Red Lodge Clearinghouse

Oberstar, enviros slam Bush admin water reg enforcement

Poor U.S. EPA enforcement of pollution rules outlined in the Clean Water Act has threatened the health of U.S. waters, according to Democrats and officials from environmental groups who spoke yesterday at a press conference marking the 35th anniversary of the law. According to a new report released yesterday by U.S. PIRG, more than half of the nation's major industrial facilities and water-treatment plants exceeded Clean Water Act pollution limits in 2005. The same study -- which analyzed water pollution data from EPA obtained through the Freedom of Information Act -- found that the average facility exceeded its pollution permit limit by 263 percent during that same year.

The results were "just the tip of the polluted iceberg" as the report did not include data from thousands of minor facilities across the country, according to PIRG's Christy Leavitt.

The group pins the blame on the Bush administration, arguing the White House has underfunded EPA and endorsed policies that undermine the Clean Water Act. The group estimates that EPA's total budget declined 13 percent from 1997 to 2006, when adjusted for inflation.

"The continued cuts to EPA's budget prevent the agency from putting enough environmental cops on the beat and limit the number of inspections to detect violations of the Clean Water Act," the report said.

That view is shared by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.), who spoke at yesterday's press conference announcing the results of the report.

"Although we have made enormous strides since the enactment of the Clean Water Act, efforts to clean up America's waters have stalled," Oberstar said. "In the past several years, the federal government has let down municipalities' efforts to protect watersheds, provide safe drinking water, and make recreational water sources fishable and swimmable."

Across the Hill, the office of Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ranking member James Inhofe (R-Okla.) had some choice words for the source of the report.

"We certainly don't consider PIRG to be an unbiased organization; they clearly have a set agenda and as a result, we view their reports with great skepticism," said Inhofe spokesman Matthew Dempsey.

Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Ohio, Connecticut, New York, North Dakota, California and West Virginia had the highest percentage of major facilities exceeding their Clean Water Act thresholds, according to the report. The states with the highest average permit violations in 2005 were: New Mexico, Vermont, Arizona, West Virginia, Iowa, Mississippi, Illinois, Indiana, California and Hawaii.

Oberstar's bill

The environmental groups present at yesterday's press conference lined up in support of Oberstar's legislation to clarify the scope of the Clean Water Act, urging other lawmakers to cosponsor the bill.

H.R. 2421, or the "Clean Water Restoration Act," tries to end jurisdictional confusion left in the wake of two confusing Supreme Court decisions by ensuring that creeks, small streams and seasonal wetlands are protected. Specifically, the bill would define the Clean Water Act as covering "waters of the United States" instead of just "navigable waters."

The Supreme Court cases in question are Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the joint cases of Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Critics of the bill say it would result in an unprecedented expansion of federal regulatory power.

Scott Campbell of the National Water Resources Association, which represents Western agriculture and municipal water users, said the bill would hurt the Clean Water Act by unleashing a "torrent of litigation and conflict because of the expansive overreach."

Inhofe's spokesman echoed that view.

"Senator Inhofe believes that the bill extends federal jurisdiction beyond just where we were prior to SWANCC, that the bill would not provide certainty to the regulated community and it would likely lead to more lawsuits," Dempsey said.

Leavitt countered that the bill is "simple and straightforward legislation that ensures that all waters of the United States are protected."

Set as favorite

Bookmark

Email This

Comments (0) Add Comment

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment

Syndicate

Related Items

Syndicate