A federal study is raising questions about the effectiveness of tailpipe testing programs. The programs are supposed to help reduce air pollution from cars and trucks. Chuck Quirmbach has details:
Transcript
A federal study is raising questions about the effectiveness of tailpipe testing programs. The programs are supposed to help reduce air pollution from cars and trucks. Chuck Quirmbach has details:
The inspector general at the EPA says many of the 34 states that do tailpipe tests are failing to file reports on the effectiveness of those programs. So, the EPA watchdog says it’s not sure about claims that those states are reducing emissions.
The American Lung Association is also concerned about the report. Association spokesperson Paul Billings says the findings cast doubt for the public.
“We want to make sure we’re not seeing gross emitters, vehicles that are polluting way too much, because we all suffer the consequences of too much air pollution in our cities.”
Billings urges the EPA to step up its effort to get information from the states, but he says staff cuts at the federal agency may be hampering enforcement. The EPA has to respond to its inspector general within a few months.
The Environmental Protection Agency says it will start monitoring the air around some large livestock farms this winter. The EPA says it will help them develop better air quality standards for these farms. But critics say the project is too soft on polluters. The GLRC’s Mark Brush has more:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection Agency says it will start monitoring the air around some
large livestock farms this winter. The EPA says it will help them develop better air
quality standards for these farms. But critics say the project is too soft on polluters. The
GLRC’s Mark Brush has more:
Thousands of farms have agreed to be a part of a voluntary air pollution monitoring
project. Big hog, poultry, and dairy operations produce a lot of manure. The manure
releases gases that can cause health problems. As part of the agreement with the EPA,
the farms will be immune from most federal lawsuits while the monitoring is done.
Jon Scholl is with the EPA. He says this voluntary approach will bring more farms into
compliance faster than direct enforcement:
“We have 2,568 agreements covering 6,267 farms that have a written agreement with the
agency that they’re going to come into compliance with applicable air quality laws, and
we think that’s significant and certainly much better than taking it on a case by case
basis.”
Critics of the voluntary project say there is enough evidence now to force these large
farms to comply with air quality laws. They say the Bush Administration lacks the
political will to do so.
The EPA has a new agreement with animal farmers who participate in a study of air quality and its relation to animal waste, which is often kept in lagoons like the one above. However, environmentalists worry about the agreement and what it may entail. (Photo courtesy of the Natural Resources Conservation Service)
Environmentalists don’t like a new agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the livestock industry. It will give some livestock farms limited immunity from environmental laws while the EPA measures pollution on their farms. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tamara Keith reports:
Transcript
Environmentalists don’t like a new agreement between the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and the livestock industry. It will give some livestock
farms limited immunity from environmental laws while the EPA measures
pollution on their farms. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tamara Keith reports:
Animals at so called “factory farms” produce a lot of manure. As it
decomposes it lets off a cocktail of gasses, which can contribute to smog,
and health problems, such as asthma. But, federal regulators say they don’t
have an accurate way of estimating emissions from these farms.
Under a new EPA agreement, some livestock operations will work with federal
regulators to monitor emissions. The farms allow air quality monitoring, and
in exchange, the EPA will agree not to sue them for environmental violations
during the 2 year program. That’s where the problem arises, says Andrew
Hanson, with Midwest Environmental Advocates.
“The way government is supposed to work is that it’s supposed to
protect you from air pollution, not enter into deals that allow facilities
to continue to pollute without threat of enforcement.”
The Environmental Protection Agency will accept public comment on the
agreement, until March 2nd.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Tamara Keith.
The Corps of Engineers will soon lower water on the Missouri River… a month after it was first ordered by a judge to do so. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Weber reports:
Transcript
The Corps of Engineers will soon lower water on the Missouri River… a
month after it was first ordered by a judge to do so. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Tom Weber reports:
The Corps is only going to keep the river levels down for three days. A
federal judge in Washington had ordered the reduction to protect nesting
endangered species… but the Corps said that would conflict with another
ruling from Nebraska that said water must be high enough for barges.
Those lawsuits were all combined and sent to a court in Minnesota… where
judge Paul Magnuson ruled the two orders were not in conflict. He says that
means the order to lower levels still applies.
Barge companies were told to secure vessels because the river will likely be
too shallow for navigation during the three days. The corps had risked
being fined a half-million dollars a day for being in contempt of the
ruling… but Judge Magnuson says he won’t enforce those fines at this time.
Environmental groups say it might be too late for the species… but it’s
better than nothing.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Tom Weber.
An Environmental Protection Agency internal document indicates that about one-quarter of the largest industrial plants and wastewater treatment facilities are in serious violation of the Clean Water Act at any given moment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
An Environmental Protection Agency internal document indicates that about
one-quarter of the largest industrial plants and wastewater treatment facilities are in
serious violation of the Clean Water Act at any given moment. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
The study shows some wastewater treatment plants exceed pollution limits for
toxic substances by more than 100-percent. The EPA document was obtained by The
Washington Post. It further reveals that only a fraction of violators of the Clean Water
Act ever face enforcement actions and fewer than half of those are ever fined for the
violations. The study concentrated on the years 1999 to 2001. But it indicated some
company and municipal wastewater plants have illegally discharged toxic chemicals or
biological waste into rivers and streams for years without getting into trouble with the
government.
Often, state governments are responsible for enforcing EPA rules to meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act. The EPA indicates it’s trying to become more
aggressive in monitoring state enforcement by creating “watch lists” of the most
flagrant violators.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
A new report says cutbacks in the Ontario government have led to a shortfall in monitoring for water pollution. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly has this report:
Transcript
A new report says cutbacks in the Ontario government have led to a shortfall in monitoring for water pollution. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen
Kelly reports.
