OH Governor Vetoes Bill That Would Violate Compact

Jul 15: Ohio Republican Governor John Kasich vetoed HB 231, legislation related to Ohio's participation in the Great Lakes Compact, an agreement between the eight Great Lakes states and two Canadian provinces to provide for management of Great Lakes water [See WIMS 7/14/11]. In vetoing the bill Kasich issued a statement saying, "Lake Erie is an incredible resource that demands our vigilant stewardship to maximize its environmental, recreational and commercial potential for Ohioans. The Great Lakes Compact ensures that Great Lakes states and provinces work together to protect the lakes and the water resources in the basin, and Ohio's legislation is intended to further Ohio's compliance with the compact. While most of HB 231 fulfills Ohio's obligations without concern and helps meet the needs of Ohio's industrial, energy and agricultural water users, portions of it must be improved. Namely, Ohio's legislation lacks clear standards for conservation and withdrawals and does not allow for sufficient evaluation and monitoring of withdrawals or usage. I look forward to working with the General Assembly to make the necessary improvements to the legislation."

 

    The bill was supported by the Coalition for Sustainable Water Management including: Ohio Chamber of Commerce, Ohio Manufacturers Association, Ohio Petroleum Council, Ohio Chemistry Technology Council, Ohio Soft Drink Association, Greater Cleveland Partnership, and Ohio Aggregates & Industrial Minerals Association.

 

    A July 15, letter from U.S. Representative Candice Miller (MI-10), co-chair of the House Great Lakes Task Force (GLTF), along with fellow co-chairs of the House GLTF sent a letter to Governor Kasich expressing concern the bill which they said would allow an excessive amount of water to be withdrawn from Ohio's portion of Lake Erie and its tributaries without any oversight. In the letter the House GLTF members wrote that: "Ohio House Bill 231, amongst other things, would allow an excessive amount of water to be withdrawn from Ohio's portion of Lake Erie and its tributaries without any oversight. Under this legislation a water user would not have to seek a permit unless there was a new withdrawal of five million gallons of water a day averaged from Lake Erie, two million gallons a day averaged from a river or groundwater source, and 300,000 gallons of water a day averaged from a high-quality, small stream.

    "These threshold numbers surpass the states and provinces surrounding Lake Erie and the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes are a shared resource. Withdraws that occur in Ohio's Lake Erie basin do not only impact Ohio, they also impact Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ontario, and Pennsylvania's waters. Three years ago, Ohio made a commitment to the Great Lakes states and provinces to conserve and sustainably use Lake Erie waters. Ohio House Bill 231 does not live up to this commitment and will jeopardize the Great Lakes and the surrounding states and provinces."

    In a letter to Ohio Senate leaders on June 27, one of the authors of the Great Lakes Compact, Sam Speck, Director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources from 1999 to 2006, who chaired the Great Lakes Commission said, "I am concerned that Substitute House Bill 231 will undermine the resource protections that the Commission worked so hard to establish in the Compact. Should the General Assembly pass the bill as currently written… Ohio will adopt legislation that violates the Great Lakes Compact. What's more, Ohio will adopt the weakest water supply protections of all of the Great Lakes states. . ."

    Access a release from Governor Kasich (click here). Access a release and the letter from the House GLTF (click here). Access a release from the Nature Conservancy and link to the Speck letter (click here). Access a legislative analysis for HB231 (click here). Access further legislative details for HB231 (click here). 

House Subcommittees Hearing On Ballast Water Discharge Regs

Jul 13: The House Transportation &  Infrastructure (T&I) Committee, Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee, chaired by Representative Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), and the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee, chaired by Representative Bob Gibbs (R-OH), held a hearing to explore current ballast water and incidental discharge management, as well as potential ways to implement cost effective and common sense approaches to future regulations.

    According to a Republican Committee release, in order to maintain stability during transit, most ocean going vessels fill internal tanks with ballast water during the loading of cargo and then release it during unloading. Ballast water has long been recognized as one of several pathways by which invasive species are transported globally and introduced into coastal waters where they did not live before. The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) released a report on the effects of ballast water discharges, which found that any ballast water management strategy that is more stringent than the one being imposed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is not currently achievable [See WIMS 7/13/11]. However, some states are pushing for more stringent standards.

    The discharge of ballast water and other substances from vessels are currently regulated by the Coast Guard, the U.S. EPA, 26 states, 2 Indian Tribes and a U.S. territory. The release indicates, "The current overlapping and contradictory patchwork of ballast water regulations hampers the flow of commerce, threatens international trade, unduly burdens vessel operations in U.S. waters, undermines job creation and hurts our economy."

