Mismanagement has led to the current Cape Cod water pollution crisis.

A recent federal court decision in Conservation Law Foundation’s and Buzzards Bay Coalition’s lawsuit against EPA addressing nitrogen pollution in Cape Cod bays has major implications for the way local water pollution control projects are funded in the Commonwealth.

The impact of nutrient pollution on the streams and bays of Cape Cod was identified as a looming problem in the 1978 Areawide Wastewater Management Plan written by a predecessor to the Cape Cod Commission. Despite the Plan’s requirement of annual updates, it sat untouched for over thirty years as the looming threat of nutrient pollution became a present crisis. Spurred by a lawsuit filed by CLF and the Buzzards Bay Coalition in 2011, the 1978 Plan is finally being updated by the Cape Cod Commission.

The importance of the current planning process’s successful completion was thrown into stark relief on August 23, when Senior Judge Mark L. Wolf of the United States District Court of Massachusetts ordered that a central claim in CLF’s and BBC’s 2011 Areawide Wastewater Management Plan lawsuit could go forward.

The lawsuit contends that EPA’s annual approvals of loans and grants for local projects from the State Revolving Fund – a pool of federal and state funds dedicated to reducing water pollution—must be consistent with applicable Areawide Wastewater Management Plans. The claim states that it is not possible for EPA to make funding decisions based on the present Plan because its 35-year-old recommendations are no longer relevant to solving current water quality problems.

Judge Wolf’s order held that EPA must determine every year that Massachusetts is only providing water pollution control funding to those projects that are consistent with a current management plan for a particular area. Congress required this annual review in order to assure that water pollution control projects are planned, funded, and implemented based on an up-to-date understanding of local water pollution problems. The Judge’s ruling stemmed from the fact that the Cape Cod plan is so outdated that money is being spent haphazardly, rather than funding projects that will address the current problems.  The rampant and continuing pollution in Cape Cod’s bays is a result of this inconsistency.

Studies have indicated that the total cost of cleaning up the polluted bays will range from $3-6 billion.  In FY2012 alone, the State Revolving Fund provided $164.7 million for clean water projects in communities across the state, according the 2012 Annual Report prepared by the Commonwealth.

To get that money flowing to projects that will be effective in controlling Cape Cod water pollution, it is imperative that Areawide Plan be updated. As the Court opinion states, “If EPA determines that the state is not complying with the SRF provisions …, the agency must cease to provide SRF funding, unless the state rectifies its actions and complies with the statute.”  The real world implications of this order are clear and significant—the future of money for local governments disbursed under the State Revolving Fund program depends on an updated and approved Areawide Plan.

The Cape Cod Commission is currently in the process of gathering stakeholder input for the Plan update. If you’re a Cape resident, check out the meeting schedule, or sign up to participate in the next round of their online public engagement tool. This stakeholder process, scheduled to be complete this December, will form the basis of the Commission’s new draft Plan.

At a time when our governors and our President were preparing to address their constituents, CLF was (and is) making news – news that raises a series of enduring questions: In our country, where is the line between federal and state authority? How clear is it? Who gets to draw it? Why would you draw it in one place instead of another?

These questions are so challenging because they are so fundamental; Americans have wrestled with these same questions for over 200 years. You’ll recall that our first national government, under the Articles of Confederation, was too weak to do the job. The Constitution granted greater power to the national government, but had to be balanced by the Bill of Rights, securing the rights of individuals and of states. The rest of our efforts to get the federal/state balance right has been marked by long periods of contentious negotiation and flashbulb moments of fractious history –national banking, secession and the Civil War, the busting of industrial trusts, the New Deal, and civil rights for all.

Protecting our health and our environment has been a part of the national and regional negotiations for decades. Recent events have provoked further discussion.

By the 1960’s and ‘70’s, when Congress began to address environmental protection and energy in a serious way, its constitutional authority to do so was relatively clear. It exercised that authority boldly, for the great benefit of generations of people and other species. However, as in much of our federalist system, there’s still a sharing of power between national and state governments, both by design and by default. The zone between federal and state authority is sometimes gray. It’s in that messy, gray area that many of our most controversial environmental issues are being debated.