The study was released by the Canadian Institute of Environmental Law and Policy.
It looked at Ontario’s pollution program for surface and groundwater over a five-year period. And it found the number of pollution discharges, spills and leaks doubled between 1994 and 99, while the number of investigations dropped. But ministry spokesman John Steele says things have changed over the last couple of years.
“Our enforcement figures are very, very good right now. I think there are about 200 additional staff of which about 150 are involved in the enforcement.”
Steele says the number of cleanup orders issued to industry increased by more than 300 percent in the last two years. But the study’s authors say the province releases little information about water pollution to the public. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
The Bush Administration wants to shift more of the job of enforcing environmental laws to the states. The Environmental Protection Agency proposes to give states twenty-five million dollars to do the job. However, environmentalists, the General Accounting Office and even the EPA’s own Office of Inspector General find problems with the plan. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham has more:
Transcript
The Bush administration wants to shift more of the job of enforcing environmental laws to the states. The Environmental Protection Agency proposes to give states 25-million dollars to do the job. However, Environmentalists, the General Accounting Office and EVEN the EPA’s own Office of Inspector General find problems with the plan. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.
Although the EPA is responsible for enforcement of national environmental laws, in most cases it assigns much of that authority to the states. Already 44 state environmental agencies act as the enforcement agency for the EPA. Now in its fiscal year 2002 budget, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator, Christie Todd Whitman, proposes cutting the agency’s staff and giving more money to the states to enforce environmental laws. This move would only shift a little more of that burden to the states.
Some members of Congress have been pushing for shifting many of the federal government’s enforcement duties to the state level, arguing that the people at the state level are more attuned to the effects that strictly enforcing regulatory laws can have on the local economy.
The EPA has found that’s sometimes true. But in considering the economic impact, the state regulators don’t always enforce the law the way the EPA wants it to be done and that can be bad for the environment. Eileen McMahon is with the EPA’s Office of the Inspector General.
“We have –going back to 1996– been doing reviews and evaluations of different areas of enforcement, air enforcement, water enforcement, other enforcement and have found, certainly, cases where the states could be doing a better job.”
In a report released just last month the EPA’s Inspector General found that while some states have great records at enforcing environmental laws. But in many other cases some states have simply looked the other way.
“We found that states’ concerns with regulating small and economically vital businesses and industries had an impact on whether or not they were effectively deterring non-compliance.”
Some environmental groups are not surprised by those findings. Elliot Negin is with the Natural Resources Defense Council. He says he wouldn’t expect much good to come from letting states take more responsibility for enforcing environmental laws.
“Well, it’s gonna open a whole can of worms. The states, many states have pretty bad track records when it comes to upholding environmental laws. And, the state politicians are, unfortunately, sometimes too close to the polluters through campaign contributions and what not.”
Despite those concerns, some members of Congress feel the US EPA has been too aggressive in its application of environmental laws, and that shifting more of the enforcement authority to the states would bring a certain measure of common sense to the process.
As, the two sides argue about the merits of enforcing environmental laws at the federal level or the state level. One government office says no decision should be made at all just yet. The General Accounting office says the states and the EPA should take stock of how things are working now.
The GAO just released a report that finds cutting staff at the federal level and shifting resources to the state level — in other words, just what EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whittman is proposing— is premature. John Stephenson is the Director of Natural Resources and Environment for the GAO. He says the EPA has no idea how many people it takes to properly enforce the law because its workforce plan is more than a decade old.
“And, so, that’s basic information you would need to determine, number one, how many enforcement personnel that the states might need and number two how many personnel EPA headquarters might need to oversee the states.”
The GAO’s Stephenson says until some kind of workforce assessment is done. There’s little point in debating whether the EPA or the states are better suited to enforce environmental laws.
“This shift in authority, as you know, is an ongoing debate in the Congress and we feel like that there needs to be this basic workforce analysis done before either side is in a position to support their relative positions.”
The EPA agreed with the General Accounting Office’s findings. But it’s unclear whether there’s enough time to assess the agencies and states’ workforce needs before Congress approves the budget that could shift some of the enforcement authority to the states.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
The Bush Administration is proposing the Environmental Protection Agency turn over more of its enforcement authority to the states. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham explains:
Transcript
The Bush administration is proposing the Environmental Protection Agency turn over more of its enforcement authority to the states. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.
In the fiscal year 2002 budget, EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whittman proposes cutting agency staff who enforce environmental laws and in their place giving states additional money to do that job. Some environmental groups say that’s a bad idea because some states have a terrible track record on enforcing environmental laws. Eileen McMahon is with the EPA’s Office of the Inspector General. That office reports states sometimes look the other way.
“We found that the state enforcement programs could be much more effective in the deterrence and non-compliance of permits.”
The Inspector General says sometimes the states don’t enforce the law when the business is vital to the local economy. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
A former state administrator from the Midwest has been nominated by President Bush to fill the nation’s top environmental enforcement position. Former Ohio EPA director Donald Schregardus now faces Senate confirmation to become the Assistant USEPA Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance. But, as Senate confirmation hearings begin in Washington, activists in Ohio say Schregardus’ pro-business philosophy makes him the wrong choice for the job. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Natalie Walston reports:
The federal government says a year long effort to crack down onpolluters of the Mississippi River has been a success. Butenvironmentalists say more needs to be done…. The Great Lakes RadioConsortium’s Bill Raack reports:
