August 9th, 2019 — Carlos Rafael and his daughter will pay a $500,000 fine for the dumping of oily bilge and fuel filters from one of his fishing vessels, the Vila Nova do Corvo II.
The vessel captain, Carlos Pereira, will pay $11,000.
The proposed settlement for violations of the Clean Water Act and Coast Guard regulations was filed in federal court on Friday. The consent decree is subject to a 30-day public comment period and court approval.
May 10, 2019 — The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has backed down on the terms of a proposed pollution permit for seafood processors in the state, after the last iteration of the permit expired eight years ago, according to the Statesman Journal.
Since the permit expired, more than a dozen Oregon seafood processors have been operating under an administrative extension as negotiations have taken place.
The Department of Environmental Quality began regulating the discharges of seafood producers in 1982, in an attempt to crack down on the shells, bones, blood and fish waste as well as chemical byproducts that were being dumped into bodies of water by companies.
When the department put out the initial version of a proposed permit in spring of last year, politicians representing fishing communities on Oregon’s coast had called the regulations “extreme.”
“In Oregon, seafood processing is a key component of coastal economies and we ask that the state revisit the revision process for the [permit] in a way that supports the success of this critical industry,” state legislators wrote in a letter to the DEQ.
April 24, 2019 — Commercial fishermen are used to overcoming challenges. Whether it’s extreme weather events or a changing market and regulations, we work hard and adapt to carve out a living for our families.
We represent a new generation of fishermen that depends on the productivity of our coastal waters for our livelihoods. We can’t earn a living for ourselves and our families unless the water is clean and capable of supporting fish and shellfish. We also need waters that are not polluted so it is safe for us to harvest and sell our catches to consumers young and old.
But now politicians in Washington are trying to gut the Clean Water Act, removing vital protections for streams and wetlands. Particularly catastrophic, the proposal would cause a dramatic and unprecedented loss of protection for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and millions of acres of wetlands in North Carolina — Southern Pocosins, Carolina Bays and Pine Savannas — are all at risk. Our estuaries and fisheries won’t likely survive the losses, nor will our livelihoods.
April 9, 2019 — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, together with the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, are attempting to loosen water pollution standards in areas where fish spawn, according to Alaska Public Media.
The rule change, initially proposed in 2006, would alter how the state enforces the Clean Water Act, which is the main tool used by federal agencies to regulate water standards. The change are designed to assist the state’s mining community, which has argued the current standards set in place by the Clean Water Act are too difficult to meet.
“Alaska’s a beautiful, pristine place, and there is no pollution and certainly the background water quality is excellent,” said Frank Bergstrom, who has been active in Alaska’s mining industry for four decades. “So if you follow the Clean Water Act to the detail, you pretty much have to discharge distilled water.”
April 3, 2019 — The Trump administration is quietly reviving a long-stalled effort by state regulators to loosen pollution standards where fish spawn. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation proposed the rule change more than a decade ago to change how it enforces the federal Clean Water Act.
After a dozen-year hiatus, it’s making its way through the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule-making process. But opponents warn if the EPA gives the 2006 “mixing zone” rule the thumbs-up, it could help pave the way for controversial projects like Pebble Mine.
The Clean Water Act is the primary tool used by the feds to regulate water pollution. Industry often argues these standards are difficult to meet.
“Alaska’s a beautiful, pristine place, and there is no pollution and certainly the background water quality is excellent,” said Frank Bergstrom, an Alaska mining consultant with 40 years of experience. “So if you follow the Clean Water Act to the detail, you pretty much have to discharge distilled water.”
That’s overstating the state’s water quality standards. Basically the limits are designed to prevent water bodies from being degraded. But years ago, Alaska and other states took the industry’s view in mind when it came up with “mixing zones.” This compromise allows things like wastewater plants, mines and oil refineries to exceed water pollution standards in designated areas.
November 16, 2018 — This week, after more than a decade of activism from the fishing industry, Congress has moved to alleviate a major regulatory burden on commercial fishermen. Part of this year’s Coast Guard reauthorization bill once again exempts fishing vessels from requiring a permit for incidental discharge from boats, in a return to a long-standing EPA practice.
“The reauthorization is a common-sense step by Congress that provides necessary relief to fishermen without compromising the environment or water quality,” said Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director of the Garden State Seafood Association. “Now commercial fishermen can focus on core environmental issues without having to deal with unnecessary, court-imposed restrictions.”
The issue dates to a 2006 court case, where the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned EPA vessel discharge rules that had been in force since the passage of the Clean Water Act. Under the ruling, fishing vessels and other boats, regardless of size, were required to get vessel discharge permits from the EPA for routine, incidental discharges. This goes so far as to potentially include water from the fish hold, rainwater washing off the boat deck, and other minor discharges.
Notably, an incidental discharge does not include any discharges related to sewage, fuel, or ballast water. Fishing vessels are still, and have always been, required to adhere to all laws that regulate these types of discharges. The court ruling simply added a new, costly, and unnecessary layer of regulations for vessels to follow.
After years of temporary exemptions as a short-term way to address the ruling, the Coast Guard reauthorization, the “Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018,” finally creates a permanent solution. Fishing vessels will return to being exempt from incidental discharge requirements, and fishermen will no longer need to deal with the added expense and bureaucratic red tape that goes along with them.
