Clean Water Profile: Ridgway "Ridge" Hall
Our Clean Water Profile series continues, highlighting a long-time advocate and legal warrior for clean water. Ridgway Hall, known by friends and colleagues as “Ridge,” is a walking encyclopedia of the history of Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts, particularly as it relates to its legal battles. I sat down with Ridge for an enlightening conversation on his career spanning several decades and why he’s still optimistic we will protect and restore our rivers and streams. The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Drew Robinson: What's your environmental origin story? What led you to such a long career fighting for clean water?
Ridge Hall: I grew up digging clams and fishing on Long Island Sound, among the Thimble Islands, which is just east of New Haven, on the Connecticut side. I got quite accustomed to doing that, and then one day saw on the side of the beach a sign saying, “No Clamming Allowed.” When I looked into what was the cause, I learned it was pollution caused by untreated sewage coming out of the Branford River, plus toxic discharges from an electroplating facility. So when I was only eight or nine years old, I had an appreciation that you can't take clean water that’s safe for fishing and swimming for granted.
Ridge at the helm, racing a Comet class sailboat in 2002.
Years later, I joined a group called the Darien Environmental Action Group, which was a local citizens group that worked to stop pollution and also dealt with mass transportation issues and other environmentally related issues. What I quickly learned is that you can get local folks interested in environmental issues when there's a crisis, but without a crisis it's hard to sustain.
When EPA was launched in 1970, and then in 1972 when the Federal Water Pollution Control Act passed, later known as the Clean Water Act, I got interested in coming to EPA. I was excited at the opportunity to address pollution issues on a national level, especially because I had been a sailor all my life, and interested in water. I eventually did join EPA as Associate General Counsel for Water right at the time when EPA was implementing the Clean Water Act. That was a very exciting time to be there.
DR: Do you have any particular memories or reflections from working at the EPA right when it was getting started?
RH: Absolutely. There were a number of programs that were either included in the Clean Water Act or were brand new. One of them was the Construction Grants Program, which provided design and construction funding for sewage treatment work system upgrades. It was the biggest public works program Congress had ever passed up to that point. It was so big that Nixon initially vetoed it because of the cost, and Congress overrode for the veto. The next important thing was the permit program. Section 301 of the Clean Water Act says, “The discharge of any pollutant by any person [to the Nation's waters], except as in compliance with [specified sections] shall be unlawful.” One of those sections was the permit requirement program, which quickly became known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program.
Perhaps the most far-reaching program was the Effluent Limitations Guidelines program. With this, Congress recognized that the technology and monitoring skills were lacking to adequately regulate and enforce water quality standards, particularly when they were mostly voluntary. So Congress created national technology-based standards for every industrial facility, creating uniform numerical effluent standards for facilities throughout the country. At EPA, we hired dozens of engineers to develop these effluent guidelines, as well as marine and freshwater aquatic biologists to develop water quality criteria. In my role as Associate General Counsel for Water, we had questions coming to us every day from our regional offices and states on how to interpret various provisions of the Clean Water Act. We developed answers on the fly, which we put into memoranda and circulated. It was a very exciting time to be there as we were making all these important decisions, many of which are still having impacts on our water quality today.
DR: Speaking of the Clean Water Act, as you know, this year is the legislation’s 50th anniversary. What sort of decisions did your team make in those early years that are still with us?
RH: The biggest deficiency in the original Clean Water Act, which was ironically the highest priority for Congress at the time, was the regulation of toxic pollutants. Congress was so eager to regulate toxics immediately that they included section 307(a) which said that EPA needed to start listing and setting stringent standards for toxic pollutants. The biggest issue we confronted was that this section did not consider costs of compliance. Also, it gave every impacted industry just one year to get in compliance, which wasn’t nearly enough time to design and install the technology necessary to meet the standards.
We quickly concluded that if we implemented these standards with the required stringency, no industry would get into compliance and major sectors of the American economy, such as steel making, would shut down. EPA decided not to issue any standards and was immediately sued by environmental groups to force us to regulate large numbers of toxic pollutants. This is when I joined the agency, and on my first day, the General Counsel gave this problem to me and told me to fix it! Well, a lot of work transpired from that point, but we eventually decided to regulate toxic pollutants under the effluent guidelines authority, which allowed us to consider economic impact and availability of necessary technologies.
There was a lot of compromise, and the environmentalists didn’t get as many toxics regulated as they wanted, as fast as they wanted, or as stringently as they wanted, but we got the job done by developing a list of toxic pollutants and standards that was feasible, would survive in the courts, and ultimately made a significant positive impact on water quality and the broader environment. We sent to Congress language that would expressly authorize what we had done, and they adopted it verbatim in what became the 1977 Clean Water Act Amendments.
DR: Why are you still working for clean water, all these years later?
Ridge presenting on the Chesapeake Bay restoration effort before the American College of Environmental Lawyers in October 2019.
