as long as those interpretations are โ€œreasonable.โ€ On Monday,ย the court discarded Chevron deference. This may sound like an abstruse legalistic squabble, but it has massive implications for Americans in all walks of life. It could subject agency decisions on scientifically based issues such asย clean air and water regulations and healthcare standardsย to endless nitpicking by a federal judiciary that already has displayed an alarming willingness toย dismiss scientific expertise out of hand,ย in favor of partisan or religious ideologies. The ruling amounts to an apogee of arrogance on the part of the Supreme Courtโ€™s conservative majority, wrote Justice Elena Kagan in a dissent joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. But itโ€™s not a new development.

โ€œThe Court has substituted its own judgment on workplace health for that of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration,โ€ Kagan wrote; โ€œits own judgment on climate change for that of the Environmental Protection Agency; and its own judgment on student loans for that of the Department of Education…. In one fell swoop, the majority today gives itself exclusive power over every open issue โ€” no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden.โ€

Conservatives have had it in for the Chevron doctrine
for a long time; given their current majority on the court, the doctrineโ€™s death has been a foregone conclusion, awaiting only the appearance of a suitable case to use as a bludgeon. Indeed, the majority was so impatient to kill the doctrine that the courtโ€™s six conservatives chose to do so by using a case that actually is moot. That case arose from a lawsuit brought by the herring industry, which objected to a government policy requiring herring boats to pay for government observers placed on board to make sure the boats were complying with their harvesting permits. The rule was imposed under the Trump administration, but it wasย canceled in April 2023 by Biden, who repaid the money that had been taken from the boat owners โ€” so thereโ€™s nothing left in it for the court to rule on.

Interestingly, Chevron deference was not always seen as a bulwark protecting progressive regulatory policies from right-wing judges, as itโ€™s viewed today. At its inception, it was seen in exactly the opposite way โ€” as giving conservative policies protection from progressive-minded judges.

A String of Supreme Court Decisions Hits Hard at Environmental Rules — The New York Times #ActOnClimate #WOTUS

Click the link to read the article on The New York Times website (Coral Davenport). Here’s an excerpt:

June 29, 2024

This term, the courtโ€™s conservative supermajority handed down several rulings that chip away at the power of many federal agencies. But the environmental agency has been under particular fire, the result of a series of cases brought since 2022 by conservative activists who say that E.P.A. regulations have driven up costs for industries ranging from electric utilities to home building. Those arguments have resonated among justices skeptical of government regulation. On Friday [June 28, 2024], the court ended the use of what is known as the Chevron doctrine, a cornerstone of administrative law for 40 years that said that courts should defer to government agencies to interpret unclear laws. That decision threatens the authority of many federal agenciesย to regulate the environment and also health care, workplace safety, telecommunications, the financial sector and more…

But more remarkable have been several decisions by the court to intervene to stop environmental regulations before they were decided by lower courts or even before they were implemented by the executive branch. On Thursday, the court said the E.P.A. could not limit smokestack pollution that blows across state borders under a measure known as the โ€œgood neighbor rule.โ€ In that case, the court took the surprising step of weighing in while litigation was still pending at the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Iron Fen. Photo credit from report “A Preliminary Evaluation of Seasonal Water Levels Necessary to Sustain Mount Emmons Fen: Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests,” David J. Cooper, Ph.D, December 2003.

The court also acted in an unusually preliminary fashion last year when itย struck down a proposed E.P.A. ruleย known as Waters of the United States that was designed to protect millions of acres of wetlands from pollution, acting before the regulation had even been made final…Similarly, in a 2022 challenge to an E.P.A. climate proposal known as the Clean Power Plan, the courtย sharply limited the agencyโ€™s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissionsย from power plants, even though that rule had not yet taken effect.

That kind of intervention has little in the way of precedent. Usually, the Supreme Court is the last venue to hear a case, after arguments have been made and opinions have been rendered by lower courts…Collectively, those decisions now endanger not only many existing environmental rules, but may prevent future administrations from writing new ones, experts say…

For example, the courtโ€™s decision to curtail the E.P.A.โ€™s authority to regulate wetlands and so-called ephemeral streams means that aboutย half the nationโ€™s wetlands could be polluted or paved without federal penalty, potentially harming thousands of species of plants and animals. In addition,ย new research has shown that the courtโ€™s decisionย also makes major American river basins vulnerable to pollution.

How conservative judges secured a โ€˜chain sawโ€™ to derail environmental rules — The Washington Post

Coyote Gulch’s Leaf charging at Red Rock Hyundai in Grand Junction May 23, 2023. The Biden administrationโ€™s effort to boost sales of electric vehicles while cutting emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles could face a tough test in the courts

Click the link to read the article on The Washington Post website (Maxine Joselow). Here’s an excerpt:

July 1, 2024

Three years ago,ย President Bidenย promisedย to โ€œdeliver a whole-of-government approach to the climate crisis,โ€ including by makingย half of all new cars electricby 2030. Now the Supreme Court has imperiled that broad agenda โ€” and possibly other climate and environment rules for decades to come. In recent rulings, particularly two last week, the high court added obstacles tothe governmentโ€™s ability to regulate air pollution, water pollution and the greenhouse gases that are heating Earth. The decisions could empower conservative judges on lower courts throughout the country to block even more environmental regulations โ€” not only under Biden but presidents who follow him. The recent rulings are โ€œespecially valuable for conservative judges who are inclined towards striking down [environmental] regulations,โ€ said Sam Sankar, senior vice president for programs at the environmental law firm Earthjustice. โ€œThey had a knife before; they have a chain saw now.โ€

On Thursday, the Supreme Courtย put on hold the Environmental Protection Agencyโ€™s planย for cutting industrial air pollution that wafts across state lines. On Friday, the justices overturned the so-calledย Chevronย doctrine,ย severely limiting the power of federal agenciesย to regulate fundamental aspects of American life, including the environment. And court rulings in 2022 and 2023 targeted the EPAโ€™s authority toย curb greenhouse gasesย and toย protect wetlands from runoff. Together, the decisions underscore how a multiyear campaign by industry and conservative groups is successfully weakening the power of the administrative state, and the EPA in particular.

In #Colorado, new scrutiny and possible fixes coming for drinking water in mobile home parks: State officials got a head start on a new testing program at one community in Western Colorado — The Water Desk

New Castle back in the day via the Red Slipper Diary

Click the link to read the article on The Water Desk website (Eleanor Bennett):

May 16, 2024

In western communities, mobile home parks provide a more affordable place to live, but residents often face problems with their drinking water. 

In Colorado, a new law gives the state authority to test water quality in these communities and force owners to fix any issues.

The state plans to start testing the water at hundreds of parks across the state this summer. Officials have already gotten a head start at one community in Western Colorado that helped spur the legislation.

Apple Tree Park sits on the banks of the Colorado River just across from the town of New Castle. 

Silvia Barragรกn moved to the park in 2015. Her street is lined with trees and she has a big yard with a garden. 

โ€œSome people might look at this as just a trashy mobile park, but itโ€™s not,โ€ Barragรกn said. โ€œItโ€™s a nice, nice neighborhood. Thereโ€™s a lot of kids in the summer running around and thereโ€™s a lot of elderly people that have lived here most of their lives.โ€

Barragรกn is originally from Michoacรกn, Mexico, and she raised her family in western Colorado. Her experience at Apple Tree Park over the last decade has mostly been positive. 

โ€œSince I moved here, I felt peaceful and at home,โ€ Barragรกn said. โ€œMy neighbors are great neighbors and I havenโ€™t had any issues in Apple Tree except the water.โ€

For years, Barragรกn and her neighbors have been speaking out about the discolored water that comes out of their taps. 

โ€œItโ€™s kind of brownish, yellowish. Itโ€™s kind of nasty,โ€ she said. โ€œItโ€™s like river water, like if Iโ€™m camping and I go get river water, thatโ€™s what it looks like.โ€

Barragรกn only wears black now because the water stains her clothes and laundry, and it ruins her appliances.

It has an unpleasant smell and taste, so she fills up water jugs at the local grocery store.

โ€œI buy water,โ€ Barragรกn said. โ€œI buy water for cooking, I buy water for drinking, I buy water for the dogs.โ€ 

When the state tested the water at Apple Tree Park, they found it meets federal EPA standards under theย Safe Drinking Water Act, passed in 1974, but it has higher than normal levels of heavy metals such as iron and manganese. The park is supplied by groundwater wells, and is outside the limits of the nearby town of New Castle, which draws the majority of its drinking supply from a nearby creek.

Joel Minor used to manage the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environmentโ€™s environmental justice program, and said Apple Treeโ€™s situation โ€” of heavy metals showing up in underground well water โ€” is pretty common. 

โ€œBecause of the taste and color and odor of the water, it can be unpleasant to drink and can cause other issues,โ€ Minor said. โ€œWe recognize that that creates challenges for park residents and may require them to spend money on things like bottled water or repairing or replacing appliances.โ€

While Apple Treeโ€™s overall water system meets federal health standards for drinking, a recent round of testing this winter found that a few samples out of the 200 taken had manganese levels that were above the EPAโ€™s health advisory for infants. High levels of manganese can negatively impact babiesโ€™ brain development.

When the state got the test results back in February, they worked with the park ownerโ€”Utah-based company Investment Property Group (IPG)โ€”to notify residents and local health officials about the issue. 

โ€œWhat we want folks to know is to be cautious about using tap water from the park for making formula for infants under the age of six-months-old,โ€ Minor said. โ€œThese particular locations where this occurred seem to be spots where maybe the water isnโ€™t being flushed quite as well.โ€

With the passage of the Mobile Home Park Water Quality Act in 2023, the stateโ€™s been working with IPG to do more regular testing and to fix the water issues. The company didnโ€™t respond to multiple requests for comment. 

In 2020, IPG bought the mobile home park from the local Talbott family, which had owned the park since its inception. The company has properties across 13 states, including more than 110 mobile home parks, according to the Mobile Home Park Home Owners Allegianceโ€™s online database.

The state has been having regular meetings with IPG, Garfield County health officials, local advocacy groups and park residents to come up with a variety of ways to improve the water. 

โ€œOne key short-term solution that weโ€™ve been working with the park on is flushing the water system more frequently, which can help remove iron and other metals that have accumulated in the system,โ€ Minor said. โ€œWeโ€™ve also worked with that same coalition to put on an informational webinar about how to do in-home flushing for appliances like water heaters and pipes so that residents are also able to flush their own water systems.โ€

Another short-term fix already underway is putting in water stations where residents can fill up jugs for cooking and drinking. 

The state is providing direct funding to the park in the form of an assistance grant to help install these stations. One has already been installed at a local school across from the mobile home park thatโ€™s also owned by IPG, and the company plans to install a second by early June in a communal area near the entrance to the park. 

โ€œThat was something we came up with based on feedback from park residents that folks are having to drive across the river and across the highway into New Castle to fill water jugs for drinking and other purposes,โ€ Minor said. โ€œSo these are key short-term solutions, but we recognize they donโ€™t address the root cause of the problem.โ€

To address the root cause, the state is proposing bigger engineering solutions like installing a filtration system, or even connecting Apple Tree to a municipal water supply. 

But Apple Tree is just one of about 750 mobile home parks in Colorado. The new legislation gives the state authority to test, but the full scope of just how bad water quality could be at those parks, and the costs to fix the various causes could easily begin to rise as testing ramps up.

There is additional funding available for park owners to make these system-wide changes, and if they donโ€™t, the state could impose fines until the problem is fixed. 

โ€œWe are really trying to prioritize solutions that wonโ€™t increase rent for park residents by either looking at lower cost options or ways of getting outside funding that can ensure that some of those costs donโ€™t get passed on to residents,โ€ Minor said. โ€œWe know that passing along the cost could potentially make the equity challenges that are already at play worse if residents have to pay more for their water bills or their space rents.โ€

Alex Sanchez leads the Glenwood Springs-based Latine advocacy nonprofit Voces Unidas, which worked with Apple Tree residents and Democratic Colorado House Representative Elizabeth Velasco of Glenwood Springs to pass the water quality legislation. 

โ€œWeโ€™re not opposed to getting state dollars and federal dollars to be able to support or incentivize some of these solutions,โ€ Sanchez said. โ€œBut ultimately, we believe itโ€™s the responsibility of those corporate owners who have been making a lot of profit off the backs of hardworking folks without having access to, you know, quality water, potentially sidewalks, infrastructure and other benefits that many of us take for granted.โ€ย 

For Sanchez and Voces Unidas, the new law is just the first step in addressing a widespread environmental justice issue โ€” many people living in these communities have lower incomes, donโ€™t speak English as a first language, donโ€™t have access to resources to file complaints, and are Latines or other people of color. 

โ€œThe issue is not just contained to one or two parks. Something is happening in these mobile home park communities and because theyโ€™re not regulated, thereโ€™s not a lot of accountability,โ€ Sanchez said. โ€œMany of these communities across Colorado are owned by corporations that are from out of state.โ€ 

In a recent statewide poll in Colorado, Voces Unidas found 41% of mobile home park residents surveyed did not trust or drink their water. 

Since 2020, the stateโ€™s health and environment department has received 66 formal water quality complaints from 42 parks. State officials estimate that it will take them four years to test the water at all of Coloradoโ€™s roughly 750 parks. 

For her part, Apple Tree Park resident Silvia Barragรกn is glad that her community is at the top of the stateโ€™s list. 

โ€œWhen I bought this place, I thought I was gonna retire here,โ€ Barragรกn said. โ€œSo I would be sad to think that I need to buy another place just because, you know, I havenโ€™t seen any change.โ€

Barragรกn hopes the new legislation will speed things up, but she doesnโ€™t know how much longer she can wait for clean water. 

This story was produced by Aspen Public Radio, in partnership with The Water Desk, an independent initiative of the University of Colorado Boulderโ€™s Center for Environmental Journalism. 

2024 #COleg: A #Colorado Program the Colorado Way — Audubon Rockies

Photo credit: Audubon Rockies

Click the link to read the release on the Audubon Rockies websiite (Abby Burk):

On May 29, 2024, Colorado Governor Jared Polis stated โ€œWater is life in Colorado and today I was proud to protect our water resources that are essential for our agriculture, our economy, and our way of life.โ€ That day, he signed HB24-1379 Regulate Dredge & Fill Activities in State Waters, making Colorado the first state in the nation to pass legislation that addresses the stream and wetlands protection gap created by the May 2023 Sackett vs. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decision. It took a lot of hard work, long days, collaboration, substantive and technical outreach, leaning into complex topics, working through misinformation, and dealing with a competing bill. We had to make some compromises, but ultimately, we came together in the โ€œColorado wayโ€ on a new law that works for Coloradoโ€™s unique intermountain waterways and protects wetlands and streams that were put at risk of losing protection by the Sackett decision.

Audubon convened and facilitated conversations to support consensus around a good solution and worked to depoliticize wetland and stream protections. After all, they support all of us. Audubon celebrates our network who submitted 2,248 comments to legislators in support of creating a robust Colorado Dredge and Fill Program that covers all streams and wetlands. Audubon members also made more than 60 contributions to the “What’s Your Wetland?” storymap in support of HB24-1379. Audubon celebrates our critical partnerships with the Protect Colorado Waters Coalition and the Colorado Healthy Headwaters Working Group as we worked together to preserve our critical needs through a storied and challenging process.

The new lawโ€”led by Speaker of the House Julie McCluskie (D-Dillon), Senator Dylan Roberts (D-Frisco), Representative Karen McCormick (D-Longmont), and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s (CDPHE) Director of the Water Quality Control Division, Nicole Rowanโ€”is excellent news for Colorado’s birds and communities that critically depend upon clean water. It helps lead the way for other states in their pursuit of wetland and stream protections in the post-Sackett landscape.

House Bill 24-1379 was one of two proposed bills that sought to address the regulatory gap created by the Sackett decision. Senate Bill 24-127, sponsored by Senator Barbara Kirkmeyer (R-Brighton), was the second. Due to the two competing approaches of the two bills, consensus was found after a wild ride of public engagement, testimonies, intense negotiations, and 29 amendments. Notably, Senator Kirkmeyer became a co-sponsor to the amended and final HB24-1379 within the last week of the legislative session, winning bipartisan backing.

Why Was a โ€œColorado Programโ€ Necessary to Protect Wetlands and Streams? 

Wetlands and stream systems are essential for birds and provide ecosystem services such as water purification, wildlife habitat, and flood, wildfire, and drought mitigation. Colorado has lost about 50 percent of its wetlands due to development since statehood, so protecting what remains is imperative. 

The Clean Water Actย  provides authorities for the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to define and regulate different types of water bodies. This includes the 404 Permit Program, which determines which wetlands must be regulated and which kinds of dredge-and-fill activities must be permitted for specific waterways.ย The U.S. Supreme Court decision inย Sackett v. EPAย dramatically narrowed the scope of these regulations and undercut waters subject to federal regulation and placed an estimated 60 percent of Colorado wetlands at risk of losing protections. Moreover, all ephemeral streams and a significant portion of intermittent streamsย in every area of the state would have lost protection if a new state program was not adopted. The United States Geological Survey’s National Hydrography Dataset* (as reported inย Colorado’s 2022ย Sackettย Amicus Brief) estimates that 24 percent of Colorado’s streams are ephemeral and 45 percent are intermittent** meaning over two-thirds of Colorado’s waters are temporary and lack year-round flow. ย 

The Sackett decision opened the doors for development to occur next to and on top of wetlands on private land, so long as there is no surface water connection between them and flowing waterways. House Bill 24-1379 was drafted to moderate the pendulum swings in federal wetland and stream protection levels in Colorado by creating a predictable State permitting and protections program that would work for Coloradoโ€™s intermountain semi-arid waterways.

What Does the New Law do for Coloradoโ€™s Wetlands, Streams, and Restoration Projects?ย 

The new state Dredge and Fill Permit Program created by HB24-1379 contains many details established in statute, and there are areas where more time and attention is needed to determine outcomes through a rulemaking process. Although the new law contains all of the federal 404 agricultural exemptions and some new exemptions tailored to Colorado needs on irrigation ditches, and much more, the below list pertains to Audubon and the Colorado Healthy Headwater Working Groupโ€™s direct work in protecting wetlands and streams and restoration project capabilities. 

  • The new regulatory protections program, with its broad application to Colorado ‘State Waters,’ surpasses the scope of the federal ‘Waters of the United States.’
    • State Waters” C.R.S. 25-8-103(19) means any and all surface and subsurface waters which are contained in or flow in or through this state, but does not include waters in sewage systems, waters in treatment works of disposal systems, waters in potable water distribution systems, and all water withdrawn for use until use and treatment have been completed.
  • The new permitting program is structured to prioritize avoidance of adverse impacts to State Waters, followed by minimization and, finally, compensatory mitigation of the unavoidable impacts.
  • Federal 404 guidelines are the floor and not the ceiling for any state rules, allowing Colorado to customize regulations that work for intermountain semi-arid waterways.
  • The existing Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) will draft the new rules and review and issue individual permits so that no new regulatory commission will be formed, and reports will be generated detailing the functionality of the new permitting approach.
  • The new law creates a new definition in the statute of “ecological lift,” which โ€œmeans an improvement in the biological health, as well as the chemical, geomorphic or hydrologic health of an area that has been damaged, degraded for destroyed.โ€
  • This new definition is used as one of several criteria for when certain restoration projects will not be required to obtain a state dredge and fill permit: For ephemeral streams, the WQCC must promulgate rules that include: โ€œAn exemption for voluntary stream restoration efforts in ephemeral streams that do not require compensatory mitigation and are designed solely to provide ecological lift where the activity is taking place.โ€ This was one of the provisions that Audubon pressed hard for to maintain the status quo that restoration of rangeland ephemeral drainages to stop erosional headcuts from destroying critical mesic areas could continue to take place without having to obtain a dredge and fill permit (as these areas have always fallen outside of the federal 404 permit jurisdiction). These mesic area restoration projects have been happening for about 10 years in Colorado with great success.
  • For perennial and intermittent streams, if your restoration project requires a federal USACE 404 Nationwide Permit 27 or other general permit, provided those activities result in net increases in aquatic resource functions and services, then a project proponent will not need a separate permit from the Water Quality Control Division.ย 

What Are the Next Steps? 

CDPHE will initiate the rulemaking process starting September 2024 through December 2025 to fully form the regulatory program put in place by HB24-1379. All voices will play a role in both the design and implementation of HB24-1379โ€™s regulatory program, helping to set up Colorado for long-term success. Watch for additional information and engagement from Audubon. Sign up for notifications and learn more here!

Conclusion 

Water connects us all, and rivers do not stop flowing at state lines. More must be done to restore federal protections for interstate river health while adequately supporting state wetland and stream protection programs. As a headwater state, Colorado must continue to lead the way for the rest of the West and the nation in terms of what can be accomplished with collaboration and shared vision. HB24-1379 does that and puts Colorado on a path to protect its waterways for future generations. At Audubon, we know the value and connectivity of our watersheds, wetlands, streams, and rivers; these are waterways we all depend uponโ€”birds and people. We also know the value of bringing people together for durable solutions and we cannot do this work without you. Together, we can protect our most precious natural resource, water, and the health of our waterways and continue the Colorado way of coming together to address our most pressing issues.

Thank you for helping us pass this historic legislation. 

Healthy mountain meadows and wetlands are characteristic of healthy headwater systems and provide a variety of ecosystem services, or benefits that humans, wildlife, rivers and surrounding ecosystems rely on. The complex of wetlands and connected floodplains found in intact headwater systems can slow runoff and attenuate flood flows, creating better downstream conditions, trapping sediment to improve downstream water quality, and allowing groundwater recharge. These systems can also serve as a fire break and refuge during wildfire, can sequester carbon in the floodplain, and provide essential habitat for wildlife. Graphic by Restoration Design Group, courtesy of American Rivers

Supreme Court overturns Chevron v. NRDC — Western Resource Advocates

West Fork Fire June 20, 2013 photo the Pike Hot Shots Wildfire Today

From email from Western Resource Advocates (Erin Overturf):

June 28, 2024

STATEMENT FROM WESTERN RESOURCE ADVOCATES

This morning, the Supreme Court ruled to overturn Chevron v. NRDC, one of the most cited cases in American law.

This is just the latest in a series of SCOTUS decisions designed to undermine the effectiveness of federal administrative agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency. 

Todayโ€™s far-reaching ruling overturns a 40-year legal framework, marking the culmination of a decades-long effort to undermine federal agenciesโ€™ efforts to protect our health and our environment. Overturning Chevron v. NRDC will exacerbate existing dysfunction in federal policymaking, inviting litigation and making it increasingly challenging to secure public health and safety standards – including solutions addressing climate change – at the federal level.

Administrative agencies are the workhorses of our modern system of government. The issues confronting our day-to-day lives are too numerous and too nuanced for the three main branches of government to address alone, but agencies have the technical expertise and flexibility to fill in the gaps.

This decision will make it harder for federal agencies to take action to protect our health and our environment,ย allowing unelected federal judges with lifetime appointments to reject the policy judgements of agencies with more expertise and replace those agency judgments with their own policy preferences.

โ€œThis ruling makes the work we do before state utility regulators and legislatures all the more important.ย Given the challenging new landscape for federal agencies created by todayโ€™s decision,ย state-level policy on climate action and environmental protection is more critical than ever.ย The feds will not be able to solve this problem for us. It is time for leadership at the state level.”ย 

In light of this decision, advocacy within our states to protect our health, our environment, and our climate has never been more important. States can and should set their own standards to reduce pollution, conserve water, and protect wildlife.  

WRA is committed to continuing to leverage our expertise driving state-level policies that protect our health and fight climate change and its impacts in the Interior West. 

#Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser: Supreme Court ruling threatens to create regulatory uncertainty, higher costs and greater harms

Perchlorate Pollution by State

Click the link to read the release on the Colorado Attorney General’s website:

June 28, 2024

Attorney General Phil Weiser released the following statement regarding todayโ€™s U.S. Supreme Court decision overruling 40 years of regulatory law precedent:

โ€œUnder 40 years of precedent known as the Chevron doctrine, the Supreme Court has given reasonable deference to federal agencies to implement statutes passed by Congress, notably, when a statute is unclear. As the court has consistently acknowledged, it is impossible for Congress to legislate every detail needed to carry out and enforce complex laws.

โ€œWith todayโ€™s opinion inย Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court appoints itself as the super regulator. The court says that it knows better than highly trained experts when it comes to protections for the air we breathe, the water we drink, public lands, worker safety, food and drug safety, public safety, disaster relief, public benefits, or any other regulation that affects American lives. [ed. emphasis mine] The courtโ€™s decision in this case threatens to create regulatory uncertainty for businesses, government agencies, and everyday Americans. As a result, it promises not only confusion, but also higher costs and greater harms. Rather than clarifying the scope of the Chevron doctrine, the court chose to sow chaos and uncertainty.

โ€œTodayโ€™s decision does not impact state regulations promulgated under Colorado state law. The Department of Law will continue to work with state agency partners to implement and enforce state regulations.โ€

Colorado was part of a coalition of state attorneys generalย that filed a court brief defending the Chevron doctrineย in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

Supreme Court Overturns #Chevron Doctrine: What it Means for #ClimateChange Policy — Inside #Climate News

Denver smog. Photo credit: NOAA

Click the link to read the article on the Inside Climate News website (Marianne Lavelle):

June 28, 2024

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News (hyperlink to the original story), a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. It is republished with permission. Sign up for their newsletter here

The high court sweeps away a โ€˜Goliathโ€™ of modern law, weakening agenciesโ€™ legal authority as courts weigh Bidenโ€™s policies to cut greenhouse gases.

