|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
W.R. Grace Liable for Libby, Montana Cleanup Costs of $54 Million WASHINGTON, DC, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - A federal judge in Montana has ordered W.R. Grace & Co. to pay over $54.5 million to reimburse the federal government for the costs of investigation and cleanup of asbestos contamination in Libby, Montana.W.R. Grace owned and operated a vermiculite mine and vermiculite processing facilities in Libby from 1963 to 1990. The vermiculite ore found in Libby is contaminated with asbestos fibers. Mining and processing activities resulted in the spread of vermiculite, and the associated asbestos fibers, to homes, businesses, and schools throughout the town. It is the largest judgment after trial in the history of the federal Superfund law, according to the Justice Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Judge Donald Molloy of the U.S. District Court of Montana ruled the company is liable for costs related to the investigation and cleanup of asbestos contamination in Libby and ruled that the EPA's revised method for calculating indirect, or overhead, costs is appropriate and that those costs may be recovered from W.R. Grace. This is the first time a federal district court has ruled on EPA's revised method for calculating overhead costs. "Today's ruling is a victory for the environment and the American taxpayers," said Thomas Sansonetti, assistant attorney general of the Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division. "From the very the beginning of this case, W.R. Grace has refused to accept responsibility for contaminating this small town in Northwest Montana with asbestos. Today's ruling rejects every argument made by W.R. Grace and requires them to pay for the cleanup of the contamination that they caused." Asbestos, a recognized human carcinogen, is known to cause lung cancer and mesothelioma, a lethal tumor of the lining of the chest and abdominal cavities. Exposure to asbestos can also cause asbestosis, a disease characterized by fibrotic scarring of the lung. Hundreds of people in Libby, including former mine workers, their families, and other residents, have shown signs and symptoms of asbestos related disease. The federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)conducted medical testing for Libby residents in the summer of 2000, and observed lung abnormalities in 18 percent of the people who participated. The agency found that mortality in Libby from asbestosis was 40 to 80 times higher than expected, and mortality from lung cancer was 20 to 30 percent higher than expected. The EPA has been removing asbestos contaminated soils and vermiculite in and near Libby since May 2000. The federal government filed suit against W.R. Grace in March 2001 to recover its investigation and cleanup costs under the Superfund law. In December 2002, Judge Molloy rejected W.R. Grace's challenges to EPA's actions in Libby, ruling that EPA's cleanup decisions were reasonable. A three day trial on the remaining issues in the case – including the adequacy of documentation of ATSDR's Libby related costs and the recoverability of EPA's overhe d costs – was conducted in January 2003 and is the subject of Wednesday's ruling. The ruling means that W.R. Grace must pay all of the $54.5 million in costs that the EPA incurred through December 31, 2001. Costs incurred after that date will be resolved in future proceedings if disputed by W.R. Grace. "The millions of dollars in litigation fees that W.R. Grace has spent in this misguided effort to escape responsibility for the Libby cleanup would have been much better spent on cleanup or on health care for Libby residents," said Carol Rushin, EPA assistant regional administrator for enforcement. The Libby cleanup also was the subject of an earlier lawsuit between the federal government and W.R. Grace as a result of the company's refusal to provide EPA with access to property that it owned or controlled near Libby. EPA needed to conduct cleanup activities on this property and filed suit in October 2000 alleging that W.R. Grace's refusal to provide access was unlawful and requesting the imposition of civil penalties. In March 2001, Judge Molloy ordered W.R. Grace to provide EPA with access to its properties in Libby. In a related settlement, W.R. Grace agreed to a civil penalty claim of $71,000 and to spend $2.75 million to create a fund to provide additional health care for Libby residents with asbestos related diseases. In April 2001, W.R. Grace filed for bankruptcy in federal court in Delaware. Any payments on yesterday's judgment must be approved by the bankruptcy court.
Conservationists Sue for Interior Documents of Utah Wilderness Deal WASHINGTON, DC, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - Conservationists filed suit in federal court Wednesday to unearth Interior Department documents concerning a deal struck in April 2003 that prohibits the federal government from identifying and protecting wilderness areas on more than 150 million acres of public lands.The legal action, filed by the environmental law firm Earthjustice on behalf of The Wilderness Society, alleges that the Interior Department is illegally withholding the documents. The documents center on a deal struck by Interior Department Secretary Gale Norton and Utah Republican Governor Mike Leavitt, who is now the Bush administration's nominee to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The deal announced on April 11 by Norton and Leavitt settled a suit first brought by Utah against the Interior Department in 1996 over the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) reinventory of wilderness quality lands. That reinventory identified three million more acres in the state as suitable for wilderness protection than the agency's 1980s inventory had identified. Although Utah's legal case was largely rejected by the courts, Leavitt renewed the challenge in March. The Utah governor and the Bush administration quickly brokered a settlement that revokes BLM's authority to conduct wilderness inventories in any state or to establish new Wilderness Study Areas in any state. The settlement also revokes the Wilderness Inventory Handbook, which is a set of guidelines for BLM managers to use in assessing wilderness protections for federal lands affected by proposed resource development. The settlement also disallows the use of a 1999 comprehensive statewide BLM reinventory of Utah's public lands. The deal removes wilderness as one of the multiple uses BLM is required to analyze when making land use decisions, critics say. Conservationists are appealing the settlement, which not only affects Utah but much of public land managed by the BLM across the United States. One business day after deal was announced on April 11, The Wilderness Society requested Interior Department documents concerning the deal under the Freedom of Information Act. Under that law, documents shared between Utah and the Interior Department on the deal must be made available to the public. More than four months after the request, however, the Interior Department has provided only a token response, according to The Wilderness Society. "Secretary Norton's radical position to never again look for or protect wilderness lands reversed the policy of the Reagan Administration and every other Interior Secretary from 1976 to the present, including James Watt," said Ted Zukoski, one of the Earthjustice attorneys involved in the case. "The goal of the deal was clear - Governor Leavitt wanted to open up some of Utah's most spectacular lands to destructive activities such as oil drilling and road building."
Residents, Conservation Groups Sue to Block Colorado Timber Sale PAGOSA SPRINGS, Colorado, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - Pagosa Springs homeowners and conservation groups sued the U.S. Forest Service today over a controversial logging operation that the plaintiffs claim would increase the threat of wildfire to nearby residents as well as harm important wildlife habitat. The Dutton timber sale area is eight miles north of Pagosa Springs, Colorado in the San Juan National Forest. Logging would occur in an area surrounding the 480 acres of private land including the Lost Valley of the San Juans community.The plaintiffs asked a federal judge to stop the sale until the Forest Service does a required population survey of nine key species in the forest. Neil Levine, Earthjustice attorney who is representing the plaintiffs in this lawsuit, said, "The law requires the Forest Service to make sure their logging doesn't put more species at risk. They've failed to live up to their responsibilities to protect the forests and wildlife." "I didn't buy property in the national forests to be surrounded by stumps and flammable logging debris," said Clive Kincaid, who owns a house on 35 acres in the Lost Valley of the San Juans. "The forests around here are going to burn big and hot because the government is selling fire resistant big trees to timber corporations while leaving behind tons of branches and brush that will fuel a holocaust if wildfire comes through during this drought. Its just crazy." The timber sale is in the district of Congressman Scott McInnis, a Republican, who is the sponsor of the so-called Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HR 1904), which has passed the House of Representatives and is currently pending in the Senate. This bill would gag local residents who object to timber sales, give the Forest Service a blank check to conduct large-scale, environmentally damaging logging projects by claiming the forests are at risk of insect infestation, and fail to do the real work of thinning overgrown brush near at-risk communities, the plaintiffs claim. John Horning, executive cirector of Forest Guardians, said, "Unfortunately it comes as no surprise that Congressman McInnis is pushing a timber sale under the guise of helping local residents when in fact the only ones helped are his friends in the timber industry." Rather than reduce fire risk by removing dense stands of trees growing near homes, the plaintiffs argue that the Dutton timber sale would increase fire risk by leaving tons of flammable logging debris behind near private homes. The timber sale would cut fire resistant old growth ponderosa pine and Rocky Mountain Douglas fir, the most commercially valuable trees in the forest. None of the project's funds have been allocated for area landowners to reduce fire risk near their homes. The Forest Service admits taxpayers would lose about $20,000 on this timber sale because it would cost the government more money to administer than it would recover from the logging company for the logs. This figure does not include the cost of lowered property values, increased soil erosion, and flooding and lost revenues in the area from hunting, fishing, and recreation. "Taxpayers are losing money to bankroll logging that undercuts my livelihood," said Paul Carpino, a local real estate agent "It's the scenic mountain beauty and wildlife that brings people to this unique area and sustains my business. It's simply irresponsible for the government to waste taxpayers' money and harm my business at the same time." The Forest Service decided in November 2002 to clearcut and selectively log 3.7 million board feet of timber in the area, an amount that would fill 740 logging trucks. Nearly seven miles of roads would be constructed and an additional seven miles of fire line bulldozed through the forest. Habitat for the federally protected Canada lynx and sensitive populations of milk snake, tiger salamander, wolverine, and three-toed woodpecker are found in the sale area.
