User:Wd1996/sandbox

= Stream Protection Rule = The Stream Protection Rule was a rule implemented by the U.S. Government that originally went into effect on January 19, 2017. The rule revised environmental regulations governing the coal mining industry, specifically the impacts of mines on local streams, that had remained mostly untouched for three decades. This rule was one of the last federally implemented regulations passed under the Obama Administration, and promised to improve the water quality of hundreds of miles of effected streams. The rule stayed in effect for less then a month before the House and Senate used the Congresional Review Act to repeal it. President Donald Trump signed this, causing the repeal to go in effect on Febuary 16, 2017.

Provisions
At a high level, the Stream Protection Rule aimed to revise existing regulations in order to improve "the balance between environmental protection and the Nation's need for coal as a source of energy." To acheive this, the rule included improvements in the protection of water supplies, water quality, streams, fish and other wildlife, and other environmental issues that are harmed by surface coal mining; furthermore, the rule provided mine operators with more regulations that would help avoid water pollution as well as water treatment costs. In addition to these guidelines, the rule also included eradicating water population outside of permit areas, requiring thorough data collection for mining operations, protection and resotration of streams, updates guidelines for protecting endangred species, and long-term treatment of unintentional water treatment. Expanding on permits, the rule also guarantees that science and technology are leveraged to analyze the potential harms of mining and  also ensures that that land that are harmed by mining operations can be restored to a conditoin comparable to its condition before the mining operation was introduced. Other goals About 30 percent of the rule's provisions consist of revisions and organizational changes that aim to help "improve consistency, clarity, accuracy, and ease of use."

Enactment
The Stream Protection Rule was enacted in late December 2016 under President Barack Obama, and went into effect on January 19, 2017. The rule built upon existing regulations that had been around since the early 1980's. The rule was released under the U.S. Department of the Interior and its development was attributed to the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. Because the Stream Protection Rule related to The Endangered Species Act of 1973, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was also required to review it, resulting in the creation of a Memorandum of Understanding between the OSMRE and the USFWS. The rule would only stay in effect for less then 30 day before being repealed by congress in mid-February of 2017.

Environmental Justice
The repeal of the Stream Protection Rule has numerous wide-ranging implications on topics of environmental justice. Due to processes known as mountaintop removal, mining companies contaminate downstream water sources, decapitate mountain tops, and bury over 2,000 miles of stream. In addition, mountaintop removal has been linked to higher rates of cancer and heart disease. In fact, according to the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, communities in heavy coal regions in the Appalachia rank on the complete bottom in citizens' overall health and happiness. According to Dr. James Whelan, the NSW Nature Conservation Council spokesperson, “Coal mining is the leading source of particle pollution and contributes to a range of cardiovascular and respiratory ailments, especially in coal-affected regions such as the Hunter, Central Queensland and the La Trobe Valley. The latest NPI report shows that PM10 emissions from coal mining have almost trebled during the last decade and warrant urgent attention."

While the Stream Protection Rule would not have stopped coal companies from dumping into streams or abolished the practice of valley filling it would have limited the threats to public water from these corporate interests. These threats to public waters are nationwide, including the chemical spill in Charleston West Virginia,  coal contamination across North Carolina, lead contamination in Flint Michigan and the contamination threat from the Dakota Access Pipeline.

These water contamination situations often affect communities who have little political or capital power to fight against these threats as they are socioeconomic minorities. For example, 41.2% of Flint city Michigan’s population is below the poverty line, and Charleston with 19.6% below the poverty line both of which are below the national average of 14.5%.

Controversy
There has been numerous sources of controversy in the repealing of the Stream Protection Rule. As Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club, said, [this] was a disgraceful opening salvo from this Congress, as they begin to try and do the bidding of big polluters.” The Stream Protection Rule itself was also the subject of controversy, as many coal mining groups claimed that this rule would have destroyed 77,000 jobs in the future. However, the Obama administration has claimed that these figures are "wildly exaggerated."

Overturning
President Donald Trump signed H.J. Res 38 on February 16, 2017, overturning the Stream Protection Rule. H.J. Res 38 effectively reverted all stream protection regulations back to January 18, 2017, which was the day before the Stream Protection Rule went into effect. President Trump stated that the repealing of the rule would save thousands of U.S. jobs, especially mine-related jobs. Previous to the rule's overturning, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had also claimed that the rule was unfairly harmful towards coal-related jobs.

Relevant Articles for our Topic Regarding Water Policy (Stream Protection Rule)
Department of the Interior official info:

https://www.osmre.gov/programs/rcm/streamprotectionrule.shtm

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=OSM-2010-0018-10631

https://www.osmre.gov/programs/rcm/docs/sprFactSheet.pdf

Federal Registrar:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/20/2016-29958/stream-protection-rule

Vox article:

http://www.vox.com/2017/2/2/14488448/stream-protection-rule

NYT article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/business/energy-environment/senate-coal-regulations.html?_r=0

Siera Club Article:

http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/green-life/goodbye-stream-protection-rule

Related Wikipedia article (environmental impact of coal mining)

Environmental impact of the coal industry

http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/green-life/goodbye-stream-protection-rule

Mother Jones article:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/02/who-really-benefits-repealing-stream-protection-rule

Fact sheet:

http://nma.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Fact-Sheet-SPR.pdf

More factual information:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=OSM-2010-0018-10631

Environmental perspective:

http://www.cleanwateraction.org/2017/02/24/was-stream-protection-rule-%E2%80%9Cjob-killing%E2%80%9D-regulation