    Chairman LoBiondo said, "We have to overcome this mindset that mandating a dozen different, unachievable standards, each more stringent than the next, somehow protects our environment. It does not. The time has finally come to enact a clear, effective, and uniform national standard that utilizes available and cost effective technology to reduce the risk of future aquatic invasions. We cannot afford to delay any longer as ballast water continues to threaten our environment and our economy." Chairman Gibbs said, "As we consider ballast water standards, we should not burden our shippers with unobtainable, unrealistic, expensive regulations that have not demonstrated a significant environmental benefit. Instead we need a common sense approach that can be enacted quickly, protects the environment, reduces red tape, grows maritime jobs and opens the flow of maritime commerce."

    Thomas Allegretti, President and CEO of the American Waterways Operators testified to the strong economic impacts of ballast water management saying, "We hope that Congress will seize the opportunity to fix this broken system because the economic stakes are very high. Each year, barges and towing vessels -- just one segment of the domestic and international maritime industry that is harmed by the current regulatory patchwork -- safely and efficiently move more than 800 million tons of cargo critical to the U.S. economy such as coal, grain, petroleum products, chemicals, steel, aggregates, and containers. The economic impact of this commerce extends far beyond the maritime industry, to the shippers, producers, and communities that rely on the safe, efficient, and cost-effective transportation of critical commodities, including commodities for export."

    Other witnesses testifying at the hearing included: Vice Admiral Brian Salerno, Deputy Commandant for Operations, U.S. Coast Guard; James Hanlon, Director Office of Wastewater Management, U.S. EPA; the Chair EPA Science Advisory Board; the Chair Committee on Numeric Limits for Living Organisms in Ballast Water, National Research Council; and the President Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association. The hearing focused on options to improve current regulations to ensure the free flow of commerce, grow maritime jobs, and protect the environment.

    Access a Republican release on the hearing (click here). Access the Republican hearing website for background, testimony, video and statements (click here).

SAB Final Review Of Ballast Water Treatment Systems

Jul 12: U.S. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) has issued its finalized advisory report -- Efficacy of Ballast Water Treatment Systems -- responding to a request from the Agency's Office of Water (OW) [See WIMS 5/24/11]. OW requested SAB to provide advice on technologies and systems to minimize the impacts of invasive species in vessel ballast water discharge. Vessel ballast water discharges are a major source of non-indigenous species introductions to marine, estuarine, and freshwater ecosystems of the United States.

 

    Ballast water discharges are regulated by the EPA under authority of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) under authority of the National Invasive Species Act (NISA). At present, Federal requirements for managing ballast water discharges rely primarily on ballast water exchange; however changes to federal ballast water regulations are under consideration. On August 28, 2009, the USCG proposed revising their existing rules to establish numeric concentration-based limits for live organisms in ballast water. The proposed rule would initially require compliance with a "Phase 1 standard" that has the same concentration limits as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) D-2 standard and subsequently require compliance with a more stringent "Phase 2 standard." EPA's existing CWA general permit for vessels will expire on Dec. 19, 2013. In its revisions to the vessel general permit, the EPA is considering numeric standards that limit the number of live organisms in discharged ballast water.

 

    To prepare the report, the SAB Panel reviewed a "Background and Issues Paper" prepared by OW and USCG (June 2010) as well as information on 51 existing or developmental ballast water management systems (BWMS) provided by OW and the public, although detailed data were available for only 15 BWMS.

   

    In addition to responding to four specific charge questions, the SAB Panel indicated, ". . .the Panel's overarching recommendation is that the EPA adopt a risk-based approach to minimize the impacts of invasive species in vessel ballast water discharge rather than relying solely on numeric standards for discharges from shipboard BWMS. The Panel found that insufficient attention has been given to integrated sets of practices and technologies that could be used to systematically advance ballast water management. These practices include managing ballast uptake to reduce the presence of invasive species, reducing invasion risk through operational adjustments and changes in ship design to reduce or eliminate the need for ballast water, development of voyage-based risk and/or hazard assessments, and treatment of ballast water in onshore reception facilities. The Panel recommended that a comprehensive analysis be done to compare biological effectiveness, cost, logistics, operations and safety associated with shipboard BWMS and onshore reception facilities."

 

    Access the complete 154-page review (click here). Access the Ballast Water Advisory panel website for background information and further details (click here).