EPA Declines to Regulate Climate Emissions from Vehicles WASHINGTON, DC, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today signed a notice denying a petition to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The petition was filed by the nonprofit, bipartisan International Center for Technology Assessment and a number of other organizations.The EPA said it is denying the petition to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles for two primary reasons. First, Congress has not granted the agency authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gases for climate change purposes. Second, the EPA has determined that setting greenhouse gas emission standards for motor vehicles "is not appropriate at this time." "Congress must provide us with clear legal authority before we can take regulatory action to address a fundamental issue such as climate change," said Jeff Holmstead, assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation. "We cannot try to use the Clean Air Act to regulate for climate change purposes because the act was not designed or intended for that purpose." "We already are taking a number of actions, at home and abroad, to address climate change" said Holmstead. "Regulating the transportation sector for climate change purposes would have enormous economic, practical, and societal impacts. The U.S. is advancing realistic and effective long-term approaches to deal with this issue." In February 2002, President George W. Bush announced a national goal of reducing the greenhouse gas intensity of the U.S. economy by 18 percent over the next 10 years. Greenhouse gas intensity is defined as the ratio of greenhouse gas emissions to economic output. This measure differs from that used by most other industrialized countries under the Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change which measures the actual emissions of six greenhouse gases. "EPA does have a number of very effective, non-regulatory programs that address climate change. Programs such as Climate Leaders, Energy Star, Green Power, SmartWay and Best Workplaces for Commuters are making substantial progress in reducing greenhouse gases," said Holmstead. Best Workplace for Commuters offers innovative solutions to commuting in order to reduce vehicle trips and miles traveled. Holmstead said, "We expect that 3.7 million employees will be covered by this program in 2005. EPA is also playing a leadership role in advancing fuel cell vehicle and hydrogen fuel technologies and policies to support the U.S. environmental, energy and national security goals."
Critics Sound Off on Bush's Coastal Zone Management WASHINGTON, DC, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - Conservationists say a Bush administration proposal to revise coastal zone management regulations will weaken protections for the nation's coastal areas.Some 20 local and national coastal groups from around the country filed official comments this week to outline their opposition to a Bush administration proposal to revise regulations designed to help implement the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). The thirty year law currently gives states the authority to review projects proposed in coastal areas, such as offshore oil and gas drilling, and to object if they are not consistent with a state's coastal management program. The proposal by the Bush administration - put forth by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - attempts to ease the protections afforded by the CZMA by revising its underlying regulations. The administration says its proposal would improve cooperation between the states and the federal government in an attempt to expedite necessary and responsible energy development, but critics say it will do nothing of the sort. They believe it would preclude states from reviewing certain types of activities that affect coastal resources, like planning for oil and gas drilling. And critics say the proposal would mean that where states retain the right to review projects, the timeframes for review would be shortened, and the information made available to states would be restricted. "The CZMA has been a critical tool in protecting our coastal environments and economies from oil and gas drilling and other ill-sighted development," said Dawn Hamilton, executive director of Coast Alliance, a national non profit organization representing more than 600 local and regional coastal conservation organizations. "This unnecessary proposal is yet one more behind the scenes giveaway by the Bush administration to the energy industry, and does nothing to improve the effectiveness of the CZMA," said Hamilton. "We do not need to sacrifice our treasured coastlines to meet America's energy needs." The conservation groups filing their comments this week further question the motivation for the proposal because the same regulations were revised less than three years ago.
U.S. Export Import Bank Rejects Financing for Camisea Gas Project WASHINGTON, DC, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - The board of directors of the Export-Import Bank of the United States today voted to reject financing for the controversial $1.6 billion Camisea Gas Project in Peru.The loan would have provided $213 million for the $2.6 billion venture led by Hunt Oil and PlusPetrol. The decision to reject the request comes amid rising criticism of the project by environmental and human rights groups and some federal lawmakers. The board members of the bank displayed "courage and environmental leadership in the face of considerable pressure," said Jon Sohn, international campaigner for Friends of the Earth. The Camisea project involves the development of two natural gas deposits in the Peruvian Amazon and the construction of two pipelines to deliver the gas to Lim and Callao, Peru. The project seeks to tap into reserves of some 13,000 billion cubic feet of gas, but there is fierce opposition to the project. Two major investors, Citigroup and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, have turned down funding and financing. According to an internal report by the US Export Import Bank, obtained by environmental and human rights organizations through the Freedom of Information Act, proposals to mitigate the environmental impacts of the project are "woefully inadequate" and the project will likely lead to landslides, destroy critical natural habitats, and spread diseases among indigenous peoples. Critics say the project is already scarring the Peruvian Amazon and affecting the Nahua-Kugapakori Reserve - home to previously uncontacted and isolated indigenous populations. Groups are also concerned about an export terminal for Camisea will also be built in the Buffer Zone of the Paracas National Marine Reserve, Peru's only marine sanctuary for endangered birds and mammals. The key issue for the board of the Export Import Bank was the refusal of the Peruvian government and companies involved to loosen 2004 gas delivery deadlines to avoid a continuing pattern of environmental and social impacts that many believe are negative and irreversible. The Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) - a multilateral organization with some 27 member countries from the North and South America as well as the Caribbean - has yet to decide whether to provide a $75 million loan for pipeline construction and whether to syndicate an additional $320 million in loans from private banks. The IADB is slated to take up the project next week.
