Two recent news items regarding the EPA should be of interest to anyone practicing environmental litigation. First, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson issued her "state of the EPA" report on her first year in office and her priorities: 
(http://blog.epa.gov/administrator/2010/01/12/seven-priorities-for-epas-future/).

Second, the Obama Administration's budget gives an indication of the directions they would like EPA to take:
(http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/0efb5bc261f61eb7852576bd00638467!OpenDocument)

Taken together, they signal a clear intent to increase the EPA's involvement in proactive protection (e.g., chemical testing, additional materials handling rules) and in clean-up enforcement (e.g., CERCLA. or "Superfund" sites).

Feb 11th: Putting a Face on Global Sustainability: The Impacts of Copenhagen

On Thursday February 11 at 6:30PM in the Green Quad Learning Center, the Green Quad will host a discussion by USC Law Professor Cinnamon Carlarne on the U.N. Climate Change Conference held last year in Copenhagen. The discussion with be a evaluation of the progress and speed of climate change, as well as what is left to be done with emphasis on experiences from other countries, their ways of living and visions for the future. For additional information, contact Jason Craig, GreenQuadLearningCenter for Sustainable Futures  803-777-1994  craigjd@mailbox.sc.edu

For more information, go to http://www.sustainablemidlands.org/

 

Feb 15th & Feb 22nd  Mayoral Candidate Forums on Environmental Issues:

1)      The John Bachman Group of the Sierra Club will host a mayoral forum on environmental issues on February 15 at 7:00PM in the USC Green Quad Learning Center.  http://www.greenquadcommunity.org/

2)      The "Mayoral Forum on sustainability issues and the environmental challenges facing Columbia" will be held on Monday February 22 at 6:00PM in the Olympia Room of Historic 701 Whaley. Come early to meet and mingle with the candidates at 5:30PM.

 

USC Belser Arboretum Open House – Sunday Feb 21st

The site is one of Columbia’s most beautiful and unusual properties. Its highly diverse topography is related to its geological history and structure. The large sand dune at the Bloomwood entry gate marks the most westward incursion of the Atlantic Ocean. The dune is primarily sand and rounded, fist-sized stones. Examples of these wave-polished stones can be seen in the retaining wall adjacent to the Bloomwood gate. The higher ridges are quite dry and support upland forest in contrast to the valley, which is characterized by bottomland forest. The cove area is a former streambed, which emptied into the Atlantic Ocean. In earlier days, an earthen dam held rain water in a pond where bald cypress thrived, and today a small cypress swamp is still present. A former stream, now a storm water outlet, tumbles down over 5 cascades into a handsome pool surrounded by ferns and wildflowers. Several underground springs are present in the lowland area by the streambed.

When Sun Feb 21 1pm   Where 4080 Bloomwood Rd. Columbia SC 29205 (map)

http://www.greenquadcommunity.org/

Offered by the SC Chapter of the US Green Building Council:

What will be covered?
• Introduction to USGBC
• Overview of Green Associate and LEED AP BD+C Exams
• LEED for New Construction (LEED-BD+C) point system
• Sustainable Sites
• Water Use Reduction; Water Efficient Landscape Design
• Optimized Energy and Atmosphere
• Green Materials and Resources
• Enhanced Indoor Environments
• Innovation and Design
• Additional Exam Topics

Who should attend?
Students and building industry leaders interested in becoming Green Associates or LEED Accredited Professionals, e.g.,
• Architects• Engineers• Developers• Planners• Contractors


Classes: Held at USC's Green Quad Learning Center, 1216 Wheat St., Building “D”
5:30 – 6:45 P.M.
Class 1: Thursday, February 18
Class 2: Thursday, February 25
Class 3: Thursday, March 4
Class 4: Thursday, March 18 (LEED AP only)
Class 5: Thursday, March 25 (LEED AP only)
Class 6: Thursday, April 1 (LEED AP only)
Class 7: Thursday, April 8 (LEED AP only)
Class 8: Thursday April 15 (LEED AP only)
Class 9: Thursday April 22 (LEED AP only)
Class 10: Thursday April 29 (LEED AP only)

Fees:
Green Associate: Full-time USC Students $ 50; USGBC-SC Members $100; Non-USGBC-SC Members $150
LEED AP BD+C: USGBC-SC Members $250; Non-USGBC Members $300

All fees are due in full on February 18 payable by cash, check or credit card. Please RSVP by Wednesday, Feb. 17th to
state@watsontatesavory.com
Visit www.usgbcsc.org for more information.

