Waukesha Water - A Study is Needed

A recent Journal-Sentinel editorial echoed Milwaukee Riverkeeper's concern that Waukesha undertake an EIS (environmental impact statement) in its application for Great Lakes Water.

[excerpted from the Journal-Sentinel]

The City of Waukesha's application for Great Lakes water needs to be done right - and carefully. It probably will be the first such application under the terms of the recently approved Great Lakes compact, and, as such, requires the closest scrutiny from the state Department of Natural Resources and the public.

At the same time, Waukesha is under a very real time constraint. It needs another source of water so it doesn't have to rely on radium-laced city wells that pose public health and environmental issues. And if it can draw water from Lake Michigan and return it without significant loss to the lake or harm to the environment, there is no good reason to deny Waukesha that water.

But the public needs to be satisfied that will be the case, and an environmental impact statement needs to be part of the process to make sure there is no harm. State officials say they will help, but not order, the city to complete a comprehensive study for the project. That's fine, as long as a study is done. The full impact of the project needs to be weighed, especially any impact on waterways into which treated wastewater would be sent on its way back to Lake Michigan. A recent city-funded study found that discharging the return flow into Underwood Creek would not degrade that stream's water quality.

Last week, Waukesha released a draft application for water, and now the DNR is asking the public to comment on a list of issues that must be included in such a study and recommend others to be added, said Eric Ebersberger, the DNR's water use section chief in Madison. Ebersberger promised a "robust analysis" of the project and added that the EIS process "allows for the greatest opportunity for public comment and information sharing with the public."

That's all good. But a Milwaukee-based environmental advocacy group has criticized the DNR's decision to put together an impact study after the application is made.

"An impact study should be part of an application to the DNR," said Cheryl Nenn of the Milwaukee Riverkeeper organization. "The study should be done to educate the public and help the city's decision-makers with this precedent-setting decision."

Nenn is right on the need to educate the public, but given the time constraints on the city, it makes sense to proceed as the city and state are planning as long as all the studies and scrutiny are done before a decision is made. Certainly, those studies should address concerns raised by Nenn's organization and other groups.

Waukesha Water Utility General Manager Dan Duchniak told Journal Sentinel reporter Don Behm that the DNR has agreed to work with the city's proposed timetable to move the application through the state's approval process by July.

"They understand we're under a court order to provide radium-safe water," Duchniak said. The city's deep sandstone wells are contaminated with naturally occurring radium and salt, and the deadline to deliver safe water is June 2018.

If the city does get an OK from the DNR, it will still need the other seven Great Lakes states to sign off on the project under the terms of the Great Lakes compact. That, too, will take time.

Ultimately, the decision on whether Waukesha should receive water should be based on what's best for the environment and for the health of citizens throughout the region. Other agendas, such as, say, using water to try to stop growth by the City of Waukesha, should not be part of the equation.

Growth in the region helps the entire region. And making sure Waukesha has a safe water source should be in everyone's interest.