Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

EPA Shouldn’t Use Coronavirus as Excuse to Look the Other Way on Pollution

With all the talk of the "new normal" brought about by the coronavirus pandemic, we cannot lose sight of how government policies and heavy industry continue to force certain populations and communities into a persistent existential nightmare. Polluted air, poisoned water, the threat of chemical explosions – these are all unjust realities that many marginalized and vulnerable Americans face all the time that are even more concerning in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nothing could make these injustices more outrageously apparent and dangerous than EPA’s signaled retreat on environmental standards and enforcement, which cravenly takes advantage of the global pandemic and a rapidly expanding economic collapse. On March 26, Susan Bodine, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, issued a memo outlining the agency's sweeping, temporary enforcement policy. Advocates, scientists, and communities almost immediately objected, and in a few days’ time, environmental organizations filed a legal petition demanding the agency walk back the policy and craft something far narrower.

Of course, EPA must adjust its enforcement policies to be responsive to the COVID-19 pandemic, with a particular view to protecting its employees and other workers from exposure to the disease. However, instead of signaling a free pass for polluters, the agency must unequivocally require compliance with environmental standards while working with companies to accommodate and resolve actual, documented challenges to their ability to comply with our environmental and public health laws – of the sort the agency offers in its instructions to public water systems.

All this work requires transparency and meaningful, proactive notice and support to affected communities, especially those already disproportionately burdened by harmful pollution and lack of access to health care. In particular, air pollution, unfettered by monitoring and controls, is a priority concern for fenceline communities, given the link between chronic respiratory illness and increased risk of harm from COVID-19.

The EPA enforcement memo is yet another example of a failure of leadership by the Trump administration. It sends a nationwide message that noncompliance will be excused while the agency abandons it duty to protect citizens from public health and environmental hazards.

EPA's policy also foists enforcement responsibility onto increasingly beleaguered state agencies. This is all the more reckless given that state leaders are focused 24-7 on emergency response to the pandemic and are likely unable to fully watchdog and mount a response to acute environmental risks and imminent threats. Contrary to messaging from EPA, past administrations did not issue a wholesale waiver of environmental monitoring requirements during previous disasters. In fact, in some cases, such monitoring was amplified to ascertain certain disaster-driven pollution risks.

EPA's temporary enforcement policy should be revised without delay, which can be done without sacrificing the reasonable flexibility that the agency already exercises in its enforcement. EPA should be explicit that it will excuse monitoring or compliance failures only if the company can show that the failure was a direct result of the pandemic. The agency should also clarify that operators must compile the data necessary and appropriate to demonstrate that any non-compliance was caused by the pandemic. Such a showing should be made in writing to EPA and state regulators within a defined period, and all such showings should be subject to timely and complete public notice.

To achieve this outcome, federal and state regulators should determine that for facilities in operation, all personnel who conduct self-monitoring and reporting are considered essential employees and that self-monitoring and reporting are an essential and mandatory function of those facilities. Regulators should presume an operator’s culpability for any failures to carry out those monitoring, reporting, and pollution control requirements until proven otherwise.

Coordination of public notice by federal and state regulators is especially critical at this time. The public has a right to know about the threat of pollution in order to mitigate their risks, and public disclosure can have a deterrent effect against inexcusable failures to comply or bad-faith efforts to avoid enforcement. However, the agency’s temporary policy fails to set adequate and clear expectations for public notice of acute risks and imminent threats. Further, the policy should also explicitly account for how public notice must be responsive to the circumstances that citizens and regulators find themselves in during the pandemic, sheltered and working from their homes.

EPA should take a lead role in gathering, coordinating, and distributing regulatory compliance information to industry, state regulators, and the public at large, serving, in part, as a clearinghouse with oversight responsibility for the data described in the agency’s temporary policy. To this end, the policy should be revised to require states to maintain centralized files of reports of noncompliance during the pandemic, as well as those agencies’ own public notifications in response to, for example, force majeure claims, noncompliance with monitoring and other required reporting, and failures of emission controls, unpermitted discharges, and emergency bypasses.

Beyond EPA, Members of Congress need to act quickly to exercise their oversight authority, whether or not the agency’s temporary enforcement policy is revised or retracted. This is necessary to monitor EPA’s implementation of its enforcement policies but also to hold the administration more immediately accountable for inconsistencies and gaps in its stated policies. For example, in Section III of the memo, Bodine indicates that federal resources will be largely focused on “situations that may create an acute risk or imminent threat to public health or the environment.” However, elsewhere in the memo, EPA pins the response for such episodes on the states.

