Rep. Jim Gooch Jr. is a Republican representing District 12.Republican lawmakers on Wednesday greenlit Senate Bill 89, a measure that will greatly diminish state protections against water pollution if enacted.The original bill sparked an outcry from environmental advocates and the opposition prompte d legislators to add last-minute exceptions for some water sources.Environmental groups say the new version of SB 89 still would risk major contamination of too many waterways, including headwater and ephemeral streams that play important roles in river and public drinking water systems. And, they say, it wouldn’t protect all groundwater sources, endangering the supplies of thousands of Kentuckians’ private wells.“And without these protections, thousands of Kentuckians who rely on these wells may lose access to affordable, clean drinking water,” said Rebecca Shelton, the Appalachian Citizens’ Law Center’s director of policy.The initial version of SB 89 would have largely, if not entirely, stopped the state from regulating pollution of all groundwater.The Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting recently detailed how the bill would put the commonwealth’s rural reaches, especially, at more risk of water pollution. For example, eastern and western Kentucky have noticeable concentrations of domestic use wells.This map shows the locations of private wells that supply groundwater to Kentuckians' homes. Each blue dot represents a well.( Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet)For more than 50 years, Kentucky law has granted protections against pollution to basically all the state’s aboveground and belowground waters, defining them collectively as “waters of the commonwealth.”Even with Wednesday’s changes, SB 89 is a big departure from that status quo.The initial Senate Bill 89, which the Republican-led Kentucky Senate passed last month, would have kept protections only for what the federal government deems “navigable waters.”The updated version of SB 89 also keeps protections for:Wellhead protection areas, which are intended to help shield wells that support public water systems from contamination.Various springs, including “naturally occurring artesian or phreatic springs” and other springs that provide domestic water supplies.Sinkholes “with open throat drains.”Republican Rep. Jim Gooch of Providence leads the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee, which introduced and approved the amended proposal Wednesday morning. He said Wednesday that he tried to address some of the concerns about the original bill.Only one Republican on the 21-member committee voted against advancing the bill, Rep. Bobby McCool of Van Lear, who noted he’s a former coal miner but said “just cannot take the risk of hurting the water system.” Democrats on the board also voted against the legislation.SB 89’s lead sponsor, Republican Sen. Scott Madon of Pineville, told the committee the legislation will provide “more clarity and regulatory certainty” for businesses when it comes to water-related government permits. He said the bill is backed by groups representing the coal, construction, manufacturing, oil and agriculture industries.“The effect of this change means that Kentucky cannot regulate more stringent than federal law, protecting our job creators from unnecessary government red tape,” Madon said.Update protects some, but not all, groundwaterThe Kentucky Resources Council said in an analysis that the updated bill still endangers too much of the water that flows underground, even though it makes exceptions for various springs.“Sinkholes are not a water resource, yet they are included in this amended definition, while the crucial karst aquifers that supply drinking water to so many rural Kentuckians are left unprotected,” said Audrey Ernstberger, an attorney for the Kentucky Resources Council, at Wednesday’s legislative meeting.“The amendment’s addition of wellhead protection areas may help in some cities that rely on groundwater for public drinking water, but it does not do anything for the tens of thousands (of) homes, farms and businesses in rural Kentucky that rely on groundwater from private wells,” she said.Ernstberger called the updated bill a “free pass for pollution” and said it betrays Kentucky’s “most precious resource.”“This bill's failure to address this concern is not an oversight. This is a deliberate choice to cater to the interests of a few at the expense of the many,” she said.After Ernstberger said that, Gooch told her, “Audrey, we don’t really have a lot of time for hyperbole.” The committee only had a half-hour allotted for Wednesday’s meeting, due to the day’s packed legislative schedule.Madon, the bill’s sponsor, pushed back on environmental groups’ warnings Wednesday, saying SB 89 won’t leave groundwater unprotected from pollution or harm Kentuckians’ drinking water.“Groundwater is protected by numerous other provisions of state and federal law,” he said. “Kentucky's public drinking water systems will still be fully and comprehensively regulated under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act and existing laws and cabinet regulations.”However, the Kentucky Resources Council contends SB 89 would remove groundwater’s most pivotal protections against pollution and, by changing the legal definition of “waters of the commonwealth,” would have negative spillover effects on other water-related regulations.Environmentalists and groundwater experts say well owners would be left to protect themselves from increased water pollution, which can get pricey.Shelton, with the Appalachian Citizens’ Law Center, told lawmakers she has a well at her Letcher County home, but the water in it contains bacteria and heavy metals like lead and arsenic.She said that left her with two options: Do heavier filtering of the water herself or hook her house up to the local public drinking water system. Both choices were expensive. She opted to set up filtration equipment, which she said cost over $3,000 plus annual maintenance costs of up to $800.“I'm fortunate to have had these choices and the ability to pay for them,” she said. “Yet I know there are still areas of Letcher County where households do not even have the option of hooking up to the public water system because the lines don't run to their house.” ...read more read less