Human Right to Water – Water Policy Consulting LLC

Climate-Resilient Water Management: An operational framework from South Asia

Climate change is having an unprecedented impact on global water resources on which billions of people rely and because water is linked to everything else, global food, energy and economies are similarly affected by impacts on water systems. As a result, in 2014 the UK Department for International Development, sponsored the Action on Climate Today (ACT) program as a political compliment to technical or scientific strategies for addressing climate related impacts on water.

Using a Climate-Resilient Water Management (CRWM) approach as a way of increasing the resilience of global water systems, ACT has been working to encourage policies that manage and protect water systems from the impacts of climate change in the water sector. Although implemented in five South Asia countries, to date, this paper proposes that the ACT strategy for water management including assessment, supply augmentation and demand; floods and droughts and other extreme events; and public and governmental education on the need for CRWM, can be applied by practitioners and policy makers working in water resource management around the world.

The paper concludes by calling for the need for a new paradigm to meet the urgent need to address the rapidly growing global water crises including:

“1. Move beyond ‘business as usual’ to integrate the best available climate data and information in managing water resources;
2. Adopt a multi-disciplinary approach to mainstreaming the risk of climate change in programs and policy;
3. Map and lock into existing government priorities at different levels to secure political will;

4. Firmly acknowledge that CRWM is political as opposed to being a purely technical or scientific paradigm; • Frame and communicate about climate change using language and concepts that are relatable and impacts that are tangible;
5. Frame and communicate about climate change using language and concepts that are relatable and impacts that are tangible.”

Governor Dunleavy Nominations Graphite Creek Project to Fast-41 Permitting

Hot Springs Creek Below the Proposed Graphite One Mine Site

Due to Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy’s nomination of Graphite Creek project in the remote Kigluaik range north of Nome, as a high-priority infrastructure project, as eligible for new legislation intended to fast track the permitting process for transportation projects. Title 41 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, (Fast-41) adopted by Congress during the Obama administration which was intended to be a surface transportation reauthorization focusing on highway, transit, and rail programs. The Act establishes a new Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (FPISC), authorized to stream line the NEPA process including elimination of public review and comment. Due to the unprecedented authority provided to the Council, until now, the Act has traditionally been applied only to Infrastructure and transportation Projects.

However, mining companies and the Trump administration have been pressuring FPISC to include mining as a sector under the Act. According to the mining industry magazine Critical Minerals Alaska 2020, “a federal entity meant to provide a one-stop-shop capable of coordinating permits across different federal agencies, thereby streamlining and shortening the overall process for large infrastructure projects that are eligible for the program. Mining projects that supply the materials needed for the energy, communication, and transportation infrastructure in the U.S. may be eligible for Fast-41.” [1] If the proposed Graphite One Mine is included into Fast-41, Critical Minerals Alaska 2020 says it “could help reduce the seven to 10 years it takes the average large mining project in the U.S. to get through the permitting process.”[2]

The sudden surge in the mining of graphite and other precious minerals in Alaska results from a dramatic increase in demand for batteries, solar power, computers, and other high-tech products that require such minerals. For instance, graphite is a significant component of the lithium-ion batteries used for electric cars and some renewable energy systems. According to the World Bank , due to the growing global interest in such cars and energy, the demand for graphite, lithium, cobalt, and other battery metals could increase by nearly 500 percent by 2050.[1] The report says that, “[g]raphite demand increases in both absolute and percentage terms since graphite is needed to build the anodes found in the most commonly deployed automotive, grid, and decentralized batteries. ” Similarly, according the United States Geological Survey, there are currently no graphite mines in the United States, requiring American battery and other manufacturers to import 58,000 metric tons of graphite during 2019.[2] According to CMA2020, with “5.7 million metric tons of quality graphite outlined so far, Graphite One Inc.’s Graphite Creek deposit in Northwest Alaska could provide a reliable domestic supply of graphite to North America’s burgeoning lithium-ion battery sector.” [3]

[1] Shane Lasley, High priority Alaska REE, graphite projects Gov nominations elevate mine projects to Fast-41 permitting, p. 6-7, High priority Alaska 2020 (November 2, 2020).

