Updated at 8 a.m. Thursday to include the link to the Federal Register, which published the proposed rules Thursday after the story posted, and public comment information.

The two federal agencies with jurisdiction over navigable waterways have published amendments to the existing “waters of the United States” rule that they say will “establish a clear, durable, common-sense definition” of the term, and a public comment period has opened.

The Environmental Protection Agency and Department of the Army’s changes have heightened worry among conservation groups that federal protections for isolated wetlands might be weakened further than they were soon after the 2023 Supreme Court decision that found wetlands must be connected by surface water to a navigable body of water to fall under the 1972 Clean Water Act.

The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers said in a release Monday that the newly proposed changes were to “fully implement the court’s direction by focusing on relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water—such as streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes—and wetlands that are connected and indistinguishable from such waterbodies.”

As part of the announcement, leadership posted the prepublication notice they planned to submit to the Federal Register, which was published Thursday, starting a 45-day public comment period.

Comments must be submitted by Jan. 5, 2026, and identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OW–2025–0322, through www.regulations.gov, by email to OW-Docket@epa.gov, or mail to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Water Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.

Language in the Clean Water Act states that the “term ‘navigable waters’ means the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas.” However, the act doesn’t define what “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS, actually are, leaving the EPA and Corps to determine the geographic scope of the rule.

Over the last five decades, pushback and litigation have forced the two agencies to revise the definition several times.

The current regulatory definition, according to the EPA, was put in place in September 2023 to align with the May 2023 Supreme Court ruling on the Sackett v EPA lawsuit.

The Sacketts filed the lawsuit after the agency ordered the Idaho couple to restore where they had begun backfilling with dirt the section of their property that the EPA considered to be wetlands of a nearby navigable waterbody. The judges sided with the Sacketts that federally protected wetlands must have an obvious connection to waterbodies like streams, oceans, rivers and lakes.

To conform to the Sackett decision, the EPA and Army amended in September 2023 the latest final rule, which had been put in place that January.

EPA Secretary Lee Zeldin and Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Adam Telle shared with Washington, D.C., lawmakers Monday afternoon an overview of the proposed rules.

“I know that across the country, news of today’s proposal is going to be met with a lot of relief and happiness from farmers, ranchers, other landowners, governments that have been looking for a simple, prescriptive definition that the whole country can operate off of, and would allow individuals to know whether or not there’s a ‘water of the United States’ without having to go hire an attorney or a consultant, having to pay someone to Tell them,” Zeldin said Monday during the announcement livestreamed on the EPA’s YouTube.

The EPA secretary explained that the proposal “includes practical, common-sense revisions that will make a real difference,” and adds definitions for what he called “key terms” such as “’relatively permanent,’ ‘continuous surface connection’ and ‘tributary’ to appropriately limit the scope of what is consistent with” the Sackett case.

“We’re establishing that jurisdictional tributaries must connect to traditional navigable waters, either directly or through other features that provide predictable and consistent flow. We’re adding a new exclusion for groundwater and revising exclusions for certain ditches prior converted cropland and waste treatment systems,” Zeldin continued. “We’re incorporating locally familiar terminology such as wet season to help determine whether a water body qualifies as WOTUS. And we’re strengthening state and tribal decision-making authority by providing clear regulatory guidelines while recognizing their expertise in local land and water resources.”

He explained that the proposed rules were developed based on input from multiple sources, including preproposal recommendations, docket information from nine public listening sessions and consultation comments from states, tribes and local governments.

Telle addressed the audience after Zeldin.

“Since 1972 Americans have struggled to understand what Congress meant when it included the term ‘waters of the United States’ in the Clean Water Act. Did it apply to them? Did it not? The definition of that term has been often abused, sometimes stretched beyond recognition over time, and it’s left Americans uncertain about whether they were complying with the Clean Water Act or not,” he said Monday, adding that “under President Trump’s leadership, the EPA and army Civil Works, which oversees the Corps of Engineers, are kicking off the formal process that will give American certainty about their property once and for all.”

Several Republican officials thanked Zeldin from the podium for initiating the proposed amendments including West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey who said that “for too long there’s been great deal of uncertainty” about the WOTUS rule.

“Unfortunately, it left many people holding the bag. Farmers, contractors, small business owners guessing whether their ephemeral stream or a backyard ditch was going to be classified as a waters of the United States rule and potentially subject them to significant penalties,” he continued.

Alabama Congressman Gary Palmer said he was confident that the rule will prioritize clean water while protecting farmers, ranchers, landowners and businesses alike.

Conservation groups have been vocal about these revisions opening up isolated wetlands to development and degradation since the announcement was made.

“Wetlands are the lifeblood of our coast, and should be held to the highest standards of protection,” North Carolina Coastal Federation Coastal Advocate Kerri Allen explained. “The wetlands most impacted by these proposed rollbacks are the very wetlands that hold water during storms and help protect downstream waters. With the proposed changes, our coast will face irrevocable damage that impacts not only our wildlife and fisheries, but also our coastal economy and communities.” The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review.

Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney Mark Sabath said Monday in a statement that this proposed rule, if adopted, “could have catastrophic ramifications for communities already plagued by flooding, water quality concerns, and drinking water shortages. After critical, longstanding protections for clean water and wetlands were drastically narrowed by the Sackett decision, we need stronger protections, not weaker, to safeguard our communities and environment.”

League of Conservation Voters Healthy Communities Program Director Madeleine Foote had a similar reaction.

“The Trump administration’s Polluted Water Rule is another blatant giveaway to big corporate polluters that will jeopardize the waters that our families and communities rely on for drinking, recreation, and fueling our local economies,” Foote said.

“In 2023, the Supreme Court’s devastating Sackett decision stripped federal protections from millions of miles of streams and tens of millions of acres of wetlands, and now corporate polluters are pushing their friends in the administration to go even further in decimating our clean water safeguards. They won’t be happy until the Clean Water Act is nothing more than words on a page and they can pollute our waters with abandon,” Foote continued.

Environmental Defense Fund Associate Vice President Will McDow stated Monday that the new proposed WOTUS rule from the Trump administration that will redefine which wetlands and waters have Clean Water Act Protections. 

“We already spend billions annually responding to disasters that were created by building in risky areas. With today’s proposed WOTUS rule, commercial developers will be allowed to pave over wetlands to build unsafe housing that either floods or increases flooding to neighbors,” he continued. “This rule brings tremendous uncertainty and risk to our nation’s drinking water, flood protections and critical habitats. Based on our peer-reviewed analysis, new requirements for wetland protections could leave nearly all wetlands without Clean Water Act protections. Requirements in the new rule are not based in science, difficult to implement in practice and will create a dangerous lack of clarity.” 

Longtime Outer Banks politician Sen. Bobby Hanig, R-Currituck, has launched a campaign to represent northeastern North Carolina at the federal level.

“I’m proud to announce that I am running for the United States Congress and the 1st congressional seat of the great state of North Carolina,” Hanig said Wednesday morning on “Talk of the Town” with Henry Hinton, a radio show on TALK 96.3 & 103.7 FM and streamed YouTube. He made the announcement on his website and social media, as well.

Hanig is running for the state’s 1^st District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, which covers Bertie, Camden, Chowan, Currituck, Edgecombe, Gates, Granville, Greene, Halifax, Hertford, Lenoir, Martin, Nash, Northampton, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrrell, Vance, Warren, Washington, Wayne and Wilson counties.

