|
Sayreville, NJ ---With the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) preparing to weaken reporting requirements for chemical facilities and refineries, U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) and New Jersey environmental leaders today voiced their strong opposition to the proposal, saying it makes it easier for corporations to pollute our environment and endanger the health of the public.
Pallone was joined by David Pringle of the New Jersey Environmental Federation and Jeff Tittel of the New Jersey Sierra Club at a press conference at Burke's Park, located in front of the DuPont Parlin Plant. The Sayreville plant is one of 90 facilities in Middlesex County that would be affected by the proposed changes.
The EPA wants to loosen reporting requirements for the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI), which was established by Congress back in 1986 to ensure that communities know how much of the most dangerous industrial chemicals are being released into their air, water, and ground. The requirements, mandated as part of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986, came in response to a tragic disaster at a Union Carbide chemical plant in Bhopal, India in 1984 that killed thousands.
The New Jersey congressman sent a letter today to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson expressing his opposition to the weakening of TRI reporting requirements and urging Administrator Johnson to withdraw the proposal. (A COPY OF THE LETTER IS ATTACHED)
Pallone wrote that not only has the TRI given citizens a much fuller picture of the contaminants that they live with, it has also encouraged companies to reduce their toxic releases. In fact, Pallone pointed to TRI data that indicates the overall volume of toxic releases has declined by 59 percent since TRI's reporting requirements began in 1988.
"Once again, the Bush administration wants to make life easier for corporations that pollute our air and water and endanger the health of New Jerseyans," Pallone said at today's press conference. "It defies logic to weaken requirements that have played an instrumental role in reducing the amount of harmful toxins released into our air. I strongly urge the EPA to immediately withdraw this proposal and work, instead, to strengthen reporting requirements to best protect public health."
If the EPA implements this proposal, 2,364 communities would be left without critical information on the toxic chemicals to which they are exposed. There is a large body of evidence indicating that exposure to industrial chemicals is widespread among Americans.
Furthermore, a June 2000 National Academies of Science panel concluded that 25 percent of developmental and neurological problems in children are a result of the interplay of exposure to chemicals and genetic factors, while three percent of the problems were due exclusively to chemical exposure.
The EPA's, proposal would make three major changes to TRI reporting requirements. First, EPA wants to allow facilities to report their toxic releases every other year instead of every year. Second, the agency plans to increase the threshold for facilities to use a shorter Form A instead of the detailed Form R from 500 to 5,000 pounds of annual releases. Form R calls for a detailed listing of the amount of each of the chemicals released from the facility and how exactly each of the chemicals is disposed.
Finally, EPA would exempt facilities that release up to 500 pounds of the most harmful toxins, known as persistent bio-accumulative toxins (PBTs), from Form R reporting requirements if they do not release them directly into the environment. Currently, facilities releasing any PBTs into the environment must complete Form R.
This month, the EPA extended the comment period on the proposed TRI changes from December 5 to January 13. Shortly thereafter, the environmental agency is expected to make a final decision. |
|