[2] Ibid.

[3] Shane Lasley, Western Alaska deposit could feed graphite into supply chain, Mining News, CRITICAL MINERALS ALASKA, pp. 28-29 (2020)

Ten Tribes Partnership Takes a Seat at the Table for Colorado River Management

The Colorado River basin is home to 26 federally recognized tribes in seven western states. Despite their long-standing rights to about 20% of the water that flows through the Colorado, many tribes are excluded from water management decisions and don’t benefit from basic water infrastructure and a secure supply of clean, safe water. The Ten Tribes Partnership is taking a seat at the decision-making table by building capacity among tribes to claim their right to water, establishing water leases, and helping restore the river’s health. Drawing upon a spiritual mandate to “ensure that this sacred water will always be protected and available” the tribes are working to “advance sustainable water management through collaborative decision-making.”

Trump Puts the Pause on Pebble Mine

A reprieve in the contentious Pebble Mine project came from an unlikely source, when President Trump paused the permitting process for the gold, copper, and molybdenum mine in Southwestern Alaska after previously backing the project. Located in the headwaters of the lucrative Bristol Bay sockeye salmon fishery, the project is slated to include the largest earthen dam ever built, despite being located in a seismically active region. The 20 square-mile pit mine would require roads and a gas pipeline through pristine wilderness near Lake Iliamna and Lake Clark. Brown bears, wolves, moose, caribou, waterfowl, and all five species of Pacific salmon, along with some 7,500 people, mostly traditional Natives, live in the region likely to be most impacted by the mine.

Trump is calling for additional information from the Pebble Limited Partnership about environmental mitigation from the degradation caused by the project. In a letter to the Partnership, the Corps listed new requirements that would need to occur in order to mitigate the impacts of Pebble to the Bristol Bay ecosystem including compensation for impacts on 2,825 acres of open water and 129.5 stream miles within the Koktuli River watershed and on 460 acres of wetlands, 231 acres of open water and 55 stream miles along the transportation corridor and port sites. The agency gave the partnership 90 days to update their plan to address these impacts. This sudden about-face appears to have been prompted by statements made by Trumps eldest son, an avid fisherman who has fished in the region, as well as other influential Republicans who have Trumps ear.

EPA Should Veto Pebble Permit

In 2017, the US Army Corps of Engineers released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to develop the world’s largest copper mine in the Bristol Bay watershed, located in the sensitive headwaters of Bristol Bay in Southwestern Alaska. The Mine which is proposed by the foreign-based Pebble Limited Partnership would destroy several miles of streams which are critical the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world and upon which twenty-five federally recognized tribal governments depend for subsistence. In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Corp was chartered with drafting the EIS to analyze in detail, the environmental impacts of proposed projects.

Next to the Project Chariot when, in the 1950s, the United States Atomic Energy Commission proposed to detonate an atomic bomb off the coast of the Chukchi Sea in order to create harbor there, the Pebble Mine could be the most contentious industrial development activity ever proposed in Alaska. Due to its potential impact on water and salmon resources, it risks the economic and cultural lifeblood of the region. As a result, the mine is opposed not only by 80 percent of Bristol Bay’s residents but also by a broad spectrum of entities that include commercial fishermen, businesses, sportsmen, and conservation groups.

Yet, despite the fact that public citizens, commercial interests, tribes, conservation organizations, and even an international mining corporation oppose this environmentally and economically disastrous Mine, the Corps under the Trump Administration, established a flawed NEPA analysis in its rush to permit it. As a result, the Pebble Mine has been referred to by the conservation community as “quite simply one of the most reckless Projects anywhere in the world today.” Last year, when opening the Oversight Committee hearings regarding the mine, Congressman Peter DeFazio, Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, called it “an abomination” and stated that “the Pebble Mine proposal is a bad idea made even worse by the sham review process currently underway.”