So far, Hanig’s only opponent in the Republican primaries being held in March 2026 is Rocky Mount’s two-term mayor, Sandy Roberson. The winner of that race will face in the November 2026 election the incumbent Congressman Don Davis, a Democrat serving his second term representing the district, if Davis goes uncontested.

Hanig decided to run because “more people in North Carolina need someone that’s going to fight for their constituents and the ‘America First agenda,’ and we don’t have it,” he told Hinton, referring to the Trump administration’s plans under the reconciliation act passed in June.

Hanig is an Army veteran and small business owner in his second term in the North Carolina Senate. He represents District 1’s Bertie, Camden, Currituck, Dare, Gates, Hertford, Northampton, Pasquotank, Perquimans and Tyrrell counties until his term ends Dec. 31, 2026. Before becoming a senator, Hanig served two terms in the state House and as chairman for the Currituck County Board of Commissioners.

In a statement from his campaign Wednesday morning, Hanig said he is a “proven leader who has always been a fierce advocate for my constituents and our shared values and beliefs. I will continue that fight when I get to Washington. I believe in President Trump’s America First Agenda and my record in the legislature backs it up. I’ve cut taxes for North Carolina families, toughened border control in the state, stood up for life, and defended our Second Amendment rights.”

Hanig said during the radio interview with Hinton that he had decided to run before his very public fight against a proposed bill that would prevent shrimp trawling in state waters a few months ago.

“I love eastern North Carolina, and this is my home. These are my people. I’m blessed to do what I do. Serving in the General Assembly has been an absolute honor, privilege and just opportunity in the lifetime,” he said, adding what he thinks he’s learned from serving as a county commissioner and in the House and Senate “has brought me to this point, and I’m ready to move on to the next level and really give northeast North Carolina what they deserve, which is good leadership to protect our values, our heritage and our way of life.”

Part of a series about the effects federal budget and staff cuts and the cancellations of programs and services are having in coastal North Carolina.

MANTEO — In the six months since the chaotic and seemingly random cutting in the federal government began, a terrible uneasiness has descended on the northeast corner of North Carolina, where all of the state’s nine national wildlife refuges employ neighbors and family members who live in the rural communities in which they’re located.

At least 10 Coastal North Carolina National Wildlife Refuge Complex staff and five employees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s regional Ecological Services office in Raleigh, so far, are believed to have voluntarily left their jobs, whether nudged by coercion or incentives.

With staff forbidden to speak with media, and ongoing legal challenges and limited public information creating uncertainty, no one appears to know what will happen to their refuges.

“I just found out we should be getting some staffing numbers from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the next couple of weeks,” Howard Phillips, the Southeastern representative for the National Wildlife Refuge Association, a nonprofit advocacy and support group for the refuges, told Coastal Review, citing informed but unofficial sources. “The dust seems to be settling a little and (the agency) is starting to get a handle on where they stand.”

But Phillips, who retired at the end of 2020 as manager of Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge in Tyrrell County, says he fears that serious consequences are already baked into the refuges’ cake, no matter what the government decides to do. The lack of trust engendered by often abrupt, unexplained cuts of staff, research and budgets as well as the “crippling” brain drain of expertise, experience and local knowledge has only made the situation more problematic.

“Could the administration suddenly decide they want to hire everybody back and start doing conservation again?” he continued. “That would take at least six months, probably 12 months. They’d have to be trained.”

The stark reality, he added, is that without knowing the Trump administration’s timeline or goal in the current upheaval, it’s impossible to understand the long-term impacts and impractical to expect much to change, much less improve.

“I mean, they’ve just given no indication that they’re going to do anything that’s going to reverse the trend right now, which is down, down, down, down,” Phillips said.

An unnamed spokesperson from the agency’s public affairs office ignored Coastal Review’s request to authorize or facilitate a refuge staff interview, but responded to several questions about impacts on North Carolina’s wildlife refuges in a May 23 email.

“As part of the broader efforts led by the Department of the Interior under President Trump’s leadership, we are implementing necessary reforms to ensure fiscal responsibility, operational efficiency, and government accountability,” the spokesperson wrote. “While we do not comment on personnel matters, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service remains committed to fulfilling our mission of conserving fish, wildlife, and natural resources for the American people.” 

Refuges in the coastal complex encompass nearly a half-million acres of farmlands, swamp forests and pocosin peatlands, intersected by rivers, streams, canals, lakes and sounds within the nation’s second-largest estuarine system.

The nine refuges — Alligator River, Pea Island, Mackay Island, Currituck, Mattamuskeet, Pocosin Lakes, Cedar Island, Swan Quarter, Roanoke River — are stretched along vast swaths of geography in the coastal plain that provide habitat for unique species and globally important ecosystems.

For instance, the critically endangered wild red wolves, the only surviving in the world, roam within a five-county recovery area based out of Alligator River, descendants of Spanish mustangs range free in Currituck, and thousands of migratory birds and waterfowl passing along the Atlantic Flyway overwinter every year at Mattamuskeet and Pocosin Lakes.

Mattamuskeet, the state’s largest natural lake, is undergoing an innovative and intensive watershed restoration project many years in the planning. And Pocosin Lakes, named for the Native American term for “swamp on hill” because of its boggy peat soil, has been studied by Duke University researchers for its ability to remediate carbon pollution. The refuge has also nearly completed an extensive rewetting project to restore the ability of the pocosin peat to absorb carbon dioxide and resist wildfires.

Two major wildfires in and around the refuge in recent decades have burned deep in the ground for many weeks, spewing tons of carbon back into the environment, with one smoldering for six months before it was finally extinguished.

Therein lies the dilemma — and the risk — to the refuges: What happens when there’s no one available to take proper care of the refuges, and to even continue the conservation mission?

Pocosin Lakes, for instance, with the recent retirement of former manager Wendy Stanton, no longer has a refuge manager.

“You know, with Wendy gone now, I don’t know that there’s anybody left at Pocosin Lakes that really understands that hydrology restoration and how it works,” Phillips said.

But it’s more than the upper-level staff, said Bonnie Strawser, president of the Coastal Wildlife Refuge Society, a local nonprofit group that supports all of the eastern North Carolina refuges. It’s also the loss of staff that maintain buildings and trails, she said, as well as the biologists who monitor water and test soil.

Strawser, who retired in 2020 after 40 years with Fish and Wildlife as visitor services manager, said that the project leader for Coastal North Carolina National Wildlife Refuge Rebekah Martin has designated acting managers in each refuge, but that’s in addition to their regular jobs with the refuges.

Martin is based at the agency’s Roanoke Island headquarters but is not authorized to speak to reporters. According to a 2023 article on the coastal refuges website, Martin oversees about 400,000 acres of habitat with more than a dozen endangered or threatened species. At the time, it said, the complex had 35 employees and more than 400 volunteers.

“We are currently down to 10 staff, and this is regular O and M — operations and maintenance — funded by general funding, refuge funding,” Strawser said in a recent interview. “Now that does not include firefighters or law enforcement, because they are funded through different programs.”

