The Trump administration wants to cut the number of waterways protected under the Clean Water Act.

Some business owners and developers say the move would help them operate better because it would change which wetlands and streams legally count as an “official water of the United States.”

Those designations are covered by the Clean Air Act, which was originally written in part by the late Michigan Congressman John Dingell.

His wife, current U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell, says protecting streams and wetlands helps stop pollution from flowing to large bodies of water like the Great Lakes.

The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.

U.S. Rep Debbie Dingell: People that are seasoned, like myself, know what our waters used to look like. And John Dingell was really the significant author of the Clean Water Act, along with the late former U.S. Sen. Ed Muskie. And he did it because the Rouge River caught on fire. Now, the consequences of what this administration is going to do would undermine the strong protections that have kept our water safe and healthy and have cleaned them up. So I’m very concerned that we not go backwards. We see the Great Lakes and our Detroit water system is significantly improved from where it was 30 years ago, 40 years ago. But we have to keep cleaning it up. And taking away those safeguards endangers our water.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: Some environmental groups often raise concerns about runoff from farmland into waterways or companies dumping there illegally at times. Now they say this change proposed by the Trump administration could increase the chance of those types of activities happening. Do you agree with those kinds of concerns?

DD: I’m very, very concerned about what this means and what the real consequences are. Lake Erie has seen very significant experiences of algae blooms. People have actually been told not to drink tap water. So I think it’s very important that we make every effort to continue to clean up our water, protect our waters. And the administration’s announcement that they were going to roll back Clean Water Act regulations worries me greatly.

QK: On the other side, some business owners and farmers, among others, have said that they think the change will help them. It’ll limit the costs and regulatory red tape, they say, of having to check if a stream or other waterway on their property is covered under the Clean Water Act. They say it should be something that states regulate more than the federal government. What’s your reaction to those comments?

DD: We need to have federal regulation. Because here’s the reality. Water doesn’t say, “oops, I’m at a state line.” Do you think Lake Erie or the Detroit River know when they’ve crossed a state border? I think we should all be working together to keep our water safe. But when water runoff is going into major tributaries like the Huron River, the Rouge River, then goes into the Detroit River, which goes into the Great Lakes, there are consequences when there are things in those waters that are not safe. Things the public needs to be protected from. I want to reduce regulation. I want to look at how we can simplify. But undermining the goal of clean water is something that worries me greatly and something I will always fight for.

Michigan is racing toward the data center boom that powers artificial intelligence and cloud computing. Lawmakers have approved generous tax breaks, and utilities are courting multi-billion-dollar projects, including a proposed $7 billion “hyperscale” campus in rural Saline Township, backed by tech giants OpenAI and Oracle. 

Supporters promise investment and new tax revenue. But critics warn that these vast, windowless buildings could come with higher electric bills, heavy demands on local water supplies, and pressure to keep fossil fuel plants running long past Michigan’s clean energy deadlines. 

So who really pays for Michigan’s data-center gold rush, and who gets to decide?

Brian Allnutt, a senior reporter and contributing editor at Planet Detroit, has been following Michigan’s data center deals from the state capitol to township board meetings and courtroom settlements. He joined Robyn Vincent to help make sense of the choices Michigan faces.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on demand.

Subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

More stories from The Metro

Southeast Michigan’s streams and rivers are studded by shadows of our industrial past. Henry Ford brought mass production of vehicles to the world, and he needed energy to power his industry. 

Old hydroelectric dams are still installed along the Rouge and Huron Rivers, but they’re crumbling and it’s becoming time to repair them, or remove them. 

In Michigan, the fate of these aging dams is still hotly debated in town halls and city council meetings. One of those place is Flat Rock, MI, where residents and local officials urged Huron-Clinton Metroparks not to remove the dam.

While the fate of Flat Rock Dam is still uncertain, 120 dams have been removed in Michigan, according to a database published by American Rivers, a river restoration nonprofit.

And dam removal brings a number of benefits for the waterway and surrounding areas, including: biodiversity and fish passage, water quality, and mitigation of catastrophic flooding in the case of dam failure.