These debates continue to this day. Take two of CLF’s hot issues recently in the news: Vermont Yankee and Cape Cod nitrogen pollution.

Vermont Yankee

The first is the adverse federal court decision CLF (and the State of Vermont) received on Vermont Yankee, the aging nuclear power plant in Vernon, VT. The decision affirmed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s broad authority over safety issues relating to nukes. It  preempted a role for states and handed a major victory to Entergy Corporation.

However, as Anthony Iarrapino points out in this blog post, the fight is far from over. There is a clear role for states in shaping our energy future; in the absence of federal action, states are leading the effort in promoting a clean energy future. Furthermore, as Anthony pointed out in his post, the court said:

“This Court’s decision is based solely upon the relevant admissible facts and the governing law in this case, and it does not purport to resolve or pass judgment on the debate regarding the advantages or disadvantages of nuclear power generation, or its location in this state. Nor does it purport to define or restrict the State’s ability to decline to renew a certificate of public good on any ground not preempted or not violative of federal law, to dictate how a state should choose to allocate its power among the branches of its government, or pass judgment on its choices. The Court has avoided addressing questions of state law and the scope of a state’s regulatory authority that are unnecessary to the resolution of the federal claims presented here.”

Even in the highly “federalized” area of nuclear power there is an undeniable role for states.

Cape Cod

The second is a settlement in principle of our litigation to clean up pollution from sewage on Cape Cod. This is a great step forward – one that  has attracted the focused attention of anti-environmentalists in Congress, as this article attests.

They preposterously allege collusion between environmentalists and the EPA in cases like this to expand federal jurisdiction beyond what Congress authorized in the Clean Water Act, thereby trumping state authority.  However, the federal/state line under the Clean Water Act is about as blurry as they come, in part because the facts relating to pollution and its impacts are extremely complex. As in all cases, the facts matter. Careful, dispassionate assessment of the scientific facts about discharges and pollution, and how the law applies to those facts – not political grandstanding by Members of Congress – is what’s necessary to achieve the visionary goal Congress as a whole committed to decades ago: the elimination of polluting discharges to United States waters, by 1985! It’s time we lived up to that commitment.

There is opportunity in messy, gray areas like the shifting federal/state interface: we can go forward or backward. That is, we can develop sensible allocations of authority between federal and state governments to achieve the public goals behind all of these public initiatives – a healthy environment and a healthy economy, or we can descend into politically motivated mudslinging that obscures the real issues and thwarts real progress.

At CLF we are committed to rational, fact-based discussion of the issues, and prudent forward motion that yields a thriving New England, for generations to come and for all. We know this terrain well. You can count on us to keep working it.

Rotten eggs and black mayonnaise – sights and smells that, to the dread of many, are becoming increasingly common across Cape Cod. Over the 30 years, increased development and insufficient wastewater treatment systems have degraded the quality of Cape Cod’s waters. CLF, in association with Buzzards Bay Coalition, are working to clean up the Cape – work that was recently covered by David Abel in The Boston Globe.

The eggs and mayonnaise (a description David used to open his piece) are but two signs of a growing body of evidence, both visible and disturbing, of degraded water quality. While visitors and residents depend upon Cape Cod’s pristine waterways – suitable for swimming, conducive to ocean life – instead they find ponds and bays that, in warm months, can be covered in a film of algae, while the water itself turns an opaque copper color.

This degradation is the consequence of too much nitrogen, the result of improperly treated  wastewater, primarily from the Cape’s preponderance of septic tanks. In the Cape’s loose, sandy soils, wastewater moves quickly through the ground, and iscarried into the bays and estuaries before it can be adequately filtered. The region’s economy, ecology, recreation and beauty have all suffered as a consequence – and will suffer more if stakeholders continue to delay action on a clean up plan.