Strawser said that there were no probationary employees in eastern North Carolina, so no one had been outright fired. Some staff who agreed to resign under one of the agency’s two rounds of the deferred resignation program, she said, were quickly shut down and put on administrative leave for varied periods of time while collecting their salaries.

Cuts in both the U.S. Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service will also hamper the agencies cooperative response to wildfires and disasters, including with the national interagency incident management teams. Strawser is a member of one of three teams in the southern area.

“I don’t know what in the world we’re going to do when fire season comes,” she said. “They stood down our team. It’s not going to be available, they said, at least until after July.”

As Strawser noted, a lot goes on behind the scenes to keep the refuges humming, including procedural processes to keep records and run programs, as well as have sponsors to maintain the “casual hire” personnel to respond to emergencies.

“But the Fish and Wildlife Service, because they lost so many people in the administrative positions, they don’t have anybody to handle the payments and the travel, so they can’t sponsor” for a team member, she said.

For the time being, the public many not notice much difference when they go to a refuge, Strawser said.

“The visitor centers are run by volunteers,” she said. “The public programs are conducted mostly by volunteers.” But there’s only three maintenance people for their nine national wildlife refuges.

“There’s been no talk of closing anything, but it’s just common sense there will problems if there’s nobody to grade the roads, if there’s nobody to do the mowing on the road shoulders, she said. “And if there’s no ‘daylighting’ of the roads, they’ll get overgrown, the sun won’t reach down, and the mud doesn’t dry out and the road is destabilized and before you know it, they’re not drivable.”

Mike Bryant, who was succeeded by Martin, had served as refuge manager for 20 years, from 1996 to 2016, and he witnessed decreasing support for the refuges from the federal government, he told Coastal Review in an interview. After retirement, he had also served as consultant for the National Wildlife Refuge Association, and was former president of the Coastal Wildlife Refuge Society. Although he said he keeps in touch, he is no longer directly involved with either group.

Since about 2010, Bryant said there has been a steady decline in staffing.

“You have refuges where there were multiple people, and with some of them, there’s just one person left, and so that’s part of the story,” he said. “So it had nothing to do with the past 60 or 90 days, whatever it is now.”

But it’s not just mandated reductions in staff that threaten the refuges, he said. The management challenge is also an aging workforce that may not be replaced.

“You got over half a million acres of National Wildlife Refuge in multiple counties, and spanning across North Carolina to the Virginia border, with all kinds of infrastructure and management mandates and no staff to get those mandates done,” Bryant said. “They’re just wondering, how are we going to meet our responsibilities if we’re the only ones left? It’s a morale buster.”

After being fully staffed around 2003, he said it seemed as if the Department of Interior stopped prioritizing conservation and Congress slowly began losing interest in supporting the refuges.

“The Fish and Wildlife budget has so many facets to it, so many other responsibilities under various laws, endangered species and ecological services and all these other entities within the agency, fisheries and all those things, are all important,” Bryant said. “But Congress was never convinced to budget specifically for operations and maintenance of national wildlife refuges.”

Meanwhile, scores of new refuges came on line in the last 25 years. And rather than hiring more personnel, more work was heaped on less staff.

“I was hired in 1996 to manage Alligator River and Pea Island,” Bryant said. “Two years later, when the manager left Mackey Island and Currituck refuges, the regional office called me and said, ‘Hey, we want you to manage those two.’ All of a sudden, I had four refuges.”

Two years later, he was told to hire and supervise a new manager at Pocosin Lakes. Then staff was reduced, forcing him to share staff between the refuges. Next, Roanoke River was added to his responsibilities — along with the 90-minute drive each way. During all those years, he was bumped up just one pay grade.

Bryant said he gets why people get frustrated with the inefficient, cumbersome aspects of the federal government. But he remembers back when the Clinton administration had reduced both staffing and regulations, and not only succeeded, but ended up with a balanced budget.

“We went through all of those things without ever feeling like the sky is falling,” he said. Rather than taking rational steps to achieve efficiency, the interest now seems more in “just destroying the government, constantly degrading it, and yes, crafting corruption.”

“There’s a few bad actors, no doubt, always, in every organization everywhere, no matter what the enterprise,” Bryant added. “There was a rational process to deal with bad employees, grounded in policy. And the policy was grounded in regulation, and the regulation was grounded in law.”

The first official unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System was Pelican Island in Florida, established for conservation in 1903 by President Theodore Roosevelt. Today there are 570 refuges and 30 wetland management districts on more than 150 million acres entrusted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and enjoyed by 69 million visitors.

Bryant is rooting for not just survival of the struggling refuge system, but its revival.

“I think we’ll recover,” he said. “I’m optimistic about that. But we’ll be deeply scarred.”

Guest Commentary

To stimulate discussion and debate, Coastal Review welcomes differing viewpoints on topical coastal issues. 

Toxic exposure is a common occurrence in the military, affecting thousands of veterans, many years after service. Thus, providing compensation and free healthcare is a federal obligation to those who have served their country. Nevertheless, up to 2022, only a few diseases were presumed to be connected with military operations.

For most veterans, receiving compensation meant undergoing an extensive bureaucratic process to demonstrate exposure and prove causality in the development of their condition. With the implementation of the PACT Act, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) recognized more than 20 diseases as presumably caused by toxic exposure during service. However, while this list is constantly expanding, the list of toxic agents for which a presumption of causality exists under the PACT Act remained the same. This leads to paradoxical situations, where some veterans receive compensation while others still need to prove causality, albeit these people suffer from the same conditions.

VOCs’ toxicity and military exposure

Volatile Organic Compounds, or VOCs, are among the toxic agents that are only partially recognized by the PACT Act. These chemicals are common in industrial solvents, degreasers, and cleaners, as well as jet fuel, adhesives, and certain paints and coatings. Given their properties, VOCs such as trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCE) were extensively used by the U.S. military for decades in equipment maintenance, aircraft cleaning, and parts degreasing.

Although very efficient in these operations, VOCs quickly turn from liquids or solids into vapor, leading to a high probability of being inhaled by personnel operating with these substances. TCE and PCE are classified as chlorinated solvents, widely used in degreasing and cleaning metal parts. These substances present significant risks not only for military staff using them, but also for their families and local communities due to improper storage and leakage in and around military sites.

There is a strong body of literature built from epidemiological studies and research on human and animal models demonstrating that TCE has carcinogenic effects in various tissues, including kidneys, lungs, liver, testicles, and stomach. These effects are observed either as a result of ingestion or inhalation. Noncarcinogenic effects have also been reported for TCE, with serious effects in neural and cardiac tissue. Similar effects are observed in PCE exposure, indicating a strong potential for carcinogenic effects. Notably, PCE’s impact on neural tissue demonstrates stronger neurotoxicity, especially in children, where exposure is associated with reduced cognitive capacity.

To date, the Department of Defense (DoD) recognizes contamination with VOCs, for which compensation is provided, only in relation to contamination from Agent Orange, a pesticide used in Vietnam, burn pits, and Camp Lejeune. Although various other military bases are recognized to have VOCs pollution, affecting both veterans and their families, these areas are not considered part of presumptive toxic contact. Pressure from the public and extensive investigations carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) forced the DoD to recognize Camp Lejeune as a site of exposure to dangerous VOCs, including TCE and PCE. Similar pressure may thus be necessary to have all sites recognized by expanding the PACT Act list of toxic agents impacting veterans for years on end.

