- A MAJOR DECISION FROM THE STATE DNR IS FAST APPROACHING.
THE AGENCY IS EXPECTED TO RULE AS EARLY AS NEXT WEEK WHETHER TO
ALLOW RACINE TO DIVERT SEVEN MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF LAKE
MICHIGAN WATER TO THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PLEASANT FOR THE USE BY
FOXCONN.
THAT DECISION COULD SET A NEW PRECEDENT FOR THE GREAT LAKES
COMPACT, WHICH BANS DIVERSIONS OF WATER OUTSIDE THE LAKE BASIN.
AREAS OF MOUNT PLEASANT ARE IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN BUT
THE CITY OF WAUKESHA WAS ALLOWED TO DIVERT LAKE MICHIGAN WATER IN
2016 UNDER THE COMPACT.
IS THE FOXCONN REQUEST DIFFERENT?
AS MARISA WOJCIK REPORTS WITH OUR PARTNERS AT WISCONTEXT,
A UW-PARKSIDE PROFESSOR OF GEOSCIENCES SAYS THE TWO
REQUESTS ARE DIFFERENT.
- THIS IS THE AREA WHERE THEY'LL RETURN THE FLOW TO THE
ROOT RIVER.
- DR. JOHN SKALBECK IS A PROFESSOR OF GEOSCIENCES AT
UW-PARKSIDE SPECIALIZING IN HYDROGEOLOGY.
HE SEES THE 2008 GREAT LAKES WATER COMPACT AS AN IMPORTANT
MEASURE IN PROTECTING THIS NATURAL RESOURCE FROM THOSE
OUTSIDE THE BASIN.
- HAD THAT COMPACT NOT BEEN IN PLACE AT THAT TIME,
THERE WOULD BE A LOT MORE PRESSURE ON THE GREAT LAKES AS
FAR AS SUPPLYING WATER TO OTHER AREAS.
- WHEN THE CITY OF WAUKESHA, LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE BASIN,
APPLIED TO DIVERT WATER FROM LAKE MICHIGAN,
SKALBECK SAW IT AS THE FIRST TEST OF THE COMPACT'S METTLE.
- THERE WAS A NEED FOR THE WATER.
THEY DEMONSTRATED THAT NEED AND THEY MET ALL THE TERMS OF THE
COMPACT.
- WAUKESHA NEEDED UNANIMOUS APPROVAL FROM THE GREAT LAKES
STATES, UNLIKE A PENDING DIVERSION APPLICATION FROM
RACINE, WHICH WOULD ONLY HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FROM THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN.
- RACINE IS APPLYING FOR THE WATER ON BEHALF OF FOXCONN.
- SKALBECK SAYS THERE ARE TWO MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
WAUKESHA'S DIVERSION APPLICATION AND RACINE'S.
THE FIRST BEING WHO THE WATER IS INTENDED FOR.
- THE PROVISION THAT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WITH THE RACINE
APPLICATION IS OVER THE INTENT FOR IT TO BE FOR PUBLIC USE.
- THE OTHER DIFFERENCE.
- THERE WAS NO INFORMATION IN THE APPLICATION ABOUT WHAT THAT
WASTE STREAM WOULD CONTAIN.
- NOT KNOWING WHAT WILL BE IN THE WATER WHEN IT LEAVES
FOXCONN.
- AGAIN, THE DNR IS EXPECTED TO MAKE THE DECISION AS SOON AS
NEXT WEEK ON WHETHER OR NOT TO ALLOW FOXCONN
TO USE LAKE MICHIGAN WATER.
PROFESSOR SKALBECK JOINED US ON THE BANKS OF THE ROOT RIVER.
HE JOINS US NOW IN STUDIO WITH ANSWERS
TO MORE OF OUR QUESTIONS.
THANKS FOR BEING HERE. - THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
- PICKING UP ON SOMETHING YOU TALKED WITH MARISA ABOUT,
WHAT IS YOUR ISSUE WITH THE APPLICATION THAT SAYS THAT THE
WATER DIVERTED WILL BE USED FOR PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY PURPOSES?
- WELL, THE GREAT LAKES COMPACT HAS LANGUAGE REGARDING
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY.
AND IT SAYS THAT IT SHOULD BE PRIMARILY FOR RESIDENTIAL,
WITH SOME COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USE.
- WELL, I GUESS FOXCONN WOULD BE THAT COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL USE, SO IT SEEMS AS THOUGH IT FITS WITHIN THE
LANGUAGE OF THE COMPACT.
- YES, BUT THE DIVERSION, THIS ASK, IS PRIMARILY FOR FOXCONN,
SO A SINGLE COMMERCIAL USER.
- AND IS THAT SOMETHING THEN THAT PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELVES HAVE
MADE PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT AND THAT THE DNR IS NOW REVIEWING?
- YES.
SO I ATTENDED THE PUBLIC MEETING IN STURTEVANT AND THEN FOLLOWING
THAT PUBLIC MEETING, I PRESENTED A LETTER AS A PUBLIC COMMENT.
