Assembly committee again seeks changes to water quality rule – WisPolitics

Report on Proposed Revisions to Surface Water Quality Rules and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction: Aligning Water Policy with SDG 6

An Assembly committee is re-evaluating an administrative rule concerning surface water quality, a critical component in achieving Sustainable Development Goal 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation). The proposed revision focuses on updating the state’s antidegradation policy, which is designed to protect surface water resources by regulating new or increased pollutant discharges. This policy directly supports the targets of SDG 6 and is integral to protecting aquatic ecosystems as outlined in SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land).

2.0 Legislative Review and Procedural Status

The Assembly Environment Committee has taken action to modify the proposed rule, citing a failure by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to incorporate previously requested changes. This procedural step highlights the governance challenges inherent in implementing environmental protections aligned with the SDGs.

• The committee approved a motion for modifications with a 4-2 vote.
• The action follows a reversal by the DNR on a prior agreement to submit modifications addressing stakeholder concerns.
• This breakdown in consensus-building impacts the multi-stakeholder partnerships essential for SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

3.0 Governance Conflict and Institutional Frameworks

The progression of the antidegradation rule is complicated by a broader legal and procedural dispute between the state’s executive and legislative branches. This conflict underscores the importance of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which calls for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels.

1. Governor Tony Evers directed the Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB) to publish the rule as part of a larger package, following a state Supreme Court ruling that limited the Legislature’s ability to suspend administrative rules indefinitely.
2. The LRB determined that the antidegradation rule had not completed the required standing committee review process.
3. The Governor has initiated a lawsuit arguing that state law does not prevent an agency from promulgating a rule before the completion of standing committee reviews.
4. The DNR has declined to comment on the committee’s recent action, citing the ongoing litigation.

4.0 Conclusion: Impact on Sustainable Development Agenda

The ongoing dispute over the water quality rule presents significant challenges to the state’s progress on key Sustainable Development Goals. The delay and institutional conflict directly affect the implementation of policies crucial for environmental protection. The resolution of this matter will be a determining factor in the state’s ability to uphold its commitments to clean water, ecosystem health, and effective governance.

• SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation): The core objective of the rule—to prevent the degradation of surface water—is fundamental to this goal.
• SDG 14 & 15 (Life Below Water & Life on Land): Protecting water from pollutants is essential for the health of freshwater ecosystems and the biodiversity they support.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The procedural impasse highlights a critical need for clear and effective governance mechanisms to advance environmental policy.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The article primarily addresses issues related to the following Sustainable Development Goals:

   • SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: This is the most directly relevant SDG. The entire article revolves around a proposed rule revision for an “antidegradation policy, which aims to protect surface water by regulating new or increased pollutant discharges.” This directly concerns the goal of ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water.
   • SDG 14: Life Below Water: By focusing on protecting “surface water” from “pollutant discharges,” the article touches upon the health of aquatic ecosystems. Pollutants from surface water sources eventually flow into larger bodies of water, impacting marine life. The policy discussed is a measure to prevent pollution at its source, which is crucial for protecting life below water.
   • SDG 15: Life on Land: This goal includes the protection of freshwater ecosystems. The “antidegradation policy” for surface water is a direct effort to conserve and protect these inland water bodies, which are vital components of terrestrial ecosystems.
   • SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article is fundamentally about a breakdown in the governance process. It details a conflict between a legislative body (“Assembly Environment Committee”), an executive agency (“Department of Natural Resources”), and the Governor’s office over the implementation of an administrative rule. The mention of a “state Supreme Court ruling” and an “ongoing lawsuit” highlights challenges related to effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the article’s focus, the following specific targets can be identified:

   • Target 6.3: “By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution…” The article’s central theme is the “antidegradation policy” designed to “protect surface water by regulating new or increased pollutant discharges.” This policy is a direct mechanism to achieve the reduction of water pollution as outlined in this target.
   • Target 14.1: “By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities…” The regulation of pollutant discharges into surface water is a key strategy for preventing land-based pollution from reaching marine environments. The administrative rule discussed is a preventative measure aligned with this target.
   • Target 15.1: “By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services…” The policy to protect “surface water quality” is a direct action aimed at the conservation and sustainable use of inland freshwater ecosystems, as specified in this target.
   • Target 16.6: “Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.” The article illustrates a challenge to this target. The conflict between the Assembly committee and the DNR, the committee’s frustration that the DNR “reversed plans to submit modifications,” and the ongoing lawsuit all point to a lack of effectiveness and transparency in the institutional process for creating and implementing environmental regulations.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article does not provide quantitative data but implies several qualitative indicators for measuring progress:

   • Indicator for Targets 6.3, 14.1, and 15.1: The primary implied indicator is the existence and successful implementation of a legally sound administrative rule on water quality. The article shows that this indicator is currently not being met, as the rule has not “completed the standing committee review process” and is the subject of an “ongoing lawsuit.” Progress would be measured by the finalization and enforcement of the “antidegradation policy.”
   • Indicator for Target 16.6: An implied indicator is the efficiency and consensus in the administrative rule-making process. The article indicates negative progress on this front, citing the committee’s need to “again [seek] modifications” and the legal challenges filed by the Governor. A successful resolution of the dispute between the legislative and executive branches would be a measure of progress toward more effective institutions.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

   SDGs	Targets	Indicators (Implied from the Article)
   SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation	6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution.	The status of the administrative rule revision for the state’s antidegradation policy.
   SDG 14: Life Below Water	14.1: Prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution from land-based activities.	The implementation of regulations on “new or increased pollutant discharges” into surface water.
   SDG 15: Life on Land	15.1: Ensure the conservation and sustainable use of inland freshwater ecosystems.	The enactment and enforcement of the policy to protect surface water quality.
   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.	The successful and collaborative completion of the standing committee review process for the administrative rule, and the resolution of the ongoing lawsuit.

Source: wispolitics.com