Exposure in North Carolina veterans

More than 620.000 veterans live in North Carolina and many of them have been directly impacted by VOCs exposure while working for the military. Camp Lejeune is now a well-known documented site where veterans and their families suffered long-term health effects due to prolonged exposure to toxic chemicals in the water supply. At the time when contamination was documented here, increased media attention and pressure from the civic society led to the creation of a compensation fund for those affected. Today, exposure at Camp Lejeune is valid for automatic compensation under the PACT Act.

While support is offered for those affected at this site, many other locations in North Carolina are known to be contaminated. For example, the Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point is currently under monitoring by the EPA, while PFAS levels here measured in 2024 exceed EPA’s new recommended limits of 4 parts per trillion in drinking water more than three times. Despite clear evidence of environmental risk, sites such as these remain excluded from presumptive coverage and lack VOCs monitoring and impact assessments. 

VA pressures, funding, procedural inconsistencies

Since 2022, the VA has processed over 1.7 million claims and granted more than 6.8 billion in compensation to veterans and their families. The costs of this program are therefore substantial. Any new agent introduced on the toxic list will likely increase these costs. Yet for any agent dismissed, thousands of veterans’ claims are denied, even following long battles to demonstrate causality. This is far from a just representation of how the VA’s mission aligns with supporting and protecting former military personnel.

Recognizing the full scope of toxic exposures, including compounds such as TCE and PCE, is essential to ensuring equitable access to benefits for all veterans and removing inconsistencies from this system. With the EPA’s recent ban on TCE and PCE, the continued lack of recognition by the DoD may become increasingly difficult to justify. As scientific evidence continues to demonstrate the health risks associated with VOCs, expanding the list of recognized agents would represent a necessary and evidence-based step toward improving the integrity and fairness of the veterans’ compensation system.

Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of Coastal Review or our publisher, the North Carolina Coastal Federation.

Part of a series about the effects federal budget and staff cuts and the cancellations of programs and services are having in coastal North Carolina.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency, speaking Wednesday during a Senate budget hearing in Washington, D.C., dismissed reports that the agency was weakening standards on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also called “forever chemicals.”

During questioning by the chair and ranking member, respectively, Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin told the Senate Appropriations Committee that news reports about the EPA weakening PFAS were inaccurate and that the standards could instead get tougher. Zeldin said expected job cuts at the agency would not impact its work.

The senators said they were concerned about the EPA’s reductions in force, or RIFs, and its ability to meet commitments made earlier this year about tackling the compounds in soils and waters.

Related: Proposed state rules on discharges defanged as EPA retreats

Murkowski noted that the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, which oversees EPA funding, frequently discusses PFAS.

“Last month, you announced that EPA will, quote, ‘tackle PFAS from all of EPA’s program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable and providing certainty for passive receivers. You said this was just the beginning of the work that EPA is going to do to tackle PFAs,” she said.

She asked Zeldin whether the EPA’s operating plan budget requests “actually reflect this kind of full-forward push on PFAS and whether it includes the $10 billion that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding provided to take on PFAS contamination.”

Zeldin replied that the EPA was “actually adding people” to its Office of Water, which he said does much of the agency’s work on PFAS. But Murkowski pressed further on the announced RIFs deferred resignations and how they would affect EPA’s ability to execute the plan.

“When I was in Congress, I was a member of the PFAS Task Force. I had voted for the PFAS Action Act. When I was a member of the House, I represented the district that had all sorts of different PFAS contamination issues,” said Zeldin.

Merkley did not appear swayed. He said rough counts showed EPA had lost about 400 people, who were fired within their first year, 560 in the first round of deferred resignations, 180  in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility jobs who were RIF’ed. Another 1,129 exited via second round of deferred resignations, with 1,800 of opt-ins.

“Now we’re up to almost 3,000,” Merkley said. “Office of R and D, it’s rumored that would reduce to 500 positions, which would be a loss of 1,300 additional — now we’re at 4,300. I’ll just point out that for two decades, the level of employment at EPA was about 17,000. Right now, it’s about 14,000, so subtracting the numbers I just shared, we’re talking about more than 4,000 reduction from that.”

He said cutting further to the expected number of 10,000 employees “raises doubts” the agency can meet its own goals.

“It sounds like it’s at odds with your commitment to tackling PFAS and I’m concerned about the numbers,” Merkley said to Zeldin.

Zeldin responded that it was apparent that the question was in response to a news story.

“It might not come as a shock to you, but sometimes the news says stuff that’s not accurate,” Zeldin said. “That is not what the agency announced. As it relates to PFOA and PFAS, you said that we were weakening the standards, and that’s actually the opposite of what the agency actually announced.”

Zeldin said “there was an issue” pertaining to four compounds, “and that’s something that we are going to be going through a process, but that doesn’t mean that the that it gets weaker. The (maximum concentration) might end up getting lower, not higher.”

Merkley entered for the record the Washington Post story with the headline: “EPA plans to weaken rule curbing forever chemicals in drinking water.”

Zeldin said he would “encourage the committee to look at the actual announcement from EPA, as opposed to the Washington Post.”

Guest Commentary

To stimulate discussion and debate, Coastal Review welcomes differing viewpoints on topical coastal issues. 

The Outer Banks is known for its beautiful coastline and rich ecosystems, drawing millions of visitors each year. Millions of dollars in tax and business revenue are collected as a result. Unfortunately, beach erosion poses a significant challenge to homeowners, business owners and vacationers along the barrier islands, particularly those in Rodanthe. Last year, the community lost seven oceanfront homes, a record high and an indicator of a worsening problem.

Beach erosion, which has occurred for millions of years, is the defined result of changing sea levels, currents, wind patterns, and severe weather events. In fact, the Outer Banks would not exist if not for this natural process. However, erosion is consuming as much as 15 feet of shoreline each year along the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

To preserve structures in place, federal, state, and local governments have launched coordinated responses, investing heavily in beach nourishment, inlet relocation, and terminal groin projects in a race against the sea. To put the severity of this issue into perspective, a 2020 review by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s (NC DEQ) Division of Coastal Management found that nearly 9,000 oceanfront structures are at risk.

Despite the growing problem, many property owners are forced to wait until their home collapses before they can file a claim through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Shoreline erosion damages are excluded from standard homeowners’ insurance, and the NFIP only covers flood-related damages, creating confusion and prohibiting proactive planning.

That is why I introduced the Preventing Environmental Hazards Act, a commonsense bill to address the unfortunate reality of beach erosion coastal homeowners face. The bipartisan legislation would authorize NFIP compensation for structures condemned due to chronic erosion or unusual flooding and allow advance payouts for demolition or relocation of up to 40% of the home’s value, capped at $250,000 – the same terms as current NFIP policy. The purpose here is to use the money to remove the structure before it collapses, rather than wait until it creates an environmental disaster.

As erosion continues to accelerate, thousands of homes across the Outer Banks are at severe risk of being swept away by the sea. Additionally, when a home collapses, debris can spread up to fifteen miles along the coast, contaminating groundwater through failing septic systems, harming aquatic species, shorebirds, and their habitats, posing safety risks to beach visitors, and creating other serious environmental hazards. Our coastal communities cannot afford a delay any longer for proactive solutions to address these challenges.

