Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

Maryland Deregulatory Commission Targets Protective Bay Regulations

Politicians are famous for reneging on, or conveniently ignoring, campaign pledges and other promises.  In some cases, politicians put themselves in untenable positions, such as when they offer conflicting promises to different interest groups.  This is when it becomes easy to see what an elected official’s true priorities are.  Governor Hogan proclaimed that he would be “the best environmental governor that’s ever served.”  Of course, he also campaigned for “regulatory reform” in Maryland. 

The Governor established a Regulatory Reform Commission by executive order in July, stacking it with an almost all-industry roster of members, and charging it with “fixing our burdensome, antiquated, broken, and out-of-control regulatory environment in Maryland.”  This week, we got to see the results of the commission’s work, and the biggest victim was the environment.  Of the 29 specific regulations or regulatory chapters targeted by the commission, all but 10 were Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) regulations.  It’s not as if “cutting red tape,” or streamlining administrative processes necessarily means weakening standards designed to protect public health or the environment.  There’s no reason that the commission needed to focus on rolling back environmental protections to achieve its stated objectives.  But that’s what it decided to do.

One MDE regulation that finds itself on the chopping block stands out.  26.04.02.07 of the Code of Maryland Regulations was revised just a few years ago to give teeth to the state’s promises under the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (Bay TMDL) to reduce nitrogen pollution from septic systems.  As most Marylanders are aware, the state experienced explosive population growth over the last half century, with much of that residential growth occurring in new suburbs and exurbs.  Importantly, this sprawl occurred beyond the borders of sewer systems and at a rate that didn’t allow municipalities to catch up.  The result is several hundred thousand homes that discharge barely-treated human waste literally right into their back yards – waste that includes Bay-choking nitrogen at levels many times greater than sewage treated by an upgraded wastewater treatment plant.  Indeed, between 1984 and 2015, the number of septic systems and percentage of the population served by septic systems in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is estimated to have increased faster in Maryland than any other state in the watershed, except rural Delaware. 

Reversing the environmental impact of decades of sprawling growth will itself take decades of effort, and will require a multi-faceted approach. But one thing that Maryland could do immediately is to require new homes served by septic systems to at least utilize the best available technology (“BAT”) for nitrogen removal.  The idea is simple – hold the line on new pollution while we chip away at existing pollution sources.  And the converse is equally simple – if we don’t account for the growth in new pollution sources, that growth could overwhelm and nullify any of our investments in restoring the Bay.  So, in 2012, MDE crafted a regulation that requires new development served by septic systems in any impaired watershed in the state to have BAT technology.  This would limit the amount of nitrogen pollution coming from new land development in Maryland.

But the Governor is a developer by trade, and the concerns repeated at the six regional meetings of the Regulatory Reform Commission were tailor-made for his interests.  Again, compare the purpose of the commission (streamlining administrative processes and enhancing customer service within government) to what the business interests serving on, and appearing before, the commission were asking for (rolling back environment and safety regulations specific to the development industry).  There are thousands of regulations on the books in Maryland on all sorts of topics.  Yet, the regulations specifically targeted were those pertaining to land development.  Sprinkler systems that save lives in new homes?  Nitrogen-removing septic systems to protect the Bay? Stormwater and erosion control requirements to keep bulldozed soils out of the local streams?  In the commissions estimate, apparently these are the specific regulations spoiling Maryland’s regulatory climate as a whole.

If this commission really wanted to change the way state agencies work with businesses in Maryland it would start with obvious things like reviewing administrative protocols, streamlining duplicative or overly complicated processes, providing additional “customer service” training, and, most importantly, adding staff at agencies so that they can quickly and efficiently perform their jobs and serve their clients. (When was the last time a business decided to enhance customer service by cutting cashiers, clerks, or customer service representatives?)  Instead, we got exactly what we should expect out of this commission – the same old giveaways to favored industries.  The interests of a few over the public interest.  Increasing profit margins for land developers, decreasing water quality and public health and safety for the rest of us. 

They may want to call it a “new day for business,” but its business as usual for politics.

Showing 2,822 results

| December 4, 2015

Maryland Deregulatory Commission Targets Protective Bay Regulations

Politicians are famous for reneging on, or conveniently ignoring, campaign pledges and other promises.  In some cases, politicians put themselves in untenable positions, such as when they offer conflicting promises to different interest groups.  This is when it becomes easy to see what an elected official’s true priorities are.  Governor Hogan proclaimed that he would […]

Rena Steinzor | December 3, 2015

Blankenship Convicted in Massey Coal Mine Disaster

Justice was done today by a hard-working jury in West Virginia that convicted Don Blankenship of conspiracy to obstruct federal mine safety rules.  This conspiracy was the primary cause of an enormous explosion that killed 29 men in the worst mine disaster in 40 years.  Although the jury was not presented with the question of […]

James Goodwin | December 2, 2015

Obama’s ‘Path to Progress’ Looking Forward: Much to Do and Little Time to Do It

In a post last week, I noted that, over the last year, the Obama Administration has finalized all or part of several of the 13 regulatory actions highlighted in a 2014 Center for Progressive Reform report challenging the President to focus renewed energy during the remainder of his term on securing critical new protections for people and the […]

Robert Verchick | December 1, 2015

Support CPR on Giving Tuesday

In August I commemorated the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina by pedaling along the self-guided “Levee Disaster Bike Tour.” I began beneath the muscular oaks along New Orleans’ Bayou St. John and threaded my way around potholes and waterfowl to pay my respects at three prominent levee-breach sites.  The ride gave me a chance to reflect […]

James Goodwin | November 24, 2015

One Year In, the Administration’s ‘Path to Progress’ Benefits American People and Environment

From the moment they secured majorities in both chambers, congressional Republicans have made no secret of their intention to launch an all-out, guerilla warfare-style campaign against the federal government — and even the very notion of governance itself. Accordingly, they have pursued a strategy of salt-the-earth sabotage designed to spread like a communicable disease the […]

Katie Tracy | November 23, 2015

What’s on the Labor Department’s Regulatory Agenda?

Late last week, the White House released its fall 2015 Unified Agenda—the semi-annual report on regulations under development or review by each federal agency. As usual, and therefore of little surprise, this latest agenda spells delay for a laundry list of critical safeguards at several agencies. According to CPR senior analyst James Goodwin’s review of the regulatory […]

James Goodwin | November 20, 2015

Fall 2015 Regulatory Agenda is Out; Clock is Ticking

Opponents of safeguards are fond of decrying what they claim is a regulatory system out of control, churning out rules at a break-neck pace.  It’s not difficult to refute  this claim when the president releases the twice-annual regulatory agenda, which spells out all the active rulemakings that are currently pending and the expected timetables for […]

Evan Isaacson | November 18, 2015

Confusion, Frustration as Maryland High Court Hears Stormwater Permits Case

Last week the Maryland Court of Appeals heard several hours of oral argument in back to back (to back) cases regarding whether five different municipal stormwater (“MS4”) permits issued by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) complied with the federal Clean Water Act and state water pollution laws. Although divided into separate cases due […]

Matthew Freeman | November 17, 2015

CPR’s Joel Mintz on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

In an op-ed for The Hill, CPR Member Scholar Joel Mintz takes a look at the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and concludes that it’s insufficiently protective of the environment, the Administration’s assertions notwithstanding. In his piece, he notes that the TPP “contains no mention whatsoever of what is widely seen as the most pressing threat to the global […]