THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, September 18, 1996 TAG: 9609180001
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 58 lines
Everyone agreed that Virginia's program to stop toxic industrial pollution of creeks, rivers and bays needed fixing, but the State Water Control Board's decision last week to replace the program, effective immediately, is hardly what environmentalists had in mind.
The replacement affords sewage-treatment plants, shipyards and industries more flexibility in solving pollution problems but imposes tighter deadlines.
``This is tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bath water,'' complained Kay Slaughter, staff attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center in Charlottesville. She said her organization and other environmental groups had urged the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to fix the old toxics program - not eliminate it.
As many as 40 companies had stopped discharging toxic substances into the environment since 1988, when the toxics program just repealed took effect. Fifty more companies are studying a remedy, officials have said.
The acknowledged flaw in the old system was the ease with which companies discharging toxic substances like mercury, lead or ammonia could delay action. The old system, said Bob Burnley, state director of environmental programs and evaluation, permitted a company to put off drafting an action plan for years by pursuing further evaluations and monitoring.
Under the new enforcement system, any business or sewage plant whose discharge tests positive for toxicity must start devising a corrective strategy right away. That strategy, Burnley said, will be added to the company's state water-pollution permit and must be implemented within the permit's five-year life.
The upside of the new program, of course, is the possibility for greater speed in fixing problems.
The downside is that the new program essentially asks the public to trust that the state environmental department and a polluting company will arrive at a pollution-ending plan that's best for all concerned, including the environment.
Environmental groups' trust of the Allen administration is too small to measure, except with fine scientific instruments. One of Allen's early steps as governor was to have a study done of state environmental laws to ensure that none was stronger than the federal government required it to be.
Roy A. Hoagland, staff attorney for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation in Virginia, said he would not be surprised to see many controversies arise from deals between state environmental officials and industries. He noted that the public learned of state officials' attempt to remove specific limits on the release of TBT, a toxic boat-paint additive, only because environmentalists read a fine-print legal ad in a local newspaper.
For several years, state officials had complained of delays with the old toxics plan and had sought to repeal the program for years.
The state should have retained the old toxic-industrial-pollution program, which has worked, though too slowly. The state could have fixed the problem of delays without trading off rigorous standards.
State cooperation with industry to solve pollution problems is surely a good idea. But sooner or later mischief will arise if the state favors flexible leniency over environmental protection. by CNB