All that said, the EPA memo does not merely add insult to injury for fenceline communities. Rather, the agency recklessly provides cover for polluters to cause real and lasting physical harm in these communities during the pandemic. There is a psychological terror, too, in waiving compliance with monitoring. Families will wonder for years if unreported pollution caused lasting harm or contributed to COVID-related deaths. Neither the temporary policy nor any prospective revisions, retractions, or, congressional oversight change the circumstances on the ground. While environmental regulators work from home and scale back routine inspections, community leaders and environmental advocates should also safely continue monitoring industry’s compliance and exercise their own oversight with public records requests for industry self-reporting and compliance waivers.

Showing 2,829 results

David Flores | April 7, 2020

EPA Shouldn’t Use Coronavirus as Excuse to Look the Other Way on Pollution

With all the talk of the "new normal" brought about by the coronavirus pandemic, we cannot lose sight of how government policies and heavy industry continue to force certain populations and communities into a persistent existential nightmare. Polluted air, poisoned water, the threat of chemical explosions – these are all unjust realities that many marginalized and vulnerable Americans face all the time that are even more concerning in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nothing could make these injustices more outrageously apparent and dangerous than EPA’s signaled retreat on environmental standards and enforcement, which cravenly takes advantage of the global pandemic and a rapidly expanding economic collapse.

Katie Tracy | April 3, 2020

Amazon vs. Its Workers

Amazon's response to the coronavirus pandemic is the latest in a long line of instances where the company has put profit ahead of the health, safety, and economic well-being of its workforce. According to Amazon employees at its fulfillment centers and Whole Foods stores, the company is refusing to provide even basic health and safety protections for workers in jobs where they could be exposed to coronavirus.

Joseph Tomain | April 3, 2020

Precaution and the Pandemic — Part II

The coronavirus has already taught us about the role of citizens and their government. First, we have learned that we have vibrant and reliable state and local governments, many of which actively responded to the pandemic even as the White House misinformed the public and largely sat on its hands for months. Second, science and expertise should not be politicized. Instead, they are necessary factors upon which we rely for information and, when necessary, for guidance about which actions to take and about how we should live our lives in threatening circumstances.

Joseph Tomain | April 2, 2020

Precaution and the Pandemic — Part I

In this time of pandemic, we are learning about our government in real time – its strengths and weaknesses; the variety of its responses; and about our relationship, as citizens, to those we have elected to serve us. Most importantly and most immediately, we have learned the necessity of having a competent, expert regulatory structure largely immune from partisan politics even in these times of concern, anxiety, and confusion.

Daniel Farber | April 2, 2020

Federalism and the Pandemic

The states have been out in front in dealing with the coronavirus. Apart from President Trump's tardy response to the crisis, there are reasons for this, involving limits on Trump's authority, practicalities, and constitutional rulings.

Michael C. Duff | April 1, 2020

The Coronavirus and Shortcomings of Workers’ Comp

Front-line health care workers and other first responders are in the trenches of the battle against the COVID-19 virus. The news is replete with tragic stories of these workers fearing death, making wills, and frantically utilizing extreme social distancing techniques to keep their own families sheltered from exposure to the virus. Should they contract the virus and become unable to work, they may seek workers' compensation coverage, which is the primary benefit system for workers suffering work-related injuries or diseases.

David Flores | April 1, 2020

Webinar Recap: State Courts, Climate Torts, and Their Role in Securing Justice for Communities

Hundreds of thousands of Americans, from the southern California surf town of Imperial Beach to the rowhouse-lined blocks of Baltimore, are banding together to bring lawsuits against several dozen of the most powerful and wealthy corporations in the world. In March, 2020, CPR hosted the third installment of its climate justice webinar series. The webinar focused on the growing climate tort litigation movement, explored why litigants are bringing these suits, and discussed where we may see additional litigation in the next several years.

Brian Gumm | March 31, 2020

CPR Joins Advocates in Blasting EPA’s Free Pass for Polluters

On March 27, the Center for Progressive Reform joined environmental justice, public health, and community advocates in calling out the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for suspending enforcement of our nation's crucial environmental laws. The agency made the move as part of the Trump administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic, despite mounting evidence that increased air pollution worsens COVID-19, the disease the virus causes.

Daniel Farber | March 30, 2020

Inequality and the Coronavirus

It's a truism among disaster experts that people who were disadvantaged before a disaster are also the most vulnerable during the disaster. There are aspects of the coronavirus pandemic that fit this mold. Here are some of the disparities we can expect to see.