Just as federal regulators move forward with a climate change policy rooted in dozens of complex provisions of law, the Supreme Court on Friday overturned the principle that has guided U.S. regulatory law for the past 40 years.

That principle held that a federal agencyโ€™s interpretation of the law should be honored, as long as it is reasonable, in cases where there is any question about the lawโ€™s meaning.

Now, the so-called Chevron doctrine has been swept aside by a 6-3 court split along ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts, who two years ago authored a major opinion limiting the Environmental Protection Agencyโ€™s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, wrote the majority opinion, reining in the power of all federal agencies. The court โ€œgravely erredโ€ in 1984 when it gave the regulators deference to decide what the laws they implement mean, he wrote.

โ€œChevronโ€™s presumption is misguided because agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities,โ€ Roberts wrote. โ€œCourts do.โ€

In response to the argument by the Biden administration that resolving such ambiguities involves policymaking that is best left to political actors, not to unelected judges, Roberts said Congressโ€”itself a political branchโ€”expects courts to decide the meaning of the law. And Congress can always change the law, he said.

โ€œTo the extent that Congress and the Executive Branch may disagree with how the courts have performed that job in a particular case, they are of course always free to act by revising the statute,โ€ Roberts wrote.

But Congress has backed away in recent decades from substantive stand-alone bills like the Clean Air Act, and has included much of its recent health and environmental decision-making in must-pass budget legislation that can leave lawmakersโ€™ intent subject to interpretation. Experts say the end result of the decision to overturn Chevron will be increased power for the courts and less for the executive branch.

The decision to overturn Chevron fulfills a long-held wish of conservative groups that seek a smaller role for the federal government. They are led by a network funded by the Koch family, which made its billions in the petrochemical industry. Although small fishing operations brought the case against federal regulators, they were represented by a titan of conservative law, former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, and lawyers for the Cause of Action Institute, which shares an address and personnel with the Koch-funded organization Americans for Prosperity.

Ironically, the 1984 case articulating the deference principle, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, was an anti-regulatory decision. In that case, a unanimous court upheld a Reagan administration air pollution regulation that environmentalists challenged as too weak. 

That rule was issued by an Environmental Protection Agency then led by the late Anne Gorsuch, a fierce opponent of regulation. Her son, Supreme Court Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, today wrote a lengthy concurring opinion affirming the wisdom of sweeping away the Chevron precedent, finding the reason in the roots of common law, from ancient Roman law to the efforts of King George to control the American colonies.

โ€œToday, the Court places a tombstone on Chevron no one can miss,โ€ Gorsuch wrote. โ€œIn doing so, the Court returns judges to interpretive rules that have guided federal courts since the Nationโ€™s founding.โ€

In the years since Chevron was decided, courts invoked the doctrine repeatedly to uphold regulations that industries chafed at, making the case one of the most-cited in administrative law (it appears in more than 41,000 cases, according to Google Scholar.) Advocates of unfettered industry began to view the legal principle as a tool of government overreach, and called for the courts to abandon it.

No one articulated that view more memorably than Gorsuch when he was a federal appeals court judge, just months before he was hand-picked by the conservative Federalist Society to be President Donald Trumpโ€™s first addition to the Supreme Court.

โ€œWhat would happen in a world without Chevron? If this Goliath of modern administrative law were to fall?โ€ Gorsuch wrote in a 2016 immigration case. Congress would write laws, agencies would โ€œoffer guidance on how they intend to enforce those statutes,โ€ and judges would โ€œexercise their independent judgmentโ€ on those laws, not bound by what agencies said they meant, he wrote. โ€œIt seems to me that in a world without Chevron very little would changeโ€”except perhaps the most important things.โ€

Chevronโ€™s Climate Stakes

When it comes to President Joe Bidenโ€™s effort to put a national climate policy in place, the most important things may well be the outcomes of a slew of lawsuits filed against the Environmental Protection Agency and other federal agencies in the past year.

These lawsuits, most of them in the names of Republican-led states that have been joined by fossil fuel industries, essentially accuse the agencies of overstepping their legal authority with regulations to curb greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise address climate change.

The agencies in most cases are applying broad legal authority Congress gave them years before the dangers of climate change were fully recognized or even contemplated. The EPAโ€™s regulations to cut carbon pollution from the nationโ€™s two leading sourcesโ€”vehicles and power plantsโ€”are based on the Clean Air Act, passed in 1970 and amended in 1990. The Securities and Exchange Commission is seeking to standardize corporate disclosure of climate risks by relying on Great Depression-era laws that require publicly traded companies to fully inform investors of factors that could affect their financial conditions.

In some cases agencies have more explicit direction from Congress than othersโ€”for example, the Clean Air Act provisions on vehicles are more specific than those governing power plants. But in virtually all pending challenges to Biden policy, foes have identified what they see as legal ambiguities, or faults in agenciesโ€™ interpretation of the law.

โ€œItโ€™s very hard to write statutes in technical, controversial areas and not have a shred of ambiguity,โ€ said Lisa Heinzerling, a professor at Georgetown Law School, in an interview prior to the decision. โ€œEven if someone is really trying to be careful, people with enough money and enough lawyers can, after the fact, really bring ambiguity out of something that was intended to be clear.โ€

Now that Chevron has been overturned, the Supreme Court has placed the onus squarely on judges to interpret regulatory law, which typically involves application of science and knowledge of the latest technological advances.

In a scathing dissent, Associate Justice Elena Kagan said the court had removed โ€œa cornerstone of administrative law,โ€ upending the structure that supported much of the federal governmentโ€™s functions.

The Chevron doctrine โ€œhas become part of the warp and woof of modern government, supporting regulatory efforts of all kindsโ€”to name a few, keeping air and water clean, food and drugs safe, and financial markets honest.โ€

Contrary to Robertsโ€™ view, Kagan said that Congress has assigned federal agencies to address interpreting the law in regulatory areas, which often involve scientific or technical subject matter. โ€œAgencies have expertise in those areas,โ€ Kagan wrote. โ€œCourts do not.โ€ Now she said such decisions will be made by courts that have no political accountability and no proper basis for making policy.

โ€œA rule of judicial humility gives way to a rule of judicial hubris,โ€ she wrote.

A Move Long Coming

But the Supreme Court for years has been moving in the direction of giving less authority to federal agencies; the trend accelerated after Trump gave conservatives a commanding 6-3 majority with his three appointees. Although the lower courts still invoked Chevron often, the high court has not relied on the doctrine in any case since 2016. And without mentioning Chevron, the Court recently has displayed little deference for agenciesโ€™ reading of the law.

Two weeks ago, for example, the Supreme Court struck down the federal ban on โ€œbump stocks,โ€ rejecting the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearmsโ€™ technical and legal analysis that the rapid-fire gun accessories convert rifles to machine guns, long banned by federal law. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that a converted rifle wasnโ€™t a machine gun, in an opinion accompanied by a highly unusual set of trigger mechanism illustrations.

โ€œWhat that opinion looks like is pretty much the court figuring out on its own how guns work,โ€ Heinzerling said. โ€œThat decision is a sign of things to come.โ€

On Thursday, in a 5-4 opinion by Gorsuch, the Supreme Court put a hold on the EPAโ€™s effort to address the difficult problem of smog-forming pollutants that drift across state lines, saying the agency had not adequately explained how it would address the cost-effectiveness of the โ€œGood Neighborโ€ program over time. (Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett broke from other conservatives in a dissenting opinion, warning the court was downplaying the EPAโ€™s role under the Clean Air Act and leaving โ€œlarge swaths of upwind States free to keep contributing significantly to their downwind neighborsโ€™ ozone problems for the next several years.โ€)

Especially relevant to climate law was the courtโ€™s 2022 decision in West Virginia v. EPA case, written by Roberts and also settled 6-3 with Republican-appointed justices in the majority. In that case, the Supreme Court set a new standard of skepticism for federal agency authority on โ€œmajor questionsโ€ of national importance, throwing out the Obama administrationโ€™s approach for cutting carbon emissions from power plants.

That case, and now the loss of Chevron deference, could well tip the balance against climate policy in the courts, experts say. A case in point is the litigation (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce) that was before the court, brought by fishing operations against the agency charged with enforcing fishing law in U.S. waters, the National Marine Fisheries Service, or NMFS. 

For three decades, NMFS has had a program of putting scientific observers on board fishing vessels to prevent overfishing and ensure compliance with other federal laws, like those to protect endangered species. Lack of observer coverage has been a chronic problem in the underfunded program and in 2020, to increase coverage to address strain on the important Atlantic herring fishery, in part due to climate change, NMFS set new rules requiring that the fishing operations pay the cost of the observers. 

The fishing operations ended up being reimbursed for 100 percent of their costs (about $30,000), but the Supreme Court did not focus on such details. Instead, it focused on what it viewed as the correct roles of agencies, Congress and the courts. Roberts wrote that it was an error for courts to give the executive agencies the benefit of the doubt whenever there was a question of the lawโ€™s meaning.

โ€œBy forcing courts to instead pretend that ambiguities are necessarily delegations, Chevron prevents judges from judging,โ€ Roberts wrote.

Tara Brock, Pacific legal director and senior counsel for the advocacy group Oceana, said the result would be less monitoring of the industry at a time when more is needed. 

โ€œThings are changing in fisheries,โ€ Brock said. โ€œSuddenly somebody in Alaska is catching species that they historically havenโ€™t. Well, what does that mean for fisheries management? Observers being present and being able to document what we are seeing on the water and having that really critical data is going to become even more valuable as climate change continues to change our oceans.โ€

But lawyers representing the fishing operations that brought the challenge said that the Supreme Court has restored balance to decision making about federal regulation.

U.S. Supreme Court flips precedent that empowered federal agencies — #Colorado Newsline

Atlantic herring. Credit: NOAA Fisheries/Calvin Alexander

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Newsline website (Jacob Fischler):

June 28, 2024

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a precedent Friday that had for decades limited judicial power to strike executive branch regulations, in a decision immediately criticized for potentially undermining decisions by scientists and agency experts.

The 6-3 and 6-2 decisions in two cases brought by fishing operators in New Jersey and Rhode Island challenged a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration rule and overturned the principle known as Chevron deference.

That precedent gave federal agencies broad discretion to use their judgment to resolve any ambiguity Congress left in a federal statute.

The courtโ€™s six conservatives reasoned that courts โ€œroutinely confront statutory ambiguitiesโ€ that have nothing to do with the authority of regulatory agencies, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.

โ€œOf course, when faced with a statutory ambiguity in such a case, the ambiguity is not a delegation to anybody, and a court is not somehow relieved of its obligation to independently interpret the statute,โ€ Roberts wrote.

Under the 40-year-old precedent, courts gave up their interpretive role and deferred to agencies, Roberts wrote.

But they shouldnโ€™t, he added. Judges should apply their own legal reasoning to reach a sound decision.

โ€œCourts instead understand that such statutes, no matter how impenetrable, do โ€”  in fact, must โ€” have a single, best meaning.โ€

1984 ruling overturned

The decision overturned Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, a 1984 Supreme Court ruling that said courts must defer to federal agenciesโ€™ expertise when considering legal challenges to a rule. The 1984 ruling significantly raised the bar for overturning an agency rule.

The precedent strengthened the executive branch under presidential administrations of both parties, but experts worry its reversal will strip agencies of the power to enact regulatory safeguards across a broad spectrum of issues including clean air and public health.

In a dissenting opinion, the courtโ€™s three liberals โ€” not including Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in one of the cases, after she recused herself because sheโ€™d heard the case as an appeals court judge before joining the Supreme Court โ€” said the majority erred by misunderstanding the roles of three branches of government.

Congress knows it cannot โ€œwrite perfectly complete regulatory statutes,โ€ Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a dissent. Interpretation of those statutes is a given, and Congress usually prefers a โ€œresponsible agencyโ€ instead of a court.

Agencies are more politically accountable and have greater technical expertise in a given issue than courts, she wrote.

โ€œPut all that together and deference to the agency is the almost obvious choice,โ€ Kagan wrote.

Kagan went on to criticize the decision as a power grab by the judiciary at the expense of agency experts.

โ€œA rule of judicial humility gives way to a rule of judicial hubris,โ€ she wrote. โ€œIn one fell swoop, the majority today gives itself exclusive power over every open issue โ€” no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden โ€” involving the meaning of regulatory law.โ€

Liberals see a weakening of safeguards

Liberal groups and elected Democrats worried the reversal will strip agencies of the power to enact strong regulatory safeguards across a broad spectrum of issues, especially climate and environmental regulations.

โ€œIt weakens our governmentโ€™s ability to protect us from the climate crisis, threats to worker safety, public health, clean air and water, safe medicines and food, a sound financial system, and more,โ€ Manish Bapna, president of the environmental group NRDC Action Fund, wrote in a statement.

โ€œTodayโ€™s reckless but unsurprising decision from this far-right court is a triumph for corporate polluters that seek to dismantle common-sense regulations protecting clean air, clean water and a livable climate future,โ€ Wenonah Hauter, the executive director of the advocacy group Food & Water Watch, said in a statement.

Rachel Weintraub, the executive director of the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards, a group that advocates for strong federal regulations, said in an interview before the decision was released that Chevron deference has allowed a host of regulations affecting consumer safety, labor, environmental protections and other issues.

โ€œThe important role that government plays in ensuring the health and safety of our families and the fairness of our markets could be undermined here,โ€ she said.

The ruling takes power away from the experts on a particular subject of a federal regulation โ€” traffic engineers at the Department of Transportation, disease experts at the Food and Drug Administration or scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency, for example โ€” and gives it to the federal judiciary, Weintraub said.

U.S. Rep. Raรบl Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat who is the ranking member on the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee, called the ruling a gift to polluters and the fossil fuel industry.

โ€œFor 40 years, Congress has passed laws with the understanding that the interpretation of those laws is for the courts, but the implementation laid in the hands of the scientific and policy career experts at our federal agencies,โ€ Grijalva said in a statement.

โ€œBut now, thanks to this extremist power-grab, our most fundamental protections will be at the whim of individual judges โ€” many of whom are far-right ideologues โ€” regardless of their lack of expertise or political agenda.โ€

Conservatives applaud rollback

Republicans in Congress and conservative activists praised the decision for weakening the administrative state, saying it would return power to the legislative branch.

โ€œThe Constitution vests Congress with the sole authority to make law,โ€ Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said in a statement. โ€œAfter forty years of Chevron deference, the Supreme Court made it clear today that our system of government leaves no room for an unelected bureaucracy to co-opt this authority for itself.โ€

Rep. Bruce Westerman, an Arkansas Republican who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee, said Fridayโ€™s ruling should spur Congress to write more prescriptive laws.

โ€œCongress has sidestepped our legal duties for far too long and todayโ€™s ruling puts us back in the driverโ€™s seat when it comes to rulemaking and regulatory authority,โ€ Westerman said in a written statement. โ€œWeโ€™re no longer going to let federal agencies fill in the details when it comes to the policies we enact.โ€

Roman Martinez, an attorney who argued on behalf of the Rhode Island fishing operators, called the ruling a โ€œwin for individual liberty and the Constitution.โ€

โ€œThe Court has taken a major step to shut down unlawful power grabs by federal agencies and to preserve the separation of powers,โ€ Martinez said in a statement distributed by the conservative public relations firm CRC Advisors. โ€œGoing forward, judges will be charged with interpreting the law faithfully, impartially, and independently, without deference to the government.โ€

No plans to reopen old cases

In the majority opinion, Roberts said the court did not plan to reopen cases that had been decided by Chevron โ€œdespite our change in interpretive methodology.โ€

Even prior to Fridayโ€™s decision, the court had used Chevron less often. During theย oral argument, Roberts cited a study that the court had relied on the precedent sparingly over the past 14 years.

The courtโ€™s conservative majority has shown a willingness to move away from deference to agency decision-making, demanding more explicit congressional instruction.

In West Virginia v. EPA in 2022, for example, the court ruled that the EPA lacked the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Daniel Wolff, an administrative law attorney at the law firm Crowell & Moring, downplayed the effect the ruling would have on the administrative state.

Congress at times explicitly directs agencies to craft regulations, and those rules will still be subject to the same standard that they were written reasonably, Wolff said in an interview prior to the decision.

Rules with solid legal and statutory foundations would survive under either standard, he said.

โ€œRolling back Chevron is simply going to mean agencies donโ€™t get the benefit of the doubt in the case of a tie,โ€ Wolff said. โ€œThey have to come into the court and persuade the court that they have the better reading of the statute.โ€

Fishing operators

The cases decided Friday was brought by herring fishing operators from New Jersey and Rhode Island who challenged a NOAA rule requiring the operators to pay for the federal monitors who regularly join fishing boats to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

The fishing operators said the rule forced them to hand over up to 20% of their profits.

After a lower court relied on Chevron deference to rule in favor of NOAA, oral arguments at the Supreme Court in January focused almost entirely on Chevron.

US Supreme Court will review nixing of #Utah oil-train project that drew #Colorado opposition — Colorado Newsline #ColoradoRiver #COriver #ActOnClimate

A train of tanker cars travels the tracks along the Colorado River near Cameo on May 16, 2023. (Chase Woodruff/Colorado Newsline)

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Newsline website (Chase Woodruff):

June 24, 2024

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday accepted a last-ditch appeal from the backers of a controversial oil-by-rail project in eastern Utah, agreeing to review a lower-court ruling that sided with a Colorado county and environmental groups who accused federal regulators of failing to adequately analyze the proposalโ€™s downstream risks.

In an August 2023 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that the Surface Transportation Boardโ€™s approval of the 88-mile Uinta Basin Railway contained โ€œnumerousโ€ and โ€œsignificantโ€ violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, and ordered the STB to correct deficiencies in the projectโ€™s environmental impact statement. The Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, a group of Utah county governments backing the project, appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court in March.

In a list of case orders released Monday morning, the court issued a so-called writ of certiorari and agreed to review the case. With the Supreme Court set to enter its summer recess next week, arguments in the case, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, will be heard during the courtโ€™s next term, which begins in October.

An ambitious multibillion-dollar scheme first formally proposed in 2019, the Uinta Basin Railway aims to connect Utahโ€™s largest oil field to the national rail network, allowing drillers there to ship large volumes of the basinโ€™s โ€œwaxyโ€ crude oil to Gulf Coast refineries. At an estimated capacity of up to 350,000 barrels exported per day, it would rank among the largest sustained efforts to transport oil by rail ever undertaken in the U.S., singlehandedly more than doubling the nationwide total in 2022, and causing a tenfold increase in hazmat rail traffic through environmentally sensitive and densely populated areas in Colorado.

Coloradoโ€™s Eagle County joined five environmental groups in suing the STB over its 2021 approval of the project, arguing the agencyโ€™s analysis had violated NEPA. A three-judge Court of Appeals panel agreed, directing the STB to further scrutinize downstream risks of increased oil-train traffic in Colorado, wildfire hazards, impacts on communities along the Gulf Coast and more.

โ€œItโ€™s disappointing the Supreme Court took up this case but the appellate courtโ€™s decision on this destructive project is legally sound and should ultimately stand,โ€ said Wendy Park, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the environmental groups that sued to block the project. โ€œThe proposal for the Uinta Basin Railway cut corners from the start but federal laws are now catching up with this climate and environmental catastrophe.โ€

In its March 4 petition to the Supreme Court, the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition argued that the lower courtโ€™s ruling conflicted with existing case law, and that analysis of such โ€œdistant effectsโ€ would exceed the STBโ€™s authority.

โ€œAgencies need a manageable line to guide their NEPA studies, and this Court is now the only place to find one,โ€ the coalition wrote.

In a reply brief, Eagle County and the environmental groups wrote that the lower court โ€œcorrectly concluded the Board has authority to consider the reasonably foreseeable effects of oil production and refining that the Railway would induce.โ€

Keith Heaton, the Seven County Infrastructure Coalitionโ€™s executive director, told a committee of Utah lawmakers in February that while he believed the project had โ€œa very good case before the Supreme Court,โ€ his organization was prepared for a do-over of the NEPA process if necessary. The project is a public-private partnership between Heatonโ€™s group, the Rio Grande Pacific Corporation and the private equity firm Drexel Hamilton Infrastructure Partners.

โ€œWorst case scenario is we can always go back and re-do the environmental impact statement,โ€ Heaton said.

Even with federal approval, however, critics have expressed widespread doubts about the partnershipโ€™s chances of securing the billions in financing necessary to build and operate the rail line. Backers have signaled their intent to apply for $1.9 billion in special tax-exempt infrastructure bonds that must be approved by the Department of Transportation, a move that also drawn staunch opposition from Colorado lawmakers.

โ€œThe fossil fuel industryโ€™s insistence on a doomed project at the expense of taxpayers underscores that itโ€™s only interested in protecting its own bottom line,โ€ said Luis Miranda, director of the Sierra Clubโ€™s Utah chapter. โ€œThe Uinta Basin Railway threatens public health, as well as treasured landscapes and waterways. A derailment would carry immeasurable harm.โ€

PFAS are toxic โ€˜forever chemicalsโ€™ that linger in our air, water, soil and bodies โ€“ hereโ€™s how to keep them out of your drinkingย water

Exposure to PFAS during pregnancy can lead to a childโ€™s low birth weight and accelerated puberty. RUNSMART/Digital Vision via Getty Images

Jessica Ray, University of Washington

Close to half of Americaโ€™s tap water contains PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These โ€œforever chemicalsโ€ are in thousands of products, from clothing and cosmetics to cleaning products, and are linked to cancers, liver damage, high cholesterol and asthma.

Dr. Jessica Ray, assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Washington, explains what PFAS are, how scientists are trying to remove them from the environment, and what you can do to reduce the impact of PFAS on your own health. https://player.vimeo.com/video/946246279 Dr. Jessica Ray discusses PFAS in our water supply.

The Conversation has collaborated with SciLine to bring you highlights from the discussion, which have been edited for brevity and clarity.

What are PFAS, and how are they used?

Jessica Ray: PFAS are a class of thousands of synthetic chemicals originally manufactured and heavily used in the 1950s. They were the active ingredient in fire suppressant foams that were used at military bases on aircraft fires.

Since then, theyโ€™ve been used in many applications and consumer products โ€“ shampoos, dental floss, nail polish. Theyโ€™ve been used in waxy coatings found in food containers. They have also been applied as nonstick coatings; for example, in cookware. Theyโ€™ve been used in outerwear to help with rain protection.

Why are PFAS called โ€œforever chemicalsโ€?

Jessica Ray: It is difficult for PFAS to degrade naturally in the environment or even during processes like water treatment.

How do PFAS move through the environment?

Jessica Ray: Unfortunately, PFAS like to stick to solid surfaces like soils. They can dissolve in water and enter the Earthโ€™s atmosphere. And because PFAS can permeate air, water and soil, humans and animals can be exposed to them in a multitude of ways.

For example, if PFAS are present in ocean water, and then the fish ingest and become contaminated with PFAS, and then we consume those fish, then we are exposed to PFAS. And unfortunately, researchers have detected PFAS in many, many different drinking water sources worldwide. Not just surface water and groundwater, but bottled water as well.

What are the health impacts of PFAS?

Jessica Ray: PFAS have been linked to liver tissue damage and kidney cancer. If a fetus is exposed to PFAS during pregnancy, that can lead to low birth weight and accelerated puberty. PFAS have also been linked to impairments of the immune system.

How can we reduce personal exposure to PFAS?

Jessica Ray: You can do a number of things. If youโ€™re cooking, you could purchase and use stainless steel or cast iron cookware, very tried and true cookware that should not contain PFAS.

Also look for products that explicitly state they are PFAS-free. And you could buy organic products, those should have lower PFAS loads. Finding ways to reduce PFAS loads to the environment and to drinking water will be important given the Environmental Protection Agency ruling in April 2024 to regulate several PFAS in drinking water. https://www.youtube.com/embed/UpobOQ54bWc?wmode=transparent&start=0 The Environmental Protection Agency has targeted six chemicals for removal from drinking water.

How can we remove PFAS from our drinking water?

Jessica Ray: A handful of companies are selling essentially a version of a Brita water filter that are targeted for PFAS. Generally though, just using something like a Brita or Pur water filter at home should help reduce exposure to not only PFAS, but other contaminants that might persist even in drinking water thatโ€™s distributed to your tap at home.

What about your research on removing PFAS from water?

Jessica Ray: My research group is exploring two different approaches for treating PFAS in water. One approach is to remove or separate PFAS from water. The other is to destroy PFAS in water.

For the separation approaches, weโ€™re looking at existing water treatment processes used in drinking water and wastewater treatment, and then trying to modify those processes to selectively target PFAS in water apart from other contaminants that might be in the water.

How is your group trying to improve PFAS filtration?

Jessica Ray: If you are filtering your water at home using a filtration cartridge, then that can help to remove a wide variety of contaminants. These contaminants can include heavy metals or other dissolved contaminants in water.

But often, PFAS in drinking water sources tend to exist in very, very low concentrations, while other contaminants exist at much higher ones. Filters only have so many adsorption sites available where contaminants are bound. And so there is a strong likelihood the adsorption sites will be occupied before the PFAS can be removed from the water.

One approach that weโ€™ve been using is to develop new adsorbents that help target PFAS. My group has been developing this material for the last couple of years. And weโ€™ve been talking to people who can help commercialize this technology so consumers can apply these kinds of point-of-use treatments to help protect them from PFAS. Itโ€™s hard to say exactly how long it will be until the treatments will be commercially available โ€“ maybe in one or two years.