Under the current proposal and future development plans, the mine would be so destructive to the environment and the Alaska economy that there has been a consistent pattern of major investors walking away from the project once they understand the overwhelming opposition and unavoidable environmental and economic risks. The fourth major firm to abandon the project since 2011, First Quantum Minerals Ltd., which had provided $37.5 million upfront and pledged $150 million over the following three years to fund the permitting process in exchange for a 50 percent share, pulled out in late May of 2018.

When the Final EIS for the project was released last month, a string of politicians, and other public figures came out in opposition to Pebble. For the first time cracks in the Trump Administration’s relentless anti-environmental regulatory strategy arose when Donald Trump, Jr. tweeted “As a sportsman who has spent plenty of time in the area I agree [that] the headwaters of Bristol Bay and surrounding fishery are too unique and fragile to take any chances with…Pebble Mine.” Similarly, long time extraction industry supporter, Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan, who after reviewing the Final EIS stated:

“… I am increasingly concerned that the final EIS may not adequately address the issues identified in the draft EIS regarding the full risks of the project as proposed to the Bristol Bay watershed and fishery… These processes should also not be rushed or fast-tracked, especially given the size and complexity of this particular project.”

While Sen. Sullivan, however, has expressed concern for the obviously flawed EIS process, so far, he is not off the fence yet as indicated by his statement that “While it is a major step in the permitting process, it must be emphasized that the Final EIS is not a decision document. The final EIS for the Pebble Mine is the first step in a long, demanding permitting process….”

In 30 years of working in the area of environmental law and policy, however, unless stopped by a lawsuit or legislation, I can’t remember a single project that was not given the go-ahead after it was recommended in a Final EIS.

When the FEIS was released on July 24, there are now, less than a couple of weeks remaining before the final decision on the permit and for the Environmental Protection Agency to veto the project. Dan Sullivan and other politicians need to take a firm stand and pressure the agency to do just that.

Bringing Water Justice to the Arctic

Responding to the current focus on anti-discrimination and the need to provide clean water to communities as a means of preventing infection and spread of the Pandemic, the decades old environmental justice and human right to water movements have combined to create new terminologies such as “Water Ethics” and “Water Justice.” House Democrats responded to the call by proposing a $1.5 trillion infrastructure bill that would include everything from tax incentives for clean energy businesses, funding for drinking water programs and for climate resiliency upgrades to public housing. They hope to submit the bill to Congress by the 4^th of July holiday.

The need to shore up water infrastructure is even getting attention in the Arctic these days where, as part of the America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2020, the plan to expand and deepen the city of Nome’s port was recently approved by the Army Corp of part of Engineers. Because the purpose of the expansion is primarily to extend the harbor into Norton Sound and dredge the outer area so that it is deep enough to accommodate big vessels like fuel tankers and large cargo and cruise ships, it’s main effect will be to further open the Arctic to commerce and development. In their present form , therefore, both infrastructure bills are missing an opportunity to effectively respond to the Pandemic and increase climate resiliency by incorporating adequate water infrastructure for indigenous communities, including many Arctic Native communities who have never had running water.

It’s easy to imagine , for example, many of the Alaska Native communities who have never had access to running water, shaking their heads in response to recent federal and state health agency cries to “Wash Your Hands!.” According to water justice advocates, “more than 2 million Americans who lack indoor plumbing or wastewater services live in remote areas, or come from high-risk groups like the elderly, disabled, homebound and homeless.” Closing the access gap, therefore, should include the use of “existing disaster response protocols to close this access gap and prioritize communities where local capacity is limited. It should partner with state and local municipalities for both immediate and long-term solutions.”

