Saturday 19 January 2019

Press Statements (73)

Vote Could Stop Controversial Fracked Gas Pipeline Under the Potomac River In a surprising move, Governor Hogan joined other Maryland Board of Public Works members in voting to reject a permit necessary for a fracked gas pipeline known as the “Potomac Pipeline.” During the Maryland Board of Public Works’ meeting on Wednesday, January 2nd, 2019, Hogan and the other members of the board unanimously rejected a right-of-way easement under the Western Maryland Rail/Trail. The proposed Potomac Pipeline would tunnel under the Potomac River to transport fracked gas from Pennsylvania to West Virginia. “For two years, we have joined our partners in the No Potomac Pipeline coalition in calling on Maryland to protect its residents from the harms of fracking, including ejecting a permit for this dangerous fracked gas pipeline proposed by TransCanada,” said Katlyn Schmitt, Staff Attorney for Waterkeepers Chesapeake. “With several new pipelines currently under consideration, including on the Eastern Shore, it is time for Maryland to improve its process for evaluating the environmental risks of fracked gas infrastructure.” The decision comes on the heels of a letter signed by 63 Maryland legislators calling on Governor Hogan to reject the easement. “Given that Maryland has banned fracking, it defies our state’s existing energy policy to bring the same public health risks to our residents by way of a pipeline,” the legislators stated. Without the right-of-away easement, the pipeline will not be constructed over the route originally proposed. According to Upper Potomac Riverkeeper Brent Walls (pictured right), TransCanada can take legal action against Maryland over the…
Proposed rule frees industry to dump toxic waste into streams, allows the destruction of millions of acres of wetlands, and threatens drinking water. On December 11, 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unveiled its proposal to replace the 2015 Clean Water Rule with a very narrow, unscientific definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). This proposed rule contradicts the law and science that is the foundation for the Clean Water Act successes of the past 40 years, will remove Clean Water Act protections for millions of wetland acres and stream miles, and will cripple federal and state clean water initiatives for the foreseeable future. EPA’s proposal ignores the robust record in support of the Clean Water Rule, and intentionally limits the opportunity for affected communities to express their views about this proposal. This proposal would remove up to 60% of stream miles and up to 80% of wetland acres from federal protections under the Clean Water Act.  “Clean water is essential for the health and sustainability of our families, communities and environment. Lest we forget -- we all live downstream. We have a responsibility, as a nation, to control pollution at its source and protect the drinking water sources of all residents – regardless of where they live,” said Betsy Nicholas, Executive Director of Waterkeepers Chesapeake. “In the Chesapeake region, streams and tributaries in the upper reaches of the Susquehanna, Potomac, Shenandoah, James and many other rivers, as well as a huge number of wetlands, would not receive protections under the…
Regulator has missed Safe Drinking Water Act deadlines for toxic and carcinogenic contaminants WASHINGTON, D.C. - Waterkeeper Alliance, Waterkeepers Chesapeake, and California Coastkeeper Alliance today notified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of their intent to sue the agency under the Safe Drinking Water Act because EPA has missed Safe Drinking Water Act deadlines for reviewing and regulating drinking water contaminants, including tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, hexavalent chromium, and others. The environmental groups are represented in this matter by Reed W. Super, Esq. of Super Law Group, LLC. EPA’s mandatory obligations under the Safe Drinking Water Act include identifying unregulated contaminants for monitoring and/or regulation, regulating those contaminants, and reviewing and revising existing drinking water regulations, all according to a specific timetable mandated by Congress. If EPA does not perform its mandatory obligations, we plan to file suit in early 2019. The mandatory duties the groups intend to enforce in the upcoming lawsuit involve particular contaminants: Chromium (including hexavalent chromium, the chemical best known from the movie “Erin Brockovich”) was regulated in 1991, with an enforceable limit of 100 parts per billion, based on the assumption that it was noncarcinogenic through oral exposure even though it is known to cause cancer when inhaled. Since then, the National Toxicology Program found “clear evidence of carcinogenic activity” when hexavalent chromium is ingested in drinking water. California set a goal of 0.2 parts per billion and an enforceable limit of 10 parts per billion. EPA has been studying it for many years but has not…