Are there alternatives to PFAS that are safer to use?

Jessica Ray: Researchers are looking into whatโ€™s called green chemistry โ€“ designing chemicals that behave similarly to PFAS but arenโ€™t as toxic and will break down in the environment. So there is hope for the future.

Watch the full interview to hear more.

SciLine is a free service based at the nonprofit American Association for the Advancement of Science that helps journalists include scientific evidence and experts in their news stories.

Jessica Ray, Professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Washington

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

States need to keep #PFAS โ€™forever chemicalsโ€™ out of the water. It wonโ€™t be cheap — #Utah News Dispatch

Click the link to read the article on the Utah News Dispatch website (Alex Brown):

May 26, 2024

In recent years, Michigan has spent tens of millions of dollars to limit residentsโ€™ exposure to the harmful โ€œforever chemicalsโ€ called PFAS. And some cities there have spent millions of their own to filter contaminated drinking water or connect to new, less-polluted sources.

โ€œWeโ€™ve made significant investments to get up to speed,โ€ said Abigail Hendershott, executive director of the Michigan PFAS Action Response Team, which serves as a coordinating group for the stateโ€™s testing, cleanup and public education efforts. โ€œThereโ€™s still a good chunk of the country that hasnโ€™t taken on anything.โ€

Thatโ€™s about to change.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued new standards last month for PFAS levels in drinking water, giving water systems three years to conduct testing, and another two years to install treatment systems if contaminants are detected. State officials and utilities say itโ€™s going to be difficult and costly to meet the requirements.

โ€œThis is going to take a lot more investment at the state level,โ€ said Alan Roberson, executive director of the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, a group that convenes leaders in state health and environmental agencies. โ€œIt creates a big workload for everybody.โ€

PFAS chemicals are widespread, found in a host of everyday products and industrial uses, and they donโ€™t break down naturally, meaning they stay in human bodies and the environment indefinitely. Exposure has been shown to increase the risk of cancer, decrease fertility, cause metabolic disorders and damage the immune system.

To date, 11 states have set limits for PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, in drinking water. Several others have pending rules or levels that require public notice. While the federal rule builds on those efforts, it also sets limits that are stricter than the state-issued rules.

โ€œWe really have looked to the states as leaders in setting standards and doing some of the foundational science,โ€ said Zach Schafer, director of policy and special projects for the EPAโ€™s Office of Water. โ€œThe state agencies are the ones who will be playing the point role [in implementing the national rule].โ€

Schafer said the agency estimates that 6% to 10% of water systems nationwide will need to take steps to reduce PFAS contamination, at a cost averaging $1.5 billion per year over an 80-year span.

Public health advocates say the EPAโ€™s rule is an important step to ensure all Americans have access to safe water. They say state actions show that such efforts can work.

But some state regulators and water suppliers โ€” even in states that already have their own rules โ€” say the strict thresholds and timelines imposed by the feds will be difficult for many utilities to achieve. While the Biden administration has dedicated billions in funding to help clean up water supplies, experts say the costs will far exceed the available money.

โ€œIt’s going to have a significant impact nationally on water rates and affordability of water,โ€ said Chris Moody, regulatory technical manager with the American Water Works Association, a group that includes more than 4,000 utilities.

Anย estimate, conducted on behalf of the association, pegs the national cost of cleaning up contaminated water at nearly $4 billion each year. The report found that some households could face thousands of dollars in increased rates to cover the costs of treatment.

โ€˜Thereโ€™s a lot of concernโ€™

New Jersey in 2018 became the first state to issue standards for PFAS in drinking water. While the stateโ€™s regulations given New Jersey a head start, officials say they still have a difficult task ahead to meet the stricter thresholds.

โ€œWhen we bring in the EPA number, the number of noncompliant systems goes up dramatically,โ€ said Shawn LaTourette, the stateโ€™s commissioner of environmental protection. โ€œThereโ€™s a lot of concern about cost and implementation.โ€

LaTourette said state leaders are working to analyze which water systems may fall out of compliance when the federal thresholds take effect. And heโ€™s calling on lawmakers to provide more money to communities that canโ€™t afford the upgrades.

In Washington state, utilities have begun testing for PFAS under state standards passed by regulators in 2021. Officials say that roughly 2% of the water systems tested so far arenโ€™t in compliance, but that number would jump to 10% when factoring in the stricter federal limits. State leaders say theyโ€™ll be able to grandfather in the data theyโ€™ve been collecting to meet EPAโ€™s testing requirements.

The agency may ask state lawmakers for a โ€œsubstantialโ€ increase in staffing to implement the new rules, said Mike Means, capacity development and policy manager with the Washington State Department of Health.

Michigan has had its drinking water standards for PFAS since 2020. Hendershott said state officials are well prepared to incorporate the EPAโ€™s thresholds. But the strict new limits could quadruple the number of water systems that fall out of compliance.

Sarah Doll, national director of Safer States, an alliance of environmental health groups focused on toxic chemicals, said state efforts were key to bringing about the federal rule.

โ€œThey created the urgency for the feds to bring these standards,โ€ she said. โ€œStates that already have regulatory standards absolutely are in a better position.โ€

โ€˜Itโ€™s very expensiveโ€™

While many states have not enacted their own standards, some have conducted testing or taken other steps to address residentsโ€™ exposure.

Missouri has been testing water systems for PFAS for more than a decade and created maps to notify residents of potential exposure. Of the 400 systems itโ€™s sampled, 11 may have trouble complying with the EPA rule, said Eric Medlock, an environmental specialist with the state Department of Natural Resources. The agency aims to bring on a chemist and laboratory equipment to conduct more testing in-house.

Medlock expressed concern that the federal limits are so strict that theyโ€™re near the threshold of what can be detected.

โ€œWhen you get down to these really low detection levels that are right at the regulatory limit, that poses a problem,โ€ he said. โ€œWe’re going to have to enforce and regulate what EPA proposed. It is going to be an issue.โ€

Medlock and others noted that states will face longer-term issues with the storage of the waste products filtered from the water,  which carry their own PFAS contamination risk.

The infrastructure bill passed by Congress in 2021 includes $5 billion over five years to help communities treat PFAS and other emerging contaminants.

More funding for cleanup may come from state lawsuits filed against chemical manufacturers. Thirty attorneys general have filed litigation against polluters, and Minnesota settled its case against 3M Company for $850 million. But leaders say such settlements arenโ€™t a predictable funding source.

In addition to the upfront cost of installing treatment systems, utilities face ongoing expenses, such as replacing filters and disposing of waste, that are less likely to benefit from federal grants and loans. Meanwhile, some water system leaders say the federal compliance timelines may not be long enough.

โ€œIt takes time to design and build a major capital project,โ€ said Erica Brown, chief policy and strategy officer for the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, a policy group that advocates for public water utilities. โ€œItโ€™s not one of those things that you say, โ€˜You have to do this, and next year,โ€™ and you can just turn it on.โ€

And some officials fear the drinking water limits could lead to more state regulations on wastewater plants and other entities whose discharges may affect drinking water sources.

โ€œIt seems like it’s going to be problematic, because [treatment] is very expensive,โ€ said Sharon Green, manager of legislative and regulatory programs with the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, an agency whose members operate 11 wastewater treatment plants.

Both state regulators and regulated utilities say state leaders need a broader approach to the PFAS problem than just treating the water that comes out of the tap. Officials need to stop pollution at the source, regulate industrial operations and limit products that contain the chemicals.

โ€œIf we keep it out of the river in the first place, โ€ฆ [the utility] doesnโ€™t have to spend millions of dollars for treatment,โ€ said Jean Zhuang, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, an advocacy group focused on the South.

While Southern states have not adopted drinking water standards for PFAS, Zhuang said South Carolinaโ€™s requirement that polluters disclose their discharges of PFAS is a good model to begin cutting off contamination sources.

As states face down the expenses of fixing the PFAS problem, some advocates also want them to remember the public health costs of inaction.

โ€œPeople will ultimately be consuming less of these chemicals and getting sick less often,โ€ said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, a public health advocacy nonprofit.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

#ClimateChange: A serious downer for mountain streams: Also other stuff that you want to read — Jonathan P. Thompson (www.landdesk.org)

Click the link to read the article on The Land Desk website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

June 4, 2024

๐Ÿฅต Aridification Watch ๐Ÿซ

Climate change is a real bummer for mountain streams โ€” it depletes the groundwater that feed creeks and rivers and makes them dirtier, besides. Thatโ€™s the grim conclusion one reaches after reading two recently published papers. Letโ€™s take them one at a time:

The Colorado River region is in the grips of the most severe, multi-decadal drought in over a millennium. The most obvious signs of this are declining streamflows across the region. But these declines, the authors of the paper point out, โ€œcannot be explained solely by lower precipitation.โ€ In 2021, for example, the Upper Colorado River Basin received about 80% of the normal snowfall. But the riverโ€™s unregulated flow into Lake Powell was just 30% of normal โ€” indicating that some of that snow was going missing somewhere along the line.

Some of the vanishing act can be attributed to sublimation, or the direct conversion of snow to water vapor, skipping the in-between liquid state (so the snow evaporates into the atmosphere rather than into streams). Climate change-exacerbated warming temperatures and dust-on-snow (and the resulting decrease in albedo) can increase sublimation. But researchers suspected something else was also at play here, namely changes in groundwater storage. 

Scientists have long assumed that groundwater didnโ€™t play a significant role in streamflows in mountainous regions because the geology didnโ€™t support large underground storage. But newer research suggests that networks of fractures in crystalline and metamorphic rock can store more water at greater depths than previously believed. Perhaps that was what was stealing the water? 

The researchers focused their investigation on the drainage of the East River, a stream that flows from the mountains above Crested Butte, Colorado, and on whose banks the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory sits. They used a high-resolution hydrological model that maps whatโ€™s going on 400 meters underground. 

The East River Valley, northwest of the historic town of Gothic, home to the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory. The mountain with the pointed peak in the distance is Mount Crested Butte. Photo credit: Mark Stone/University of Washington

They found that, normally, groundwater storage can help stabilize streamflows during fluctuations between wet and dry years. Big snow recharges the aquifer, and the aquifer bolsters stream flows during droughts. But modeling shows that after just one extremely dry year, the groundwater storage does not recover, even after subsequent wet years. Higher temperatures, meanwhile, increase vegetationโ€™s evapotranspiration โ€” or consumption of groundwater โ€” which further diminishes groundwater storage recharge. Wintertime snowmelt actually increases groundwater recharge during the winter and early spring, but in doing so, steals water that would otherwise go to streamflow. 

So, yeah, not only does global warming diminish the snowpack, it also depletes groundwater storage, which ultimately leads to reduced Colorado River flows and more tension and conflict over how to divide up what little water โ€” that could be contaminated with metals (see below) โ€” remains. Iโ€™d recommend reading the whole paper, since my summary really doesnโ€™t do it justice. It has interesting insights into how mountain hydrology works. Hereโ€™s a diagram from the paper giving a good overview of the phenomenon:

As if that wasnโ€™t bad enough, now we learn that those depleted streams are also getting dirtier. That is, concentrations of potentially toxic metals are increasing in mountain streams. And, yes, itโ€™s thanks to human-caused climate change (though the metal-loading itself isnโ€™t necessarily human-caused). 

Itโ€™s important to note that this paper focuses on acid rock drainage as opposed to acid mine drainage. Both phenomena work the same: Water and oxygen react with sulfide minerals, usually pyrite, to form sulfuric acid. The acid then dissolves other minerals and โ€œloadsโ€ the water with those metals, such as lead, copper, aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, and zinc โ€” each of which can harm aquatic life in high concentrations. Acid rock drainage is the more overarching term, but generally refers to this reaction occurring naturally. Acid mine drainage is when mining catalyzes or exacerbates the phenomenon by introducing subterranean minerals to oxygen and water.

Cement Creek and an iron fen above Silverton, Colorado. Cement Creek is affected by both natural acid rock drainage and human-caused acid mine drainage. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

An analysis of 40 years of water chemistry from 22 mineralized watersheds across Colorado found that sulfate, zinc, and copper concentrations were increasing by about 2% per year average โ€” and have nearly doubled over the last 30 years. Some of this may be due to declining streamflows, which carry less water to dilute the metals. But the researchers found that load โ€” or the amount of metals in the water โ€” is also increasing, and is on average โ€œat least an equal contributorโ€ as the dilution effect. They also found that loads began climbing more dramatically beginning in 2000, when the current mega-drought kicked in. 

And there appears to be a correlation between the mean annual air temperature, or MAAT, and the acid mine drainage load and concentration. This led researchers to theorize that warming temperatures are melting previously frozen ground, opening up new pathways for oxygenated groundwater flow (in the same way that mining does), which in turn leads to more formation of acid rock drainage. Similarly, declining groundwater storage could lower water tables, exposing more subterranean sulfides and minerals to oxygen, thus increasing groundwater acidity and metal loading. 

The authors conclude: โ€œOur correlation analysis therefore points to accelerating sulfide weathering rates from melting of frozen ground as perhaps the most important driving mechanism for observed regional increases in concentration and load at acidic sites.โ€


๐Ÿ“– Reading Room ๐Ÿง

In my teens and early twenties, I made a nearly annual springtime pilgrimage from Durango or Santa Fe to the Tucson area for some sunshine and desert time. One of my favorite things to do while there was to hike up Mt. Wrightson. The trailhead is at around 5,000 feet in elevation in the lush, jungle-like Madera Canyon, itself a stark contrast to the blazing cacti and scrub-smattered lowlands nearby. The well-worn trail takes you through a variety of eco-zones before topping out on the 9,456-foot summit where, inevitably, there would be snow. And, yes, I know that itโ€™s weird to hike back to the high country climate while on an escape from the same, but itโ€™s different when at the end of the day Iโ€™d be sitting in an open air cafe under a brilliant bougainvillea. 

Wrightson is in the Santa Rita Mountains, one of dozens of Madrean Sky Islands, or wildly biodiverse mountain ranges in southern Arizona and northern Mexico. The Arizona Republicโ€™s Brandon Loomis has a good and heartbreaking story about how the Sky Islands are threatened by climate change, development, and a new mining boom โ€” especially to extract so-called โ€œgreen metalsโ€ such as manganese, which is used in electric vehicle batteries. 


โ›๏ธ Mining Monitor โ›๏ธ

Defunct uranium mines and waste rock above the San Miguel River near the former townsite of Uravan in western Colorado. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Maybe uraniumโ€™s too hot to handle? In March we reported that Sassy Gold was set to acquire 345 uranium mining claims on 8,206 acres in La Sal Creek, the Lisbon Valley, the Uravan Mineral Belt, and on the San Rafael Swell from Kimmerle Mining and its associated firm, Three Step Partnership, both of Moab. Now Sassy is retracting its offer, saying it โ€œidentified a number of material political, environmental and technical risks associated with the propertiesโ€ that โ€œfundamentally altered the value of the proposed transaction.โ€ You donโ€™t say?

*** 

Congress continues to push legislation that would โ€œreformโ€ the 1872 General Mining Law. Good news, right? Wrong. These lawmakers โ€” which include both Democrats and Republicans from mining-heavy states โ€” are looking to codify an older interpretation of the law allowing mining companies to dump waste rock or mill tailings on federal mining claims that are not valid, i.e. they donโ€™t contain minerals of proven value. The bill passed the House and is now working its way through the Senate. Inside Climate News has more on that.

Meanwhile, efforts to actually reform the 152-year-old law to make it less of a giveaway to corporations appear to be at a standstill.

Report: Advocacy in Action Sackett v. EPA: The state of our waters one year later — @AmericanRivers

Click the link to access the report on the American River website. Here’s the introduction:

Introduction
One year ago, the Supreme Court issued its sweeping decision in the case Sackett v. EPA, which invalidated federal Clean Water Act protections for most streams and wetlands in the United States. Since then, the fight for clean water protections has been at the state level. This report outlines the state of clean water protections one year out from the Sackett decision and why federal protections for our critical waters is vital in the face of worsening climate change and other threats.

In the year since the Supreme Court ruling, two states passed or introduced legislation to create new permitting programs to fill the gap in federal protections and eight states passed or introduced stronger laws and policies to strengthen state protections. Two states passed legislation weakening state-level protections, while efforts to weaken state protections failed in four other states.

A cartoon by Dan Piraro — @IrenaBuzarewicz

2024 #COleg: #Coloradoโ€™s new wetlands protections lead the nation 1 year after EPA rules were struck by Supreme Court — Fresh Water News

Autumn view of the wetlands and cottonwood groves in the Yampa River basin at Carpenter Ranch, located west of Steamboat Springs, Colorado. Photo courtesy of The Nature Conservancy

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

One year after  the U.S. Supreme Court removed federal regulations protecting wetlands and streams from development pressures in its Sackett v. the EPA decision, Colorado is the first state in the nation to pass legislation replacing those regulations, according to a new national report.

The report, by the Clean Water For All coalition and Lawyers for Good Government, shows that eight other states have taken action to restore some level of protection or are trying; five launched failed attempts to impose further cutbacks; and one state, Indiana, rolled back protections further. Thirty-five states have taken no action.

Environmentalists say the spotty response is a clear indication that Congress must intervene to create consistent, clearly defined protections that work for all states, and which protect rivers and wetlands that cross state boundaries.

โ€œDifferent states are struggling to see how to respond to it,โ€ said Kristine Oblock, senior campaign manager for the Clean Water for All coalition. โ€œAnd the state-by-state solutions are not going to be enough to protect our waters. โ€ฆ Our goal is to restore federal protections.โ€

The problem is particularly acute in Colorado and other Western states, where vast numbers of streams are temporary, or ephemeral, flowing only after major rainstorms and during spring runoff season, when the mountain snow melts. The Sackett decision said, in part, that only streams that flow year-round are subject to federal oversight. It also said that only wetlands that had a surface connection to continually flowing water bodies qualified for protection. Many wetlands in Colorado have a subsurface connection to streams, rather than one that can be observed above ground.

The Sackett decision came after decades of federal court battles over murky definitions about which waterways fall under the Clean Water Actโ€™s jurisdiction, which wetlands must be regulated, and what kinds of dredge-and-fill work in waterways should be permitted. There also were long-running disputes over what authority the act had over activities on farms and Western irrigation ditches, and what activities industry and wastewater treatment plants must seek permits for.

Finding a clear, bipartisan solution that Congress might embrace isnโ€™t likely to be easy. โ€œItโ€™s only been a year, so a lot of different entities are still working out the path forward,โ€ said Jonathan Wood, vice president of law and policy at Montana-based Property and Environment Research Center, or PERC, a conservative think tank that filed a brief supporting the Sacketts, in last yearโ€™s Supreme Court case. The Sacketts are private landowners.

โ€œItโ€™s possible that Congress could act,โ€ Wood said. โ€œI think there is an appetite for it but it seems unlikely. And if the suggestion is to just go back to how it was applied pre-Sackett, I donโ€™t see a path forward for that.โ€

Polls in Colorado and nationwide show majority support among Democrats, Republicans and independents for restoring protections.

Colorado lawmakers were able to win bipartisan backing for their bill after weeks of intense negotiations. Whether the same thing could occur at the national level is a big question.

โ€œBipartisan is easier at the state level because you arenโ€™t trying to regulate different hydrologies across the country. Any time youโ€™re trying to establish a rule that applies to New England and the West, it is difficult,โ€ Wood said. That Colorado lawmakers were able to agree on regulatory exemptions for agriculture, developers, some cities and other industries also likely helped propel the measure to passage, Wood said.

And there are other options besides Congress. PERCโ€™s mission is to find free market solutions to environmental problems. Wood said PERC would like to see incentives for private landowners to protect wetlands, something Indiana lawmakers approved this year, even after removing other protections. PERC would also like to see industry held accountable for paying the costs of restoring the wetlands that have already been lost.

โ€œWetlands reduce pollution from someone else, so why not make the polluters pay,โ€ Wood said. โ€œThese kinds of opportunities all provide a path forward that is less conflict ridden than the Clean Water Act regulations that have applied for the last several decades.โ€

Still, environmentalists plan to keep their eyes on Congress, said Josh Kuhn, senior water campaign manager for Conservation Colorado.

โ€œItโ€™s clear that there is bipartisan support for this effort from the public and we need them to make their voices heard,โ€ Kuhn said. โ€œDoing so will create the political will to address the threat of deteriorating water quality and the impacts of climate change,โ€ Kuhn said.

More by Jerd SmithJerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

#NewMexico to receive $18.9M in federal money for โ€˜forever chemicalโ€™ detection — Source New Mexico #PFAS

Staff from New Mexicoโ€™s Congressional Delegation, Rep. Melanie Stansbury, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 Director Earthea Nance present New Mexico Environment Department Secretary James Kenney, and Rebecca Roose, the infrastructure advisor to the governor, with an $18.9 million dollar check for โ€˜forever chemicalโ€™ detection on Thursday, May 23, 2024 at the Roundhouse rotunda. (Danielle Prokop / Source NM)

Click the link to read the article on the Source New Mexico website (Danielle Prokop):

May 24, 2024

Federal grant is authorized in two-year chunks, NM Environment Department aims to pull more than $47M for PFAS detection and clean-up over the next five years.

Big check energy at the Roundhouse.

National and state environmental officials celebrated a $18.9 million federal grant for most of New Mexicoโ€™s water systems to use over the next two years to detect โ€œforever chemicals,โ€ in the stateโ€™s drinking water.

State officials say they hope to pull down a total of $47.2 million in the next five years in additional rounds of federal grants. The first two years will focus on detection and subsequent phases will address removal of Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS for short) in drinking water.

More than 496 systems serving 231,000 New Mexicans are eligible for the funding, state officials said.

A check of this size will help the state โ€œfund its wayโ€ out of pollution, said New Mexico Environment Secretary James Kenney from the Roundhouse Rotunda.

โ€œThese forever chemicals will not be a forever legacy. We will address these chemicals and New Mexico will be the leader in the way we do that,โ€ he said.

What are PFAS?

This class of synthetic chemicals are ubiquitous, present in the blood of most people in the U.S. They are toxic and extremely hard to break down. There are nearly 15,000 types of these chemicals, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Their resistance to breaking down in sunlight, water, oil and fire over time makes them useful in fabrics, nonstick cookware, food packaging, in our carpets, clothes and firefighting foam. It also means they build up in our bodies, linked to cancer, heart and liver problems, developmental damage, vaccine resistance and other health issues.

Despite decades of rising concern about the dangers of these chemicals, the EPA only implemented drinking water limits for only the five most-common, releasing the final rule in April 2024.

These drinking water limits for the two most-studied and common chemicals โ€“ PFOA and PFOS โ€“ is 4 parts per trillion, the lowest limit the EPA believes to be technologically possible. The new rule requires water systems to be compliant by 2029.

The size of the problem will require billions of dollars in spending, with an estimated cost of $1.5 billion to implement the drinking water rules.

And thatโ€™s just the low estimate. The U.S. military estimated PFAS clean-up just on military bases and surrounding communities to be at least $31 billion.

New Mexico context

As the nation grapples with the reality of these contaminantsโ€™ omnipresence โ€“ in rainwaterin our bodiesin animals โ€“  New Mexico water systems are already struggling.

In 2021, the environment department found PFAS in at least 15 water systems in New Mexico, according to tests performed with federal assistance.

The most impacted communities are in Curry County and Otero County, according to that data. Thatโ€™s also where PFAS plumes from firefighting foam infiltrated the groundwater for decades next to military bases. The state tested more than three dozen cities and water systems for 28 compounds. Only five compounds are subject to the proposed limits.

Firefighting foam containing PFAS chemicals is responsible for contamination in Fountain Valley. Photo via USAF Air Combat Command

A Clovis dairy had to euthanize more than 3,600 cows after Cannon Air Force base contaminated water sources infiltrated wells on the dairy.

Rep. Melanie Stansbury described hearing about the moment, saying that the disaster made PFAS not just an economic issue, but a personal one for New Mexico.โ€

โ€œItโ€™s a big day for New Mexico. itโ€™s a big day for families, itโ€™s a big day for ranchers, and itโ€™s a big day in our fight to really tackle the chemical contaminants that affect our communities,โ€ Stansbury said.

Rebecca Roose, acting as the infrastructure czar in the governorโ€™s office said addressing PFAS is part of a larger plan to address water scarcity in the arid state.

โ€œWhen we talk about our water being polluted and contaminated and not safe, thereโ€™s few things we take more seriously than that,โ€ Roose said. โ€œPerhaps right up there with it is protecting the water so that it never becomes polluted, contaminated or unsafe, because there is not a drop of water to spare.โ€

The federal grant is funded from the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, which contained at least $9 billion earmarked for addressing PFAS contamination.

This is the first grant of its kind in the region, said Earthea Nance, who oversees EPA Region 6, which includes Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico.

Nance said there are no set plans for enforcement for holding PFAS polluters accountable in Region 6, but said that could change with more information.

โ€œI donโ€™t want to say no, because we mean, tomorrow, we could start putting a plan together,โ€ she said.

Nance said the EPA Region 6 office is relying on state officials to help determine how large the enforcement response will be.

โ€œBecause weโ€™re giving this money to the state of (New) Mexico, some of that will fall on them in terms of assessing the situation so that we can then figure out how to identify enforcement issues,โ€ Nance said.

EPA R6 Director Earthea Nance, right, sits with NMED Secretary James Kenney at Thursday, May 23, 2024 event in the rotunda. (Danielle Prokop / Source NM)

How does the program work?