Since coming to Congress, I have worked tirelessly to address the challenges created by our shifting shoreline, meeting regularly with local officials, representatives from NC DEQ, and the National Park Service. It is a privilege and a top priority of mine to secure federal funding to help cover the cost of projects to protect our beach communities. However, mitigation programs intended to protect threatened homes are often slow, suboptimal, and difficult to access. Advance NFIP payouts will empower homeowners by providing flexibility to prepare for or recover from natural disasters while at the same time mitigating risks to beachgoers and mariners.

Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of Coastal Review or our publisher, the North Carolina Coastal Federation.

Before Hurricane Helene devastated parts of western North Carolina and Hurricane Milton charged across Florida, Brunswick County commissioners were raising concerns about the federal government’s depleted disaster relief funding.

One week after an unnamed storm dumped more than 16 inches of rain last month on parts of the county, commissioners adopted a resolution “unequivocally” supporting Congress fully fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster relief fund and replenish the more than $6.1 billion the agency was forced to transition to immediate needs funding.

When immediate needs funding goes into effect, funding for nonlifesaving and life-sustaining projects is put on hold so that the agency can get critical supplies like food, water and generators to communities in the wake of a natural disaster.

But the funding shift also creates a backlog in aid to local governments awaiting long-term disaster relief aid, which places “an undue burden on disaster survivors and local governments, and complicates already onerous programs with many counties relying on loans to cover recovery costs,” according to Brunswick’s resolution.

Congress in late September provided $20 billion for the disaster relief fund as part of a short-term spending bill to fund the government through Dec. 20 and, on Sept. 30, FEMA lifted the immediate needs funding status.

But, unless Congress acts this month, FEMA will likely have to reenact that funding.

The $20 billion Congress allocated to the disaster relief fund last month pales in comparison to the latest damage cost assessment from Hurricane Helene, a storm data analytics company CoreLogic estimates to range between $30.5 billion and $47.5 billion.

Hurricane Milton’s destructive path across an already hurricane-battered Florida is expected to rack up tens of billions more in damage.

“You’ve got to remember, there’s still a long line of disasters that happened before Oct. 1 that need to be paid for and so that fund is going to be depleted quickly,” said Brunswick County Commissioner Chair Randy Thompson, referring to the start of the federal fiscal year. “My guess is that fund is going to, once they start working on this disaster, it’s probably going to end up impacting it considerably to the point of it may put them right back in the same situation that they were in almost immediately.”

Thompson was speaking with Coastal Review by telephone Oct. 2 from somewhere in Avery County, one of the areas pummeled by Hurricane Helene when the storm swept up the Gulf Coast into Florida’s Big Bend north through western North Carolina.

He is chief executive officer of Thompson Disaster Recovery Associates Inc., a consulting firm that provides services to local, state and federal agencies. He had already been to three counties in the western part of the state, which suffered unprecedented flooding caused by Helene’s rains, when he was reached by phone.

“I have never seen anything like this,” he said. “There’ll be recovery, but this is a life-changer. I’m not sure what things will look like for a long time.”

As of Oct. 10, the death toll from Helene had risen to at least 230 across six states, including 88 confirmed in North Carolina.

On the same day Thompson spoke with Coastal Review, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced that FEMA could meet immediate needs, but that the agency does not have enough funding to last through hurricane season, which ends Nov. 30.

In an Oct. 1 letter, several congressional leaders, including Senators Thom Tillis and Ted Budd from North Carolina, suggested Congress meet before both chambers are to return to session next month.

“Although the true level of devastation is still unfolding, it is clear that Congress must act to meet the unmet needs in our states and address the scope and scale of destruction experienced by our constituents,” the letter states, referring to Hurricane Helene. “This may even require Congress to come back in October to ensure we have enough time to enact legislation before the end of this calendar year.”

In a White House press briefing Thursday afternoon, Mayorkas, speaking via video conference from western North Carolina, said FEMA will be able to provide immediate needs relief to recent hurricane-battered areas.

“When Congress returns we will need them to act quickly to appropriately fund the disaster relief fund, upon which FEMA relies to deliver assistance to people after extreme weather events,” he said. “And so, we can meet the immediate needs, we will need funding, very rapidly.”

Erin Greten, a lawyer who provides counsel on disaster response and recovery assistance laws with Washington-based firm Baker Donelson, P.C., said in an email response to Coastal Review’s questions that if Congress does not act quickly, FEMA is likely to impose immediate needs funding, or INF, restrictions “again soon.”

“Congress is long overdue on passing a disaster supplemental to help FEMA support the costs of recent large events,” Greten said. “If Congress fails to act quickly, and FEMA is forced to re-enact INF restrictions, communities who rely on FEMA for their recovery will suffer.”

FEMA public assistance grants, for example, are reimbursement grants, which means an applicant has to submit a request for reimbursement after it has paid for the work.

“Most applicants do not have funds available to advance the funding necessary to perform the work without incurring debt,” Greten said. “If Congress fails to sufficiently fund the (disaster relief fund) and FEMA is required to apply INF restrictions, FEMA will halt reimbursements for permanent facility repairs and replacements, causing communities to accrue unnecessary financing costs through no fault of their own.”

Thompson said when counties and local governments pull money from their fund balances to meet emergency needs, they rely on federal reimbursement.

At the time this report was published, Brunswick County had not received a federal or state declaration for damage caused by the unnamed storm that flooded properties and washed out well-traveled bridges and roads.

As Brunswick recovers from the hit it took from the unnamed storm last month, the county has received numerous calls and questions from residents there about how they can help provide aid to fellow North Carolinians in the western part of the state, according to the county’s website.

The county estimates it has spent about $2.8 million directly related to the storm, including damages to county property, “and that insurance will not likely cover,” according to information provided by Brunswick County Communications Director Meagan Kascsak.

“However, this number is subject to change as we are still assessing expenditures from the storm,” she wrote.

Under a federal declaration, FEMA reimburses 75% of the total cost, Thompson explained. North Carolina has historically provided a 25% match.

“That part of it is something that is extremely important, but if you don’t get assistance and payback from FEMA and if it’s extended over long periods of time it actually could hurt the local government in their preparation of having a fund balance to be able to address immediate needs as they come up,” Thompson said. “This is huge for everybody and for us to pick it up as a local jurisdiction, this is something that impacts the nation, not just little Brunswick County.”

New Hanover County beaches could again mine sand from nearby inlets to nourish their oceanfront shores under a proposed law recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives.

The bill would exempt a handful of federal coastal storm risk management projects on the East Coast from a rule that prohibits local governments from tapping sand sources they have historically used within the Coastal Barrier Resources System.

The proposed law would apply only to projects that have been pumping sand from borrow sources within the federally protected system for more than 15 years. Those include Masonboro Island at Wrightsville Beach, Carolina Beach Inlet at Carolina Beach, an inlet in South Carolina and one in New Jersey.

H.R. 524, introduced by Rep. David Rouzer, R-N.C., in January 2023, would also return the use of federal funds for projects that use sand within a Coastal Barrier Resources Act, or CBRA, unit to nourish adjacent beaches outside of the system.

“This legislation allows these beaches to continue to use their historic borrow sites for protection from storm damage, maintain their natural ecosystems, and protect our local economy,” Rouzer stated in a press release following the House’s April 11 passage of the bill.