In September, our staff at CLF, together with Buzzards Bay Coalition, filed a federal lawsuit against the US Environmental Protection Agency. Our claim: that the EPA failed to fulfill its responsibilities to oversee a regional water quality plan as required by the Clean Water Act. This lawsuit was CLF’s second showing EPA’s failure to address the Cape’s nitrogen pollution problem. The first, concerning point sources, was filed in August, 2010, and can be found here.

Why is this so important? The regional plan under question has not been updated since 1978, despite predictions at the time about the environmental risks of unchecked nitrogen pollution. Today, the consequences of decades of inaction are clear: badly degraded waterways, with mounting costs for solutions and little time left to ponder them while the region’s ecology and economy hang in the balance..

The answer, CLF argues, is a legally enforceable, coordinated blueprint to clean up the Cape. “It’s our firm belief that a coordinated regional approach is necessary – not individual towns trying to solve the problems on their own,” says Christopher Kilian, a senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation as quoted in The Boston Globe article.

The approach EPA will ultimately take is the subject of ongoing negotiations between CLF and the Buzzards Bay Coalition, EPA and Barnstable County officials. A report to the Court is due December 6th. Stay tuned.

For more on CLF’s efforts on cleaning up the Cape, read our release on our recent lawsuit, filed with the Buzzards Bay Coalition.

You can also find out more at the website of the Buzzards Bay Coalition.

I really do love our New England sharks. But I also love to surf. And as the water temperature at my favorite break is going down, the great whites are heading south. One less thing to worry about as I struggle with frigid water, thick head-to-toe neoprene, and my own personal resolve to surf all year long.

Out of sight may be good news for a surfer like me, but it’s important that we don’t let these magnificent creatures get out of mind. With Shark Week 2012 still 263 days away and counting, I am resolved to do occasional posts of shark news, facts and conservation updates to help get us through the long, sharkless months ahead.

So to kick things off, here are a few of my favorite current events, a la shark:

• Taiwan will no longer allow shark finning, starting next year. Hopefully this type of ban will become more prevalent, and our important apex predator will be allowed to grow in size and number and help our oceans thrive. If you’re not sure you want more sharks, and bigger ones at that, consider the incredibly important role they play in our marine ecosystems. In short, they help preserve a healthy balance of species, from other large fish, on down to clams and oysters.

• And a great local story: the Cape Cod Shark Hunters. Don’t worry, they don’t hunt to kill. They track down “The Landlord” (surfer nickname for great whites) and tag it. Then scientists from Woods Hole and the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries track them to learn more about their habits, and to help us know when it isn’t safe to go in the water. I love their slogan: “Tag a shark, save a tourist!”

If you love sharks and can’t wait until my next post, check out the series I did around Shark Week 2011. More to come soon!

Just over a year ago, CLF and the Buzzards Bay Coalition sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to expedite the clean up of a nitrogen pollution scourge  on Cape Cod that was threatening the Cape’s bays and the local economy that depends on them. Today, CLF and the Bay Coalition filed a second lawsuit against EPA that focuses on the Agency’s failure to regularly approve and update a critical wastewater management plan that, if implemented, might have averted the crisis. CLF and the Bay Coalition’s actions seek to move the clean-up forward before it is too late.

In a press release, Chris Kilian, CLF’s director of Clean Water and Healthy Forests, said, “Cape Cod is on brink of ecological disaster. We need enforceable regulatory commitments to ensure that the clean-up happens before it is too late. The discussions of what solutions will work and how to pay for them are critical and must continue, but they can’t go on forever. We intend to hold EPA accountable for its obligations to review, update and enforce a working, time-bound plan to stop the flow of nitrogen-laden wastewater and stormwater into the Cape’s bays. It is the keystone of this clean-up effort.”

The parties will commence a mediation process known as Alternative Dispute Resolution on Wednesday, September 21 at EPA’s offices in Boston. The deadline for a resolution is December 6, 2011.

Read the full press release.