Water ethics is also getting media attention these days in the form of the disproportionate impact of oil and gas development on Arctic Native communities as it relates to climate change. Last month, for example in the worst environmental disaster in Russian history, tons of water spilled into the Ambarnaya River in Siberia, due in part to rapidly melting permafrost at the Nornickel plant. As with so many industrial crises, the damage from the spill landed heaviest on the nearby indigenous peoples of the Taimyr Krasnoyarsk Territory.

In a bizarre twist on the water injustice of oil and gas drilling, however, the Alaska Delegation has managed to turn recent attention on the problem of discrimination on it’s head, by requesting that the federal government investigate recent global banking policies to forego loans and investments with companies that produce oil and other fossil fuels. Their argument? Such policies harm local Alaska Native communities who rely on drilling in the Arctic for jobs. Noticeably absent from the letter that Lisa Murkowski, Dan Sullivan and Don Young sent to the comptroller of the currency and the chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp , however, is the discriminatory effects of carbon producing drilling activity on these same communities who rely on the unraveling fresh water and marine ecosystems in the rapidly heating Arctic for subsistence.

Still, our response to COVID-19 may provide an opportunity to address climate change in the Arctic. At least for now, airlines and other businesses are in slowdown around the globe and in some countries, CO2 emissions and air pollution are at their lowest in many years. To some extent, house democrats are using the opportunity provided by the Pandemic to address the need to convert to clean energy and focus on environmental justice by introducing climate change legislations which calls for net-zero CO2 emissions over the next 30 years and reducing pollution in communities that are disproportionately affected.

Why not go a step further and take the hint when Mother Nature is trying to send us a message? Could we, for example, use the opportunity from reduced travel and other CO2 emitting activities to switch to flying less, making a quicker switch to electric cars and focusing less on infrastructure that supports carbon producing industrial development, and more on providing water accessibility and applying nature-based solutions related to water issues?

Clean Water Act Dries Up Under Trump Administration Rule

A coalition of Democratic attorneys general attempted, without success, to delay the implementation of a new definition of streams and wetlands put forth by the Trump administration. The new “Waters of the U.S.” Rule or WOTUS removes environmental protections for streams, wetlands and groundwater, and is seen as a major win for farmers and land developers. Under the new ruling, pesticides and fertilizers can now be dumped directly into waterways, and wetlands can be destroyed or filled in to accommodate construction projects. Contamination of drinking water from unregulated pollutants puts millions of Americans at risk. The ruling went into effect on June 29^th. Read more here.

In another effort to stop implementation of the Rule, the Navajo Nation and several environmental groups filed suite in U.S. District Court in New Mexico against the Trump Administration. The law suit which also includes Amigos Bravos, the New Mexico Acequia Association, the Gila Resources Information Project and the Environmental Integrity Project and other environmental groups also claims that the Administration failed to consider the impacts of Climate Change on western watersheds that are already affected by over a decade of drought. As a result, smaller systems which are affected more by low flows and higher temperatures from drought conditions will be impacted more significantly by reduced protection from polluters. Agricultural and other livelihoods will that rely on Acequia and other non-industrial irrigation systems dependent upon adequate and timely snow, rain and runoff for crops will be put at risk.

According to Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez, “At this point in time, with climate change occurring around the world, it’s more prudent than ever to protect our land, water and air. We, as Diné People, have a duty to preserve and conserve our natural resources to ensure that our future generations have access to clean water, air and land.”

WPC Developing Panel on Impacts of Rising Stream Temperatures and Development at American Water Resources Association Annual Meeting

Salmon Die-Off Tubutulik River in Western Region, Alaska

WPC is convening a session topic entitled “The Impacts of Mining and Climate Change on Rising Stream Temperatures in Alaska” for the American Water Resources Association’s Annual Meeting taking place in Orlando, Florida from November 3-6.