The grant has the unwieldy name; Emerging Contaminants in Small or Disadvantaged Communities Program (EC-SDC). Name aside, it will allow for New Mexicoโ€™s environment leaders to spend up to $18.9 million over the next two years.

The programโ€™s first phase will oversee water sampling, creating a statewide database and outreach to water systems, according to environment department officials.

Public water systems with 10,000 or fewer connections, or communities where the median household income falls between $56,828 โ€“ $75,770 are eligible to opt in, using this form.

โ€œThe great thing about this grant is we will be hiring and controlling a lot of the contract work and actually implementing it, which does take a little bit of a relief off the water systems,โ€ said Kelsey Rader, the deputy division director for Water Protection with the state.

Rader said further federal money, two years from now, would offer more than testing, but also water treatment.

โ€œThatโ€™s whatโ€™s really special about this grant is that it covers everything from the testing, from the design to the actual remediation, in paying for the necessary upgrades,โ€ she said.

When asked if the $18.9 million is close to addressing the scope of PFAS in New Mexicanโ€™s water systems, Rader said the department doesnโ€™t have a date set on when theyโ€™ll be able to test every New Mexico system.

โ€œItโ€™s difficult to say when thatโ€™s going to happen,โ€ she said.

More work to do

Kenney said the state is still working to address current contamination, noting the environment department recently sent a letter asking for the federal government to commit to clean up water surrounding the Cannon Air Force base, not just beneath it.

A contentious court fight continues on, as the New Mexico Environment Department is still attempting to require the U.S. Air Force to follow state testing and treatment protocols over contamination at Cannon Air Force base. The case has stretched on for years in federal district court and now is in the 10th Circuit Appeals Courts.

The state is currently in mediation with the U.S. Air Force over the litigation and has been for over a year, said Bruce Baizel, the compliance and enforcement director for the environment department. The parties just extended that mediation period through late June.

The $18.9 million for clean-up would go farther, if peopleโ€™s contact with PFAS in everyday items were reduced, said Kenney.

โ€œIn our legislative session, Iโ€™d like to see a bill introduced that bans PFAS but for essential uses, like medical devices,โ€ he said. โ€œBut if given the choice of having a toxic chemical in your house that then becomes a toxic chemical in your body, I would choose not to have it in my house, or my body.โ€

Toโ€™Hajiilee water line groundbreaking: โ€œan impossible projectโ€ — John Fleck (InkStain.net)

An impossibility. Photo credit: John Fleck/InkStain.net

Click the link to read the article on the InkStain.net website (John Fleck):

May 15, 2024

With the obligatory shovels in pre-softened dirt, a group of political leaders from the Navajo Nation, New Mexico state and local government, and water agencies this morning (Wed. 5/15/2024) formally inaugurated a new pipeline being built to connect the Navajo community of Toโ€™Hajiilee to the 3.5 million gallon reservoir in the picture โ€“ clean, piped water to a community that now has one working well and water so bad no one drinks it.

One of the oldtimers whoโ€™d been working on it for more than two decades walked up to me and said, โ€œThis is an impossible project.โ€

What he meant was that the project had overcome seemingly insurmountable hurdles in the interactions between a welter of government agencies with overlapping jurisdictions and sometimes incompatible responsibilities.

I went to the event wearing two hats โ€“ as a member of the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authorityโ€™s Technical Customer Advisory Committee, and on behalf of the Utton Center, which has a long history of working on Native American water stuff. (I was literally wearing my ABCWUA gimme cap, I donโ€™t have an Utton one.)

Toโ€™Hajiilee, 35-ish miles west of Albuquerque, has six water wells. Five have already failed. The sixth is regularly off line. When itโ€™s down, they have to shut down school and the clinic. When itโ€™s working, the water is awful.

The vision statement from the Universal Access to Clean Water For Tribal Communities project is simple: โ€œEvery Native American has the right to clean, safe, affordable water in the home ensuring a minimum quality of life.โ€

In this 1999 book Development as Freedom, the Nobel laureate economist and moral philosopher Amartya Sen explains freedoms as โ€œthe capabilities that a person has, that is, the substantive freedoms he or she enjoys to lead the kind of life he or she has reason to value.โ€

โ€œRightsโ€ are tricky political terrain, because theyโ€™re often framed in negative terms โ€“ the absence of coercion or interference from others, particularly the state. But Senโ€™s making an affirmative argument here. It is not enough for the collective to simply get out of the individualโ€™s way. The collective has an affirmative moral obligation to create the conditions under which the individual can flourish โ€“ to pursue that which they โ€œhave reason to value,โ€ to repeat Sen. Thatโ€™s sorta what my friends at the Universal Access project are saying with their vision statement.

At the urging of a colleague, Iโ€™ve been reading Sen lately in an effort to make sense of the moral underpinnings of the collective choices we face as we cope with the reality of less water. (For those familiar with Sen, know that I am not reading the mathy parts โ€“ theyโ€™re impenetrable!)

THE PLUMBING โ€“ PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL

The Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utilityโ€™s 7W reservoir, the tan thing in the picture, sits on high ground midway between Albuquerque and Toโ€™Hajiilee, a perfect water source for the community. In eighteen months under the current construction schedule, weโ€™ll have a 7 mile pipe from here to there.

If the tally in my notes is correct (donโ€™t hold me to this, Iโ€™m not a real journalist any more), itโ€™s a ~$20 million project, with a mix of federal, state, and Navajo Nation funding.

The actual water in the pipes is the result of a fascinating agreement between the Navajo Nation and the Jicarilla Apache Nation in norther New Mexico. The Navajo Nation will lease Jicarailla water, which will be wheeled down the San Juan River, into the Rio Grande, and then diverted by the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority, treated, and pumped up to 7W.

THE STRUGGLES TO GET THIS DONE

Former Bernalillo County Commissioner Debbie Oโ€™Malley, speaking at the groundbreaking, told the story of the bare-knuckle politics it took to overcome the intransigence of a landowner that stood in the way of the project โ€“ Western Albuquerque Land Holdings. And for sure, Oโ€™Malley and the group she worked with deserve a ton of credit for the use of their knuckles at a critical point in the struggle to get the pipeline built.

But more important is the community of Toโ€™Hajiilee itself, people like Mark Begay, my colleague on the Albuquerque water utilityโ€™s Technical Customer Advisory Committee. For decades, Begay and the other leaders in Toโ€™Hajiilee acted on behalf of their community to pursue โ€œthat which they had reason to valueโ€ โ€“ water!

This is about the communityโ€™s own collective agency, โ€œthe result of collective processes and collective actions in which peopleโ€™s interactions shape their common destiny.โ€ (Oscar Garza-Vรกzquez)

It was a joy to share the celebration of their success. Iโ€™ll be back in 18 months when they open the taps.

#ClimateChange causing increase in metals concentrations in streams, study finds: Melting permafrost makes โ€˜phenomenal conduitโ€™ for unlocking new contaminants — @AspenJournalism

Lincoln Creek flows into Grizzly Reservoir and is a source of drinking water for Colorado Springs. Experts say mineral concentrations are increasing in streams across Colorado due to climate change. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Aspen Journalism website (Heather Sackett):

May 21, 2024

Coloradoโ€™s mountains are pockmarked with orange tailings piles, adits, tunnels and rusted tramways, the remnants of a historic mining industry often blamed for fouling the stateโ€™s waterways.

But a recent study points the finger at a different culprit as the cause of increasing metals concentrations in Coloradoโ€™s high mountain streams: climate change. And these findings have implications for local ecosystems and the water supplies of mountain communities.

Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Colorado Boulder analyzed water chemistry data over the past 40 years for 22 stream sites throughout Coloradoโ€™s mountains. They found that concentrations of zinc and copper have doubled over the past 30 years, with melting of previously frozen ground being a likely major cause.

โ€œThese trends are concerning because, even at low concentrations, dissolved metals can negatively affect downstream ecosystem health and the quality of water resources,โ€ reads the paper, which was published in Water Resources Research in late April.

Tanya Petach, a climate scientist at the Aspen Global Change Institute, worked on the study. She said the trend of increasing metals concentrations is relatively steep and widespread across Coloradoโ€™s mountains.

โ€œThereโ€™s this theory that those increases in metal concentrations in these streams are really driven by a climate change signal,โ€ Petach said. โ€œWe are really used to tying increases in metals to mining activities, but in this case, weโ€™re only seeing a climate response.โ€

The process that causes metals leaching into streams can be both naturally occurring and caused by mining activities. In both cases, sulfide minerals in rock come in contact with oxygen and water, producing sulfuric acid. The acid can then leach the metals out of the rock and into a stream, a process known as acid rock drainage. As temperatures warm, rock that has long been encased in ice becomes exposed to weathering.

โ€œThese high-elevation streams, some of them have mean annual air temperatures right around freezing,โ€ Petach said. โ€œSo you go from having permafrost to melting that permafrost. Once you lose the ice, youโ€™ve created a phenomenal conduit for new water and oxygen to come into contact with sulfide minerals that have been blocked for centuries, if not millennia.โ€

Diane McKnight, an environmental engineering professor at CU Boulderโ€™s Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, has been measuring the pH levels of the upper Snake River in Summit County for decades. On a recent trip with students, a stream that usually had a pH level of about 4 measured 2.75, meaning the acidity had greatly increased.

โ€œI said: Wait, the probe must be wrong, the probe must be broken,โ€ McKnight said. โ€œGuess what, the probe was not broken. โ€ฆ The public should be aware the world is changing and there are surprises.โ€ [ed. emphasis mine]

The study says declining streamflows are also contributing to increasing metals concentrations, but not as much as the increase in acid rock drainage caused by climate change.

This map shows 22 stream sites throughout Coloradoโ€™s mountains where scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Colorado Boulder analyzed water chemistry data over the past 40 years.

Lincoln Creek similarities

These findings on the Snake River and other sites in Colorado are important for the members of a workgroup trying to figure out how to address increasing metals concentrations in Lincoln Creek above Aspen. Although Lincoln Creek wasnโ€™t one of the sites included in the study, the conditions in Lincoln Creek mirror many of the headwaters study sites.

โ€œLincoln Creek is very intriguing because it matches a similar pattern,โ€ Petach said. โ€œThe Lincoln Creek system seems fairly similar to a lot of these other high-elevation headwaters catchments where this occurs.โ€

Water quality issues in Lincoln Creek have been a concern for years and have been getting worse. A November report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency showed that metals concentrations in Lincoln Creek are high enough to be toxic to fish and aquatic life. The creek above Grizzly Reservoir exceeds state water quality standards for aluminum, cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese and zinc, and aluminum and copper concentrations were higher than standards set by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) in multiple locations.

The report found that the vast majority of the contamination was coming from a โ€œmineralized tributaryโ€ to Lincoln Creek and not from the nearby Ruby Mine, where prospectors in the early 1900s dug for gold, silver and lead.

A workgroup dedicated to Lincoln Creek and composed of officials from state, local and federal agencies, nonprofit environmental groups and others has been meeting often since the EPA report was released. Since the EPA is authorized to address elevated metals concentrations only from human-caused activities like mining, itโ€™s unclear how the contamination would be cleaned up or what agency is responsible for it.

But the workgroup is making headway on the issue, said member Karin Teague, executive director of the nonprofit environmental group Independence Pass Foundation.

โ€œIt could be a model for how a community might respond to contamination in its watershed,โ€ Teague said. โ€œWe are really getting our arms around the problem, the extent of it, the nature of it, and then, of course, the million-dollar question being: What, if anything, can be done about it?โ€

Pitkin County Environmental Health Manager Kurt Dahl and Pitkin County Healthy Rivers Administrator Lisa Tasker gave an update on the groupโ€™s progress to county commissioners at a work session Tuesday. There are plans for four different water quality projects this summer: the U.S. Forest Service plans to collect water quantity and flow data; Colorado Parks and Wildlife will monitor metals concentrations in Lincoln Creek and the Roaring Fork River; the Roaring Fork Conservancy will take samples below Grizzly Reservoir to look for impacts related to a Grizzly Dam rehabilitation project; and scientists and students from CUโ€™s INSTAAR program will look for rare earth metals in the water, sediment and bugs of Lincoln Creek. Pitkin County has approved grants for three of the four projects so far.

Grizzly Reservoir was a bright shade of turquoise in September 2022. The man-made alpine lake has high concentrations of metals that are toxic to fish, according to a report from the Environmental Protection Agency. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

What about the water supply?

Lincoln Creek is one of seven streams in the Roaring Fork basinโ€™s headwaters that feed the Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Co.โ€™s Independence Pass transmountain diversion system, which provides drinking water sources for Front Ranges cities, including Colorado Springs, which owns a majority of the systemโ€™s water. Grizzly Reservoir, on Lincoln Creek below the contamination source, is used as a collection pool for water collected from the creeks, which is sent through the Twin Lakes Tunnel to the Arkansas River basin and eventually to the Front Range. The Snake River system where McKnight has conducted research flows into Dillon Reservoir, Denver Waterโ€™s biggest storage bucket.

A map of the Independence Pass Transmountain Diversion System, as submitted to Div. 5 Water Court by Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Co.

The EPA report said that in the case of Lincoln Creek, the dilution, the distance the water travels and the water-treatment process limit the impacts to drinking water. But since the issue is widespread across Coloradoโ€™s mountains, communities that get their drinking water from high-elevation streams could be impacted.

โ€œThese metal concentrations tend to be diluted when the small tributaries confluence with larger, cleaner streams, so we donโ€™t tend to think of these as being a huge problem for large municipal water supplies,โ€ Petach said. โ€œBut the place where it could impact the drinking water supply is in high-elevation mountain communities that are receiving waters from smaller tributaries.โ€

The city of Aspen gets the majority of its drinking water from Castle Creek, a mountainous tributary of the Roaring Fork River. Aspenโ€™s Utilities Resource Manager Steve Hunter said that source water protection is a key concern for the city.

โ€œAfter talking with our water treatment staff, they are not seeing a rise in these metals at the treatment plant and all treated water meets or exceeds CDPHE/EPA requirements,โ€ Hunter said in a prepared statement. He added that the city has not done source water sampling for these compounds in either Castle or Maroon Creek watersheds as CDPHE/EPA does not require testing Aspenโ€™s source water for these compounds.

This story ran in the May 22 edition of The Aspen Times, the May 23 edition of the Vail Daily.

Map of the Roaring Fork River drainage basin in western Colorado, USA. Made using USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69290878

#Climate health risks posed by floods, droughts and water quality call for urgent action — European Environment Agency #ActOnClimate

Click the link to read the release on the European Environment Agency website (Cesare Barillร ):

May 14, 2024

Climate change is worsening floods, droughts and is reducing water quality, posing an increasing threat to our health, according to a European Environment Agency (EEA) report published today.ย Fast-tracking implementation and better coordination of efforts by governments, water authorities and healthcare providers are urgently needed to prevent and reduce health impacts.

The EEA report ‘Responding to climate change impacts on human health in Europe: focus on floods, droughts and water qualityโ€™ draws attention to the water-related impacts of climate change on health and well-being that are already felt across Europe and include deaths, injuries, outbreaks of infectious diseases and mental health consequences.

Between 1980 and 2022, 5,582 flood-related deaths and 702 wildfire-related deaths were recorded across 32 European countries. Already today, one in eight Europeans lives in areas potentially prone to river floods and around 30% of people in southern Europe face permanent water stress. Climate change willย further increase exposureย of people to weather extremes with serious health consequences. Senior citizens, children, those in poor health, lower income groups, farmers and emergency service teams are among the groups experiencing greatest health impacts from floods, droughts, wildfires or water- and vector-borne diseases.

With these facts, the report underscores the critical need toย urgently implement existing EU legislation, notably various European climate, water and health policies and integrate them further, and roll out the already existing solutions across all sectors and government levels to protect lives, prevent adverse health outcomes and increase wellbeing.

“Protecting human lives and health from the impacts of climate change, including droughts, floods and worsened water quality is of utmost importance and urgency.ย Existing European climate, water and health policies offer a solid foundation for action, but they need to be implemented more broadly and systematically.ย To ensure our future well-being all levels of government across many sectors need to put in place effective solutions so that we can prevent and reduce physical and mental health impacts. We support them with knowledge through the activities of the EEA and the European Climate and Health Observatory.” — Leena Ylรค-Mononen

Faster rollout of effective solutions

To enhance our preparedness for future climate-related challenges to health from floods, water scarcity and deteriorated water quality, responses are needed in both the health sector and other sectors that have an impact on health, including water management, spatial planning, building design or insurance.

The EEA report seeks to inspire action by showing various examples of practical solutions implemented in the EEA member and collaborating countries.

A precondition for upscaled action is the greaterย integration of climate change into health policiesย in Member States and increased resources and competencies for climate change adaptation with a focus on health at subnational levels.ย Quick winsย include raising public awareness about the risks and solutions, whileย longer-term actions, including infrastructure improvements and nature-based solutions, require systematic planning and investment. The differences in vulnerability of various population groups and the geographical variation of impacts require anย equity-based, targeted approachย to preventing health impacts for all under the changing climate.

Sources/Usage: Public Domain. Post-wildfire flooding and debris flow in a small canyon above the Las Lomas debris basin in Duarte, the winter after the the June 2016 Fish Fire in Los Angeles County, California.

Key risks calling for action

Floods

  • Between 1980 and 2022,ย 5,584 flood-related deathsย were recorded in the 32 EEA member countries.
  • Currently, around 53 million people (12% of Europeโ€™s population) live in areas potentially prone toย river flooding, although often with flood defences in place. This number increased by 935,000 between 2011 and 2021, showing continuous development on floodplains.
  • One in nine hospitals in Europe is located in areas potentially prone to river flooding.
US Drought Monitor June 28, 2012

Droughts and water scarcity

  • Due to demand for water and droughts, regions in Europe are under nearlyย permanent water stress, and not just in the south.
  • Prolonged spells of dry and hot weather facilitate the spread ofย wildfires, mainly in southern Europe, but increasingly in other regions. Between 1980 and 2022, 702 people lost lives directly through wildfires in the 32 EEA member countries, and many more were affected by wildfire smoke.
Waterborne diseases are a significant global concern, particularly in regions with inadequate sanitation and contaminated water sources. Understanding the symptoms of waterborne diseases and implementing preventive measures is crucial to maintaining public health. Credit: Medium

Water quality

  • Rising air and water temperatures facilitateย pathogen growth, increasing the risk of waterborne diseases.
  • Heavy rainfall events make it twice as likely to haveย harmful pathogen concentrations in water bodiesย due to contaminated run-off and combined sewage overflows.
  • In low-lying areas, sea level rise causesย intrusion of saline waterย into groundwater and surface water aquifers, with spillover effects on crops.
  • Low flows during dry periods result inย higher concentrations of pollutants, requiring costly wastewater treatment. During dry and hot periods, cyanobacterial blooms in nutrient-rich waters can jeopardise water quality.

About the report

The report is published as part of activities of the European Climate and Health Observatory, building on and complementing the Observatoryโ€™s work. The report follows from the European Climate Risk Assessment published earlier this year, which highlighted health as one of the at-risk sectors.

โ€˜Time is running outโ€™: Navajo Nation urges Congress to act on Radiation Exposure Compensation Act expansion bill — #Utah News Dispatch

Navajo miners near Cove, Arizona in 1952. (Photograph by Milton Jack Snow, courtesy of Doug Brugge/Memories Come To Us In the Rain and the Wind)

Click the link to read the article on the Utah News Dispatch website (Shondin Silversmith):

May 16, 2024

Kathleen Tsosie remembers seeing her dad come home every evening with his clothes covered in dirt. As a little girl, she never questioned why, and she was often more excited to see if he had any leftover food in his lunchbox.

โ€œWe used to go through his lunch and eat whatever he didnโ€™t eat,โ€ Tsosie said, recalling when she was around 4 years old. โ€œAnd he always had cold water that came back from the mountain.โ€

Tsosieโ€™s father, grandfather, and uncles all worked as uranium miners on the Navajo Nation near Cove, Arizona, from the 1940s to the 1960s. The dirt Tsosieโ€™s father was caked in when he arrived home came from the mines, and the cold water he brought back was from the nearby springs.

Tsosie grew up in Cove, a remote community located at the foothills of the Chuska mountain range in northeastern Arizona. There are 56 abandoned mines located in the Cove area, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

In the late 1960s, Tsosie said her grandfather started getting sick. She remembers herding sheep with him and how he would often rest under a tree, asking her to push on his chest because it hurt.

Tsosie said she was about 7 years old when her uncles took her grandfather to the hospital. At the time, she didnโ€™t know why he was sick, but later on, she learned he had cancer. Her grandfather died in October 1967.

Over a decade later, Tsosieโ€™s father also started getting sick. She remembers when he came to visit her in Wyoming; she was rubbing his shoulders when she felt a lump. She told him to get it checked out because he complained about how painful it was.

Her father was diagnosed with cancer in 1984 and went through treatments, but died in April 1985.

โ€œWhen my dad passed away, everybody knew it was from the mine,โ€ Tsosie said. He was just the latest on a long list of Navajo men from her community who worked in the uranium mines and ended up getting sick and passing away.

She recalls how her father used to tell her that, one day, it may happen to him, but she did not want to believe him. Her dad worked in the uranium mines for over 20 years.

The sickness did not stop there. In February of 2007, Tsosie was diagnosed with breast cancer, and she would spend years in treatment and eventually go into remission in December 2007.

But, this year, Tsosie got the news in February that her cancer has returned, and she is now taking the steps toward getting treatment.

Tsosieโ€™s family history with uranium mining and growing up in an area downwind from nuclear testing sites is similar to many Navajo families in Arizona, Utah and New Mexico. Her family is among the thousands potentially impacted by radiation from nuclear weapon testing, according to National Cancer Institute research.

Because of that history, Tsosie became an advocate for issues related to downwinders and uranium mine workers from the Navajo Nation, including the continuation of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act.

The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or RECA, provides a program that compensates individuals who become ill because of exposure to radiation from the United Statesโ€™ development and testing of nuclear weapons.

RECA was initially set to expire in 2022, but President Joe Biden signed a measure extending the program for two more years. Now, itโ€™s set to expire in less than a month.

Tsosie first heard of the program in the 1990s after her mother applied for it because her father was a uranium mine worker. She remembers the day her mother got a compensation check for $100,000 and handed it to her.

โ€œShe gave it to me, and she said, โ€˜This is from your dad,โ€™โ€ Tsosie said, adding that her mother didnโ€™t go into many details at the time, only saying that families with loved ones who died of cancer were getting checks.

Tsosie said she was upset about the check because her father had died, and $100,000 was nothing in comparison.

โ€œI was really mad, and thatโ€™s just how the federal government thinks of us as Navajo people,โ€ she explained.

The second time she worked with RECA was for her own case. After her cancer treatments concluded in December 2007, she took some time to heal before determining in March 2008 whether she qualified for RECA. She did qualify and received compensation.

Since RECA was passed in 1990, more than 55,000 claims have been filed. Of those, more than 41,000 claims, or about 75%, have been approved โ€” and roughly $2.6 billion had been paid out as of the end of 2022.

Claims for โ€œdownwindersโ€ yield $50,000. For uranium mines and mill workers providing ore to construct nuclear weapons, claimants typically receive $100,000.

Proving that exposure to nuclear waste and radiation causes cancers and other diseases is difficult. However, the federal program doesnโ€™t require claimants to prove causation: They only have to show that they or a relative had a qualifying disease after working or living in certain locations during specific time frames.

In July 2023, the U.S. Senate voted to expand and extend the RECA program, and it was attached as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, which funds the Department of Defense.

It could have extended health care coverage and compensation to more uranium industry workers and โ€œdownwindersโ€ exposed to radiation in several new regions โ€” Colorado, Missouri, New Mexico, Idaho, Montana, and Guam โ€” and expanded coverage to new parts of Arizona, Nevada and Utah.

The defense spending bill for 2024 was signed into law on Dec. 22 by Biden, but the RECA expansion was cut from the final bill before it landed on his desk.

When she heard that the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act amendments failed to pass, Tsosie said it really impacted her, and she cried because so many people deserve that funding.

โ€œI know what it feels like. I know what it feels like to suffer,โ€ she said.

Without an extension, RECA is set to expire in June, and the deadline for claims to be postmarked is June 10, 2024, according to the DOJ.

Navajo leaders advocate for RECA

The sunset of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act is approaching fast, and leaders from the Navajo Nation are urging Congress to act on the expansion bill that has been waiting for the U.S. House of Representatives to take it up for more than two months.

โ€œTime is running out,โ€ Justin Ahasteen, the executive director of the Navajo Nation Washington Office, said in a press release.

โ€œEvery day without these amendments means another day without justice for our people,โ€ he added. โ€œWe urge Congress to stand on the right side of history and pass these crucial amendments.โ€

Republican Sen. Josh Hawley from Missouri introduced S. 3853 โ€“ The Radiation Exposure Compensation Reauthorization Act, which funds RECA past its June sunset date for another six years.

The bill passed through the U.S. Senate with a bipartisan 69-30 vote on March 7.  But since being sent to the House on March 11, the bill hasnโ€™t moved.

The RECA expansion bill would include more communities downwind of nuclear test sites in the United States and Guam. It would extend eligibility for uranium workers to include those who worked after 1971. Communities harmed by radioactive waste from the tests could apply for the program, and expansion would also boost compensation payments to account for inflation.

