InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 23
Posts 1815
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 09/27/2008

Re: None

Friday, 11/06/2009 11:15:30 PM

Friday, November 06, 2009 11:15:30 PM

Post# of 811
Testimony of
Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Before the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
United States House of Representatives
October 15, 2009
(PDF 7 Pages)

"Data available to EPA shows that, in many parts of the country, the level of significant non-compliance with permitting requirements is unacceptably high and the level of enforcement activity is unacceptably low. For example, one out of every four of the largest Clean Water Act dischargers had significant violations in 2008. Many of these violations were serious effluent violations or failure to comply with enforcement orders.
The government’s enforcement response to these violations is uneven across the country. For example, a violation in one state results in the assessment of mandatory minimum penalties, while in another state, no enforcement action is taken for the same violation. This situation creates a competitive disadvantage for states that are enforcing the law. We need to change this. Strong and fair compliance and enforcement across the country is vital to establishing a level playing field for industrial facilities, preventing some regions from attempting to achieve an economic advantage over others. And most importantly, having clean water is not a luxury. Rather, we need to make sure that all citizens, regardless of the state that they live in,should be able to drink safe water and swim and play in clean lakes, rivers and bays.

We need to address these key problems and that’s why I am happy to announce EPA’s new Clean Water Act enforcement plan.
EPA’s Enforcement Office, led by Cynthia Giles, has recommended to me – and I have decided to act on – three crucial steps to strengthen federal and state Clean Water Act enforcement to better protect water quality.

First, we need to develop more innovative approaches to target enforcement to the most serious violations and the most significant sources. We need to ensure protective permits and appropriate civil and criminal enforcement for factories and large wastewater treatment plants that unlawfully discharge pollutants to waterways. We also need to reshape our enforcement program to be more effective in tackling violations from the many dispersed sources that continue to be serious threats to our waters and a major reason too many of our waters do not meet water quality standards. Some of the biggest threats are posed by concentrated animal feeding operations and by contaminated stormwater that flows from industrial facilities, construction sites, and urban streets into our waters.

Second, we need to strengthen our oversight of state permitting and enforcement programs. Many states have strong water quality protection programs and take enforcement to assure compliance. But we’ve seen great variability among the states in enforcement performance. EPA must clearly

articulate the acceptable “bar” for state clean water programs and consistently hold states accountable. In situations where states are not issuing protective permits or taking enforcement to achieve compliance, EPA needs to act to strengthen state programs and to pursue federal enforcement actions as necessary.
Third, we are and will continue to take immediate steps to improve transparency and accountability. We have a responsibility to “tell it like it is” to the American public.

We have already published the data and information that EPA has on Clean Water Act compliance and enforcement across the country on our website. We will continue this practice as new information becomes available. We also are working to accelerate the development of 21st century information technology tools to help us gather information more efficiently and to make it easier for the public to access and understand that information. For example, I am directing my staff to quickly develop a proposed rule requiring electronic reporting from regulated facilities, to replace the current paper based system. Electronic reporting could save regulated facilities, EPA and the states millions of dollars each year. At the same time, providing that information to the public shines a spotlight on facility performance.

"

Source: http://www.epa.gov/ocir/hearings/testimony/111_2009_2010/2009_1015_lpj.pdf


Not compensated in any manner for research and/or posts. Information should be construed as information only for discussion purposes. Always conduct your own dd. Just my opinion

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.