The bill is now with the Senate environment and public works committee.

Proponents of the bill argue that allowing projects that had for years used sand within the system to nourish nearby beaches reduces costs and ecological impacts.

“It’s an opportunity to recycle sand. It’s an opportunity to reduce potential environmental impacts. And, it’s an opportunity to reduce federal and local expenditures,” said New Hanover County Shore Protection Coordinator Layton Bedsole. “I think Wilmington had been in compliance 20 years before CBRA was written and we haven’t encouraged development in sensitive coastal locations like inlet shoulders. That’s a major tenant in CBRA.”

Congress passed CBRA, pronounced “cobra,” in 1982 to discourage building on relatively undeveloped, storm-prone barrier islands by cutting off federal funding and financial assistance, including federal flood insurance. The act was also established to minimize damage to fish, wildlife and other resources associated with coastal barrier islands.

Last May, Matthew Strickler, deputy assistant secretary for the Interior Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Parks, expressed the current administration’s objections to H.R. 524 in his testimony before the House natural resources committee.

Using federal funds to move sand dredged within the system to an area outside of it “is considered counter to CBRA’s purposes,” he said referring to the Coastal Barrier Resource System, or CBRS.

“While some of the sand taken from CBRS units for beach renourishment activities may return to the unit over time, the overall impacts of dredging in these areas protected by CBRA are detrimental to coastal species and their habitats,” Strickler said.

But proponents of the bill argue that years of monitoring these inlets prove otherwise.

“We’re in a situation where Mother Nature brings sand down our beach into an engineered borrow site and then we recycle it back up on the beach in the next three or four years. That’s ideal. We’re recycling rather than mining. We’ve got consistency that works for us that we can work with,” Bedsole said.

December 2023: Sand nourishment to begin in Wrightsville Beach

Wrightsville Beach was using the rich, beach-quality sand routinely pumped from Banks Channel and placing that material on its ocean shore for roughly two decades before CBRA was enacted.

In the mid-1990s, the Army Corps of Engineers permanently allowed the town to use Masonboro Inlet as a sand borrow source, shielding the town from ongoing debates over the interpretation of the law as it pertains to whether sand within a CBRS unit may be dredged and placed onto a beach outside of a CBRA zone.

By 2019, then-Interior Secretary David Bernhardt determined that federal funds could be used to pay for dredging sand with CBRS units and placing that sand on beaches outside of those zones for shoreline-stabilization projects.

A year later, the National Audubon Society challenged Bernhardt’s interpretation in a lawsuit filed against the former secretary, the interior department and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The organization argued the interpretation “vastly expands potential sand mining projects” within areas protected in the system.

The Biden administration overturned the rule in 2021 and Audubon agreed to drop its lawsuit.

The new interpretation forced beach towns that had historically used sand from CBRA zones to look offshore.

Facing exponentially higher costs and an offshore borrow site scattered with old tires broken free from an artificial reef, the town was given an emergency exception by the Corps to get sand from the inlet. That project, which pumped roughly 1.04 million cubic yards of sand onto Wrightsville’s beach, wrapped in mid-March.

The cost to use sand dredged from the inlets is substantially lower than pumping sand from an offshore borrow site.

The last time Carolina Beach tapped the inlet borrow site for sand to place on its ocean shoreline the bid tab was $5 a yard.

“The current project came from the offshore borrow area, as it has, was $11 and some change a yard,” Bedsole said. “It just costs more to go offshore.”

Bids are expected to go out this spring for Carolina and Kure beaches’ nourishment projects, which as of now will use sand from an offshore borrow site.

How that sand might affect the channel Carolina Beach used for years as a sand source has raised concerns among beach town officials.

“We have pulled sand out of that inlet for pretty much my entire life,” said Carolina Beach Mayor Lynn Barbee. “We know what the environmental impacts are. They’re very minimal. We haven’t seen any sort of erosion because of taking that out of there. We haven’t seen any impacts to wildlife, ever, so it’s hard to see what the harm is. What we’ve been doing in the inlet is the borrow pit fills up and we pump that sand out every three years onto the beach and then it drifts back in and fills up and we pump it back out. That seems intuitively better than going out offshore and basically running a sand mine underwater and disturbing what was natural out there.”

Another issue, he said, is how sand pumped onto the beach from the offshore site may affect the inlet, one heavily used by boaters and offers the fastest route for first responders to get into the water.

Barbee said the town has seen “unprecedented” shoaling in Carolina Beach Inlet since it began using the offshore borrow site.

“We have really struggled to keep that open,” he said. “We’ve seen the cost to keep the inlet open go up. If in fact our theory is correct, where else would that sand have come from if it wasn’t introduced from the offshore borrow pit. You’re introducing a new sand source into the traditional system. Certainly, anecdotally, we didn’t have this problem, we do something different, now we do have the problem. It doesn’t seem like it’s a huge leap.”

Barbee said the hope is that the bill will become law before the next project begins.

“If not, we have three more years of these elevated costs, and then we’re just putting more and more sand in the system, and the worry is that when does it become too much?” he said.

The nation’s wildlife refuges have taken a federal funding cut that is expected to shutter more visitors’ centers, diminish wildlife management capabilities and further trim an already wafer-thin force of wildlife officers.

With just hours looming before a government shutdown, the Senate on Friday approved a resolution to fund about 30% of the federal government through Sept. 30.

President Biden on Saturday signed H.R. 4366, a short-term measure that keeps government agencies open and operating for now.

But officials worry how a $14 million cut to the nation’s wildlife refuges will further hurt that system’s resources that are already stretched to the limit, particularly at a time when managing natural lands is gaining recognition as a way to adapt to climate change in some areas of the country, including here in North Carolina’s coastal region.

Mike Leahy, National Wildlife Federation’s senior director of wildlife, hunting and fishing policy, told Coastal Review last week the deep funding cut was unexpected, but not necessarily a surprise.

“We were hoping for at least flat,” he said Thursday. “But for them to take a 2.6% cut when we’re already heavily underfunded is going to create additional problems.”

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has operated the system for years with pared-back staff, leaning on volunteers and partners to help with the management of refuges, “but they can only do so much,” Leahy said.

“I think you’re looking at visitor centers that will either continue to be closed or operating on limited hours or be closed if they have been open. You’re looking at less habitat, which is the whole purpose of the refuge system, and certainly less law enforcement and monitoring of refuges,” he said.

About seven states currently have refuges that do not have wildlife officers.

Since 2010, the refuge system has lost 16% of its employees, or about 800 people, leaving about 2,500 to operate and manage 95 million acres spread throughout all 50 states. The system also includes 755 million acres of marine refuges.

In comparison, the National Park Service holds 85 million acres and operates on a budget of more than $4 billion with more than 29,000 full-time-equivalent employees, according to information Leahy provided.

“This is really about long-term elevation of the refuge system and meeting its needs,” he said. “We recognize it was all Congress could do this year to fund the government at all, so we’re happy the refuge system is getting funding along with other federal land and conservation programs. But, long term, the refuge system tends to get overlooked, forgotten and doesn’t have the same support within Congress and the public as the National Park system, for example, which are super important and terrific, but the refuges play a really important role too.”

Refuges – there are more than 550 – are targeted toward the needs of wildlife species and are protected areas utilized to maintain and recover endangered species and provide havens for migratory birds and waterfowl.