NWF Assessment Of Progress On Great Lakes Compact

Jul 12: A report by the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) provides an "honest critique" of the states' progress in efforts to implement the Great Lakes Compact. Marc Smith, senior policy manager for NWF's Great Lakes Regional Center said, "This report is a wake-up call to the states to step it up. The future of the Compact remains bright, but our Great Lakes need a renewed commitment by the states and the region to address the bad -- and prevent the ugly." The Compact is an agreement between the Governors of New York, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and the Premiers of Ontario and Quebec which ban new diversions of water from the Great Lakes basin and provide for coordinated conservation, use and data collection efforts.

 

    NWF indicates that the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact (Compact) is at a critical juncture.  The Compact, a binding agreement among the Great Lakes states to protect the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin from diversions and excessive withdrawals, became law two and a half years ago. Together with a similar agreement between the states and the Great Lakes Canadian provinces, the Compact set minimum requirements for water use across the Basin. Each state agreed to implement the Compact by meeting a series of deadlines over five years, subject to regional oversight. Today, implementation of the Compact is at the halfway point. Two deadlines have already passed, and the final deadline is December 8, 2013. 

 

    Sara Gosman, water resources attorney for the National Wildlife Federation's Regional Center, and author of the report said, "Halfway to the five-year mark, implementation of the Great Lakes Compact is progressing at a snail's pace. While some states have taken their obligations under the Compact seriously, and indeed chosen innovative approaches, many have opted for the lowest common denominator. All have failed to meet one or more of the deadlines. The Compact Council has not stepped up and held the states accountable. The Council is operating on a shoestring budget from a foundation grant and cannot even muster the resources to bring the state representatives together for a formal meeting more than once a year."

 

    The report -- The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Implementation of the Great Lakes Compact" reviews the current status of state and regional implementation of the Compact in three critical areas: diversions out of the Basin; water conservation and efficiency; and water withdrawal permitting. For each area, the report gives examples of "the good, the bad…and the downright ugly."

 

    Among other examples cited as good in the report, NWF says that Michigan's groundbreaking online screening test for withdrawals, which has won three national awards, is a novel means of predicting resource impacts and providing users with a quick determination. However, the report identifies as "bad" that, "Michigan has failed to apply its permitting standard to proposed large withdrawals in a way that is consistent with its obligations under the Compact."

 

    The report points out that highlighting a case of "the ugly," the Ohio General Assembly recently passed legislation which NWF says "sinks to a new low in the annals of Compact implementation. This unbalanced bill is drastically at odds with the Great Lakes Compact and threatens water flows and concentrated pollutants, placing recreation, tourism, and wildlife at risk." Kristy Meyer, agricultural and clean water director with Ohio Environmental Council said, "As the Lake Erie state with the most to lose, Ohio has the distinction of having the weakest permitting program of all Great Lakes states, while clearly violating the Compact. Lake Erie could see increased harmful algal blooms, reduction in critical habitat for sport fish, such as walleye, perch and steelhead; and a loss of recreational opportunities."

 

    New York Representative Brian Higgins (D-NY), a member of the Congressional Great Lakes Task Force, sent a letter today (July 13) urging Ohio Republican Governor John Kasich to veto legislation in his state that would allow businesses to remove 5 million gallons of water a day from Lake Erie.  Rep. Higgins, whose district borders Lake Erie, warned that tapping into the Great Lakes would be "devastating environmentally and economically," and questioned the action from an "ethical and legal standpoint" saying the effort may violate the Great Lakes Compact approved by Congress in 2008. 

 

   Access a release and link to the complete report, executive summary and related information (click here). Access a release and letter from Rep. Higgins (click here).

Scientists Address Great Lakes & Mississippi River Basins Separation

Jul 1: A group of Great Lakes and Mississippi River scientists have published a technical paper in the Journal of Great Lakes Research entitled, Dividing the waters: The case for hydrologic separation of the North American Great Lakes and Mississippi River Basins. According to an abstract, legislation has been introduced this year in the U.S. Congress, but not yet enacted, that would direct the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to complete a study of the options that would prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Basins.

 

    The abstract indicates that, "Hydrologic separation is the only option which closes the aquatic connection between the two basins and does not require continuous operation and maintenance of various technologies that have some risk of failure. The one-time, capital cost to separate the two basins is widely acknowledged to be high, and the outstanding question is whether the costs are justified given the significant risk of future ecological damages and long-term economic losses. Interests opposing separation have mounted a public campaign that the news media have picked up to deny that hydrologic separation should be considered or that a problem even exists."

