- Thursday, 01 March 2018 12:38
- Written by Katlyn Schmitt
Waterkeepers Chesapeake, Potomac Riverkeeper Network and other partners submitted comments on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) Environmental Assessment (EA) of TransCanada’s proposed fracked gas pipeline under the Potomac River. Our comments call out the agency for a variety of failures of analysis, including outdated methodologies, reliance on inaccurate or unsupported facts, and unwarranted conclusions.
For over a year, we have joined our No Potomac Pipeline coalition partners in voicing our concerns to State and Federal authorities over the serious threats this pipeline has on the Potomac River, the drinking water for 6 million people. There has been a pattern of reluctance from those authorities to hear our concerns and to fully assess this pipeline project in its entirety.
Comments filed are extensive and detailed, but some of the highlights are:
- FERC failed to properly evaluate the serious risk and potential impacts on public health and safety posed by horizontal directional drilling under the Potomac River and C & O Canal
- The EA, by using methodologies which are outdated or based on inaccurate facts, fail to adequately consider impacts on climate change
- The EA does not adequately discuss all reasonable alternatives, including an option that would attach the pipeline to a bridge over the Potomac instead of drilling underneath the river.
It is unfortunate that FERC continues to disregard the threats to our environment from pipeline companies like TransCanada, rather than assess the true costs and recognize the impacts to our citizens and neighbors. Our comments show that FERC has failed its duty to prepare its environmental assessment in accordance with law, and with common sense. Instead, they continue to rubberstamp natural gas projects like this one.
- Monday, 26 February 2018 16:09
- Written by Betsy Nicholas
Marylanders expect transparent government. This transparency is essential across all sectors of government and industry, including agricultural waste management. Without access to this information, local communities and citizens cannot be assured that these operations are not polluting the water that Marylanders rely on for drinking, swimming and fishing.
That’s why Waterkeepers Chesapeake along with Maryland Clean Agriculture Coalition (MCAC) are supporting legislation to address a significant loophole in current law that makes it impossible to obtain access to public records through a Public Information Act request if those records are held by agricultural operations. Maryland’s agriculture industry is afforded a level of secrecy that no other industry in our state enjoys, despite being heavily subsidized. Closing this loophole is critical to advancing transparency in the state, as well as to cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay.
As currently written, Agric. § 8-801.1, a provision of the Maryland Water Quality Improvement Act, requires most farms to follow Nutrient Management Plans (NMPs) and annually submit a plan summary to the Maryland Department of Agriculture (MDA). These plans are not written by the farmers themselves, but with the support of professional planners who are paid for with our public dollars.
Current law requires MDA to “maintain a copy of each summary for 3 years in a manner that protects the identity of the individual for whom the nutrient management plan was prepared.” Although this provision seems to only affect MDA’s disclosure of identifying information, such as the owner’s name and unique plan ID number, from the plan summaries themselves, recent court decisions have dramatically expanded the scope of this exemption. Specifically, although agencies are required to interpret exemptions narrowly, Maryland courts have read this provision as requiring MDA to redact information from any related documents if information in other records (such as publicly funded cost-share documents or pollution-related enforcement records) could potentially create a linkage to a specific plan summary.
Protecting the identities of thousands of nutrient management plan holders poses real obstacles to public oversight and transparency. MDA is tasked with ensuring that these operators comply with their plans and use public resources to do so. Access to information about the operation enables citizens to track public funding of conservation projects, compliance with NMPs to control pollution and the effectiveness of MDA’s oversight program.
In its recent report on Maryland’s Public Information Act, the Office of the Attorney General flags the current provision in the Agriculture Article that “protects the identity of the individual for whom the nutrient management plan was prepared.” The Attorney General notes that this “one-sentence provision was the subject of seven years of litigation arising out of the Department of Agriculture’s response to PIA requests from various environmental organizations.”
The report recommends “that § 8-801.1 of the Agriculture Article be amended to specify what identifying information should be withheld when nutrient management plans are provided in response to a PIA request.”
HB 1221: Protection of Personal Information in NMPs Act will do just that. By specifying what types of “personal information” are protected under NMPs in Maryland, the bill will bring NMPs in line with other information that’s available through Public Information Act requests. The current confusion around the type of personal information protected under NMPs has increased the cost to both the Maryland Department of Agriculture and information seekers alike. By specifying exactly what is protected, it prevents a complex and costly analysis in the case of each Public Information Act request.