What do the fees include?
• 3 GA Associate Classes, 10 LEED AP Classes
• Dinner
• Access to study guides and instructor presentations.

AIA Continuing Education and Engineering PDHs Available

South Carolina has numerous former industrial sites which would require remediation prior to development for future use ("Brownfields"). The type and amount of cleanup will vary, of course, based upon the contaiments of concern and the proposed use (residential usually requiring greater cleanup).  Obviously, incentives for such redevelopment benefit everyone, and both federal and state authorities have programs designed to encourage remediation and redevelopment. (click here for SC's program thru DHEC.)

These incentives also include tax credits which allow all or a significant portion of environmental cleanup costs to be deducted in the year incurred. (Usually, costs which create permanent improvement must be capitalized and deducted over a # of years). Although the federal tax benefit expired December 31, 2009, legislation is pending to extend the Brownfields Tax Incentive again. Note also that legislation in 2006 amended the tax incentive to include petroleum cleanup. (Generally, petroleum is excluded from CERCLA regulation.) (See EPA factsheet here. See additional info here.)

In addition, SC offers a significant tax credit for cleanup costs. (See form with citations here.)

E-mail from the SC Chapter of the Green Building Council:

Learn about the 2010 legislative priorities of the South Carolina Conservation Common Agenda, from the green advocates and lobbyists who work with the General Assembly. Topics include developing a comprehensive state energy policy that focuses on efficiency and alternative energy sources, water withdrawal permitting, and funding the South Carolina Conservation Bank.

DETAILS WHEN: Friday, February 12th, 11:30am to 1:15pm
WHERE: Midlands Technical College Northeast Campus (MAP)
PROGRAM COST: $10/Person; Lunch will be provided

RSVP by Monday, February 8th to Michael Criss (mcriss@sc.rr.com)
www.usgbcsc.org

In a decision affecting the possible fate of hundreds of thousands of SC's interior wetlands, the SC Supreme Court recently ruled that DHEC has regulatory authority over wetlands in certain coastal counties regardless of whether they are connected to coastal body of water. (Spectre v. SCDHEC, 2/1/10) A developer in Horry County had challenged DHEC's denial of a permit to fill in 30+ acres of freshwater wetlands. The Court held that DHEC acted within its authority under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) in denying the permit. The CMZA defines the “coastal zone” as Beaufort, Berkeley, Charleston, Colleton, Dorchester, Horry, Jasper, and Georgetown counties. ( See S.C. Code Ann. § 48-39-10 et seq..)

"Carolina Bays" are an example of these types of isolated wetlands, and are considered by environmentalists and others as essential to ecology and stormwater management. However, after recent US Supreme Court decisions which severely limited Federal authority over wetlands (see Rapanos, 2006, and Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 2001) state law provided the only regulatory limitation over the development or drainage of wetlands not connected to navigable or coastal waters. Landowners and developers have been challenging DHEC's authority over these areas for almost a decade.

S.C. DHEC is accepting nominations through December 18, 2009 for the S.C. Environmental Awareness Award, which is designed "to recognize South Carolinians for outstanding contributions made toward the protection, conservation and improvement of South Carolina’s natural resources." See http://www.scdhec.gov/environment/admin/envawareness/envawards.htm for more information. (Please refrain from nominating a cigarette company.)

Recent announcements of governmental grants related to environmental projects include the largest grant in Clemson University history - a $45 Million grant from the US Department of Energy to test "next-generation" wind turbines and drive trains at the former Charleston Naval Complex. Clemson has secured an additional $53 Million in matching funds to construct a large-scale testing facility. Construction is scheduled to begin in early 2010 and expected to be operational by 2012.  See http://www.midlandsbiz.com/news/headlines/589/ for more information and links to relevant websites.

On a much smaller scale, but more likely to be relevant to local organizations, the EPA announced a grant of up to $160,000 to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) for "a pilot project program utilizing collaborative problem-solving … to address the environmental and social justice concerns within the selected communities. DHEC will offer technical assistance to communities as they conduct environmental assessments and address environmental issues identified in the community. Each pilot project will meet specific criteria. There will be opportunities to participate in leadership development training designed to create organizational capacity, assist in developing strategies, and build partnerships."