Survey Finds Half of New Englanders Unaware of Mercury Risks MONTPELIER, Vermont, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - The New England Zero Mercury Campaign released results today of a new survey that finds more than half of the 1,400 consumers surveyed are unaware of mercury exposure risks to women and children from consumption of canned tuna.Of the 1,394 New Englanders across six states informally surveyed about their knowledge of government advisories about mercury contaminated fish, 36 percent were unaware that the government advises people to limit eating certain fish due to mercury. Some 45 percent were unaware that women of childbearing age and young children should not eat swordfish, tuna steak, and certain freshwater fish because of mercury contamination. The survey found that 59 percent were unaware that state health departments advise pregnant women and young children to limit consumption of canned tuna, one of the most consumed fish in the United States. The Mercury Policy Project - a campaign partner in the study - said the results reiterate the need for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and health departments to strengthen fish consumption advisories and require businesses selling fish to post mercury fish warnings. "Over one year ago, FDA's advisory committee recommended that pregnant women and kids be advised to limit consumption of canned tuna," said Mercury Policy Project Director Michael Bender. "During the committee meeting, FDA scientists stated that upwards of 50 percent of women of childbearing age are unaware of exposure risks to mercury from eating fish. Our results are similar and bolster the need for FDA to stop delaying and act now." The primary health risk from mercury emerges when airborne mercury falls into surface waters where it can accumulate in streams and oceans. Bacteria in the water transform mercury into methylmercury, which fish absorb when they eat aquatic organisms and humans absorb when they eat fish. Scientists have shown that methylmercury can cause brain and nerve damage and studies indicate children and women of childbearing age are at a disproportionate risk. Currently, FDA also advises pregnant women and young children not to eat swordfish, shark, tilefish and king mackerel due to high mercury levels. The FDA also advises sensitive populations to limit commercially caught fish consumption to 12 ounces per week while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency advises limiting consumption of recreationally caught fish for these populations to six ounces per week for adults and two ounces per week for children. Forty three states currently have advisories in effect warning citizens to reduce or avoid fish consumption because of mercury contamination, compared to only 27 states in 1993 - a 60 percent increase in the past decade. Twelve states now warn pregnant women and children to limit consumption of canned tuna, and some states advise that the albacore "white" canned tuna has much higher mercury levels than the "light" canned tuna. Recent testing by the Mercury Policy Project found that the "white" tuna has mercury levels four times higher than the "light" canned tuna.
Scientists Unveil the Secret of Spider Webs CLARE, Michigan, August 28, 2003 (ENS) - A Clare, Michigan tire dealer faces up to 14 years in prison for falsifying documents required by the state of Michigan to track the destination of scrap tires.On August 21, detectives from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Office of Criminal Investigations arrested Vernald Cole of Remus, Michigan. Cole operates a tire retail business in Clare and was arrested at that location with the assistance of the Clare City Police Department. The arrest stems from a felony warrant authorized by the Clare County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office and issued by the 80th Judicial District. Cole was taken to the Clare County jail and later arraigned on the charges. The charges stem from a Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) investigation of scrap tire manifests containing false information regarding the final destination of scrap tires. The Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA) regulates the transport, accumulation, and processing of scrap tires. NREPA also requires the use of a manifest to track the origin and destination of a scrap tire shipment. The improper storage of scrap tires is a serious concern for the DEQ. Improperly stored scrap tires can pose a serious fire hazard and provide breeding sites for mosquitoes that may carry pathogens such as the West Nile virus and encephalitis, the agency said. Many scrap tires have been accumulated at unregistered collection sites with inadequate bonding as required by state law. Illegally transported scrap tires often end up at such unregistered sites. An amendment to the state law in 2002 resulted in changes to the scrap tire manifest system requirements resulting in better tracking of the disposition of these tires. George Bruchmann, chief of the DEQ’s Waste and Hazardous Material Division, said, “The accurate tracking of used tires is important to prevent illegal dumping. The DEQ will seek punishment for those who wish to scam the tracking system or create manifests that contain false or misleading information.” The Michigan Department of Attorney General has also filed civil lawsuits against Cole for two un-registered, non-compliant scrap tire collection sites located in mid-Michigan. Cole has been released on a $5,000/10 percent bond pending a preliminary examination on the charges. He faces up to 14 years in prison for each of the two charges. |