- AND SO IN YOUR MIND IT'S NOT ENOUGH,
THIS PUBLIC USE OF THIS WATER THAT A PORTION OF IT
IS GOING TO COMMERCIAL USE.
- WELL, IT SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE STRAINING THE INTENT
OF THE LAW, THE COMPACT.
- YOU ALSO RAISED THE ISSUE OF WHAT WILL BE IN THE WASTEWATER,
WHAT THAT MIGHT CONTAIN.
BUT THE DNR SAYS THAT THE WATER WILL BE TREATED TO MEET
APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
SO WHAT ABOUT THAT?
- THAT'S FINE, BUT THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW WHAT THE WASTE
STREAM CONTAINS AND THAT I BELIEVE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF
THE APPLICATION, TO KNOW WHAT KIND OF CHEMICALS THAT FOXCONN
WOULD BE DEALING WITH.
- SO WHAT ARE YOUR CONCERNS THERE?
- JUST THAT IT'S CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW,
WHAT WILL BE COMING OUT OF THAT WASTE STREAM AND MAKE SURE THAT
RACINE KNOWS THAT AND CAN MONITOR FOR THAT IF THEY'RE
GOING TO NEED TO ACCEPT THAT WASTE.
- HOW IS THIS APPLICATION FOR DIVERSION DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF
PROCESS THAN THE WAUKESHA APPLICATION, LIKE TIME LINE,
FOR EXAMPLE?
- WELL, THE WAUKESHA APPLICATION FELL INTO THE
PROVISION OF A COMMUNITY WITHIN A STRADDLING COUNTY.
AND SO THAT REQUIRED APPROVAL FROM THE EIGHT GREAT LAKES
STATES AND THE TWO CANADIAN PROVINCES.
AND THAT TIME LINE WAS FAIRLY LENGTHY.
IT WAS A VERY RIGOROUS REVIEW.
THIS ONE FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF A STRADDLING
COMMUNITY, SO IT REQUIRES JUST APPROVAL FROM WISCONSIN.
- IS IT YOUR SENSE OR CONCERN THAT THE STATE
DIDN'T TAKE ENOUGH TIME?
- NO.
I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THE TIME LINE, YOU KNOW,
IF IT CAN GET A CAREFUL AND QUICK REVIEW.
THAT'S FINE.
MY MAIN CONCERN WAS THAT IT SEEMED TO BE STRETCHING THE
INTENT OF THE COMPACT LANGUAGE.
- SO WHAT ARE CLOSE OBSERVERS LIKE YOURSELF,
OF THIS FOXCONN WATER DIVERSION, EXPECTING THE DNR TO DO HERE?
- WELL, I WOULD GUESS THEY WOULD MAKE THEIR DECISION BASED
ON THE APPLICATION AND THE PUBLIC COMMENTS,
AND I GUESS WE'LL WAIT AND SEE WHAT THEY DECIDE.
- WHAT'S YOUR BEST EDUCATED GUESS AS TO WHETHER THEY WILL
DECIDE IN FAVOR OF THIS DIVERSION?
- WELL, THE STATE HAS INITIATED INFRASTRUCTURE ALREADY.
THERE'S ROADS THAT ARE BEING MODIFIED.
THERE'S PIPELINES THAT ARE BEING LAID.
SO I WOULD -- I GUESS I WOULD SPECULATE THAT THERE WOULD BE
SOME PRESSURE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A PERMIT THAT'S ISSUED.
- THAT'S RIGHT.
SO IN THAT EVENT, IN THE EVENT THAT THE DNR IN FACT APPROVES
THIS DIVERSION, IS IT YOUR EXPECTATION THAT THIS WOULD
RESULT IN LITIGATION ON THE PART OF PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE IT?
- I WOULD BE SURPRISED IF THERE WAS NOT LITIGATION
AROUND THE APPROVED PERMIT.
I THINK SOME FOLKS HAVE ALREADY MADE OVERTURES DURING THE PUBLIC
MEETING AND AS WELL AS DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
- ON THE BASIS OF WHAT?
- ON THE BASIS OF THE PUBLIC SUPPLY.
- NOW, EVEN THOUGH, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED,
THE RACINE WATER DIVERSION ONLY NEEDS STATE APPROVAL,
HOW HAVE OTHER GREAT LAKES STATES WHICH ARE A PART OF THE
COMPACT REACTED TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSED DIVERSION?
- WELL, I DID SEE ONE LETTER FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK THAT
WAS ALSO QUESTIONING THE PUBLIC SUPPLY.
AND THEN I BELIEVE THERE WAS A LETTER FROM ILLINOIS ABOUT
THE ISSUE OF THE CONTAMINANTS IN THE WASTE STREAM.
SO THEY WERE JUST LOOKING FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.
- ALL RIGHT.
WELL, JOHN SKALBECK, THANKS FOR JOINING US TWICE.
WE APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.
- ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
- GO TO WISCONTEXT.ORG FOR NEW REPORTING ON THIS TOPIC.