So, what’s next for Michigan’s dams and rivers? What options do residents and lawmakers have? And, what opportunities are ahead for the Great Lakes state?

Elizabeth Riggs, the Great Lakes Regional Director for American Rivers, joined Robyn Vincent on the Metro to discuss.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on demand.

Subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

More stories from The Metro

Visitors sometimes leave stuff behind at Great Lakes beaches. Broken pieces from plastic toys or bits of styrene from coolers can get lost in the sand.  

One of the most common pieces of plastic trash found are cigarette butts. 

Here’s some background on that. 

Four years ago, I interviewed people who volunteered through the Alliance for the Great Lakes Adopt-a-Beach program. They were cleaning up trash at Duck Lake State Park. 

Lake Michigan is connected to Duck Lake by a small channel. When the big lake gets high, plastic trash is pushed into the smaller lake by wind and waves. Then when the water recedes, a lot of the plastic gets caught in the vegetation on either side of that connecting channel. A lot of plastic. 

I visited the Duck Lake State Park beach again two years ago and did another microplastics story, which included information about recovering plastic as a recyclable resources for a line of outdoor wear. 

This year, I went back to Duck Lake for a third time. 

It had been raining earlier in the morning. When I arrived, it was a little cloudy, but there was a nice breeze coming off Lake Michigan. 

My plan was to spend an hour picking up trash along the road adjacent to the beach and on the beach itself. I wanted to see if there was a pattern of a lot of cigarette butts on the beach. 

I had a small bag for cigarette butts. I also took a larger garbage bag, because I figured I’d pick up the other trash I found.  

I was going to compare this beach with another one in the afternoon, so I decided to limit the time to one hour.  

In that time, I picked up 158 cigarette butts.  

I had thought I might find 60. Obviously, my estimate was way off. 

An employee at the park told me some people park their cars next to the beach to enjoy the view of Lake Michigan, and then toss their cigarette butts on the ground while they’re there. There’s a bit of irony there, right? 

The fibers in those cigarette filters can quickly break down into microplastics and that’s not good. 

“Wildlife can be ingesting it. It can end up in our drinking water source for 40 million people. It’s also just, you know, adding to the litter on the beach itself, of course, having impact on the enjoyment of the beach, things like that,” said Olivia Reda. She organizes beach cleanups for the Alliance for the Great Lakes. 

“Eighty-six percent of the pieces that we find in a given season are composed of either partially or fully of plastic. So, cigarette butts, again being part of that problem, you know, breaking down into small pieces, less than 5 millimeters, end up in the Great Lakes, or they can end up in the Great Lakes,” Reda said. 

Back in 2018, I interviewed Mary Kosuth, from Dunwoody College of Technology in Minneapolis. She found microplastics in every municipal water supply her research checked in cities that pull water from the lakes.

She also found microplastics in Great Lakes beer, although the amount didn’t necessarily correspond with the microplastics in the tap water supply. That might be because the grains used in the beer often come in sacks made of woven polypropylene. 

She said even if plastic itself is inert, additives or chemicals absorbed from the environment could be harmful to human health. 

“We found in marine environments, at least, these plastic particles are very good at absorbing chemicals from the water,” Kosuth said, adding “So things like PCB, DDT, brominated flame retardants, things like these can actually form a coating on the outside of the plastic particles, which means that we would be ingesting higher amounts of that.” 

Is that really that much of an issue in the Great Lakes? A study out of the Rochester Institute of Technology estimates 22 million pounds of plastic debris enters the Great Lakes from the U.S. and Canada each year. 

My day on the road was not finished. I still had more trash to pick up. My next stop was Ludington State Park about an hour away. It’s a much bigger beach and has a lot more visitors.  

One of the things that could help is more bins for litter and recycling. That’s what Andrea Densham has found. She’s Senior Policy Advisor for the Alliance for the Great Lakes.  

She says scolding people who smoke for throwing their cigarette butts on the beach doesn’t help much. She says a different approach is better. For example, signs at the park encouraging people to join together to keep the beach clean are helpful. 

“Maybe the best answer is both signage, reminding folks that birds and children enjoy the beaches and that having cigarette butts is really damaging.” 

That is, damaging to both the experience at the beach and to the environment.  

She said having more trash cans at or near beaches would help. 

“There aren’t actually enough in many places, both recycling and litter bins, right by the beaches. And that causes some unnecessary eye-trash, I think.” 

Densham said receptacles for cigarettes and cigars are also needed.  

Overall she said all plastic trash is a major problem and society needs to eliminate single-use plastic products as much as possible. 

After wandering around Ludington State Park’s expansive beach for a while, I only found four cigarette butts. The road to the park runs along the beach for about three miles. There are places to park your car along the way. I found about a half-dozen cigarette butts at each of those places.  

I talked to a guy who’d been walking the beach and he said he only saw a couple of cigarette butts along the way. So, not a lot of that kind of trash compared to what I found at Duck Lake State Park earlier in the day. 

So, I tracked down the Park Manager, Jim Gallie, and asked him about that. 

“At least once per month, we have volunteers that come out to the park and they have segments of the beach that they walk and the pick up litter. They pick up cigarette butts, any debris that they find. Anything that they find that is larger than something they can handle, they report that to us. So, we work closely with the Friends of Ludington State Park on that. And that’s, I think at least one reason why are beaches are in pretty good shape,” he said. 

Not all the state, county, township, and city beaches have that extra help on a regular basis. 

But there are annual cleanups and a Great Lakes-wide effort is coming up. 

On September 20th is International Coastal Cleanup. The Alliance for the Great Lakes expect thousands of its Adopt-a-Beach volunteers to clear the beaches of trash at sites across the Great Lakes. I imagine that will include tens of thousands of cigarette butts. If you want to help, take latex or nitrile gloves with you. Picking up cigarette butts is kind of nasty and smelly. Trust me on that one. 

A couple strolls the beach near the main swimming area at Ludington State Park.

The U.S. Supreme Court could decide if a case involving the Line 5 oil pipeline stays in Michigan court or goes back before federal judges.

The case began in 2019 when Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel sued in state court to partially shut down Line 5. Nessel cited three state laws to make an environmental case for stopping the project.

It then got moved to federal court in 2021 at the request of Enbridge, the Canadian company that operates the pipeline. That request came much later than a 30-day window to do so, partly because Enbridge says it was waiting on the result of a similar lawsuit from Michigan’s governor.

A lower federal court granted an exception to the timeline. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, didn’t buy that argument and sent the case back to the 30th Circuit Court in Ingham County where a hearing was held in January.

The Supreme Court, on Enbridge’s appeal, will decide whether there are exceptions to the 30-day period to remove a case to federal court.

Enbridge argues, while the Sixth Circuit took a narrow view of that time frame, other appellate courts have allowed exceptions. It believes the case belongs in federal court because the matter butts up against international treaty law and some federal laws as well.

In a statement, Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy said the company is “encouraged” by the Supreme Court decision Monday to take up the case.

“The District Court cited the important federal issues in this case, including U.S.-Canada Treaty issues, and the fact that litigation of these issues was already pending in another case in federal court. 

However, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, deciding that district courts have no authority to give exceptions to the 30-day time limit.

The Sixth Circuit’s remand decision is in conflict with decisions from two other federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, which both held that there can be exceptions to the 30-day limit. The Supreme Court review will resolve this conflict in the courts of appeals,” Duffy said in an email.

Meanwhile, the Attorney General’s office is maintaining its position.

“The Department’s lawsuit is based on state claims and law, and it belongs before a Michigan court.  We remain undeterred in our commitment to protect the Great Lakes, especially from the devastating catastrophe a potential Line 5 rupture would wreak upon all of Michigan,” a written statement from AG spokesperson Kimberly Bush said.

If the case goes back to federal court, the proceedings that have happened in state court may be moot. Meanwhile, the legal fight between Enbridge and the governor is already playing out in federal court.

All this is happening as Enbridge tries to move forward with a project to build a tunnel around a replacement section of the Line 5 pipeline that runs through the Straits of Mackinac. That project is currently in the permitting process.

Enbridge says the tunnel would make the pipeline safer by protecting it from anchor strikes. Environmental groups are fighting it, saying it could potentially rupture and dump massive amounts of oil into the Great Lakes.