Refuges are public lands that may be used for hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental education and interpretation.

They are in rural areas, and sometimes hard to reach, like the 19.6 million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, as well as urban areas within 25 miles of cities with a population of 250,000 or more.

North Carolina is home to nearly a dozen refuges, most of which are located in the mid- to northern coastal plain.

But faced predominately over the past several years with a budget that is either flatlined or reduced, refuges in this state have had their share of woes.

Budget cuts several years ago forced the temporary closure to the public of the Walter B. Jones Sr. Center for the Sounds at the 110,000-acre Pocosin Lakes Wildlife Refuge. The Red Wolf Education and Health Care Facility was also shuttered for a time.

“That’s atrocious that the public lands and public assets held by all North Carolinians and Americans were closed,” North Carolina Wildlife Federation CEO Tim Gestwicki said.

Gestwicki said he was “mad as hell” about the cuts to the refuge system, particularly in the face of a system that is seeing an uptick in visitors and one that he said is important to climate vulnerable coastal areas of the state.

“It’s some people in Washington that are looking at a ledger sheet and saying, “Oh, let’s cut here, let’s cut here,’ with no idea what those ramifications are,” he said. “Why the Fish and Wildlife Service continues to be on the low end of the totem pole of these other public agencies is kind of a mystery since they’re the only agency that has the mandate to oversee wildlife species and can expand wildlife refuges. Misguided, misguided, misguided.”

North Carolina is home to about 500 different species of greatest conservation need, which are those species of declining or rare populations, that need help recovering in order to keep them from being state or federally listed.

Gestwicki said the refuges in the state’s coastal region are the gatekeepers of climate change and rising seas, particularly since state legislators last year adopted a bill that strips protections for an estimated 2.5 million acres of isolated wetlands.

Isolated wetlands, which include Carolina bays and pocosins, are not directly connected to any body of water, but are hydrologically and ecologically valuable because they recharge groundwater and can store vast amounts of water during coastal storms.

“Nobody’s going to be filling up wetlands in our wildlife refuges,” Gestwicki said. “(Refuges) are places for our citizens to hunt, fish, enjoy wildlife and, more importantly these days, to reap the ecological benefits of these public lands.”

Natural lands like those in refuges have been highlighted in the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s recently released Priority Climate Action Plan, which identifies natural and working lands as places that can permanently store atmospheric carbon and substantially offset greenhouse gas emissions.

Gestwicki said the budget decrease will leave roads in some of the refuges in disrepair, habitat restoration projects pushed aside, cut back on monitoring of some species, and affect law enforcement.

“I don’t know how many of the visitor centers can remain open,” he said. “I don’t know how much of the statutory duties can well be accomplished. You can only squeeze, squeeze, squeeze. I can tell you that the numbers (of visitors) are expanding, but I can also tell you that if visitor centers are closed, if roads are closed, if commodes are stopped up, that diminishes the experience dramatically. This is our big backyard and stewarding these resources, stewarding these assets is the responsibility of Congress and what Congress is showing us is a direct opposite of stewarding. They’re cutting that and that’s a slap in the face, in my opinion, to the American people and the taxpayers.”

A coastal North Carolina fisherman who died this week in a boating accident was honored Friday in the House of Representatives.

Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., rose during the morning session to remember the life of Chad Dunn, 36, who died Sunday in a boating accident in Oregon Inlet. Also killed in the accident were 65-year-old Capt. Charlie Griffin. Coast Guard officials said the pair departed from Virginia Beach and were enroute to Pirate’s Cove Marina in Manteo for repairs.

“He was taken far too soon,” Murphy said. “As a member of the fishing community, Chad was beloved by those who knew him as well as his passion for the sea. Whether casting lines into the oceans depths or navigating tumultuous waters of life, Chad approached every challenge with courage and grace.”

Murphy said that while the sea may have claimed Dunn’s physical existence, “his spirit remains in our hearts, our minds, especially those in the boating community and fishing community of Oregon Inlet and the Outer Banks. I pray that God brings peace to his loved ones in this very difficult time.”

At the time Dunn and Griffin were reported missing, visibility was a little over half a mile, seas at 4 to 6 feet and winds of 10-15 knots, Coast Guard officials said.

Published in collaboration with WOBX and Island Free Press.

Update Oct. 2: The U.S. House and Senate have approved a continuing resolution that funds federal government operations through Nov. 17, according to the Oct. 1 Island Free Press update.

President Biden signed the bill into law prior to the end of the fiscal year on Saturday night that, among other things, puts on hold a potential closure of the three national parks located on the Outer Banks.

Original Story “National Park Service plans unclear as shutdown looms” published Friday:

The timing for a shutdown couldn’t be worse for visitors and locals who enjoy the activities available at the National Park Service Outer Banks Group’s three parks: Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Wright Brothers National Memorial and Fort Raleigh National Historic Site.

It would be the third shuttering of most federal government operations in the last decade.

National Park Service officials have not been able to comment on what their plans are if the shutdown happens starting Sunday morning.

The Department of the Interior’s preparations for a shutdown are not available online, as The White House webpage link is to a plan dating back to 2017.

With no federal government spending plan or continuing resolution in place, parks would lack the regular funds used for daily operations, NC Newsline reports.

The National Park Service furloughed about seven out of every eight workers during shutdowns in October 2013 and December 2018-January 2019, according to a report last week from the Congressional Research Service.

But the Interior Department took different approaches to visitor access in each shutdown under presidents of different parties.

In 2013, under Democratic President Barack Obama, the three parks facilities were shuttered and visitors told to leave during the partial government shutdown that lasted 16 days.

That full closure happened when the fall fishing season was in high gear and large numbers of sea turtle nests were inside their hatch windows from Coquina Beach to Ocracoke Inlet. Concessionaires like Avon Pier and Oregon Inlet Fishing Center were initially not allowed to operate, but reopened two weeks later.

Park roads to the Cape Hatteras and Bodie Island lighthouses, beach access parking areas and off-road vehicle ramps were blocked. The First Flight, Billy Mitchell and Ocracoke airstrips were shut down.

The closure spurred a protest in Buxton, with 100 to 150 people marching from N.C. 12 to the old Cape Hatteras Lighthouse site.

Nationally, the 16-day 2013 shutdown resulted in a loss of $2.4 million to the Outer Banks economy alone, according to a 2014 NPS report cited by the Congressional Research Service.

In 2018 and 2019, under Republican President Donald Trump, most parks remained at least partially open with services reduced. In part, that approach relied on visitor fees, which an independent federal oversight agency said was likely illegal.

But the gates were still closed to areas like the Wright Brothers National Memorial, but that didn’t stop visitors from trying to access the grounds in Kill Devil Hills.

Vehicles filled the entrance gate area along U.S. 158 on the first day before cones were put in place to block the driveway.

That shutdown lasted 35 days and was over December and January, when visitor levels are usually at their lowest. Seven to 10 staff members, mainly law enforcement rangers, of the National Park Service’s 90 total employees in the Outer Banks Group were working intermittently, while all other personnel were furloughed.

It was marked by vandalism and trash piling up at parks across the country, as well as incidents of people illegally driving on the Cape Hatteras National Seashore beaches, illegal camping on the beach, and isolated damage to facilities.

