Polluters Playground
More than one in four (26 percent) of the largest U.S. industrial, municipal
and federal facilities discharging dangerous chemicals were in serious violation
of the Clean Water Act at least once during a recent 15-month period, according
to a report released in May by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
The report, Polluters Playground: How the Government Permits
Pollution, describes many shortcomings in the monitoring of water
pollution and efforts to deter polluters.
It is outrageous that the Bush Administration is proposing to slash
enforcement budgets when more than one in four polluting facilities are
breaking the law, says U.S. PIRG Environmental Advocate Richard
Caplan. We need clean water now, and we have to start by requiring
polluters to obey the law.
The report analyzed the behavior of major facilities nationwide by reviewing
violations of the Clean Water Act between October of 1998 and December
of 1999, recorded in the EPAs Permit Compliance System database.
The report found that 159 major facilities were in Significant Non-Compliance
(SNC) during the entire 15-month period.
Of the 42 industrial facilities in SNC for the entire 15-month period,
EPA records indicate only one received a fine over the past five years.
Big Oil: Slowing Supply
Since the mid-1990s, oil companies may have acted to suppress refinery
capacity and control gasoline supply in an effort to drive up gasoline
prices and boost profit margins, according to a report released in June
by Senator Ron Wyden, D-Oregon.
The report is based on internal oil company documents that raise questions
about anti-competitive practices among leading oil companies, Wyden says.
With the industry blaming high gasoline prices on insufficient refinery
capacity and costly environmental regulations, Wydens report reveals
that oil companies may have worked to contrive tight supplies.
These documents raise significant questions about whether Americas
oil companies tried to pull off a financial triple play, boosting profits
by reducing refinery capacity, tagging consumers with higher pump prices
and then arguing for environmental rollbacks and additional financial
incentives, says Wyden.
In memos detailed in the 11-page Wyden report, oil companies articulate
a desire to reduce oil and gasoline supply. One document from Texaco reads,
Significant events need to occur to assist in reducing supplies
and/or increasing the demand for gasoline in order to increase prices
and grow profit margins.
Oil company competitors also discuss mutual opportunities to control
oil and gasoline supply, thus keeping markets tight. In one case, a Mobil
document concerning an offline small refiner in California states, Needless
to say, we would all like to see Powerine [an independent refiner] stay
down. Full court press is warranted in this case.
I started investigating high gas prices in Oregon back in early
1999, and in the two years since, its become clear that Americas
gasoline crunch is much more than a simple case of supply and demand,
Wyden says. This report raises more serious questions about whether
anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices are keeping the markets from
working the way they should and hurting American consumers in the
process.
In 1999, Wyden first launched his own investigation into possible antitrust
violations in the oil industry. His 1999 report was the initial basis
for a Federal Trade Commission investigation and revealed anti-competitive
gas pricing in the Pacific Northwest.
Wydens probe showed that the industry engages in zone pricing and
discrimination against independently owned gas stations.
Earlier this year, at a hearing of the Consumer Subcommittee of the Senate
Commerce Committee, Wyden introduced another oil company memo revealing
ARCOs intent to keep the West Coast market tight by
exporting gasoline to Asia.
Wyden is calling for a ban on exports of Alaskan North Slope crude oil.
$1B Award Against Exxon
A New Orleans jury in May ordered ExxonMobil Corp. to pay a retired Louisiana
judge and his family $1 billion for contaminating their land with radioactivity.
The jury ordered Exxon to pay $56 million to clean up the 33-acre site,
$145,000 for lost property value, and $1 billion in punitive damages to
former Jefferson Parish District Judge Joseph Grefer and his family.
The jury sent a clear message to Exxon in particular and the oil
industry in general that these radioactive materials should and must be
cleaned up immediately, said Stuart Smith, the lawyer who represents
Judge Grefer and his family. Evidence in the record indicates that
this is a widespread problem affecting oil fields throughout the United
States.
The Grefers land was leased from the late 1950s until 1992 to Intracoastal
Tubular Services, a company contracted to clean Exxons pipes.
Intracoastal was found 15 percent at fault for the contamination, but
the jury ruled ExxonMobil should pay its share because only the oil giant
could have known that the crust being cleaned from the pipes was radioactive.
Exxon said justice was not done and that it will appeal the verdict.
Russell Mokhiber
|