โ€œThe Navajo Nation calls for immediate passage of S. 3853,โ€ Ahasteen said in a press release. โ€œThis is to ensure that justice is no longer delayed for the Navajo people and other affected communities.โ€

Ahasteen told the Arizona Mirror in an interview that congressional leaders holding the bill back due to the programโ€™s expense is not a good enough reason not to pass it.

โ€œThey keep referencing the cost and saying itโ€™s too expensive,โ€ he said. But, he explained, the RECA expansion is only a sliver of U.S. spending on foreign aid or nuclear development.

And it shouldnโ€™t even be a matter of cost, Ahasteen said, because people have given their lives and their health in the interest of national security.

โ€œThe bill has been paid with the lives and the health of the American workers who were exposed unjustly to radiation because the federal government kept it from them and they lied about the dangers,โ€ he said. 

Navajo uranium miners at the Rico Mine in 1953. (Source: The Navajo Uranium Miner Oral History and Photography Project at the Center for Southwest Research, University Libraries, University of New Mexico)

From 1945 to 1992, the U.S. conducted a total of 1,030 nuclear tests, according to the Arms Control Association.

Many were conducted at the Nevada Test Site, with 928 nuclear tests conducted at the site between 1951 and 1992, according to the Nevada National Security Site. About 100 of those were atmospheric tests, and the rest were underground detonations.

According to the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, atmospheric tests involved unrestrained releases of radioactive materials directly into the environment, causing the largest collective dose of radiation thus far from man-made radiation sources.

Between the 1940s and 1990s, thousands of uranium mines operated in the United States, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Most operated in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico and Arizona, typically on federal and tribal lands.

The number of mining locations associated with uranium is around 15,000, according to the EPA, and of those, more than 4,000 have documented uranium production.

Navajo Nation leaders advocated and worked with officials in Washington, D.C., for decades to get the amendments added to the RECA that would benefit more Navajo people who have been impacted by uranium mining, as well as radiation exposure.

Their efforts continue with the current expansion bill: Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren, Navajo Nation Council Speaker Crystalyne Curley and the Navajo Nation Washington Office team have been working on an advocacy push this week with congressional leaders.

โ€œOur people have borne the cost of Americaโ€™s nuclear program in their health and well-being,โ€ Nygren said in a written statement. โ€œThe amendments we advocate for today are not merely legislative changes; they are affirmations of justice and a commitment to heal the wounds of the past.โ€

On May 14, Nygren and Curley met with former Navajo uranium miners and members of Congress to urge passage of the amendments before RECA expires in a few weeks.

โ€œAs the Navajo Nation, we feel that thatโ€™s the best fit for us, especially for our miners,โ€ Curley told the Mirror about her support of the expansion bill.

Curley said sheโ€™s spent her time in Washington educating congressional leaders about the Navajo Nation and the impact uranium mining has had on their people.

โ€œA lot of our Navajo fathers, grandparents, and uncles went into these mines without any protection,โ€ she said. โ€œAnd now, many decades later, weโ€™re dealing with the health effects.โ€

The legacy of uranium mining has impacted the Navajo Nation for decades, from abandoned mines to contaminated waste disposal.

From 1944 to 1986, nearly 30 million tons of uranium ore were extracted from Navajo lands, according to the EPA, and hundreds of Navajo people worked in the mines, often living and raising families in close proximity to the mines and mills.

Ahasteen said those numbers show exactly how large the uranium operations were on the Navajo Nation and the impact it would have on the Navajo people.

โ€œThere are photos on record to show Navajo people being exploited, not given any proper protective equipment, but (the federal government) knew about the dangers of radiation since the โ€™40s,โ€ Ahasteen said. โ€œThey were given a shovel and a hard hat, and they were told: Go to work. Youโ€™ll earn lots of money. Youโ€™ll have a nice life, and we did that, but it didnโ€™t work so well for us.โ€

Although the mines are no longer operational across the Navajo Nation, contamination continues, including 523 abandoned uranium mines in addition to homes and water sources with heightened levels of radiation.

The health risks associated with this contamination include the possibility of lung cancer from inhaling radioactive particles, as well as bone cancer and impaired kidney function resulting from exposure to radionuclides in drinking water.

โ€œWe want to remind all of the members of Congress that it was because of the Navajo Nation that we are where we are today,โ€ Ahasteen said. โ€œIt is because of the uranium workers (that) the United States is the nuclear power that it is today.โ€

Ahasteen said the Navajo people have demonstrated their patriotism for the U.S. time and time again, but the country continues not to recognize that.

โ€œThatโ€™s really whatโ€™s appalling,โ€ he added.

As of December 2022, the U.S. Department of Justice stated that 7,704 claims from tribal citizens representing 24 tribal nations had been filed with the RECA program, 5,310 had been granted and more than $362.5 million had been awarded.

Navajo people make up 86% of the claimants, according to the DOJ, and they have received awards totaling more than $297 million.

RECAโ€™s downwind affected area covers land within multiple federally recognized tribal nations, including the Navajo, Hopi and White Mountain Apache.

Ahasteen provided RECA claim numbers for Arizona as of April 2023. A total of 15,603 RECA claims had been submitted in Arizona, 3,052 of which came from the Navajo Nation.

โ€œThat accounts for about 20% of all claims in Arizona,โ€ he said.

In New Mexico, he said that there were a total of 7,300 claims, and 2,900 were Navajo.

โ€œThat means 40% of all of New Mexico claims are Navajo,โ€ Ahasteen said. โ€œCombined between Arizona and New Mexico, Navajo makes up about a fourth of all RECA claims.โ€

Ahasteen said it is disappointing that the program is approaching expiration and that the expansion bill still hasnโ€™t moved in the House.

โ€œWe are hopeful that when it is brought to the House floor for a vote, Congress will speak, and they will move forward with the amendments because itโ€™s the right thing to do,โ€ he added.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Graphic credit: Environmental Protection Agency

Despite $Billions Spent, Tide of Harmful Farm Pollutants Grows Ever Larger: โ€œBest management practicesโ€ are not impeding flow of farm nutrients into nationโ€™s waters — The Circle of Blue

Click the link to read the article on the Circle of Blue website (Keith Schneider):

April 15, 2024

Kindra Arnesen is a 46-year-old commercial fishing boat operator who has spent most of her life among the pelicans and bayous of southern Louisiana, near the juncture where the 2,350-mile-long Mississippi River ends at the Gulf of Mexico.

Clark Porter is a 62-year-old farmer who lives in north-central Iowa where he spends part of his day working as an environmental specialist for the state and the other part raising corn and soybeans on hundreds of acres that his family has owned for over a century.

Though theyโ€™ve never met, and live 1,100 miles apart, Arnesen and Porter share a troubling kinship โ€“ both of their communities are tied to a deepening water pollution crisis that is fouling the environment and putting public health in peril across multiple US states.

Gulf hypoxic dead zone

Arnesenโ€™s home lies near an oxygen-depleted expanse of the northern Gulf known as the โ€œdead zone,โ€ where dying algae blooms triggered by contaminants flowing out of the Mississippi River choke off oxygen, suffocating shrimp and other marine life.

Porterโ€™s farm is positioned at the center of the Upper Mississippi River Basin where streams and other surface waters saturated with farm wastes flood into the big river, and contaminated groundwater permeates drinking water wells. Cancer incidence in Iowaย is among the nationโ€™s highest,ย and is rising.ย 

Unprotected farm fields yield topsoil as well as farm fertilizers and other potential pollutants when heavy rains occur.

The culprit at the center of it all is a colossal tide of fertilizer and animal manure that runs off fields in Iowa and other farm states to find its way into the Mississippi River. The same agricultural pollution problems are plaguing other iconic US waterways, includingย Chesapeake Bayย andย Lake Erie.

US farmers use more fertilizer and spread more manure than in most other countries, accounting for roughly 10 percent of global fertilizer use, behind China and India. But while the nutrients contained in animal manure and fertilizer are known to nourish crop growth, the resulting nitrogen and phosphorous that end up in waterways are known to create severe health problems for people.

A grand government plan to address the problem has cost taxpayers billions of dollars with minimal results so far, and nowhere is the problem more pronounced than in the Mississippi River Basin.

The reasons for the persistent pollution problem are multi-fold, including strong industry opposition to regulations to control the farm contaminants, and a perverse system in which some government programs incentivize farming practices that add to the pollution even as other government programs try to induce farmers to reduce the pollution.

โ€œYouโ€™re talking about systemic dysfunction,โ€ said Matt Liebman, professor emeritus of agronomy and sustainable agriculture at Iowa State University.

(The MARB has some of the most productive farming regions in the world and contains parts of 31 states. Source: Paper No. JAWR-20-0047-P of the Journal of the American Water Resources Association.)

An โ€œextraordinary taskโ€

The US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A) has called nutrient pollution โ€œthe single greatest challenge to our nationโ€™s water quality,โ€ and acknowledges that much of the nutrient pollution flowing into the northern Gulf originates on agricultural land. For nearly 30 years the agency has led a task force that includes tribal leaders and officials from 12 states working together to try to impede fertilizer and manure from running off cropland at the center of the country.

The task force has set a goal of reducing the five-year average extent of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf to less than 2,000 square miles by 2035. To meet that goal, the task force has been trying to cut total nitrogen and phosphorous loads in the water 20 percent by 2025 and 48 percent by 2035.

Key to the effort are a suite of voluntary conservation practices promoted by the US Department of Agriculture (U.S.D.A.) aimed at reducing the pollution, including idling land, not tilling before planting, using cover crops to protect the soil, and building retention ponds and wetlands to collect and absorb nitrogen. Farmers are also encouraged to plant nitrogen-absorbing vegetation in buffer strips along streams. The U.S.D.A. said in 2015 that the conservation programs were making headway, but in 2022 reported that efforts to reduce flows of nitrogen and phosphorus off farmland were showing negligible results.

The E.P.A. did not respond to a request for an interview. The U.S.D.A. said in an email message that In separate reports in 2017 and 2022 agency researchers โ€œdocumented some promising trends nationally for reducing nutrient losses, such as increases in cover crop use, increased use of advanced technologies such as use of enhanced efficiency fertilizers and use of variable rate fertilizer application technologies, and a slight increase in soil testing. However, the key finding was that there was a national decline in nutrient management over a decade resulting in an increased loss of subsurface nitrogen and soluble phosphorus loss.โ€

The US has spent more than $30 billion since 1997 on efforts to clean up the Mississippi Basin, but inย a 2023 progress reportย to Congress the E.P.A. said much more work is needed. Reducing nutrient loads is โ€œan extraordinary task,โ€ the E.P.A. report states. โ€œAttempts to intercept, treat, or otherwise address nutrients after they are mobilized on the landscape are complex, difficult, and often costly.โ€

Last summer, the oxygen-depleted Gulf โ€œhypoxicโ€ zone measured roughly 3,000 square miles, which was smaller than in previous years. But experts said that was mostly due to a deep drought in the Midwest that reduced the riverโ€™s flow into the Gulf. In 2021, after a wet spring and summer, the Gulfโ€™s hypoxic zone was close to 6,000 square miles.

And despite government efforts, nutrient loads to the Gulf in 2020 tallied roughly 3.7 billion pounds of nitrogen and 452 million pounds of phosphorous from what the government calls the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin (MARB), the task force said in its report. That was up from total MARB nutrient loads to the Gulf in 2017, which were approximately 3.3 billion pounds of nitrogen and 314 million pounds of phosphorus, according to the 2019 task force progress report.

โ€œMore nitrogen is coming off the fields,โ€ said R. Eugene Turner, professor emeritus of oceanography and coastal sciences at Louisiana State University and an expert on the Gulf hypoxic zone. โ€œOn average the load and the concentrations of nitrogen in the river are not coming down.โ€

The primary cause is more nitrogen pouring off the land from the big upper Mississippi River Basin farm states. From 2010 to 2022 the average annual amount of nitrogen leaving farmland in Iowa was 666 million pounds. That was 14 percent more nitrogen than from 1980-1996, according to state data.  

In Minnesota, state authorities found nitrogen in major rivers, including the Mississippi increased from 21 percent to 55 percent over the past 20 years, according to a summary report in 2020.

Silvia Secchi, a professor and natural resource economist at the University of Iowa, agreed. Government agencies โ€œtell you they are spending all this money, therefore they must be doing something right. But if you look at water quality data, at whatโ€™s really happening, itโ€™s getting worse, not better.

โ€œWe have a tremendous amount of nutrients that pollute all the waters here, and end up killing fish and damaging the environment downstream,โ€ Secchi said.

Jerry Stoefen, a farmer from New Liberty, Iowa concerned about nutrient pollution reads results of a nitrate test strip that shows nitrate concentrations in Rock Creek behind his house at 20 parts per million, or 20 times natural background levels. Nitrate, a toxic pollutant, forms when nitrogen mixes with oxygen. Photo credit: Circle of Blue

โ€œLike a jigsaw puzzleโ€

Thereโ€™s a reason federal and state agencies count so heavily on conservation practices to cure nutrient pollution. In field trials conducted by agricultural universities, and where farmers apply them over a period of years, they really work. The use of cover crops, which are planted not to be harvested but to provide a protective layer over soil, have been found to significantly reduce nutrient runoff. Planting vegetation in drainage ditches, installing sediment retention ponds, and building wetlands are also known to be effective.

Two of the largest conservation programs are the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), both administered by the US Department of Agriculture (U.S.D.A).

Last year, the U.S.D.A. spent $400 million in CSP and EQIP payments in the six biggest Mississippi River Basin farm states โ€“ Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin. Itโ€™s a portion of the roughly $2 billion that the federal and state governments annually spend on conservation programs in the Mississippi Basin, according to Michael Happ, a researcher at the Minneapolis-based Institute of Agriculture and Trade Policy

But farmers in those six states โ€“ the basinโ€™s largest source of nitrogen โ€“ applied CSP and EQIP practices to fewer than 3 million acres, according to federal data. Thatโ€™s less than 3 percent of the 119 million acres of cropland in those states.  

Sociologists who study why producers arenโ€™t flocking to be paid to improve soil, conserve water, reduce runoff, and lower expenses, say the biggest impediments are the substantial changes required in how they farm. And their fear of losing productivity and revenue.

As a specialist with the Iowa Department of Agriculture who counsels farmers on best management practices, Porter explains it this way: โ€œItโ€™s perceived risk. Fear and worry about the effects on their drainage and their bottom line, and on yields. Itโ€™s a different system of farming than the one theyโ€™re using.โ€

Porter says his Iowa farm is an example of how effective changing farm practices can be in improving water quality. He started planting cover crops in 2011 on 550 acres to reduce erosion, build soil health, and keep excess nitrogen fertilizer in the ground. He constructed buffer zones in low-lying areas to prevent nitrogen from draining into streams. He retired 13 acres and raised a fertilizer-free meadow. The cost has been paid by state and federal grants.

As his diligence and techniques took hold over a decade, the farmโ€™s soil fertility improved and the amount of fertilizer he spread diminished, as did the level of toxic nutrients leaving his land.  Samples of water draining from his farm showed nitrogen concentrations of 1 to 2 parts per million, equivalent to natural background levels.

โ€œItโ€™s a little like a jigsaw puzzle,โ€ said Porter. โ€œItโ€™s a systemic solution with multiple layers of best management practices that you fit together based on your topography, your soil types. Itโ€™s all available. It can work.โ€

Porter is trying to convince other farmers in his state to follow in his footsteps. โ€œIโ€™m getting yields that Iโ€™m happy with. Iโ€™m not spending as much money on the front end,โ€ he said. โ€œI feel better about the effects on my neighbors and people downstream.โ€

Nancy Rabalais, a marine ecologist at Louisiana State University, has led voyages to document the expanse of the Gulf hypoxic โ€œdeadโ€ zone, since 1985. (Photo courtesy of Nancy Rabalais)

โ€œNot like it is nowโ€

One big reason many farmers have not been eager to embrace changes that lead to cleaner water is simply because they have not had to.

The federal Clean Water Act enacted in 1972 provided the E.P.A and states powerful authority to limit chemicals and contaminants from being discharged into US waterways through a โ€œpoint sourceโ€, defined as pipes and manmade ditches. The law does not consider flows from irrigated croplands or stormwater discharges as point sources.

At the time in the early 1970s, the implications of waiving oversight of farm pollution was not thoroughly evaluated. US agriculture largely consisted of smaller, lower-polluting, mixed crop and livestock farms that grazed animals in manure-absorbing pastures.

But carving farms out of the Clean Water Actโ€™s reach has since proved to be a significant factor in worsening water quality. Had the farm sector been held accountable for its waste, it would have been compelled to keep fertilizer and manure spread on fields out of surface and groundwater. That, in turn, would have kept farms operating at a scale that brought environmental costs in line with revenue.

Another barrier to any meaningful reduction in nutrient pollution is the action by Congress to incentivize farmers to plant corn, a crop that when conventionally grown requires large amounts of nitrogen fertilizer. US farmers grow more corn each year than they can sell, driven by government incentives โ€“ a practice that enriches companies selling corn seed and the chemicals used to grow corn โ€“ but results in range of harmful environmental injuries, including fouling waterways.

โ€œThe scale of the problem dwarfs the level of response, unless you change the design of the dominant crop and livestock production systems,โ€ said ISUโ€™s Liebman.

When it was first identified in the 1950s, what scientists now call the Northern Gulf Hypoxia Zone was seen as a small biological curiosity. But in the 1980s, as researchers gained greater understanding of the peril to marine life, they started mapping the size of the toxic zone, documenting its ominous growth. Congress passed the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act in 1998 to address pollution in US coastal waters by pinpointing sources of nutrient contamination and their environmental consequences, and working to slash the pollution.  

Now, more than two decades later, the money and time seems largely wasted, at least to Arnesen, who sees the deadly toll the toxic tide takes on marine life in her work operating a fishing boat. 

โ€œI started fishing offshore in the Northern Gulf of Mexico 25 years ago,โ€ she said in an interview. โ€œWe caught everything. Not like it is now. Algae blooms cause massive fish kills. Weโ€™re seeing it all over the northern Gulf. Itโ€™s affecting the overall ecology of the system. It also affects me as a human being. We consume water out of the river. I try not to think about it. It scares me.โ€

This report was originally published by The New Lede and is part of an ongoing series looking at how agricultural policies are affecting human and environmental health.

Created by Imgur user Fejetlenfej , a geographer and GIS analyst with a โ€˜lifelong passion for beautiful maps,โ€™ it highlights the massive expanse of river basins across the country โ€“ in particular, those which feed the Mississippi River, in pink.

2024 #COleg: Coloradoโ€™s demand for water is slated to surpass supplies by 2050. Did lawmakers do enough to address the crisis? — The #Denver Post

A wetland along Castle Creek. Photo credit: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:

May 18, 2024

Nine major bills aim to reduce water use in cities, replace nixed federal protections of wetlands and minimize the amount of toxic โ€œforever chemicalsโ€ leaching into water supplies. Gov. Jared Polis already has signed four of the bills into law, while four more await his signature and one will go to voters…But momentum must continue if Colorado is to avoid looming water shortages, lawmakers and advocates said. Critical conversations aboutย paying farmers and others to use less waterย and making sure that conserved water is used thoughtfully must turn into policy, they said…

The biggest achievement this year, lawmakers and advocates said, was the passage ofย House Bill 1379, whichย fills a gap in wetlands and stream protectionย created by a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year…Among other water-related bills passed this session were two focused on quality:ย Senate Bill 81, which has been signed into law, bans the sale of some consumer products withย intentionally added PFAS chemicalsย โ€” like cookware and ski wax โ€” beginning in 2026 and another class of products in 2028, in part to reduce how much of the chemicals reach waterways. Andย Senate Bill 37ย (not yet signed into law) orders a study of ways to use โ€œgreen infrastructureโ€ to improve water quality…Voters will be asked in November to decide a ballot measure referred byย House Bill 1436ย allowing the state to keep more sports betting tax revenue for state water projects. The measure would remove the cap on the amount of money that goes for those projects…

Several other bills are targeted at conservation in various ways:

  • Senate Bill 197ย (not yet signed into law), would implement recommendations from the Colorado River Drought Task Force convened last year. That includes making it easier for tribal nations to apply for state water grants and allowing people who hold agricultural water rights to loan them to the state water conservation board to boost flows.
  • Senate Bill 5ย (signed into law), bans theย installation of new non-functional turfย and artificial turf on commercial, industrial, government and HOA-owned property beginning in 2026.
  • House Bill 1362ย (signed into law), allows the installation of graywater systems in new construction statewide. Graywater systems collect water after its first use and reuse it for a variety of purposes, like flushing toilets or watering plants.
  • House Bill 1435ย (not yet signed), would allocate $56 million toย water projectsย through state agencies, including water supply forecasting and turf replacement. The bill also includes $20 million for the purchase of theย Shoshone power plant water rights.
  • Senate Bill 148ย (signed into law), allows stormwater facilities toย harvest and store rainย running off hard surfaces like asphalt.

Plan to use cyanide to extract gold from #Leadville mining waste has residents concerned: Proposal has prompted locals to submit hundreds of comments in opposition — The #Denver Post #ArkansasRiver

California Gulch back in the day

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:

A company in Leadville wants to truck 1.2 million tons of the waste to a mill on the southwestern edge of the high mountain city, use cyanide to extract gold and silver from the rocks, and then return the hills to a more natural state. CJK Milling says its proposed operation would be โ€œone of the largest, most innovative environmental cleanups of abandoned mine wasteโ€ in Leadville โ€” and a model for other historic mining areas.

But the companyโ€™s proposal has prompted skepticism and alarm in Leadville, with some locals opposing the additional trucks the project would put on roads in the area. Others fear the use of toxic cyanide โ€” up to 600 pounds a day โ€” so close to town and the Arkansas River. They worry about the projectโ€™s potential impacts on soil, water and air quality.

The proposal has also raised a broader question: What is the future of mining in a town that once relied on it but has cultivated a new identity as a high-altitude hub for tourism and recreation?

[…]

Company leaders, however, say their project is not a mining operation โ€” and instead is focused on removing the waste piles and returning the land they sit on to its natural state. The project could be an example of profitable, privately funded cleanup of mining waste, said Nick Michael of CJK Milling.

Lincoln Park/Cotter Community Advisory Group encourages well owners to participate in monitoring program — The #CaรฑonCity Daily Record #ArkansasRiver

Lincoln Park/Cotter Mill superfund site via the Environmental Protection Agency

Click the link to read the article on the Caรฑon City Daily Record website. Here’s an excerpt:

May 10, 2024

In February 2023, the current Radiation Materials License holder, Colorado Legacy Land (CLL), declared insolvency and stated they could no longer maintain staff to ensure site security or continue regular operations. The Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) took emergency action and contracted with the existing company, Ensero Solutions LLC, to continue with the necessary on-site activities.ย  CDPHE assumed the monitoring program including wells and air monitoring stations because CLL had abandoned these responsibilities.

At the end of February, the CDPHE sent a letter to residents of Lincoln Park who have been part of the well-monitoring program established decades ago to keep track of groundwater contamination associated with the former Cotter Uranium Mill. The agency was asked for permission to access properties and test wells as had been done routinely in the past by either Cotter or CLL.

At the Community Advisory Group (CAG) meeting on April 16, Shiya Wang, CDPHE Radiation Project Manager, announced that of the 38 letters sent to well owners, only 16 responses were received to allow CDPHE representatives to continue the monitoring program. If you, the well-owner, receive a follow-up letter, please take the time to complete your information and get it back to the CDPHE. Any questions can be directed to the agency or the CAG at its Facebook page, โ€œLincoln Park/Cotter Community Advisory Groupโ€

The reason for monitoring, as stated in the letter, is: โ€œContinuous sampling of environmental media provides valuable data to both the State and to the Lincoln Park Community regarding the migration of hazardous constituents in the environment that have been associated with historical operations at the Site. Residents are encouraged to continue providing access to the sampling location so that this information can continue to assist the Stateโ€™s, as well as the communityโ€™s, understanding of the current conditions in the area.

2024 #COleg: Bipartisan group approves law to fill federal regulatory gap that left #Colorado streams, wetlands at risk — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News)

These wetlands, located on a 150-acre parcel in the Homestake Creek valley that Homestake Partners bought in 2018, would be inundated if Whitney Reservoir is constructed. Photo credit: Heather Sackett/Aspen Journalism

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

May 9, 2024

Thousands of acres of Colorado wetlands and miles of streams, left unprotected by a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, would be shielded under a hard-won measure that was approved this week by a bipartisan group of state lawmakers.

Environmental advocates say Colorado leads the nation in adopting such regulations, which will replace certain Clean Water Act rules that were wiped out last year in the U.S. Supreme Court case Sackett v. EPA.

โ€œColorado is the first state to pass legislation on this issue,โ€ said Josh Kuhn, senior water campaign manager for Conservation Colorado. โ€œIt had a lot of attention because of the magnitude of the bill. There were dozens and dozens of meetings to try and strike the right balance. Weโ€™re really happy with this final piece of legislation.โ€

The Sackett case sharply limited the streams and wetlands that qualify for protection under the Clean Water Act, a decision that water observers said had a particularly broad impact in the West. In Colorado and other Western states, vast numbers of streams are temporary, or ephemeral, flowing only after major rainstorms and during spring runoff season, when the mountain snow melts. The Sackett decision said, in part, that only streams that flow year-round are subject to oversight. It also said that only wetlands that had a surface connection to continually flowing water bodies qualified for protection. Many wetlands in Colorado have a sub-surface connection to streams, rather than one that can be observed above ground.