Polling data shows that more than three-quarters of respondents supported eliminating the exemption that makes agricultural pollution control plans secret. A 2015 Opinionworks poll found that 77 percent would support legislation to make agricultural pollution control plans available to the public.
NMPs contain vital information for the protection of the Maryland’s local waters and streams. Having access to these plans will ensure the success of Maryland’s water quality standards and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. Increased government transparency around NMPs also ensures that any related tax dollars are serving their desired function of reducing pollution in our waterways.
— Betsy Nicholas, Executive Director of Waterkeepers Chesapeake, MCAC co-chair
- Monday, 12 February 2018 16:18
- Written by Robin Broder
Proposed 90% Cut Ignores Overwhelming Bipartisan Support of Program
(Monday, Febraury 12, 2018) President Trump’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2019 essentially eliminates federal funding for the cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay, the largest program to restore a body of water in U.S. history, just as the effort reaches its halfway point. The budget recommends that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Chesapeake Bay Program budget be slashed from its current allocation of $73 million to just $7.3 million – an exact 90 percent cut to current funding. These funds would only be designated for monitoring and would effectively shutdown all other aspects of the restoration effort.
“By slashing the Chesapeake Bay Program funding, the president is giving polluters a green light to destroy the United States’ largest estuary and its already-imperiled tributaries,” said Betsy Nicholas, Executive Director of Waterkeepers Chesaeake. “The multi-state restoration work of the Bay and our rivers and streams is just beginning to pay dividends in the form of cleaner water and restored habitat. We can’t reverse course.”
A multi-state, federally supported program is the only way to restore the Chesapeake Bay, because the tributaries to the Bay cross state boundaries and provide clean drinking water to millions. In addition, the Bay is the economic engine for the region, providing an estimated one trillion-dollar value in fisheries, shipping, tourism, and other industries.
The president’s proposed budget is a direct attack on our rights to clean water and air. In addition to gutting the Bay Program, it calls for a 34 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency, cutting funding for the agency to $5.4 billion — its lowest funding level since 1990. In addition, the president’s infrastructure plan proposes to replace our nation's public highways and bridges with toll roads, cut existing highway funds, sell off our public lands, and gut basic environmental protections that have long protected our water, air, land, and wildlife.
Last year, the president recommended completely eliminating funding for the Chesapeake Bay Program in the Fiscal Year 2018 budget.This was met with resistance from not only the environmental community, but members of Congress.This funding results in millions of dollars in support for projects that are improving communities and protecting local waterways around the watershed. Both the House and the Senate ignored the president’s recommendation, and increased the funding in their respective appropriations bills. We call on our Congressional leaders to do the same this year.
01.26.2019 10:00 am - 1:00 pm
Polar Bear Plunge: Support Blue Water Baltimore! - Baltimore Harborkeeper
01.26.2019 10:00 am - 1:00 pm
Pollution Reporting 101 & Outfall Screening Blitz Training - Baltimore Harborkeeper
01.28.2019 1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
Invasive Species Removal at Chapel Island - James Riverkeeper
02.05.2019 6:00 pm - 7:30 pm
Education Volunteer Info Session - James Riverkeeper
02.13.2019 10:00 am - 11:00 am
A New Paradigm for Oysters in the Chesapeake Bay
02.15.2019 5:00 pm - 8:00 pm
Cambridge Wild and Scenic Film Festival - Shore Rivers
02.22.2019 10:00 am - 1:00 pm
Paint Out Pollution - James Riverkeeper
02.25.2019 1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
Invasive Species Removal at Chapel Island - James Riverkeeper
- Waterkeepers (18)
- Agriculture (0)
- Conowingo Dam (9)
- Clean Water Advocacy (9)
- Polluted Runoff & Sewage Overflows (5)
- Fossil Fuels (0)
- Press Statements (14)
- Publications (1)
- Waterkeepers in the News (160)
- Fisheries & Oysters (2)
- Open Government (Transparency) (4)
- Rapid Response (0)
- Take Action (15)
- Chesapeake Bay TMDL (1)
- EPA Funding, Rollbacks & Federal Legislation (9)
- Events (10)
- Employment Opportunities (0)
- Water Quality Monitoring (1)