In the summer of 2019, due to dramatic temperatures increases, thousands of salmon died throughout Alaska as they migrated to spawning grounds, because the water exceeded lethal temperature limits. These climate related stressors are further exacerbated by state and federal lands that are being opened to mining and related development on fish and wildlife populations.

The Session will address the impacts of increasing water temperatures in watersheds affected by land releases and therefore, the combined impacts of climate change and mining development on subsistence resources in Alaska including: 1) Application of models starting with global emission scenarios that will ultimately detect instream flows for specific subbasins and collection of instream flow, temperature and dissolved oxygen data; 2) Identify lands that include critical fish habitat and potential locate able minerals that have been opened for mining; and 3) A process for applying the modeling and data collected to assist policy makers and land managers to mitigate land uses that potentially exacerbate climate related impacts to watersheds.

Please contact us if you are interested in being a presenter on this topic and traveling to Orlando in the fall!

Tentative Presentation Topics include : 1) Forcasting drought and temperature increases and modeling stream flows in Alaska; 2) Use of Traditional Knowledge in Protecting Rivers in the Arctic; 3) Bureau of Land Management FLPMA Land Withdrawal Revocations; Overview of 2019 Water Year in Alaska; 4) Pacific Northwest Drought Early Warning System.

Global Water Scarcity May Exacerbate Coronavirus Impacts

We’ve all heard that the best way to counter the coronavirus is to wash our hands frequently with soap and water but, for more than 40 percent of the world’s people, access to clean water for regular handwashing is a challenge. The United Nations, in an effort to improve access to safe water for drinking, bathing, and frequent handwashing, have identified three key factors contributing to this shortfall.

Cycles of drought or shortages brought on by climate change have left many communities around the globe with water shortages. Vast numbers of people live without running water in their homes, or experience water scarcity during portions of the year. Moreover, poor sanitation due to primitive waste management, unregulated mining practices, and agricultural run-off contaminate vital streams and rivers. Finally, the infrastructure used to transport water is aging, and treatment of water used to dispose of drugs, cleaning products, and other household goods is expensive and difficult.

Long-term planning and innovative measures to conserve water, capture rainwater, and reuse wastewater are needed on a broad scale to combat these issues, both locally and at a national level. While these actions may not stim the current tide of coronavirus infections, they are critical in addressing future infectious outbreaks. Read more

US Water Alliance Releases National Report on Water Access Challenges

The US Water Alliance, DigDeep and Michigan State University, recently released “Closing the Water Access Gap in the United States: A National Action Plan“, which is claimed to be the most comprehensive report to date on water access challenges in the United States.

According to the USWA, “[w]ith on the ground research and data analysis, we discovered that over two million Americans live without access to running water, indoor plumbing, and safe sanitation.” The report focuses on interviews with local residents addressing on challenges related to failing infrastructure, contamination, and high financial costs for limited amounts of water just to live in certain rural and tribal communities.

The USWA also says that the Federal government’s collection of water infrastructure data which has been cut back in recent years, has never accurately measured the lack of such infrastructure for many communities. The report states that “communities of color are more likely to lack water access than white communities, and that the disparity is particularly extreme for Native Americans” which is more likely to have trouble accessing water than any other group.

According to the report, the number of Native American households that don’t have plumbing is almost 20 times that of white households. Claiming to have conducted the most extensive research on water infrastructure in the United States, including the commissioning of experts from around the country, the authors of the report found was that race was the major factor in water and sanitation access.

Early in the 20^th century, when water-borne illnesses was a leading cause of death in the U.S., the federal government modernized water and sanitation infrastructure which almost eradicated those diseases. Even in the days of ambitious government programs to improve water related sanitation, however, some tribal communities located in remote areas were passed over because it was too expensive to provide access to potable and other water. Now, with federal funding for water infrastructure fraction of what it once was, federal health agencies estimate that it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to provide basic water and sanitation access to places like on the Navajo Nation in Southern New Mexico.