The legal decision came after decades of federal court battles over murky definitions about which waterways fall under the Clean Water Actโ€™s jurisdiction, which wetlands must be regulated, what kinds of dredge-and-fill work in waterways should be permitted, what authority the act has over activities on farms and Western irrigation ditches, and what activities industry and wastewater treatment plants must seek permits for.

With the passage ofย House Bill HB24-1379,ย which passed Monday, Colorado wetlands are once again formally protected, as are ephemeral streams, said Kuhn.

โ€œIt also sets the federal regulations as the floor, not the ceiling, so that Colorado can go above and beyond those to ensure we are protecting our resources,โ€ Kuhn said.

House Bill 1379, sponsored by House Speaker Julie McCluskie, D-Dillon, Rep. Karen McCormick, D-Longmont, and Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Frisco, was one of two proposed bills that sought to address the regulatory gap created by the Sackett decision. Senate Bill 127, sponsored by Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, was the second.

While Senate Bill 127 ultimately was not approved, a number of exemptions it contained to address concerns of farmers, miners, developers and some cities, were eventually added to House Bill 1379 and Kirkmeyer signed onto the measure as well, becoming a Senate sponsor along with Roberts.

Those exemptions were important to gathering the support of farm and real estate interests, among others, according to John Kolanz, an attorney who represents developers and who served in a state workgroup that helped lay the groundwork for the new regulations.

โ€œThere was significant movement from the first draft to the end. Barbโ€™s bill played a big role in that. This is an important program that touches a lot of people, and interests and activities. I think the end result is pretty good,โ€ Kolanz said.

Among the exemptions that were added is a rule that specifically exempts maintenance work on irrigation ditches and canals. Another exempts work that disturbs less than one-tenth of an acre of wetland or 3/100th of an acre of a streambed.

โ€œIf youโ€™re a developer โ€ฆ and youโ€™re under those thresholds, you donโ€™t need a permit, you just need to follow best management practices,โ€ said Kuhn, who was among the negotiators who hammered out the details of the final legislation.

In addition, if a pipeline is installed or a ditch is lined, that activity is exempted if it can result in water conservation.

House Bill 1379 also gives regulators the option to add one staff person on the Western Slope to help with program administration in that region, and provides nearly $750,000 in the state 2024-25 fiscal year budget and nearly $250,000 in the next year to get the new regulatory program, housed within the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, up and running.

Senateย  Bill 127 had proposed housing the program within the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, due to concerns about anย existing backlogย in the CDPHEโ€™s wastewater discharge program.

With the decision to house the program in CDPHE come requirements that require frequent reporting to lawmakers to ensure that health officials have the resources they need to review and issue permits, Kuhn said.

The Water Quality Control Commission will have until Dec. 31, 2025 to finalize the rules implementing the new law.

The bill is awaiting the governorโ€™s signature.

โ€œIn Colorado, where the rivers and streams are the lifeblood of our land, our agriculture, and our communities, the importance of water cannot be overstated,โ€ Kirkmeyer said in a text message. โ€œI believe that House Bill 1379 will be the strongest protection for Colorado streams and wetlands that we have had in the last 50 years.โ€

More by Jerd SmithJerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

Report on microplastics published by USGS — NGWA

Diagram credit: USGS

Click the link to read the release on the NGWA website:

May 6, 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey published a report on May 2 on the critical topic of microplastics in the environment.

The report titled โ€œIntegrated Science for the Study of Microplastics in the Environment โ€”  A Strategic Science Vision for the U.S. Geological Surveyโ€ is available on the USGS website.

The report which covers microplastics and nanoplastics states โ€œa myriad of environmental exposure pathways to humans including ingestion, inhalation, and bodily absorption, are likely to exist.โ€ It adds there is growing evidence that bioaccumulation of microplastics in tissues and organs of humans can potentially lead to nutritional and reproductive effects.

Current science gaps are mentioned. The report says that โ€œunderstanding if or when environmental exposures pose a health risk is complicated by the diversity of microplastic sizes, morphologies, polymer types, and chemicals added during manufacturing or sorbed from the environment; ongoing challenges in analytical methods used to detect, quantify, and characterize microplastics and associated chemicals in our ecosystems; and the fact that ecotoxicological studies regarding microplastics are still in their infancy.โ€

It also adds that a better understanding of the sources, pathways, fate, and biological effects of microplastics has become a priority of the federal government as well as some state governments.

One of the most cited Groundwaterยฎ papers in recent years is โ€œMicroplastic Contamination in Karst Groundwater Systemsโ€ by Samuel V. Panno et. al. NGWA members can view the complete paper on Wiley Online Library.

The Environmental Protection Agency rejects plan to pump Moneta oilfield waste into potential drinking water — @WyoFile #ActOnClimate #KeepItInTheGround

On the Wind River Indian Reservation, Fort Washakie is home to nearly 1,800 people. (Matthew Copeland/WyoFile)

Click the link to read the article on the WyoFile website (Angus M. Thuermer Jr.):

April 24, 2024

Federal environmental officials have rejected a request by Aethon Energy to pump Moneta Divide oilfield wastewater into the Madison aquifer, saying the deep reservoir could be used for drinking water, especially by tribal nations on the Wind River Indian Reservation.

The Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in November 2020 approved wastewater disposal into the 15,000-foot deep well, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said last week the stateโ€™s decision did not align with federal rules.

Aethonโ€™s plan does not support a finding โ€œthat the aquifer cannot now and will not in the future serve as a source of drinking water,โ€ the EPA wrote in a 20-page record of decision. Aethon argued, and the Wyoming commission agreed 4-1, that the underground Madison formation was too deep and remote to be used for drinking water.

The EPA relied on the Safe Drinking Water Act as the authority under which to protect the aquifer. It also cited climate, environmental justice and tribal interests in its decision, pointing to the nearby Wind River Indian Reservation as a community that could use the water.

โ€œThe significance of that is the EPA finally didnโ€™t wimp out on us,โ€ said Wes Martel, a member of the Wind River Water Resources Control Board. โ€œWeโ€™re just glad they now have some people in place following up on their Indian policy.โ€

The Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribes โ€œforesee increased reliance on groundwater for drinking water purposes and anticipate needing to access deeper aquifers, such as the Madison aquifer, as the climate changes and water resources grow scarcer,โ€ the EPA wrote in a 94-page analysis of tribal interests. The agency cited historic cultural and spiritual ties to the land and water and tribesโ€™ status as sovereign nations in its decision.

โ€œWe have to make sure our future generations have a reliable source of clean water,โ€ Martel said. โ€œOur reservation, this is all we have left. Weโ€™ve got to do our best to protect it.โ€

The Powder River Basin Resource Council, along with the Wyoming Outdoor Council and others, has spent years monitoring discharge reports and industry permits and was vital in challenging pollution threats, Martel said.

The EPA understood that science, and the law did not support Aethonโ€™s request, said Shannon Anderson, organizing director and staff attorney with the resource council. โ€œThey recognized the value of our groundwater resources and the need to protect those into the future,โ€ she said, hailing the decision.

Vast quantities of water

Aethon must find a way to dispose of produced water โ€” a brine pumped from energy wells to release gas and oil โ€” as it expands the Moneta Divide field by 4,500 wells. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management authorized that expansion in 2020, leaving the question of water disposal to Wyoming, which has authority over surface and underground water quality under overarching federal standards.

Aethon must find a way to dispose of the equivalent of 120 Olympic-sized swimming pools full of produced water a day to expand the field. Aethon and Burlington Resources, a co-producer at Moneta, could generate $182 million a year in federal royalties, $87.5 million a year in Wyoming severance taxes and $106 million annually in County Ad Valorem taxes from the expansion.

An elk skull adorns a fencepost near the Eastern Shoshoneโ€™s buffalo management land on the Wind River Indian Reservation. (Katie Klingsporn/WyoFile)

But Aethon has violated state permits that allow it to pump some produced water into Alkali and Badwater creeks that flow into Boysen Reservoir, a drinking water source for the town of Thermopolis. Wyomingโ€™s Department of Environmental Quality has notified the Dallas-based investment company of its infraction and has required Aethon to reduce the salinity of surface discharges this year.

The DEQ this year listed the two creeks as โ€œimpairedโ€ and unable to sustain aquatic life. Underground injection of wastewater into the Madison was to be a new component of the disposal program.

The EPA cited climate change, drought, increasing temperatures and use of reservation surface water by others as some of the reasons to preserve the Madison aquifer.

โ€œRemoving the existing statutory and regulatory protections for a potential source of high-quality drinking water for the rural and overburdened communities in Fremont County and on the WRIR would further exacerbate existing inequities particularly with respect to historic and ongoing adverse and cumulative impacts to water resources and community health,โ€ the EPA wrote.

โ€œThus, equity and environmental justice considerations, which include Tribal interest considerations, support maintaining the existing [Safe Drinking Water Act] protections that apply to the aquifers consistent with Congressional intent to protect both current and potential future sources of drinking water,โ€ EPA documents state.

Neither Aethon nor a representative of the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission responded immediately to a request for comment Wednesday. But WyoFile received this response from Tom Kropatsch, oil and gas supervisor for the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, shortly after publication:

โ€œWe do not agree with EPAโ€™s decision on this application. We are still reviewing their decision and the information utilized by EPA in support of their decision. Much of this information was not part of the original application or a part of the record. EPA did not follow the standard procedure of allowing the WOGCC and the applicant to review and respond to the additional information they had available prior to making their final decision. EPA evaluated data that differs in its geographic, geologic, engineering, and other technical information. EPA also inappropriately related the proposed injection location to other areas of the state. Since the data EPA reviewed does not accurately reflect the conditions at the location of the proposed disposal well it is not appropriate to rely on it for a decision on this application. The WOGCC is reviewing EPAโ€™s decision and weighing its options for further action.โ€

Wyoming rivers map via Geology.com

2024 #COleg: Colorado Bill Protects Wetlands & Streams — Getches-Wilkinson Center

Blanca Wetlands, Colorado BLM-managed ACEC Blanca Wetlands is a network of lakes, ponds, marshes and wet meadows designated for its recreation and wetland values. The BLM Colorado and its partners have made strides in preserving, restoring and managing the area to provide rich and diverse habitats for wildlife and the public. To visit or get more information, see: http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/slvfo/blanca_wetlands.html. By Bureau of Land Management – Blanca Wetlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern, Colorado, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42089248

Click the link to read the article on the Getches-Wilkinson Center website (Andrew Teegarden):

May 8, 2024

On May 6th, 2024 the Colorado Legislature passed HB24-1379 โ€“ a bill designed to protect the wetlands and streams at risk after the U.S. Supreme Courtโ€™s ruling in Sackett v. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). The passage of the house bill saw overwhelming support from the regulated community, environmentalists, and concerned citizens.

HB24-1379 would not have been passed if not for the hard work and dedication of the bill sponsors; Speaker Julie McCluskie, Senator Dylan Roberts, Representative Karen McCormick, and Senator Barbara Kirkmeyer. These sponsors worked tirelessly to advocate for our state waters by compromising with and listening to stakeholders throughout the session.

Colorado is one of the first states in the country to pass legislation to restore protections to wetlands and streams from development activities. Other states will be able to model the stakeholder engagement process utilized by the bill sponsors to provide protections from unmitigated development.

The Protect Colorado Waters Coalition was the primary driver behind the campaign which helped HB24-1379 cross the finish line. Both Kristine Oblock, Campaign Manager with Clean Water for All and Josh Kuhn, Senior Water Campaign Manager with Conservation Colorado, upheld the coalition and worked behind the scenes to have foundational elements included in the legislation. For example, the coalition was successful in keeping the current definition of state waters. The bill sponsor went a step further to directly include wetlands within that definition to permanently expand the scope of covered waters. As we detailed in previous posts, the more comprehensive definition of state waters removes the need to quibble over jurisdiction and streamlines the permit process for applicants. Additionally, the coalition advocated for the federal 404(b)(1) guidelines to act as the floor rather than the ceiling for environmental review of permit decisions.

We, here at the Getches-Wilkinson Center, are ecstatic to see the coalition’s efforts result in meaningful legislation designed to protect our aquatic ecosystems for generations to come. Our mission is to promote the sustainability of the lands, air, and water in the Western United States and HB24-1379 aligns with that mission. We look forward to the rulemaking process where the Water Quality Control Commission within the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment will promulgate rules to establish how permits are issued, and the requirements applicants must follow.

Ephemeral streams are streams that do not always flow. They are above the groundwater reservoir and appear after precipitation in the area. Via Socratic.org

Environmental Protection Agency Announces Final Rule to Protect Water Quality Where Tribes have Treaty and Reserved Rights

North American Indian regional losses 1850 thru 1890.

Click the link to read the release on the Environmental Protection Agency website:

May 2, 2024

WASHINGTON  โ€“ Today, May 2, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a final rule that will help protect water quality where Tribes hold and assert rights to aquatic and aquatic-dependent resources. For the first time, this action establishes a clear and consistent national framework for EPA and states to consider Tribal treaty and reserved rights when establishing Water Quality Standards under the Clean Water Act. In addition, this rule advances the Biden-Harris Administrationโ€™s commitment to uphold the United Statesโ€™ treaty and federal trust responsibility to federally recognized Tribes. When implemented, this final rule will better protect waters that Tribes depend on for fishing, gathering wild rice, cultural practices, and other uses.

โ€œPresident Biden is committed to ensuring that all people have access to clean and safe water. Strengthening our regulations to support Tribes and protect precious water resources is essential,โ€ said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. โ€œWith this action, EPA is establishing clear rules of the road that will support healthier Tribal communities. We look forward to partnering with Tribes and our state co-regulators to implement Clean Water Act protections consistent with Tribal treaty and reserved rights.โ€

Historically, EPA has addressed Tribal reserved rights under the Clean Water Act on a case-by-case basis in state-specific actions. This practice fostered uncertainty for Tribes, states, and entities seeking to comply with Clean Water Act requirements. EPAโ€™s final rule provides clarity and transparency by revising the federal water quality standards regulation to better protect Tribal reserved rights under the Clean Water Act. With this action, EPA is ensuring that water quality standards are established taking into consideration Clean Water Act-protected aquatic and aquatic-dependent resources where Tribes hold and assert rights to those resources under federal treaties, statutes, or executive orders. This final regulatory framework will be applied consistently while accounting for local conditions and factors to inform the development of specific water quality standards.

With this action, EPA is honoring the federal trust responsibility and striving to protect Tribal reserved rights related to water resources, consistent with commitments outlined in the agencyโ€™s 2021 action plan, Strengthening the Nation-to-Nation Relationship with Tribes to Secure a Sustainable Water Future.

โ€œThe Tribal Reserved Rights rule protects the rights of Tribal citizens, accorded by treaties, statutes, and other federal laws, to hunt, fish, and gather food in their usual and accustomed territoriesโ€”including areas under state jurisdiction,โ€ said National Tribal Water Council Chairman Ken Norton. โ€œWhen treaties are honored as the highest law of the land, as the Constitution directs, it is a victory for Tribes across the nation.โ€

“Upholding treaty reserved rights in Ceded Territories is the right thing to do, both for Tribal members and the environment. As stressors such as climate change, pollutants and development harm the environment, it is increasingly important for Tribal members to have the opportunity to exercise their rights in Ceded Territories,” said Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Environmental Director, Brandy Toft. “It is our hope that this rule will assist to preserve the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe’s treaty protected right to harvest resources, such as fish and wild rice for subsistence, for generations to come.”

โ€œIn the Anishinaabe (or Ojibwe) language, gibimaajiโ€™igomin nibi means โ€˜water is life,โ€™โ€ according to Jason Schlender, Executive Administrator of the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC). โ€œAnishinaabe people recognize that clean water sustains the more-than-human relatives (natural resources) that they rely on to continue their lifeways. It was these lifeways that our member Tribes were protecting when they reserved the right to hunt, fish, and gather on land that they ceded (or sold) in treaties with the United States. GLIFWC welcomes federal actions that will ensure that water quality is improved and sustained to ensure the continued health of our more-than-human relations.โ€

โ€œElwha Tribe is pleased that the federal rule will ensure that Tribes will be heard,โ€ said Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Vice-Chairman Russell N. Hepfer. โ€œI always advocate for consultation to occur early and often. Water quality is important for our human health and for our resources. More important for our future generations. Elwha Tribes looks forward to consultation with EPA as this rule is implemented.โ€

The final rule will be effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Learn more about EPAโ€™s final Tribal Reserved Rights rule.

Background

Water quality standards define the water quality goals for a waterbody and provide a regulatory basis for many actions under the Clean Water Act, including reporting on water quality conditions and status; developing water quality-based effluent limits in National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits for point-sources; and setting targets for Total Maximum Daily Loads.

Navajo government asks Biden admin to stop uranium transport across Navajo Nation — KNAU

Graphic credit: Environmental Protection Agency

Click the link to read the article on the KNAU website. Here’s an excerpt:

May 1, 2024

Navajo leaders signed onto legislation Tuesday asking President Joe Biden to use his executive authority to halt uranium transportation on the Navajo Nation ahead of some of the first scheduled trips. The Pinyon Plain Mine near the South Rim of the Grand Canyon began production in December. Mine owner Energy Fuels is expected to transport uranium ore on highways through northern Arizona and the Navajo Nation to a southern Utah mill. The legislation emphasizes the historic impact uranium mining has had on the Navajo people.

“During the Cold War, the demand for uranium surged, prompting extensive mining operations on Navajo lands without adequate environmental safeguards, resulting in lasting devastation to land, water, and public health, including high rates of cancer and other illnesses among Navajo uranium miners and their families.โ€

Biden-Harris Administration Announces $3 Billion for Lead Pipe Replacement to Advance Safe Drinking Water as Part of Investing in America Agenda

Click the link to read the release on the Environmental Protection Agency website:

May 2, 2024

EPA announces latest round of funding toward President Bidenโ€™s commitment to replace every lead pipe in the nation, protecting public health and helping to deliver safe drinking water

WASHINGTON โ€“ Today, May 2, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced $3 billion from President Bidenโ€™s Investing in America agenda to help every state and territory identify and replace lead service lines, preventing exposure to lead in drinking water. Lead can cause a range of serious health impacts, including irreversible harm to brain development in children. To protect children and families, President Biden has committed to replacing every lead pipe in the country. Todayโ€™s announcement, funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and available through EPAโ€™s successful Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), takes another major step to advance this work and the Administrationโ€™s commitment to environmental justice. This funding builds on the Administrationโ€™s Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan and EPAโ€™s Get the Lead Out Initiative.

Working collaboratively, EPA and the State Revolving Funds are advancing the Presidentโ€™s Justice40 Initiative to ensure that 40% of overall benefits from certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. Lead exposure disproportionately affects communities of color and low-income families. The $9 billion in total funding announced to date through EPAโ€™s Lead Service Line Replacement Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program is expected to replace up to 1.7 million lead pipes nationwide, securing clean drinking water for countless families.

โ€œThe science is clear, there is no safe level of lead exposure, and the primary source of harmful exposure in drinking water is through lead pipes,โ€ said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. โ€œPresident Biden understands it is critical to identify and remove lead pipes as quickly as possible, and he has secured significant resources for states and territories to accelerate the permanent removal of dangerous lead pipes once and for all.โ€

President Bidenโ€™s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests a historic $15 billion to identify and replace lead service lines. The law mandates that 49% of funds provided through the DWSRF General Supplemental Funding and DWSRF Lead Service Line Replacement Funding must be provided as grants and forgivable loans to disadvantaged communities, a crucial investment for communities that have been underinvested in for too long. EPA projects a national total of 9 million lead services lines across the country, based on data collected from the updated 7th Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. The funding announced today will be provided specifically for lead service line identification and replacement and will help every state and territory fund projects to remove lead pipes and reduce exposure to lead from drinking water.

The Lead Service Line-specific formula used to allot these funds allows states to receive financial assistance commensurate with their need as soon as possible, furthering public health protection nationwide. The formula and allotments are based on need โ€” meaning that states with more projected lead service lines receive proportionally more funding.

Alongside the funding announced today, EPA is also releasing aย new memorandumย that clarifies how states can use this and other funding to most effectively reduce exposure to lead in drinking water. Additionally, EPA has developedย new outreach documentsย to help water systems educate their customers on drinking water issues, health impacts of lead exposure, service line ownership, and how customers can support the identification of potential lead service lines in their homes.

The Biden-Harris Administrationโ€™s ambitious initiative to remove lead pipes has already delivered significant results for families across the nation. Todayโ€™s latest funding will ensure more families benefit from these unprecedented resources, and support projects like these:

  • West View Water Authority inย Pennsylvaniaย has received $8 million through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to replace 750 lead service lines in underserved areas of the community โ€” primarily inย Allegheny County. Of that funding, more than $5.4 million is forgivable, reducing the overall financial burden on ratepayers and the community.
  • Inย Tucson, Arizona, the city received $6.95 million in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds to develop lead service line inventories for their nine public water systems. The city will use this inventory to develop a plan to replace lead service lines in the community and improve drinking water quality for residents โ€” many of whom live in low-income and disadvantaged communities.
  • Located in between Chicago and Milwaukee, the community ofย Kenosha, Wisconsinย has been at the forefront of the stateโ€™s efforts to remove 5,000 lead service lines in their community. To accelerate lead service line removal, Kenosha is working with EPAโ€™s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law-funded Water TA team to help customers self-inventory their service line material and apply for federal funding to remove and replace lead service lines.
  • Theย Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, located across westernย North Carolina, has been selected to received support from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Lawโ€™s lead service line replacement funds to conduct service line inventories and prepare preliminary engineering reports for five of the public water systems on their land.

o view more stories about how the unpreceded investments from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are transforming communities across the country, visit EPAโ€™s Investing in Americaโ€™s Water Infrastructure Story Map. To read more about some additional projects that are underway, see EPAโ€™s recently released Quarterly Report on Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funded Clean Water and Drinking Water SRF projects and explore the State Revolving Funds Public Portal.  

Todayโ€™s allotments are based on EPAโ€™s updated 7th Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment (DWINSA) including an assessment of newly submitted information. To date, this is the best available data collected and assessed on service line materials in the United States. Later this summer, EPA will release an addendum to the 7th DWINSA Report to Congress which will include the updated lead service line projections. EPA anticipates initiating data collection, which will include information on lead service lines, for the 8th DWINSA in 2025.

For more information, including state-by-state allotment of 2024 funding, and a breakdown of EPAโ€™s lead Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, please visit EPAโ€™s Drinking Water website.

US military bases teem with #PFAS. Thereโ€™s still no firm plan to clean them up — Grist

Petersen Air Force Base. Photo credit: Peterson Air and Space Museum

Click the link to read the article on the Grist website (Sachi Kitajima Mulkey):

April 29, 2024

Excessive levels of PFAS have been detected at 80 percent of active and decommissioned military bases.

In 2016, Tony Spaniola received a notice informing him that his family shouldnโ€™t drink water drawn from the well at his lake home in Oscoda, Michigan. Over the course of several decades, the Air Force had showered thousands of gallons of firefighting foam onto the ground at Wurtsmith Air Force Base, which closed in 1993. Those chemicals eventually leached into the soil and began contaminating the groundwater.

Alarmed, Spaniola began looking into the problem. โ€œThe more I looked, the worse it got,โ€ he said. Two years ago,ย  his concern prompted him to co-found the Great Lakesย PFASย Action network. The coalition of residents and activists is committed to making polluters, like the military and a factory making waterproof shoes, clean up the โ€œforever chemicalsโ€ theyโ€™ve left behind.

PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a class of nearly 15,000 fluorinated chemicals used since the 1950s to make clothing and food containers, among other things, oil- and water-repellent. Theyโ€™re also used in firefighting foam. These chemicals do not break down over time, and have contaminated everything from drinking water to food. Research has linked them to cancer, heart and liver problems, developmental issues, and other ailments.

The U.S. Department of Defense, or DOD, is among the nationโ€™s biggest users of firefighting foam and says 80 percent of active and decommissioned bases require clean up. Some locations, like Wurtsmith, recorded concentrations overย 3,000 times higherย than what the agency previously considered safe.

Today, the EPA considers it unsafe to be exposed to virtually any amount of PFOA and PFOS, two of the most harmful substances under the PFAS umbrella. Earlier this month, it implemented the nationโ€™sย first PFAS drinking water regulations, which included capping exposure to them at the lowest detectable limit. As of April 19, the agency also designated these two compounds โ€œhazardous substancesโ€ under the federalย Superfundย law, making it easier to force polluters to shoulder the costs of cleaning them up.ย 

Meeting these regulations means that almost all of the 715 military sites and surrounding communities under Defense Department investigation for contamination will likely require remediation. Long-standing cleanup efforts at more than 100 PFAS contaminated bases that are already designated Superfund sites, like Wurtsmith, reveal some of the challenges to come.

โ€œThe heart of the issue is, how quickly are you going to clean it up, and what actions are you going to take in the interim to make sure people arenโ€™t exposed?โ€ said Spaniola.

A sign warning hunters not to eat deer because of high amounts of toxic PFAS chemicals in their meat, in Oscoda, Michigan. Drew YoungeDyke, National Wildlife Federation

In a statement to Grist, the DOD says its plan is to follow a federal clean up law called the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or CERCLA, to investigate contamination and determine near- and long-term clean up actions based on risk. But many advocates, including Spaniola, say the process is too slow and that short-term fixes have been insufficient. 

The problem started decades ago. In the 1960s, the Defense Departmentย worked with 3M, one of the largest manufacturers of PFAS chemicals, to develop a foam called AFFF that can extinguish high-temperature fires. The PFAS acts as a surfactant, helping the material spread more quickly. By the 1970s, every military base, Navy ship, civilian airport, and fire station regularly used AFFF.ย 

Firefighting foam containing PFAS chemicals is responsible for contamination in Fountain Valley. Photo via USAF Air Combat Command

In the decades that followed, millions of gallons flowed into the environment. According to the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, or EWG, 710 military sites throughout the country and its territories have known or suspected PFAS contamination. Internal studies and memos show that not long after 3M and the US Navy patented the foam in 1966, 3M learned that its PFAS products could harm animal test subjects and accumulated in the body. 

In a 2022 Senate committee hearing, residents from Oscodatestified about the health impacts, such as tumors and miscarriages, from the PFAS contamination at Wurtsmith. In 2023, Michigan reached a settlement after suing numerous manufacturers, including 3M and Dupont. Today, thousands ofย victims across the country are suingย the chemicalโ€™s manufacturers. While some organizations and communities have tried to hold the military financially responsible for this pollution โ€” farmers in several states recently filed suits in the U.S. District Court in South Carolina to do just that โ€”ย the DOD says itโ€™s not legally liable.

Congressional pressure on the Pentagon to clean these sites has been growing. In 2020, National Defense Authorization Acts required it to phase out PFAS-laden firefighting foam by October, 2023. Since passing that law, Congress has also ordered the department to publish the findings of drinking and groundwater tests on and around bases.

Results showed nearlyย 50 sitesย with extremely high levels of contamination, and hundreds more with levels above what was then the EPAโ€™s health advisory. Following further congressional pressure, the military announced plans to implement interim clean-up measures atย three dozenย locations, including a water filtering system in Oscoda.

According to a report by the Environmental Working Group, it took an average of nearly three years for the Department of Defense to complete testing at these high-contamination sites. It took just as long to draft stopgap cleanup plans. Today, 14 years after PFAS contamination was discovered at Wurtsmith, the first site to be tested, no site has left the โ€œinvestigationโ€ phase, and there has yet to be a comprehensive plan to begin permanent remediation on any base.

The Department of Defense says any site found to have PFAS contamination exceeding the Environmental Protection Agencyโ€™s previous guideline of 70 parts per trillion will receive immediate remediation, such as bottled waters and filters on faucets. When a site is found to be contaminated, the EPA says, the department has 72 hours to provide residents with alternate sources of water.

After six years spent working with various clean up initiatives, Spaniola says waiting for the military to take action has taken a toll on the people of Oscoda. โ€œThe community had a really good relationship with the military,โ€ he said. โ€œIโ€™ve watched that change from a very trusting relationship to a terrible one.โ€ 

Dozens of states have mandated additional requirements to treat PFAS in municipal water systems, but such efforts often overlook private well owners. Thatโ€™s leaving thousands of people at risk, given that in Michigan, where some 1.5 million people drink water from contaminated sources, 25 percent of residents rely on private wells.  

Nationwide, the Environmental Working Group found unsafe water in wells nearย 63 military bases in 29 states. While the DOD has tested private wells, it has not published the total number of wells tested or identified which of them need to be cleaned up.ย 

Typical water well

โ€œFor those who are on well water, itโ€™s a real problem until thereโ€™s a bit of recognition for some sort of responsibility for the contamination,โ€ said Daniel Jones, associate director of the Michigan State University Center for PFAS Research. He is advising cleanup efforts near Grayling, Michigan. โ€œIt sort of comes down to who has pockets deep enough to pay for the things that need to be done.โ€

The EPAโ€™s recent decision to designate PFOA and PFOS โ€œhazardous substancesโ€ under the federal Superfund law isย unlikely to provide quick financial assistance to communities, even though the agency has madeย $9 billion availableย for private well owners and small public water systems to address contamination. Whether that support reaches private well owners is up to individual states, which can work with regional EPA offices to draft project plans beforeย applying for grantsย to secure funding.

The agency has established a five-year window for water systems to test for PFAS and install filtering equipment before compliance with the newly tightened levels will be enforced. While EPA says the new PFOA and PFOS regulations do not immediately trigger an investigation or qualify them as Superfund sites on theย National Priorities List,ย decisions for each site will be on a case-by-case basis.

โ€œIt is a tremendous win for public health, it is tremendously important and cannot cannot come soon enough, particularly for military communities who have been exposed for decades,โ€ said Melanie Benesh, vice president of governmental affairs at the Environmental Working Group. Benesh hopes that the new rules help push the Defense Department to move more quickly.

PFAS contamination in the U.S. October 18, 2021 via ewg.org.

Newย EPA rules will force fossil fuel power plants to cut pollution

by Robert Zullo, Utah News Dispatch
April 25, 2024

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday released a sweeping set of rules aimed at cutting air, water and land pollution from fossil fuel-fired power plants.

Environmental and clean energy groups celebrated the announcement as long overdue, particularly for coal-burning power plants, which have saddled hundreds of communities across the country with dirty air and hundreds of millions of tons of toxic coal ash waste. The ash has leached a host of toxins โ€“ including arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium, radium and other pollutants โ€“ into ground and surface water.

โ€œToday is the culmination of years of advocacy for common-sense safeguards that will have a direct impact on communities long forced to suffer in the shadow of the dirtiest power plants in the country,โ€ said Ben Jealous, executive director of the Sierra Club, one of the nationโ€™s oldest and largest environmental organizations. โ€œIt is also a major step forward in our movementโ€™s fight to decarbonize the electric sector and help avoid the worst impacts of climate change.โ€

But some electric industry and pro-coal organizations blasted the rules as a threat to jobs and electric reliability at a time when power demands are surging. They also criticized the ruleโ€™s reliance on largely unproven carbon capture technologies.

Americaโ€™s Power, a trade organization for the nationโ€™s fleet of about 400 coal power plants across 42 states, called the number of new rules โ€œunprecedented,โ€ singling out the new emissions standards that will force existing coal plants to cut their carbon emissions by 90% by the 2032 if they intend to keep running past 2039.  Michelle Bloodworth, the groupโ€™s president and CEO, called the rule โ€œan extreme and unlawful overreach that endangers Americaโ€™s supply of dependable and affordable electricity.โ€

The Pennsylvania Coal Alliance, a nonprofit organization representing Pennsylvania coal mining companies, called the new rule โ€œa haphazard and dangerous threat to our gridโ€™s electricity supply, national security and our economy,โ€ in a news release.

โ€˜This forces thatโ€™

Many experts expect the regulations to be litigated, particularly the carbon rule, since the last time the EPA tried to restrict carbon emissions from power plants, a group of states led by West Virginia mounted a successful legal challenge that went to the U.S. Supreme Court.

But Julie McNamara, deputy policy director with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the agency took great pains to conform the rule to the legal constraints outlined by the court.

โ€œThis rule is specifically responsive to that Supreme Court decision,โ€ she said. โ€œWhich doesnโ€™t mean that it wonโ€™t go to the courts but this is so carefully hewn to that decision that it should be robust.โ€

The four rules EPA released Thursday mainly target coal-fired power plants.

โ€œBy developing these standards in a clear, transparent, inclusive manner, EPA is cutting pollution while ensuring that power companies can make smart investments and continue to deliver reliable electricity for all Americans,โ€ EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan said.

In some ways, they attach a framework to a sea change in electric generation that is already well under way, McNamara said.

Coal accounted for just 16% of U.S. electric generation in 2023, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. In 1990, by comparison, it comprised more than 54% of power generation. However, some states are more reliant on coal power than others.

In 2021, the most coal-dependent states were West Virginia, Missouri, Wyoming and Kentucky, per a 2022 report by  the EIA.

โ€œThis rulemaking adds structure to that transition,โ€ McNamara said. โ€œFor those who have chosen not to assess the future use of their coal plants, this forces that.โ€

The same EIA report found that Ohio and Pennsylvania had the largest declines in coal-fired capacity over the past two decades. Both states shifted from coal to natural gas as their largest source of electricity over that period.

Heather Oโ€™Neill, president and CEO of the clean energy trade group Advanced Energy United, said the new regulations are a chance for utilities to embrace cheaper, cleaner and more reliable options for the electric grid.

โ€œInstead of looking to build new gas plants or prolong the life of old coal plants, utilities should be taking advantage of the cheaper, cleaner, and more trusty tools in the toolbox,โ€ she said.

The carbon rule 

In 2009, the EPA concluded that greenhouse gas emissions โ€œendanger our nationโ€™s public health and welfare,โ€ the agency wrote, adding that since that time, โ€œthe evidence of the harms posed by GHG emissions has only grown and Americans experience the destructive and worsening effects of climate change every day.โ€

The new carbon emissions regulation will apply to existing coal plants and new natural gas plants. Coal plants that plan to operate beyond 2039 will have to capture 90% of their carbon emissions by 2032. New gas plants are split into three categories based on their capacity factor, a measure of how much electricity is generated over a period of time relative to the maximum amount it could have produced.

The plants that run the most (more than 40% capacity factor) will have to capture 90% of their carbon emissions by 2032. Existing gas plants will be regulated under a forthcoming rule that โ€œmore comprehensively addresses GHG emissions from this portion of the fleet,โ€ the agency said.

Michelle Solomon, a senior policy analyst for Energy Innovation, an energy and climate policy think tank, predicts that most coal plants will close rather than install the costly technology to capture carbon emissions.

โ€œClimate goals aside, the public health impacts of the rules in securing the retirement of coal fired power plants is so important,โ€ she said. Coal power in the U.S. has been increasingly pressured by cheaper gas and renewable generation and mounting environmental restrictions, but some grid operators have still been caught flat-footed by the pace of coal plant closures.

โ€œI think the role of this rule, to provide that certainty about where weโ€™re going, is so crucial to get the entities that have control over the rate of the transition to start to take action here,โ€ she said. But the National Rural Electric Cooperative Associationโ€™s CEO, Jim Matheson, called the rules โ€œunlawful, unrealistic and unachievableโ€ noting that it relies on technology โ€œthat is not ready for prime time.โ€

And Todd Snitchler, president and CEO of the Electric Power Supply Association, a trade group for competitive power suppliers, called the rule โ€œa painful example of aspirational policy outpacing physical and operational realitiesโ€ because of its reliance on unproven carbon capture and hydrogen blending technologies to cut emissions.

A beefed up Mercury and Air Toxic Standards rule

The EPA called the revision to the Mercury and Air Toxic Standards  โ€œthe most significant update since MATS was first issued in February 2012.โ€ It predicted the rule would cut emissions of mercury and other air pollutants like nickel, arsenic, lead, soot, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and others. It cuts the mercury limit by 70% for power plants fired by lignite coal, which is the lowest grade of coal and one of the dirtiest to burn for power generation.

For all coal plants, the emissions limit for toxic metals is reduced by 67%. The EPA says the rule will result in major cuts in releases of mercury and other hazardous metals, fine particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide.  The agency projects โ€œ$300 million in health benefits,โ€ including reducing risks of heart attacks, cancer and developmental delays in children and $130 million in climate benefits.

Stronger wastewater discharge limits for power plants

Coal fired power plants use huge volumes of water, and when the wastewater is returned to lakes, rivers and streams it can be laden with mercury, arsenic and other metals as well as bromide, chloride and other pollution and contaminate drinking water and harm aquatic life.

The new rule is projected to cut about 670 million pounds of pollutants discharged in wastewater from coal plants per year. Plants that will cease coal combustion over the next decade can abide by less stringent rules.

โ€œPower plants for far too long have been able to get away with treating our waterways like an open sewer,โ€ said Thomas Cmar, a senior attorney at Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law organization, during a briefing on the new rules earlier this week.

Closing a coal ash loophole 

Coal ash, whatโ€™s left after coal has been burned for power generation, is one the nationโ€™s largest waste streams. The 2015 EPA Coal Combustion Residuals rule were the first federal regulations for coal ash. But that rule left about half of the ash sitting at power plant sites and other locations โ€“ much of it in unlined disposal pits โ€“ unregulated because it did not apply to so-called โ€œlegacy impoundmentsโ€ that were not being used to accept new ash.

โ€œWeโ€™re going to see a long-awaited crackdown on coal ash pollution from Americaโ€™s coal plants, and itโ€™ll be a huge win for Americaโ€™s health and water resources,โ€ said Lisa Evans, a senior attorney with Earthjustice. โ€œThey are all likely leaking toxic chemicals like arsenic into groundwater and most contain levels of radioactivity that can be dangerous to human health.โ€

Groundwater monitoring data shows that the vast majority of ash ponds at coal plants are contaminating groundwater, said Abel Russ, a senior attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project. Butunder the old rule, Russ said, facilities could dodge cleanup requirements by blaming contamination on older ash dumps not covered by the regulation.

โ€œThis is a huge loophole,โ€ Russ said. โ€œYou canโ€™t restore groundwater quality if youโ€™re only addressing half of the coal ash sources on site.โ€

However, several attorneys on the Earthjustice briefing said the new rules, which will require monitoring at clean up and hundreds of more ash sites, will only be as good as the enforcement.

โ€œItโ€™s meaningful only if these utilities obey the law. Unfortunately to date, many of them have not,โ€ said Frank Holleman, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Utah News Dispatch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Utah News Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor McKenzie Romero for questions: info@utahnewsdispatch.com. Follow Utah News Dispatch on Facebook and Twitter.

The Environmental Protection Agency, South Adams County Water and Sanitation District to break ground on drinking water treatment enhancements for #PFAS chemicals on April 25, 2024

This USGS map shows the number of PFAS detected in tap water samples from select sites across the nation. The findings are based on a USGS study of samples taken between 2016 and 2021 from private and public supplies at 716 locations. The map does not represent the only locations in the U.S. with PFAS. Sources/Usage: Public Domain. Visit Media to see details.

From email from the EPA:

DENVER (April 23, 2024) — On Thursday, April 25, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Administrator KC Becker will join U.S. Senator Michael Bennet on a visit to the South Adams County Water and Sanitation District (SACWSD) to break ground on a water treatment system that will allow SACWSD to deliver high-quality drinking water that meets all state and federal regulations, including EPA regulations for to treat PFAS chemical contamination by 2029.

WHO:       

ยท       U.S. Senator Michael Bennet

ยท       EPA Regional Administrator KC Becker

ยท       South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Board President Heidi McNeely

ยท       South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Manager Abel Moreno

Additional representatives from South Adams County Water and Sanitation District will be in attendance, along with other key project partners from:

ยท       Brown & Caldwell, engineering consultant

ยท       PCL Construction, construction manager

ยท       United States Environmental Protection Agency

ยท       Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

WHAT:  

EPA and partners will break ground on the Klein Enhancement Project. The project, a partnership with Brown & Caldwell Engineering and PCL Construction, will construct an ion-exchange water treatment system that will allow SACWSD to deliver high-quality drinking water that meets all state and federal regulations, including EPA regulations required to treat for PFAS chemical contamination. SACWSD was recently awarded nearly $61 million in federal funding to complete the construction. The project is expected to be completed in late 2026. 

Tours of existing treatment facilities and the enhancement project site will be available after speakersโ€™ remarks.

WHEN:         2 p.m., Thursday, April 25, 2024

WHERE:       7400 Quebec Street, Commerce City, Colorado 

Polluters must pay to clean up areas contaminated with PFOA, PFOS — SourceNM.com #PFAS

EPA Administrator Michael Regan (Photo by Lisa Sorg / NC Policy Watch)

Click the link to read the article on the SourceNM.com website (Lisa Sorg):

April 22, 2024

Industries that discharge toxic PFOA and PFOS compounds into the environment will now be held legally and financially responsible for the contamination, according to a final rule issued by the EPA last week.

The Department of Defense is also subject to the new requirements.

PFOA and PFOS are now classified as hazardous substances under Superfund law, which authorizes the EPA to use its enforcement powers to require polluters pay for and clean up the contamination. The designation also mandates new reporting requirements for facilities that release the compounds into the environment.

These facilities include 3M, DuPont and its spinoff company, Chemours.

โ€œDesignating these chemicals under our Superfund authority will allow EPA to address more contaminated sites, take earlier action, and expedite cleanups, all while ensuring polluters pay for the costs to clean up pollution threatening the health of communities,โ€ EPA Administrator Michael Regan said.

The EPA announced the new rule a week after setting legally enforceable drinking water standards for five types of the toxic compounds, as well as a mixture. PFOA and PFOS are among those compounds with maximum contamination limits of 4 parts per trillion.

Exposure to PFOA, PFOS and other similar compounds has been linked to multiple health problems, including thyroid and liver disorders, reproductive and fetal development problems, immune system deficiencies, high cholesterol, and kidney, testicular and other cancers.

There are several exemptions to the rule โ€” entities that receive, often unknowingly, these compounds from industrial sources: community water systems and publicly owned treatment works, municipal storm sewer systems, publicly owned/operated municipal solid waste landfills, publicly owned airports and local fire departments, and farms where biosolids are applied to the land.

When Regan announced the new drinking water standards, public utilities clamored for ways to pass the treatment costs to polluters. PFOA and PFOS, as well as other types of the toxic compounds, canโ€™t be removed through traditional treatment methods. The upgrades can run in the tens of millions of dollars. The $1 billion in federal funding to help utilities meet the drinking water standards is not enough, given the widespread contamination.

โ€œCommunities across the Southeast and the country have been shouldering the costs of PFAS contamination for far too long,โ€ said Kelly Moser, senior attorney and leader of the Water Program at the Southern Environmental Law Center. โ€œTodayโ€™s designations will help put the burden of addressing PFAS pollution back on the polluter. Now states and municipalities must use the tools they have to stop ongoing toxic PFAS pollution before more contaminated Superfund sites are created.โ€

Under the new rule, entities are required to immediately report releases of PFOA and PFOS that meet or exceed the reportable quantity of one pound within a 24-hour period to the National Response Center, as well as state, tribal and local emergency responders.

โ€œAfter decades of industry using and disposing PFOA and PFOS, EPA can now accelerate cleanups of the most contaminated sites,โ€ said Earthjustice Legislative Counsel Christine Santillana, in a prepared statement. โ€œItโ€™s highly encouraging to see EPA initiate this designation and gives hope to impacted communities that their health will be better protected.โ€

The final rule also means that federal entities that transfer or sell their property must provide notice about the storage, release, or disposal of PFOA or PFOS on the property and guarantee that contamination has been cleaned up or, if needed, that additional cleanup will occur in the future. It will also lead the Department of Transportation to list and regulate these substances as hazardous materials, according to the EPA.

Under federal law, hazardous materials can be transported only with a special permit, accompanied by a shipping manifest. Transportation documents for most hazardous substances are public through the EPAโ€™s e-Manifest database; it will now be easier to track the transport of PFOA and PFOS.

This designation of the two chemicals will also ensure that hundreds of Department of Defense installations with PFOA and PFOS contamination are finally cleaned up.

This could affect the Tarheel Army Missile Plant in Burlington, where PFOA and PFOS were found in the groundwater and soil last year. Although the military has already transferred that property to private owners, the Department of Defense is responsible for cleaning up contamination below the ground โ€” now including PFOA and PFOS.

โ€œNearly 500 military installations are contaminated with PFAS, but the DOD has failed to make PFAS cleanup a priority โ€“ and our service members and defense communities are paying the price,โ€ said Jared Hayes, a senior policy analyst at the Environmental Working Group.

The national Sierra Club had submitted public comments last year, asking the EPA to crack down on industrial dischargers.

โ€œWeโ€™re grateful that the EPA continues to find ways to fight what can only be described as an uphill battle against PFAS contamination,โ€ said Erin Carey, acting director of the North Carolina chapter of the Sierra Club. โ€œRight now, the regulation of these dangerous chemicals is far too narrow to be fully protective. With more than ten thousand of these compounds in production, we must move toward regulation of PFAS as a class, rather than this โ€˜whack-a-moleโ€™ method of regulating individual compounds. Broader and more ambitious action will be required of this agency, of industry and of our elected leaders to meaningfully tackle the terrifying and widespread threat of โ€˜forever chemicalsโ€™ in our bodies and our environment.โ€

NC Newsline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. NC Newsline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Rob Schofield for questions: info@ncnewsline.com. Follow NC Newsline on Facebook and Twitter.

Drinking water for 268,000 Coloradans exceeds new limits on โ€œforever chemicals.โ€ How will providers find millions to fix the water? — The #Denver Post #PFAS

This USGS map shows the number of PFAS detected in tap water samples from select sites across the nation. The findings are based on a USGS study of samples taken between 2016 and 2021 from private and public supplies at 716 locations. The map does not represent the only locations in the U.S. with PFAS. Sources/Usage: Public Domain. Visit Media to see details.

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Noelle Phillips and Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:

April 21, 2024

Theย 27 water systemsย identified by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment as exceeding the new standards range in size from Thornton, which serves about 155,000 customers, to Dawn of Hope Ranch, a religious retreat in Teller County that serves 55 people. Some of the larger utilities on the stateโ€™s list already are planning to build multimillion-dollar filtration systems, but experts say the smaller water providers will be among the last to fall into compliance. While grant money is available, experts note itโ€™s likely water customers will pay some of the costs via higher rates.

The federal regulations announced 10 days ago require drinking water providers to lower the concentration of forever chemicals below the new limit by 2029. The chemicals โ€” perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, collectively known as PFAS โ€” have been used for decades to make waterproof, nonstick or stain-resistant products and are linked to a wide range of health problems, including cancer and reduced fertility…

In Colorado, state water regulators have a good idea which water systems have PFAS in their drinking water supplies, said Christopher Higgins, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the Colorado School of Mines, who is an expert in PFAS contamination. Fifty-six other water providers in the state have found PFAS in their water but in concentrations below the EPAโ€™s limit, including Aurora, Frisco and Gunnison…

The federal government set aside more than $10 billion to help communities test and treat drinking water for PFAS. That money is intended for rural or disproportionately impacted communities. Thatโ€™s not nearly enough, Zobell said…Unless there is a leap in PFAS-removal technology in the next three years, many providers will have to raise rates or find money elsewhere, Zobell said. Moody, with the American Water Works Association, said the financial burden has been a primary concern among water providers…There are just a handful of companies in the United States that build and install the filtration systems, Moody said. They will go after the larger contracts, leaving the smallest, more rural water companies in the back of the line because those contracts will be less profitable.

Removing PFAS from public water will cost billions and take time โ€“ here are ways to filter out some harmful โ€˜forever chemicalsโ€™ atย home

PFAS are showing up in water systems across the U.S. Jacek Dylag/Unsplash, CC BY

Kyle Doudrick, University of Notre Dame

Chemists invented PFAS in the 1930s to make life easier: Nonstick pans, waterproof clothing, grease-resistant food packaging and stain-resistant carpet were all made possible by PFAS. But in recent years, the growing number of health risks found to be connected to these chemicals has become increasingly alarming.

PFAS โ€“ perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances โ€“ are now either suspected or known to contribute to thyroid disease, elevated cholesterol, liver damage and cancer, among other health issues.

They can be found in the blood of most Americans and in many drinking water systems, which is why the Environmental Protection Agency in April 2024 finalized the first enforceable federal limits for six types of PFAS in drinking water systems. The limits โ€“ between 4 and 10 parts per trillion for PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, PFNA and GenX โ€“ are less than a drop of water in a thousand Olympic-sized swimming pools, which speaks to the chemicalsโ€™ toxicity. The sixth type, PFBS, is regulated as a mixture using whatโ€™s known as a hazard index.

Meeting these new limits wonโ€™t be easy or cheap. And thereโ€™s another problem: While PFAS can be filtered out of water, these โ€œforever chemicalsโ€ are hard to destroy.

My team at the University of Notre Dame works on solving problems involving contaminants in water systems, including PFAS. We explore new technologies to remove PFAS from drinking water and to handle the PFAS waste. Hereโ€™s a glimpse of the magnitude of the challenge and ways you can reduce PFAS in your own drinking water:

Removing PFAS will cost billions per year

Every five years, the EPA is required to choose 30 unregulated contaminants to monitor in public drinking water systems. Right now, 29 of those 30 contaminants are PFAS. The tests provide a sense of just how widespread PFAS are in water systems and where.

The EPA has taken over 22,500 samples from about 3,800 of the 154,000 public drinking water systems in the U.S. In 22% of those water systems, its testing found at least one of the six newly regulated PFAS, and about 16% of the systems exceeded the new standards. East Coast states had the largest percentage of systems with PFAS levels exceeding the new standards in EPA tests conducted so far.

America’s Most Endangered Rivers of 2024 — @AmericanRivers

Ten rivers. Ten solutions. Ten opportunities to protect the rivers on which all life depends. Americaโ€™s Most Endangered Riversยฎ of 2024 shines a spotlight on threats to clean water, and how pollution impacts to our health and our communities.

#1: Rivers of New Mexico New Mexico is the state hardest hit by a recent Supreme Court ruling that slashed protections for streams, threatening drinking water sources and livelihoods across the state.

#2: Big Sunflower and Yazoo Rivers A massive pumping project would impact thousands of acres of wetlands vital to wildlife and the Mississippi Delta ecosystem.

#3: Duck River The drinking water source for 250,000 people and one of the richest rivers for biodiversity is threatened by excessive water withdrawals.

#4: Santa Cruz River This symbol of restoration and resilience is threatened by climate change and water scarcity.

#5: Little Pee Dee River A major highway project is putting clean water and wildlife habitat at risk.

#6: Farmington River A hydropower dam is threatening fisheries and harming water quality in this important drinking water source.

#7: Trinity River This important tributary to the Klamath River is at risk from excessive water withdrawals, threatening both salmon and people.

