THESE FACILITIES OFTEN BREAK THE LAW MORE THAN ONCE AND FOR MORE THAN ONE POLLUTANT

Description

October 2007 An analysis of 2005 Clean Water Act compliance Troubled Waters An analysis of 2005 Clean Water Act compliance October 2007 Troubled Waters i Acknowledgments Written by Christy Leavitt, Clean Water Advocate with Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center. © 2007, Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center Cover photo: Victor Balabanov, under license from Shutterstock.com The author would like to thank Alison Cassady, Research Director with Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center, for her contributions to this report. Additional thanks to the numerous staff at state environmental protection agencies across the country for reviewing the data for accuracy. The recommendations are those of the Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders. To obtain additional copies of this report, visit our website or send a check for $25 made payable to Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center at the following address: y Center 1536 Wynkoop Street Suite 100 Denver, CO 80202 303-573-3871 www.environmentcolorado.org Troubled Waters ii Table of Contents Executive Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Introduction: The State of America’s Waters ...

Informations

• Publié par: Viot
• Nombre de lectures: 43
• Langue: English

Extrait

 

 

 

  October 2007

An analysis of 2005 Clean Water Act compliance 



      

  Troubled Waters       An analysis of 2005 Clean Water Act compliance                          

 

  October 2007      

  

  Acknowledgments   Written by Christy Leavitt, Clearn  AdWvaotecate with Environmleonrta CdoResearch & Policy Center.   © 2007, Environment ColRoreasdeoa rch & Policy Center    Cover photo: Victor Balabanov ,l iucnednesre from Shutterstock.com    The author would like atno kt hAlison Cassady, Research Diretcht oErn vwiironment Colorado Research &  Policy Center, for her contributions to thi s Ardedpitoirotn. al thanks hteo   temun affstt usrota se at environmental protection agencies acrostsr tyh feo rc oreuvniewing dtahtea  for accuracy.     The recommendations are those of the Ent viCrot o nond der aeCtnci yP lohc& arseReo adorlnemn necessarily reflect vtiheew s of our funders.    To obtain additional copies of this repourr,t   ble payaade 25 mot vsiti  oteser wsiebf kc$ roa dnehc  Environment Colorado Research y&  CPeonlitcer at tfhoell owing address:    Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center 1536 Wynkoop Street Suite 100 Denver, CO 80202 303-573-3871 www.environmentcolorado.org  

 

Troubled Waters ii

----------------------------------------------------------------17  M ---------------------------- ----------------------ygolodohte naW tareA tc----sault on the Cle---------------------------------------- eRoc 1- 4---------------- ----------------tidaenmm----s-on  rieaelCnidehT gt AcrmPeWan r tetaL aetsti sof re 12 Rep 6 of th b  sdoireP gnitro  1ryuaan JenweetcemednD 50a  ,02.---200531, ber  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   App ---2 x A.endilitiF caxEecei s ec Dnd a0520,  1yraunaJ  neewteb Onceast t Lets areimtcP reA W ta ------------------------------------------------ ,0250--meeb r13 ---------------------------------------------------------------- gnideht C rinaelciFatili Eeseexc.BA llC loroda o ----22  Appendix          -35     

Troubled Waters iii

--------------------------------   ofe blTa  Sumtive----mary ettnC no exuc  s E   ---- In 1 --------  :no ehTdortitcu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- 3-- kcaBougr: ndPeA itrm ---------------------------------------------------------------- efotStairacA emater’s W----s--- emiracs’idgn:sA  ---4  Fin --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e-utllPoo  t inistration’s As ---- hT euBhsA md --------------------------------------------------------------------s-ay--------elbuorT wretaW d

   t tasael setts;  niot g cix 0 

Executive Summary   ctober 18, 2007 marks th  etsro oerramdnal a ,tcA r tedndteinw lak  anniversary o fht elCae naWet53 e O a    damnhysihe pin tinta fht eangeiryto aters.  tion’s wacimna l,lacehc alicnt ibid ogolng the In passi Clean Water Act, Congress set the goals of eliminating the discharge of pollutants into the nation’s waterways by 1985 and making all U.S. waterways fishable and swimmable by 1983. Although we made significant progress in improving watenrc eq uthalei typ assisage of the Clean Water Act, we are far  from realizing the Act’s original vision.   Using information provided Ub.yS t. hEen vironmentaol tPerction Agency (EPA) in response to a Freedom  of Information Act request, this report analyzes all m a cxetae  htitcilir faajoedsed their Clean Water Act permits between January 1, 2005 caenmd bDere 31, 2005; reveatlsy tphe eo f pollutants they are  discharging into our waterways; and details  ttoh ew heixcthe tnhtese facilities are exceeding their permit  levels   .      More than two decades after the drafte1r9s7 o2f  Ctlhean Water Act intended for the discharge of all pollutants to be eliminated, facilities acrostsr yt hceo nctoinuune to violatlue tipoonl limits, at times  egregiously.     Findings include:   Thousands of facilities continue to exceed their Clean Water Act permits.   ”Nationally, more than 3600 major facilities (57%) exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits once between January 1, a2n0d0 5D ecember 31, 2005.      ”ities exceeding  efom jarof caliheig pstceeragntetatiw st hth ehtAcr lC riehtetaW naes .S.U 01 ehT  permit limits at least once anre,   Matu ,noentcci Ohio, Cmpshire,eN ,aH wsI ednal, tsodRhchsaetussi New York, North Dakota, California, and West Virginia.   ”The 10 U.S. counties with the most faxcilie seitt gnideele Cirheerat WanA tcp reimsta  tleast once in  this period are Harris County, Texas; Los Angeles County, California; Worcester County, Massachu New Haven County, Connecticlcuta;s iCeau Parish, Louisiana; AllegChoeunyty, Pennsylvania; Hartford County, Connecticut; Will County, IllinoisC; oWunatyyn, e Michigan; and Erie County, New York.       These facilities often exceed their permaint so nmcoer ea ntdh for more than one pollutant.    ”424,ah nert  dom0ep edoireht mit ep rteortu seddiecdeni gtiei sxermits intheir perof cali6300m ja The  exceedances of their Clean Water Act permitislimits.  Teasnt hat many facilities exceeded their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant.                                                     a Facilities are designated as “major” based on an EPA scoring system that considers a combination of factors, includ pollutant potential, streamflow volume, public health impacts, and proximity to coastal waters. Troubled Waters 1