RH: The last forty years of my life I've been sailing on the Chesapeake Bay and biking around it and enjoying the watershed. After I retired from my law firm twelve years ago, the TMDL was established, which was very exciting. I started working with some friends at Chesapeake Bay Foundation and other organizations, and that was about the time that the Choose Clean Water Coalition launched. It was also about that time that Russ Stevenson began exploring the creation of the Chesapeake Legal Alliance. When Russ asked if I would like to help, I didn’t hesitate to say yes. It was a great fit to use my experience to help organizations on a pro bono basis with cases related to the protection of clean water throughout the watershed.
DR: You mentioned you were around when the Coalition first started. How are you connected to the Coalition today?
RH: The Coalition forming at the same time as the TMDL was very fortuitous. The TMDL tool is the only section of the Clean Water Act that allows EPA to work with states to effectively address interstate pollution. Over the years, it's been absolutely invaluable to give now more than 275 environmental groups—national, regional, and local voices—a way to organize. Whether it's through Lobby Day, or responding through comments on regulatory action, or the annual conference. It's been just terrific, and I have enjoyed serving as a co-chair on the TMDL Workgroup along with Evan Isaacson of Chesapeake Legal Alliance and participating with the Agriculture Workgroup and some other efforts. Overall, the Coalition is extraordinarily effective in bringing people together.
DR: We couldn’t do it without you and people like you! Time for a few fun questions. What’s your favorite place in the Bay watershed?
RH: Oh, wow! I have loved biking on the Eastern Shore, and there are a couple of rivers like the Nanticoke where I kayak frequently. If I had to pick one, I’d go with Wades Point, right past St. Michaels, towards Tilghman Island. It’s this wonderful old Inn, built originally by a guy who built ships for the War of 1812. It has a 180-degree view of the East Bay and is just one of the prettiest areas. It’s also very low key and a great place to relax and unwind.
DR: Awesome! Here’s another good one—what’s your favorite critter in the watershed?
RH: I'd say the Atlantic Sturgeon. It’s a remarkable species that looks like it came from the dinosaur age, which its ancestors did! For a long time, people thought they were not in the Bay. I don't know whether we are looking harder and better, or whether the water quality has improved enough to support them, just as it has with dolphins and other species that were hard to find in the Bay twenty years ago, but I think sturgeon are just fascinating and I’m pleased to see efforts to preserve them.
Most recently, a citizens group, supported by ShoreRivers, rose up to block a proposed salmon farming plant in a very sensitive area. It was, as Tom Horton said, a classic example of something that was probably a good idea, but in a horribly wrong place. It demonstrates the power of civic action and an effective member of the Coalition, ShoreRivers, helping organize and block what would have been a devastating blow to one of the spawning areas for the sturgeon.
DR: You were looking quite spiffy before you headed out whitewater rafting at this year’s conference! How was your time on the water?
Ridge with Chesapeake Legal Alliance’s Molly Brown before embarking on the whitewater rafting field trip at the 2022 Choose Clean Water Conference.
RH: Oh, I loved it! I turned to several people in my raft and said, “Look you can see the high-rise buildings of Richmond!” And here we are, right out here whitewater rafting and there were blue herons flying across our bow. It was just terrific.
DR: Alright, two more questions. What do you see as the greatest challenges for the Bay restoration effort, of course not just for the Bay itself but all the rivers and streams that feed it?
RH: There are a number of them. It’s hard to pick the biggest. Certainly, climate change is imposing some new burdens on all of us. But I would say the biggest challenge is the costs. Where are we going to find the resources to pay for the rest of the cleanup? There are success stories out there of communities relying on innovation and creativity to meet pollution reduction goals. For example, when updating wastewater treatment plants, some communities are relying less on modeling and more on data gathering and monitoring. With the data, they’re utilizing artificial intelligence and algorithms to adjust their plant operations. All of this can cut costs dramatically.
Beyond point source pollution, we need to find ways to get farmers money to implement conservation practices on their land. There are many proven practices that are extremely cost-effective and not only help improve local water quality but also have an impact on climate change by sequestering carbon. Also, conservation practices help the farmer’s bottom line and stimulate local economies. We need to get more money in the hands of farmers.
DR: I couldn’t agree more! Last question—and you’re particularly well-suited to answer this based upon your decades of experience—what gives you hope that we’ll meet these challenges and find success in our efforts to protect and restore the rivers and streams that feed the Bay?
RH: The energy level of the younger generation. Whether it’s the younger staffers working in the Coalition’s member organizations, or even kids in college right now, this generation is deeply concerned with the environment, climate change, and of course, clean water. I think they are going to pick up the baton.
Drew Robinson is the Choose Clean Water Coalition’s Senior Communications Manager
*Header photo: Ridge sailing a 45’ sloop in the middle of the Bay in 2019.