#8: Kobuk River Road development and mining threaten clean water, wildlife, and Iรฑupiat culture.

#9: Tijuana River Pollution is choking the river, causing sickness, forcing beach closures, and endangering local economies.

#10: Blackwater River A proposed highway project would be a disaster for water quality and fish and wildlife habitat.

โ€˜Forever chemicalsโ€™ found in Sleepy Bear well water system: City water shows undetectable amount of PFAS — Steamboat Pilot & Today

Click the link to read the article on the Steamboat Pilot & Today website (Suzie Romig). Here’s an excerpt:

April 14, 2024

Children age five and younger, and women who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant or breastfeeding, are more susceptible to health impacts from commonly called โ€œforever chemicals,โ€ which have been found so far in unhealthy levels in one neighborhood water system in Routt County…Sleepy Bear mobile home park, located along U.S. Highway 40 on the western edge of Steamboat Springs, has recorded PFAS levels in the neighborhood water system that are higher than health advisory and national drinking water standards. The mobile home park is not part of the city water system and uses a well water system, according to the local park manager…

โ€œMost people living in the United States have some amount of these chemicals in their blood,โ€ according to the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment. โ€œPeople in communities that have been contaminated by PFAS โ€” through water or other sources โ€” are more likely to have health impacts.โ€

[…]

Consumer drinking water testing for Sleepy Bear showed 9.2 parts per trillion of PFOA, which is more than double the newly released legally enforceable standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA limits PFOA and PFOS drinking water standards to four parts per trillion. The CDPHE, which issues water system permits in the state, advised Sleepy Bear residents to โ€œconsider taking action to reduce your exposure.โ€ Since the EPA previously issued a health advisory in June 2022, Sleepy Bear voluntarily participated in a proactive testing program for PFAS water sampling in June 2023. Sleepy Bear contracted water operator Ron Krueger, owner of Crystal Clear Water Treatment in Lakewood, said Thursday he is awaiting direction from the CDPHE for next steps…

Mount Werner Water & Sanitation District General Manager Frank Alfone said the district has been conducting voluntary PFAS testing that will continue throughout 2025. The most recent testing in February showed no detectable levels of PFAS in the city drinking water supply.

2024 #COleg: #Colorado Wetlands: Lawmakers clash as they seek state protections — Colorado Politics

Colorado River headwaters tributary in Rocky Mountain National Park photo via Greg Hobbs.

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Politics website (Marianne Goodland). Here’s an excerpt:

April 13, 2024

This month, lawmakers looked at the dueling approaches contained in two measures seeking to implement a way for the state to manage “dredge and fill discharge” permits tied to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision [Sackett vs. EPA] that redefined how a body of water can be protected under the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Waters of the United States” rule…Supporters of the first bill, which gives the task to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, insist it’s the proper venue because it already experience dealing with permitting and water quality issues. Supporters of the second measure, which hands the responsibility to the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, maintain thatย the Department of Natural Resources is better equipped, since it already deals with related disciplines, such as water resource management, water rights law and land management.

In any case, policymakers agree that Colorado residents, industries and the wetlands needs certainty…Alex Funk with the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership told a legislative committee last August that almost 90% of fish and wildlife in Colorado rely on the state’s wetlands at some point during their lifecycle.  House Speaker McCluskie told the House agriculture committee on April 8 that since Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency held that only permanent streams and rivers are protected under the federal Clean Water Act, those with a continuous surface connection to another permanent water body. That puts Colorado waters at risk, she said.  Pitkin County Commissioner Greg Poschman also noted that the state’s headwaters are made up of small streams that do not have year-round flow because they are under snowpack half the year โ€” suggesting Sackett would put those waters at risk.

PFAS โ€˜forever chemicalsโ€™: Why EPA set federal drinking water limits for these health-harming contaminants

Scientists test drinking water for PFAS at an EPA lab in Cincinnati. AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel

Kathryn Crawford, Middlebury

The more scientists learn about the health risks of PFAS, found in everything from nonstick cookware to carpets to ski wax, the more concerning these โ€œforever chemicalsโ€ become.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency now believes there is no safe level for two common PFAS โ€“ PFOA and PFOS โ€“ in drinking water, and it acknowledges that very low concentrations of other PFAS present human health risks. The agency issued the first legally enforceable national drinking water standards for five common types of PFAS chemicals, as well as PFAS mixtures, on April 10, 2024.

I study PFAS as an environmental health scientist. Hereโ€™s a quick look at the risks these chemicals pose and efforts to regulate them.

What exactly are PFAS?

PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. This is a large group of human-made chemicals โ€“ currently estimated to be nearly 15,000 individual chemical compounds โ€“ that are used widely in consumer products and industry. They can make products resistant to water, grease and stains and protect against fire.

Waterproof outdoor apparel and cosmetics, stain-resistant upholstery and carpets, food packaging that is designed to prevent liquid or grease from leaking through, and certain firefighting equipment often contain PFAS.

In fact, studies have found that most products labeled stain- or water-resistant contain PFAS, and another study found that this is even true among products labeled as โ€œnontoxicโ€ or โ€œgreen.โ€ PFAS are also found in unexpected places such as high-performance ski and snowboard waxes, floor waxes and medical devices.

A firefighter walks past a row of firefighter gear.
Firefighters are concerned that PFAS in firefighting foams and protective gear could be a reason cancer rates are rising. AP Photo/Steven Senne

At first glance, PFAS sound pretty useful, so you might be wondering whatโ€™s the big deal?

The short answer is that PFAS are harmful to human health and the environment.

Some of the very same chemical properties that make PFAS attractive in products also mean these chemicals will persist in the environment for generations. Because of the widespread use of PFAS, these chemicals are now present in water, soil and living organisms and can be found across almost every part of the planet, including Arctic glaciers, marine mammals, remote communities living on subsistence diets and in 98% of the American public.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates common types of PFAS are now in at least 45% of the countryโ€™s tap water. PFAS maker 3M, facing lawsuits, announced a settlement worth at least US$10.3 billion in June 2023, with public water systems to pay for PFAS testing and treatment.

What are the health risks from PFAS exposure?

Once people are exposed to PFAS, the chemicals remain in their bodies for a long time โ€“ months to years, depending on the specific compound โ€“ and they can accumulate over time.

Research consistently demonstrates that PFAS are associated with a variety of adverse health effects. A review by a panel of experts looking at research on PFAS toxicity concluded with a high degree of certainty that PFAS contribute to thyroid disease, elevated cholesterol, liver damage, and kidney and testicular cancer.

A woman lying on her back on white carpet holds up a little girl who is pretending to fly. A white couch is behind them.
Stain-resistant fabrics and carpets often contain PFAS. Deagreez via Getty Images

Further, they concluded with a high degree of certainty that PFAS also affect babies exposed in utero by increasing their likelihood of being born at a lower birth weight and responding less effectively to vaccines, while impairing womenโ€™s mammary gland development, which may adversely affect a momโ€™s ability to breastfeed.

The review also found evidence that PFAS may contribute to a number of other disorders, though further research is needed to confirm existing findings: inflammatory bowel disease, reduced fertility, breast cancer, and an increased likelihood of miscarriage and developing high blood pressure and preeclampsia during pregnancy. Additionally, current research suggests that babies exposed prenatally are at higher risk of experiencing obesity, early-onset puberty and reduced fertility later in life.

Collectively, this is a formidable list of diseases and disorders.

Whoโ€™s regulating PFAS?

PFAS chemicals have been around since the late 1930s, when a DuPont scientist created one by accident during a lab experiment. DuPont called it Teflon, which eventually became a household name for its use on nonstick pans.

Decades later, in 1998, Scotchgard maker 3M notified the Environmental Protection Agency that a PFAS chemical was showing up in human blood samples. At the time, 3M said low levels of the manufactured chemical had been detected in peopleโ€™s blood as early as the 1970s.

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has a toxicological profile for PFAS. And the EPA had issued advisories and health-based guidelines. But despite the lengthy list of serious health risks linked to PFAS and a tremendous amount of federal investment in PFAS-related research in recent years, PFAS hadnโ€™t been regulated at the federal level in the United States until now.

The new drinking water standards set limits for five individual PFAS โ€“ PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS and HFPO-DA โ€“ as well as mixtures of these chemicals. The standards are part of the EPAโ€™s road map for PFAS regulations.

The EPA has also proposed listing nine PFAS as hazardous substances under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, a move that worries utilities and businesses that use PFAS-containing products or processes because of the expense of cleanup.

Biden-Harris Administration Finalizes First-Ever National Drinking Water Standard to Protect 100M People from #PFAS Pollution

PFAS contamination in the U.S. October 18, 2021 via ewg.org.

Click the link to read the article on the Environmental Protection Agency website:

As part of the Administrationโ€™s commitment to combating PFAS pollution, EPA announces $1B investment through President Bidenโ€™s Investing in America agenda to address PFAS in drinking water

April 10, 2024

WASHINGTONย – Today, April 10, the Biden-Harris Administration issued the first-ever national, legally enforceable drinking water standard to protect communities from exposure to harmful per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as โ€˜forever chemicals.โ€™ Exposure to PFAS has been linked to deadly cancers, impacts to the liver and heart, and immune and developmental damage to infants and children. This final rule represents the most significant step to protect public health underย EPAโ€™s PFAS Strategic Roadmap. The final rule will reduce PFAS exposure for approximately 100 million people, prevent thousands of deaths, and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses. Todayโ€™s announcement complementsย President Bidenโ€™s government-wide action planย to combat PFAS pollution.ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

Through President Bidenโ€™s Investing in America agenda, EPA is also making unprecedented funding available to help ensure that all people have clean and safe water. In addition to todayโ€™s final rule, EPA is announcing nearly $1 billion in newly available funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help states and territories implement PFAS testing and treatment at public water systems and to help owners of private wells address PFAS contamination. This is part of a $9 billion investment through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help communities with drinking water impacted by PFAS and other emerging contaminants โ€“ the largest-ever investment in tackling PFAS pollution. An additional $12 billion is available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for general drinking water improvements, including addressing emerging contaminants like PFAS. 

EPA Administrator Michael Regan will join White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Brenda Mallory to announce the final standard today at an event in Fayetteville, North Carolina. In 2017, area residents learned that the Cape Fear River, the drinking water source for 1 million people in the region, had been heavily contaminated with PFAS pollution from a nearby manufacturing facility. Todayโ€™s announcements will help protect communities like Fayetteville from further devastating impacts of PFAS.

โ€œDrinking water contaminated with PFAS has plagued communities across this country for too long,โ€ said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. โ€œThat is why President Biden has made tackling PFAS a top priority, investing historic resources to address these harmful chemicals and protect communities nationwide. Our PFAS Strategic Roadmap marshals the full breadth of EPAโ€™s authority and resources to protect people from these harmful forever chemicals. Today, I am proud to finalize this critical piece of our Roadmap, and in doing so, save thousands of lives and help ensure our children grow up healthier.โ€   

โ€œPresident Biden believes that everyone deserves access to clean, safe drinking water, and he is delivering on that promise,โ€ said Brenda Mallory, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. โ€œThe first national drinking water standards for PFAS marks a significant step towards delivering on the Biden-Harris Administrationโ€™s commitment to advancing environmental justice, protecting communities, and securing clean water for people across the country.โ€

โ€œUnder President Bidenโ€™s leadership, we are taking a whole-of-government approach to tackle PFAS pollution and ensure that all Americans have access to clean, safe drinking water. Todayโ€™s announcement by EPA complements these efforts and will help keep our communities safe from these toxic โ€˜forever chemicals,โ€™โ€ said Deputy Assistant to the President for the Cancer Moonshot, Dr. Danielle Carnival. โ€œCoupled with the additional $1 billion investment from President Bidenโ€™s Investing in America agenda to help communities address PFAS pollution, the reductions in exposure to toxic substances delivered by EPAโ€™s standards will further the Biden Cancer Moonshot goal of reducing the cancer death rate by at least half by 2047 and preventing more than four million cancer deaths โ€” and stopping cancer before it starts by protecting communities from known risks associated with exposure to PFAS and other contaminants, including kidney and testicular cancers, and more.โ€

EPA is taking a signature step to protect public health by establishing legally enforceable levels for several PFAS known to occur individually and as mixtures in drinking water. This rule sets limits for five individual PFAS: PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA (also known as โ€œGenX Chemicalsโ€). The rule also sets a limit for mixtures of any two or more of four PFAS: PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS, and โ€œGenX chemicals.โ€ By reducing exposure to PFAS, this final rule will prevent thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of serious illnesses, including certain cancers and liver and heart impacts in adults, and immune and developmental impacts to infants and children. 

This final rule advances President Bidenโ€™s commitment to ending cancer as we know it as part of the Biden Cancer Moonshot, to ensuring that all Americans have access to clean, safe, drinking water, and to furthering the Biden-Harris Administrationโ€™s commitment to environmental justice by protecting communities that are most exposed to toxic chemicals. 

EPA estimates that between about 6% and 10% of the 66,000 public drinking water systems subject to this rule may have to take action to reduce PFAS to meet these new standards. All public water systems have three years to complete their initial monitoring for these chemicals. They must inform the public of the level of PFAS measured in their drinking water. Where PFAS is found at levels that exceed these standards, systems must implement solutions to reduce PFAS in their drinking water within five years. 

The new limits in this rule are achievable using a range of available technologies and approaches including granular activated carbon, reverse osmosis, and ion exchange systems. For example, the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, serving Wilmington, NC โ€“ one of the communities most heavily impacted by PFAS contamination โ€“ has effectively deployed a granular activated carbon system to remove PFAS regulated by this rule. Drinking water systems will have flexibility to determine the best solution for their community.

EPA will be working closely with state co-regulators in supporting water systems and local officials to implement this rule. In the coming weeks, EPA will host a series of webinars to provide information to the public, communities, and water utilities about the final PFAS drinking water regulation. To learn more about the webinars, please visit EPAโ€™s PFAS drinking water regulation webpage. EPA has also published a toolkit of communications resources to help drinking water systems and community leaders educate the public about PFAS, where they come from, their health risks, how to reduce exposure, and about this rule. 

โ€œWe are thankful that Administrator Regan and the Biden Administration are taking this action to protect drinking water in North Carolina and across the country,โ€ said North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper. โ€œWe asked for this because we know science-based standards for PFAS and other compounds are desperately needed.โ€

โ€œFor decades, the American people have been exposed to the family of incredibly toxic โ€˜forever chemicalsโ€™ known as PFAS with no protection from their government. Those chemicals now contaminate virtually all Americans from birth. Thatโ€™s because for generations, PFAS chemicals slid off of every federal environmental law like a fried egg off a Teflon pan โ€” until Joe Biden came along,โ€ said Environmental Working Group President and Co-Founder Ken Cook. โ€œWe commend EPA Administrator Michael Regan for his tireless leadership to make this decision a reality, and CEQ Chair Brenda Mallory for making sure PFAS is tackled with the โ€˜whole of governmentโ€™ approach President Biden promised. There is much work yet to be done to end PFAS pollution. The fact that the EPA has adopted the very strong policy announced today should give everyone confidence that the Biden administration will stay the course and keep the presidentโ€™s promises, until the American people are protected, at long last, from the scourge of PFAS pollution.โ€

โ€œWe learned about GenX and other PFAS in our tap water six years ago. I raised my children on this water and watched loved ones suffer from rare or recurrent cancers. No one should ever worry if their tap water will make them sick or give them cancer. Iโ€™m grateful the Biden EPA heard our pleas and kept its promise to the American people. We will keep fighting until all exposures to PFAS end and the chemical companies responsible for business-related human rights abuses are held fully accountable,โ€ said Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear.

More details about funding to address PFAS in Drinking Water

Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, EPA is making an unprecedented $21 billion available to strengthen our nationโ€™s drinking water systems, including by addressing PFAS contamination. Of that, $9 billion is specifically for tackling PFAS and emerging contaminants. The financing programs delivering this funding are part of President Bidenโ€™s Justice40 Initiative, which set the goal that 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that have been historically marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. 

Additionally, EPA has a nationwide Water Technical Assistance program to help small, rural, and disadvantaged communities access federal resources by working directly with water systems to identify challenges like PFAS; develop plans; build technical, managerial, and financial capacity; and apply for water infrastructure funding. Learn more about EPAโ€™s Water Technical Assistance programs.

More details about the final PFAS drinking water standards:

  • For PFOA and PFOS, EPA is setting a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal, a non-enforceable health-based goal, at zero. This reflects the latest science showing that there is no level of exposure to these contaminants without risk of health impacts, including certain cancers.ย 
  • EPA is setting enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels at 4.0 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS, individually. This standard will reduce exposure from these PFAS in our drinking water to the lowest levels that are feasible for effective implementation.ย 
  • For PFNA, PFHxS, and โ€œGenX Chemicals,โ€ EPA is setting the MCLGs and MCLs at 10 parts per trillion.
  • Because PFAS can often be found together in mixtures, and research shows these mixtures may have combined health impacts, EPA is also setting a limit for any mixture of two or more of the following PFAS: PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS, and โ€œGenX Chemicals.โ€ย 

EPA is issuing this rule after reviewing extensive research and science on how PFAS affects public health, while engaging with the water sector and with state regulators to ensure effective implementation. EPA also considered 120,000 comments on the proposed rule from a wide variety of stakeholders.

Background:

PFAS, also known as โ€˜forever chemicals,โ€™ are prevalent in the environment. PFAS are a category of chemicals used since the 1940s to repel oil and water and resist heat, which makes them useful in everyday products such as nonstick cookware, stain resistant clothing, and firefighting foam. The science is clear that exposure to certain PFAS over a long period of time can cause cancer and other illnesses.  In addition, PFAS exposure during critical life stages such as pregnancy or early childhood can also result in adverse health impacts.

Across the country, PFAS contamination is impacting millions of peopleโ€™s health and wellbeing. People can be exposed to PFAS through drinking water or food contaminated with PFAS, by coming into contact with products that contain PFAS, or through workplace exposures in certain industries. 

Since EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan announced the PFAS Strategic Roadmap in October 2021, EPA has taken action โ€“ within the Biden-Harris Administrationโ€™s whole-of-government approach โ€“ by advancing science and following the law to safeguard public health, protect the environment, and hold polluters accountable. The actions described in the PFAS Strategic Roadmap each represent important and meaningful steps to protect communities from PFAS contamination. Cumulatively, these actions will build upon one another and lead to more enduring and protective solutions. In December 2023, the EPA released its second annual report on PFAS progress. The report highlights significant accomplishments achieved under the EPAโ€™s PFAS Strategic Roadmap.

Products that contain PFAS. Graphic credit: Riverside (CA) Public Utilities

2024 #COleg: New wetlands, stream oversight proposal surfaces at the #Colorado Capitol — Fresh Water News

Blanca Wetlands, Colorado BLM-managed ACEC Blanca Wetlands is a network of lakes, ponds, marshes and wet meadows designated for its recreation and wetland values. The BLM Colorado and its partners have made strides in preserving, restoring and managing the area to provide rich and diverse habitats for wildlife and the public. To visit or get more information, see: http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/slvfo/blanca_wetlands.html. By Bureau of Land Management – Blanca Wetlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern, Colorado, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42089248

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

March 27, 2024

Colorado lawmakers will consider a fresh proposal to grant the state authority to oversee streams and wetlands left unprotected by a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year.

House Bill 24-1379, sponsored by House Speaker Julie McCluskie, D-Dillon, Rep. Karen McCormick, D-Longmont, and Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Frisco, would allow the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to oversee a wide array of industrial players, including home and road builders and mining companies, and determine what steps are necessary to minimize any damage to streams and wetlands caused by their activities.

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling inย Sackett vs. EPAย that sharply limits the streams and wetlands that qualify for protection under the Clean Water Act, a decision that water observers said had a particularly broad impact in the West. In Colorado and other Western states, vast numbers of streams are temporary, flowing only after major rainstorms and during spring runoff season, when the mountain snow melts.

Colorado Rivers. Credit: Geology.com

In addition, hundreds of Colorado wetlands lack an obvious surface connection to streams, in part because so many of the stateโ€™s streams donโ€™t flow year-round.

โ€œAs a state we donโ€™t want to let a good crisis go to waste,โ€ McCluskie said in a briefing last week, referring to the Sackett decision and the regulatory gap that was created. โ€œOur water is part of the romance and tradition of being a Coloradan. Protecting those waterways could not be more important. But we recognize there needs to be clarity and certainty for our industry partners. And we have tried to be very considerate of differing viewpoints.โ€

At issue is how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency now defines so-called Waters of the United States, or WOTUS, which determines which waterways and wetlands are protected under the federal Clean Water Act. The definition has been heavily litigated in the nationโ€™s lower courts since the 1980s and has changed dramatically under different presidential administrations.

The U.S. Supreme Court decided in May that the WOTUS definition that included wetlands adjacent to streams was too broad.

In its ruling, the court said only those wetlands with a direct surface connection to a stream or permanent body of water, for instance, should be protected.

The courtโ€™s decision in the WOTUS case means it will be up to Colorado and other states to decide whether and how to handle that regulation โ€” including permitting โ€” and enforcement.

Colorado enacted temporary emergency protections last year to give the state time to create a new program.

And last month, Republican Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, of Brighton, introducedย ย Senate Bill 24-127, alsoย designed to fill the regulatory gap. The Kirkmeyer measure, which has broad industry support, is scheduled for its first hearing April 4, but itโ€™s likely to meet stiff resistance in the Democratic-controlled General Assembly.

Among the key differences between the two measures is that Kirkmeyerโ€™s proposal states that any new rules canโ€™t be more restrictive than those in place prior to the Sackett decision, while McCluskieโ€™s says protections should be โ€œat least as protectiveโ€ as those in place at that time, according to Jarrett Freedman, spokesman for the House Democrats.

Another difference is that Kirkmeyerโ€™s bill would place the new oversight program within the Colorado Department of Natural Resources instead of the CDPHE. Kirkmeyer said a huge permitting backlog at CDPHE  shows the agency would be unable to handle dredge-and-fill permitting required under her proposal.

McCluskie, however, believes the new program would be better housed within the state health department and that new funding would alleviate permitting delays.

The first hearing on theย House Bill 24-1379ย has not been scheduled, Freedman said.

A broad array of environmental groups has come out in favor of McCluskieโ€™s measure.

Iron Fen. Photo credit from report “A Preliminary Evaluation of Seasonal Water Levels Necessary to Sustain Mount Emmons Fen: Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests,” David J. Cooper, Ph.D, December 2003.

โ€œWetlands are natureโ€™s kidneys, they filter natural pollutants, they help reduce the severity of wildfires,โ€ said Josh Kuhn, senior water campaign manager at Conservation Colorado who spoke on behalf of the Protect Colorado Waters Coalition.

โ€œBut the Sackett decision left many of those wetlands unprotected โ€ฆ and we have also lost protections for seasonal streams.  If pollution is dumped into streams when snow melts and runs off, that pollution gets washed into the larger rivers. โ€ฆ If there is mining or development activity and they are dumping fill, or dirt, into dry streambeds, when there is water moving through those streambeds it is going to take those pollutants with it and pollute our water supply,โ€ he said.

Farm, homebuilding and mining interests have been closely watching the bill, which includes extensive exemptions for agriculture for such things as irrigation ditch repair, and on-farm water management activities. It also includes some exemptions for mining operations.

But there is still concern about the regulatory burden the new program will place on those industries and the time it will take to write new regulations and launch the program.

House Bill 24-1379 stipulates that rules be written by May 31, 2025.

โ€œThe rulemakings that they are contemplating are going to be complicated and detailed, and itโ€™s going to be a lot to accomplish in a short period of time,โ€ said John Kolanz, a northern Colorado attorney who often represents developers and who is tracking the bill. โ€œIt seems like a tall task.โ€

More by Jerd SmithJerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

Ephemeral streams are streams that do not always flow. They are above the groundwater reservoir and appear after precipitation in the area. Via Socratic.org

2024 #COleg: Western Slope lawmakers introduce rival bill to protect #Colorado wetlands — Summit Daily

Blanca Wetlands, Colorado BLM-managed ACEC Blanca Wetlands is a network of lakes, ponds, marshes and wet meadows designated for its recreation and wetland values. The BLM Colorado and its partners have made strides in preserving, restoring and managing the area to provide rich and diverse habitats for wildlife and the public. To visit or get more information, see: http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/slvfo/blanca_wetlands.html. By Bureau of Land Management – Blanca Wetlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern, Colorado, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42089248

Click the link to read the article on the Summit Daily website (Elliot Wenzler). Here’s an excerpt:

March 22, 2024

House Bill 1379 is only one of the approaches being considered by the Colorado legislature this session.ย Senate Bill 127, introduced in February by Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, proposes that the permitting system should instead be managed by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources.ย 

โ€œThey do the floodplain planning, the water planning, theyโ€™re responsible for the streams and rivers, thatโ€™s not the health department,โ€ she said. 

Kirkmeyer argues that the permitting shouldnโ€™t be under CDPHE because the department already has a huge backlog for its other permit programs.ย The two bills have several other key differences, including how they define which waters should be protected and how stringent the permitting process is for different industries, such as mining. Agricultural activities would be largely exempt under both bills.ย  Senate Bill 172 has a more narrow approach to which state waters should be protected, largely consistent with the Sackett decision. House Bill 1379 would go somewhat beyond the scope of what was protected before that ruling…

House Bill 1379 was assigned to the House Agriculture, Water and Natural Resources Committee. Senate Bill 172 is set to be heard by the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee April 4.