 

    The abstract continues, "The campaign rests on four assertions: (1) existing electric barriers in the Chicago canals are effective; (2) it is too late -- the carps are already in the Great Lakes or soon will be; (3) Asian carps will not thrive in the Great Lakes due to inadequate food and spawning habitat; and (4) Asian carps are unlikely to cause serious harm. Our review of these assertions and the ecological and socio-economic threats to both basins supports our recommendation that the pending legislation be passed and that it include analysis of hydrologic separation of the two basins." The scientists indicate in the paper that the potential victims of the current campaign to discredit proposals to separate the basins are the 40 million in the region who look to the Great Lakes for everything from drinking water to recreation to economic stability, as well as those living throughout the Mississippi River Basin already damaged by the zebra mussel and other southbound invaders from the Great Lakes.

 

    A number of environmental organizations issued a release on the paper indicating that the "researchers affirm what the environmental community has been urging even before the first November 2009 Asian carp DNA find inside an electric barrier that serves as the last line of defense between the Great Lakes and carp-riddled Mississippi River Basin." They said, "As the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stalls on congressionally ordered studies to find a permanent solution -- resorting to fish kills and other short-term tactics to stop the carp's lakeward migration -- environmentalists and a growing chorus of lawmakers continue to push for physically separating the two basins."

    Joel Brammeier, President and CEO of the Alliance for the Great Lakes said, "Extraordinary evidence demands extraordinary solutions, and the evidence is piling up in favor of separation. Declaring independence between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River is the only option." Robert Hirschfeld of Prairie Rivers Network said, "The artificial connection between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River is a revolving door for wave after wave of invasive species to infest the 30 states of the Mississippi River Basin and do untold ecological and economic damage."

 

    The groups issuing the joint release on the scientific paper included: Alliance for the Great Lakes; Freshwater Future; Great Lakes United; Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition; National Wildlife Federation; Natural Resources Defense Council; Prairie Rivers Network; and Sierra Club.

 

    Access a release from the groups (click here). Access the Journal of Great Lakes Research with abstract and information on obtaining the paper (click here). Access an online posting of paper from Michigan State University (click here). Access a fact sheet on the scientists' paper from the organizations (click here).

(click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period -- THIS IS THE LAST DAY -- you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

Senate Confirms Two New IJC Appointments

Jun 30: The U.S. Senate has confirmed the Presidential appointments of Dereth Britt Glance, of New York and Richard M. Moy, of Montana to be Commissioners on the part of the United States on the International Joint Commission (IJC) [See WIMS 3/10/11]. The two new appointees will join Lana Pollack who was appointed as Chair of the U.S. Section, International Joint Commission, by the effective on June 26, 2010. The appointees will replace former U.S. Commissioners Irene B. Brooks and Sam Speck.

 

    Ms. Glance is currently the Executive Program Director for Citizens Campaign for the Environment, a non-profit citizens environmental and public health advocacy organization in New York and Connecticut. Rich Moy is a Senior Fellow at the Center of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy at the University of Montana and a land and water consultant.

 

    Access further information on the appointment approvals (click here); and (click here). Access a 3/9/11 release from the White House with further details on the nominees (click here). Access the IJC website for additional information (click here).

(click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period -- THIS IS THE LAST DAY -- you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

EPA Science Advisory Board Meetings On GLRI Review

Jun 15: U.S. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) has announced a public face-to-face, 2-day meeting of the SAB panel to review the interagency Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) Action Plan (FY 2010-FY2014) that describes restoration priorities, goals, objectives, measurable ecological targets, and specific actions for the Great Lakes. The meeting will be held on July 12, 2011 from 9 AM to 5:30 PM  and on July 13, 2011 from 8 AM to 5 PM (Central Time) at the Congress Plaza Hotel in Chicago.

 

    EPA is leading the interagency Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) to protect and restore the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of the Great Lakes. The GLRI is designed to target the most significant environmental problems in the region, as documented in extensive scientific studies and by stakeholder review. To guide the efforts of the GLRI, EPA and its Federal partners, through the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force, developed a comprehensive multi-year Action Plan. The GLRI Action Plan identifies outcome-oriented performance goals, objectives, measurable ecological targets, and specific actions for five major focus areas: toxic substances and areas of concern; invasive species; near-shore health and nonpoint source pollution; habitat and wildlife protection and restoration; and accountability, education, monitoring, evaluation, communication, and partnerships. The EPA Great Lakes National Program Manager has requested the SAB to review the GLRI Action Plan to assess the appropriateness of its measures and actions to achieve its stated priorities and goals. On June 1, the SAB issued a determination memo announcing the 16 members SAB Panel for Review of Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan.

    Access the Federal Register announcement of the meeting with further details and links to related information (click here). Access the SAB GLRI Panel website for complete information, documents and meetings related to the review (click here).

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.