Volunteers coordinated by the North Carolina Beach Buggy Association emptied trash cans and pick up litter in the national seashore.

Outer Banks residents, businesses, civic organizations and local governments stepped in to help Park Service, U.S. Coast Guard and other federal workers who lost their primary source of income. The Town of Manteo waved late fees on utilities and other payments, and local restaurants offered free meals and food pantries extended hours.

The shutdown delayed several projects that had been planned for 2019 in the parks. But it did not slow visitation that year, which set a new record that has since been eclipsed.

N.C. Newsline reports that U.S. Sen. John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that has jurisdiction over the Park Service, wrote to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland last week asking to use visitor fees to cover operational costs during a shutdown.

The NPS used fees collected under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act to keep parks open to visitors during the last shutdown and could do so again, he said.

“Your judicious use of FLREA fees will protect the millions of people who plan and save for trips to these special places, ensure that gateway communities that rely on park visitation for jobs and economic stabilities do not needless suffer, and sustain the dedicate National Park Service employees who rely on a regular paycheck,” Barrasso wrote.

But the Trump administration’s use of those funds was illegal, the Government Accountability Office found, as those fees were supposed to be used for other purposes.

So if Congress decides not to act before Saturday night, and at least come up with a temporary solution, there’s a good chance the chains will be up at the ramps and the doors locked on the bathrooms at the Outer Banks’ national parks when the sun rises Sunday morning.

Coastal Review collaborates with Island Free Press and WOBX to provide readers important news of the North Carolina coast.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., introduced a bill Thursday to honor six Carteret County residents who were among the eight who died in a plane crash last year.

The crash Feb. 13, 2022, took the lives of four adults and four East Carteret High School students, including Down East natives Noah Styron, 15; Hunter Parks, 45; Jonathan “Kole” McInnis, 15; Stephanie Fulcher, 42; Jacob “Jake” Taylor, 16; and Michael “Daily” Shepherd, 15. Pilot Ernest “Teen” Rawls and his son Jeffrey Rawls also died in the crash near Drum Inlet.

Families and friends of the victims had posted signs of remembrance on the waterways near Atlantic in Carteret County in August, the Carteret County News-Times reported at the time. Murphy’s Down East Remembrance Act sets the exact coordinates of six creeks on federal land and renames them after the six Down East victims.

Related: Down East shares grief, strength after tragedy

“Last year, Eastern North Carolina was struck by a horrible tragedy. One year later, we look to immortalize the six Down East victims so that they will never be forgotten,” Murphy said in a statement. “While I cannot imagine the immense pain their families are still feeling, it is my hope that this bill will bring some consolation and closure. I am grateful for my colleagues in the North Carolina delegation for joining me in this effort.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., joined by Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., are to introduce in the Senate a companion bill.

“Eastern Carolina continues to grieve the victims lost in the tragic plane crash last year,” said Tillis in a statement. “I am proud to introduce legislation to name creeks in honor of the North Carolinians who lost their lives on that fateful day. I thank Congressman Murphy for his leadership in this effort and hope my colleagues will take swift action to take up and pass this legislation.”

Reprinted from Carolina Public Press

North Carolinians know, finally, what political maps they will use to elect representatives to the U.S. House in 2022. 

On Monday evening, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request from state Republican legislative leadership to stop an order from state courts from going into effect. 

North Carolina will go forward with its primary elections on May 17, the candidate filing period that completed on Friday will stand, and a map that a panel of trial court judges drew will be used to elect the state’s 14 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, but only for this year’s election.  

Three conservative justices, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, dissented and wrote they would have stopped that map from being used, instead reverting to the map the state Supreme Court declared an unconstitutional gerrymander and which would have all but guaranteed Republicans at least 10 of the state’s seats in the U.S. House. 

The congressional maps in use for 2022 are most likely to result in seven Republican seats, six Democratic seats and one toss-up seat, according to the data of how voters in each district voted in previous elections. 

“Today’s move by the court reinforces that legislatures do not have a ‘free pass’ to violate protections against partisan gerrymandering when drawing districts that undeniably hurt voters,” said Hilary Harris Klein, a voting rights lawyer at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, which represents one of the plaintiffs, good-governance group Common Cause, in the lawsuit. 

Not over yet, maybe

A fourth conservative justice, Brett Kavanaugh, agreed that state Republicans’ arguments were strong but said it would be too disruptive for the federal courts to intervene this close to an election. 

“The issue is almost certain to keep arising until the Court definitively resolves it,” Kavanaugh wrote in his concurrence. 

Republicans may still get that chance, just not as soon as they would have liked. Kavanaugh suggested the case, or one raising similar constitutional questions, should be taken up for consideration in the next judicial term, which will get underway in the fall. 

In a press release Monday, N.C. Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger suggested state Republican leadership may do just that. 

“While we’re focusing on the 2022 elections, we will continue to evaluate this decision and next steps in this case,” Berger said. 

Berger, along with House Speaker Tim Moore and other Republicans responsible for drawing the state’s political maps, were the defendants in the redistricting lawsuits. 

Should the legislative Republicans request further review of the case, Kavanaugh along with the three dissenting justices have enough votes to put the case on the court’s docket, per the U.S. Supreme Court’s rules. To grant a stay, which is what Republican legislators requested in this filing, they would have needed five votes in favor.

Two more conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett, voted with the majority this week. But Roberts has previously expressed interest in the legal theory that North Carolina’s legislative Republicans used in this case. 

Republican arguments rest on Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which says the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”

That should mean, North Carolina legislative Republicans argue, that state courts should not be able to put a check on the rules state legislatures make for federal elections. Only federal courts and Congress could check state legislative power over making those rules. 

The justices also denied a request for review coming out of Pennsylvania, which raised similar legal questions. 

North Carolina’s General Assembly will still get the chance to draw a new congressional map for the 2024 election cycle that, should it withstand lawsuits, could hold for the rest of the decade until the 2030 census triggers another round of redistricting.

Coastal Review is partnering with Carolina Public Press to provide readers with more stories relevant to the coast. 

Denouncing Republicans in the North Carolina General Assembly for the recently enacted congressional redistricting that carves out some of his Democratic base, longtime 1^st District Congressman G.K. Butterfield announced Thursday that he will not seek reelection again.

In a video announcement, Butterfield, who has served since 2004, said he was disappointed in the legislature’s GOP majority, saying the recently enacted map was gerrymandered.

“It’s racially gerrymandered, it will disadvantage African American communities all across the 1st Congressional District. I am disappointed, terribly disappointed with the Republican majority legislature for again, gerrymandering our state’s congressional districts and putting their party politics over the best interests of North Carolina and while I am hopeful that the courts will also play overturn this partisan map, and see that a fair map is enacted, I have made the difficult decision that I will not seek reelection to the United States House of Representatives. It is time for me to retire and allow the torch to be passed to someone who shares the values of the district and can continue the work,” Butterfield said in the video.

A number of legal challenges to the redistricting have been filed, including this week by the North Carolina League of Conservation Voters, seeking to stop the state from holding elections using the new congressional and legislative maps.

Butterfield was appointed in 2007 as chief deputy whip of the House Democratic Caucus, and in the current session was elevated to replace the late Rep. John Lewis as a senior chief deputy whip, the first Democrat from North Carolina to serve in this role.