Last night, I sought refuge from the oppressive heat by taking a long swim in the cool, clean water of our local lake.  Families and young children packed the shallows where they found relief from record-breaking temperatures.  Floating along in this happy summer scene, I could not help but think of how fortunate we are to live in a country where our laws recognize that our happiness, our safety, and our economy depend on our ability to keep our water clean.

Thanks to the Clean Water Act, many waters are safe for swimming. Call your Senators to let them know you support this important law and want to ensure that all of our waters are safe for swimming, drinking, and fishing before it's too late.

In many places across the nation, the freedom to swim safely on a hot summer day was only a dream a generation ago when raw sewage and industrial pollution choked our nation’s waters.  Without the pollution controls and infrastructure investments required by the Clean Water Act and the work of groups like CLF to ensure that the law was being followed over the last forty years, water that is “drinkable, fishable, and swimmable” would still be beyond the reach of most Americans. Yet there remain many rivers, lakes, and bays from New England to the Gulf of Mexico and beyond where the Clean Water Act’s promise of water safe for recreation, drinking, and wildlife conservation have yet to be fulfilled.

POLLUTION CAN MAKE YOU “DEATHLY SICK”

Earlier this month, Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe–one of the most anti-environmental members of Congress–received a stark reminder of how the dream of a swim on a hot summer day can quickly become a nightmare when we don’t have enough clean water.  Inhofe reported getting “deathly sick” from an upper respiratory illness he contracted when he swam in Oklahoma’s Grand Lake during a recent blue-green algae bloom caused by the combination of excess pollution and extreme heat. Fortunately, his 13 year-old granddaughter had the good sense not to join him in the illness-inducing swim.

Despite searing heat, swimmers stayed out of the slime-coated waters of Lake Champlain's St. Albans Bay most of last summer. Earlier this month, the Vermont Health Department warned swimmers about blue-green algae blooms that have appeared in the Bay again this summer.

From Vermont’s Lake Champlain to Cape Cod to Rhode Island’s Narragansett Bay and in many lakes, rivers, and streams along the way, pollution from poorly-treated human waste and dirty runoff from streets, parking lots, and agricultural operations is feeding the growth of harmful blue-green algae of the sort that made Senator Inhofe feel “deathly sick.”  Added runoff from extreme rainfall events and hotter temperatures caused by global warming, will require even stronger clean water restoration and protection measures as we adapt in a changed climate.

THE CLEAN WATER ACT IS UNDER ATTACK

Sadly, some in Congress are attacking the EPA and the Clean Water Act, cynically attempting to free polluters of accountability under the false claim that pollution control is bad for the economy.  Click here to read about some of the “dirty water” bills being pushed through Congress by the Tea Party and some powerful Democrats who are in the pocket of the coal companies.

Twenty-eight years ago, the heavily-polluted Boston Harbor beaches were the poster children for the unfulfilled goals of the Clean Water Act.  Using enforcement tools under the Clean Water Act, CLF and U.S. EPA forced the beginning of a cleanup effort that many an overheated Bostonian can be grateful for as they head to the water this summer. The tremendous economic development that has occurred on the Boston waterfront as the water became cleaner is powerful proof that the Clean Water Act is a responsible and balanced tool for achieving many of society’s goals.  CLF and EPA are continuing the work under the Clean Water Act to ensure that Boston Harbor beaches remain safe for swimming and that citizens in upstream communities along the Charles, Mystic, and Neponset Rivers enjoy the same freedom to boat and swim without fear of becoming sick from pollution.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

As the U.S. Senate starts to consider the “dirty water” bills coming from the House, Senators are faced with a clear choice.  You can make a difference by calling or emailing your Senator and urging them to reject attempts to gut the Clean Water Act and weaken the EPA. Click here to find the phone number or email address for your Senator.  Join CLF in speaking up for clean water before it’s too late. 

