By GRACE KELLY/ecoRI News staff
Rhode Island has 285 impaired waterways, including 59 percent of its lake and pond acres. (Frank Carini/ecoRI News)
Earlier this month the Trump administration got the ball rolling on a Clean Water Act overhaul that could put U.S. waterways at risk.
The Clean Water Act
requires federal permitting for anyone conducting business — think agriculture
and industrial production — that could pollute waters of the United States
(WOTUS).
In 2015, the Obama administration
added the Clean Water Rule to the 1972 act, expanding
on the definition of WOTUS to include temporary and isolated waterways.
“The Obama rule in 2015 was designed
to limit pollution in about 60 percent of the countries waterbodies, and not
only that, but it was also designed to protect drinking water sources for a
huge amount of the U.S.,” said Heather Govern, vice president and director of
the Conservation Law Foundation’s Clean Air and Water Program.
“So the idea was to extend the federal authority on this because many of the upland waterbodies don’t have protection; these temporary tributaries, streams, and wetlands have been just subjected to pollution from agriculture and industry for decades and decades.”
“So the idea was to extend the federal authority on this because many of the upland waterbodies don’t have protection; these temporary tributaries, streams, and wetlands have been just subjected to pollution from agriculture and industry for decades and decades.”
Since 2017, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the Trump administration have decried the rule as
an abuse of power, saying changes will “remove Washington bureaucrats from
making ambiguous decisions on land which they aren't familiar with” and
claiming the Obama-era rule stifled local economies and made opening, say, a
new factory much more arduous.
“Today, EPA and the Department of the Army finalized a rule to repeal the previous administration’s overreach in the federal regulation of U.S. waters and recodify the longstanding and familiar regulatory text that previously existed,” EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler is quoted in a Sept. 12 press release.
“Today’s Step 1 action fulfills a key promise of President Trump and sets the stage for Step 2 — a new WOTUS definition that will provide greater regulatory certainty for farmers, landowners, home builders, and developers nationwide.”
Before being named EPA
administrator, Wheeler worked in a
law firm that represented coal interests and lobbied against the Obama
administration’s environmental regulations. He is a critic of limits on climate
emissions and the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
While polluting obvious sources of
drinking water and large bodies of water will still be prohibited, under the
Trump administration’s definition of WOTUS, pollution from stormwater runoff
and groundwater near farms and factories could become a major issue.
“You’ve got a real possibility that
those industries are going to cause chemical runoff, stormwater runoff that
hits these bodies of water that are no longer under protection,” Govern said.
“Plus, all of our nation’s waters are connected, and the streams and tributaries and wetlands often run into larger rivers, larger lakes, and there is a need to protect the smaller water bodies in order to protect the larger ones.”
“Plus, all of our nation’s waters are connected, and the streams and tributaries and wetlands often run into larger rivers, larger lakes, and there is a need to protect the smaller water bodies in order to protect the larger ones.”
Rhode Island currently has 285
impaired waterways, or bodies of water that fail to meet specific water-quality
standards with regards to its intended use and classification.
The percentages of impaired
waterways, according to Jane Sawyer from the Rhode Island Department of
Environmental Management (DEM), are as follows: 59 percent of lake and pond
acres, 53.2 percent of rivers and stream square miles, and 35.7 percent of
estuarine square miles.
“That’s a lot of impaired waterways
for such a small state,” Govern said.
For Johnathan Berard, state director
of Clean Water Action’s Rhode Island chapter, the fear of more polluted waters
is one problem that this repeal could exacerbate. Another problem is degrading
the critical infrastructure that wetlands create in terms of flood control.
“Because some wetlands will be
removed from protection, that they could be paved, developed, filled in, etc.,
and we know that wetlands are critical infrastructures in preventing flooding,”
Berard said.
“So as climate change worsens and has a bigger impact in our state, we need to protect wetlands and reestablish wetlands, and not allow protections to be undone.”
“So as climate change worsens and has a bigger impact in our state, we need to protect wetlands and reestablish wetlands, and not allow protections to be undone.”
To keep Rhode Island’s wetlands —
and all of the state’s water systems — safe, we need to ensure that 2015 recommended updates
to Rhode Island’s Freshwater Wetlands Act, which was originally put into law
into the 1970s, are accepted, according to Topher Hamblett, Save The Bay’s
director of advocacy and policy.
“During a 2015 revision of the law,
the task force made some recommendations, including that DEM be given more
staff to actually implement the new law, because the new law expands the areas
that DEM can regulate,” Hamblett said. “The hitch is that here we are in 2019
and the regulations that are really the meat of wetlands regulations here in
Rhode Island are still in draft form.”
In the summary of the proposed draft
revisions to the state’s Freshwater Wetlands Act, it notes that the
revisions, “Expands the jurisdiction of state agencies and requires the
promulgation by rule of standards for wetland buffers and setbacks. The
legislation recognizes the important values of buffers in the protection of the
wetland resources and the benefits they provide.”
A workshop for the public to comment
on the draft of these changes was held Sept. 11. Hamblett said he hopes the
revisions are accepted, as they will secure stronger protection for Rhode
Island’s wetlands during a time when federal support is dwindling.
“The Trump administration can try to
do what it wants to on a national level,” he said. “But meanwhile for Rhode
Island, we need to focus on our Freshwater Wetlands Act because some of the
same waters that the federal Clean Water Rule was protecting, and will no longer,
are at stake here.”