“We have worked to fix this issue for our clients since 2006,” said Rick Marks, a Principal at Robertson, Monagle & Eastaugh in Reston, VA. “Despite a challenging and sustained effort it is rewarding to finally see a victory for common sense delivered by the 115th Congress. Our thanks go to those coastal Members of Congress and their staff from around the country whose persistence finally paid off for commercial fishermen everywhere.”
October 29, 2018 — A U.S. Federal Court in Seattle, Washington, U.S.A. has issued a ruling that is intended to protect salmon and steelhead trout in the Columbia River basin from rising water temperatures.
In the mile-long lakes created by hydropower dams on the rivers, the water temperature has often exceeded 70 degrees Fahrenheit for days at a time, though the Clean Water Act bars the temperature in the river from exceeding 68 degrees. Cold water species such as sockeye and steelhead become stressed at temperatures over 68 degrees and stop migrating when the temperature exceeds 74 degrees.
The ruling instructs the Environmental Protection Agency to protect the species. The EPA will, within 60 days, come up with a “comprehensive plan to deal with dams’ impact on water temperature and salmon survival,” according to Columbia Riverkeeper Executive Director Brett VandenHeuvel, one of the plaintiffs of the case, which was initially filed in February 2017. Other conservation and fishermens’ groups were plaintiffs in the suit as well: Idaho Rivers United, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, Snake River Waterkeeper, and The Institute for Fisheries Resources.
Read the full story at Seafood Source
August 3, 2018 — An environmental group plans to sue New Hampshire’s largest fish hatchery, allegations that discharge from the facility is polluting nearby lakes and rivers.
The Conservation Law Foundation announced its plans Thursday to sue the New Hampshire Fish and Game Departments and its commissioners over discharges from the Powder Mill Fish Hatchery in New Durham. It now must wait 60 days before filing a lawsuit in federal court.
In its letter, the group alleges that hatchery food and waste containing high levels of phosphorous, nitrogen and other pollutants has caused “significant water quality violations” in the Merrymeeting River and nearby waterways. The notice alleges that the discharges are in violation of the hatchery’s federal permit which, in turn, violates the federal Clean Water Act.
Among the Conservation Law Foundation’s biggest concern is algae growth and outbreaks of cyanobacteria, which they claim have sickened people and animals, hurt property values along the river and prompted the state to ban activities like swimming in some waterways. The waterways aren’t used for drinking water.
“It’s unthinkable what this state facility has done to the Merrymeeting River, degrading its health and putting the public’s health at risk with cyanobacteria outbreaks,” Tom Irwin, director of Conservation Law Foundation New Hampshire. “During the heart of the summer, people want to swim, boat, and enjoy New Hampshire’s rivers and lakes. They don’t want to be told ‘stay out’.”
Fred Quimby, a retired environmental toxicologist who lives in New Durham where the hatchery is located, said the state has known about this problem for more than 15 years and has failed to take appropriate action to address the dirty discharges. He said cyanobacteria outbreaks have become more common, leading to some people getting skin rashes and animals dying.
Read the full story from the Associated Press at the New Jersey Herald
July 10, 2018 — Fireworks rippled across dark horizons around the nation on the Fourth of July in celebration of Independence Day. The following afternoon, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s first foray into federal government leadership came to an end with no sparks, no bang, not even a dull thud. Rather, it came as a Tweet from the president.
Pruitt’s short term at the helm of the EPA was belabored by ongoing and mounting investigations into his spending on travel and security, and his use of the position to strike personal deals, including a job for his wife.
“The unrelenting attacks on me personally, my family, are unprecedented and have taken a sizable toll on all of us,” Pruitt reportedly wrote in his resignation letter.
The long list of potential violations also led close aides and EPA staffers to resign, and Pruitt was beginning to lose support from Republicans in Congress who had approved his nomination.
A whistleblower — who was fired from EPA in February for raising questions about Pruitt’s spending and management — reported that the agency kept a secret calendar to hide industry-related meetings.
The discovery of just such a meeting with representatives from Pebble Mine owner Northern Dynasty resulted in an immediate flip-flop of EPA’s decision to forestall the mine under the Clean Water Act.
After Pruitt’s May 1 meeting with Pebble Partnership CEO Tom Collier, Northern Dynasty published a press release on May 12 declaring that EPA had settled the lawsuit in exchange for a reversal of the agency’s 2014 decision that the mine would violate the Clean Water Act and threaten Bristol Bay’s wild salmon population.
June 29, 2018 — Three days before the deadline for public comments on the proposed Pebble Mine project in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt directed his staff to create a rule limiting the agency’s ability to regulate projects under Clean Water Act guidelines.
These are the exact guidelines that commercial fishermen and local tribes urged Obama-administration EPA officials to invoke to protect Bristol Bay, Alaska’s salmon gold mine.
In a memo dated Tuesday, June 26, Pruitt directed the EPA’s Office of Water to submit the following changes, at minimum, to the Office of Management and Budget within the next six months:
• Eliminating the authority to initiate the section 404(c) process before a section 404 permit application has been filed with the Corps or a state, otherwise known as the “preemptive veto.”
• Eliminating the authority to initiate the section 404(c) process after a permit has been issued by the Corps or a state, otherwise known as the “retroactive veto.”
• Requiring a regional administrator to obtain approval from EPA Headquarters before initiating the section 404(c) process.
• Requiring a regional administrator to review and consider the findings of a final Environmental Assessment or environmental impact statement by the Corps or a state before preparing and publishing notice of a proposed determination.