Information about the EPA programs for these grants can be found at  http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/grants/ej-sejca-grants.html (State grants program)  and http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/grants/ej-smgrants.html (Small Grants program)

One obvious goal of these governmental grants is to stimulate private investment (both money and commitment) and the development of commercially-viable industries to meet our needs in an environmentally-friendly manner. (At least as far as we understand it at this point. You may recall that cigarettes were once promoted for their "health" benefits. See, e.g.,  http://www.frankwbaker.com/brief_history_of_tobacco_ads.htm )

The Santee Cooper Board of Directors, citing economic uncertainty, voted unanimously on Monday to suspend pursuing permits for a new coal-fired power plant proposed to be built in Florence County along the Great Pee Dee River. (Santee Cooper homepage.) This action makes it unlikely the plant will ever be constructed.

 

The proposal had been under fire from numerous environmental groups (see ConservationVoters of SC) opposed to coal-fired plants, which create massive amounts of greenhouse gases (primarily carbon dioxide) and mercury. Perhaps it is just coincidental that the announcement comes on the heels of the release of a multi-year study of mercury contamination (see my last post) which found the highest concentrations of mercury in southern blackwater rivers. The proposed location of the coal-fired plant in the Pee Dee area would likely impact the vast blackwater waterways of the Great Pee Dee, Little Pee Dee, Lynches, Lumbar, and Waccamaw rivers – all of which are already subject to a DHEC fish consumption advisory due to mercury contamination. (DHEC’s fish advisory map.)

 

In addition, the continued use of coal exacerbates controversial practices such as mountain-top removal mining in the Appalachians (http://www.nrdc.org/energy/coal/mtr/default.asp), as well as producing coal ash waste streams (which create secondary dangers – it was a coal ash slurry pond that collapsed in Kingston, Tennessee, sending millions of tons of toxin-containing slurry into waterways, destroying dozens of homes, and creating a clean-up currently estimated at $1.2B. (See one report here.).)

 

Energy production has long been a source of friction between industry (power producers and power users) and environmentalists. The fact that Santee Cooper acknowledged an environmental issue only in terms of costs & federal regulation is a reflection of the different points of view on this issue. Future progress, in terms of balancing efficiency and environmental protection, will require that both sides acknowledge the costs – monetary and environmental – that necessarily accompany energy production.

The EPA announced on Thursday that South Carolina will receive over $60Million in Recovery Act funds for water projects, including over $40Million for the S.C.’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which provides low-interest loans for water quality protection projects for wastewater treatment, non-point source pollution control, and watershed and estuary management. In addition, the state will receive $405,500 for its Water Quality Management Planning (WQMP) program whose goal is to improve water quality in lakes, rivers and streams. Some of these funds can awarded to local planning organizations for activities such as monitoring water quality, developing plans to restore polluted waters, and identifying ways to protect healthy waters from becoming polluted. The EPA release says “[s]tates are also encouraged to use these funds for more innovative planning activities, such as developing plans to adapt to climate change, analyzing trends in water availability and use, and creating low-impact development programs.” (EPA news release)

 

Timely announcement considering another study was just released showing that virtually every watershed in the country has some level of mercury contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey (part of the US Dept of the Interior) released the results of a multi-year study on Wednesday. (See news release on study here.)  Prior studies have addressed mercury contamination in ocean and lake fish, and the latest study found that 27% of fish in rivers and streams exceeded the EPA standards for consumption of two or more servings per week. (See USA Today story here.)

 

Mercury contamination in watersheds comes mainly from atmospheric mercury, almost all of which is a result of coal-burning in power plants. However, other more easily-identifiable sources include mining operations, landfills, trash incinerators, and chemical and concrete plants.  (See EPA factsheet on mercury here.) The highest concentrations of mercury were found in the “blackwater” rivers and streams of South Carolina and other southern states. Forty-eight states currently have fish consumption advisories, and South Carolina’s map of affected waterways covers virtually the entire state (SC’s Fish Advisory Map).

Mercury exposure can harm multiple organs as well as the body’s immune system, making people more susceptible to secondary illnessness and disease. In addition, mercury exposure to unborn and young children can cause significant physical and mental development problems. (See EPA’s factsheet on health effects here.)

 

Although most mercury poisoning litigation relates to specifically-identifiable potential sources (mercury filings, vaccines, processed tuna), mercury contamination of waterways is more widespread and potentially a greater threat to the population at large. Clusters of mercury-related symptoms within a confined geographic area may be traceable to specific sources and could lead to litigation against industries and power plant operators.