May 17th was a good day for fish and Massachusetts fishermen. In a harsh but eloquent opinion issued on Tuesday, the federal First Circuit Court of Appeals told the U.S. Coast Guard in no uncertain terms that it had failed to meet its responsibilities to fully evaluate the potential environmental impacts of its decision to overrule protections that Massachusetts put in place to protect Cape Cod, Buzzards Bay and the islands from further oil spills from coastal oil transport.

At issue was a new set of state rules, adopted by the Massachusetts legislature after the disastrous Bouchard oil barge spill in 2003 on a rock outcropping in Buzzards Bay. The state rules imposed mandatory tug escorts for oil barges, barge manning, and crew task requirements that were stricter than existing federal rules. The Coast Guard didn’t like being second-guessed on safety issues and issued rules that overruled the Massachusetts effort with more lax and oil transport-friendly requirements. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Coalition for Buzzards Bay challenged that action in federal district court and Conservation Law Foundation also briefed the case.

On appeal from an unfavorable lower court opinion, the federal Court of Appeals agreed with Massachusetts, chastising the lower court that it had misread legal precedent. The Court of Appeals held that the Coast Guard had done no environmental review at all despite the “tidal wave” of public concern about the consequences of the weaker rules and increased risks of more oil spills. Instead of a “hard look” at those risks, the Court found that the Coast Guard had, at best, given them a “brief glance.” In trying to avoid confronting the safety issues, the Appeals Court said, the Coast Guard “rip[ped] out the heart” of its own rules.

A bird covered in oil as a result of the Bouchard oil barge spill (Photo: MA EOEEA)

Unfortunately, the fight to protect Cape Cod, Buzzards Bay, and the Islands is not over, and further vigilance will be critical. The case will now be sent back to the Coast Guard to complete the necessary environmental review. We can only hope that they will be more responsive this time around. Coastal oil transport is no doubt critical to our regional economy but it must be done with maximum protections. Oil economic interests should not trump coastal safety issues. The future of our fisheries depends on clean coastal waters as does the health of all marine life, from fish to fowl to mammals.

A great debt is owed to the Massachusetts legislature for acting so forcefully on this issue and to the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office and the Coalition for Buzzards Bay for their intelligent and passionate defense of these state interests. May 17, 2011 was a good day for our oceans.

Photo Credit: Cape Cod Times

I was disheartened, but not surprised, to read news accounts of a massive fish kill earlier this week on Cape Cod.  Over 1,000 fish turned belly-up in a river that feeds into a bay along the south shore of Cape Cod.  The mystery here is not so much about what caused this devastation, but how quickly the fix will come. And why more people aren’t up in arms about the problem?

The culprit is well-known to most who live on the Cape – septic systems leach nitrogen through the sandy soil and into coastal rivers and bays. This, in turn, feeds runaway algae and plant growth that robs fish of oxygen and wreaks havoc on the ecosystem. The nitrogen puts valuable shellfish beds at risk, too. Scientific reports show the problem is growing. Year after year, the upper reaches of many bays along Cape Cod (including coastal rivers) are being overtaken by unsightly, smelly algae.

Memories of cleaner waters…

The algae-clogged waterways I have learned of from CLF members and scientific reports are a far cry from what I remember.  My family’s vacations to Cape Cod were among our best ever, and not just because of the mini-golf and plentiful ice cream.  We played in a salt pond for hours on a giant inflatable turtle. We learned to swim in the bays’ gentle waves. We dug for clams in the tidal flats, and explored rivers and creeks.

Do you have similar memories? Maybe you want to make sure the bays stay pristine, for your own children or grandchildren. That is one reason we at CLF are working hard to address this problem.

What is being done?

Right now, residents and town officials in the 15 towns on Cape Cod are making crucial decisions about how to deal with the nitrogen problem. Septic systems in many places will have to go, or be upgraded. Yes, this will be expensive. Some federal and state funds are available to help. By account of the Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce, 43% of the Cape’s economy is driven by tourism, and shellfish beds bring in additional revenue.   What would be the price of losing the gorgeous blue water, clean sand, and healthy shellfish that so many of us have come to love?

Click here learn more about our Cape Cod advocacy. And weigh in!