By Ken Fountain
Fifty-eight percent of the state’s industrial
facilities, including several in the Baytown area, discharged more
pollution into waterways between July 1, 2003 and Dec. 31, 2004 than
their operating permits allowed under the federal Clean Water Act.
A
report by the watchdog group Environment Texas, called “Troubled
Waters,” is based on data culled from the federal Environmental
Protection Agency’s annual Toxic Release Inventory, which lists
self-reported air, water and land emissions from facilities.
Luke
Metzger, a spokesman for the Austin-based group, said the report is
designed to highlight environmentalists’ concerns that the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality enforcement policies don’t
discourage polluters.
“Too many Texas refineries, chemical
plants and other facilities are discharging chemicals into our rivers,
lakes and streams that are above legal limits,” he said.
Metzger
said that Texas has a “water quality crisis,” with almost a third of
the state’s lakes so polluted that they’ve been deemed unfit for
swimming or fishing.
“We see a serious lack of tough enforcement
by regulators to hold these facilities accountable. We know that most
of these exeedances go without punishment, and when there are
penalties, they’re generally far less than what the companies saved by
breaking the law in the first place. We’re pushing for tougher
enforcement by the TCEQ.
Metzger said that the Texas State
Auditor issued a report in 2003 that found “that companies routinely
keep large amounts of illegally gained profits, creating perverse
incentives to violate the law.”
He called on Gov. Rick Perry to
appoint a new commissioner, who would replace the retired Commissioner
Ralph Marquez, who would take a stronger line on enforcement against
polluters.
“There’s going to be some major decisions made by
this commission in the next few months, so whoever the governor
appoints is going to really be the tie-breaker on decisions affecting
the fairness of enforcement and the effectiveness of their enforcement
program.
But Terry Clawson, a spokesman for the state agency,
refuted the group’s claims, stating the in 2005, the agency fined
companies and municipalities a record $12.4 million, with an additional
$1,159 in administrative orders.
Last year, the agency conducted approximately 83,000 investigations of emissions, he said.
“We are very active in protecting the health and environment of Texans,”
Clawson
said that fines are only a part of the agency’s enforcement function,
which he said is not necessarily meant to be punitive.
“Our ultimate goal is not to fine companies, but to achieve compliance,” he said.
Clawson
said the agency’s enforcement policies have resulted in “millions of
dollars in upgrades and changes in processes” by industry to reduce
pollution.
Among the hundreds of companies and municipalities
cited by Environment Texas in the “Troubled Waters” report are several
from the Baytown area.
Among them are the Chevron
Phillips Chemical Corporation’s Cedar Bayou plant, which was cited for
releasing total organic compound into Cedar Bayou in September 2003 and
releasing total organic compound and oil and grease at its fire
training grounds in November 2004.
According to a statement released by the company, maintenance work was performed.
“We
consider both events to be isolated incidents and steps have been take
to prevent a reoccurrence. The Cedar Bayou Plant is committed to
environmental excellence,” said Ted Henken, the facility’s technical
manager.
The NRG Texas (formerly Texas Genco) Cedar Bayou power
plant was cited for three instances: releasing oil and grease into
Trinity Bay in September and October 2003 and iron into the bay in July
2004.
Ben Carmine, director of environmental operations at the
company’s Houston headquarters, said that in each case, the reported
exeedences were miniscule amounts over the permitted quantities, and
that steps had been taken to prevent reoccurrences.
He noted that the plant had only three reportable violations in an 18-month period.
“We do try to ensure environmental excellence, and we do a pretty good job of it,” Carmine said.
The
Advanced Aromatics plant was cited four times in the report for
releasing a chemical called di-n-butyl phthalate, ammonia nitrogen, and
phenolics between September 2003 and August 2004.
Bill Rankin,
the company’s vice president for regulatory affairs, attributed the
citation for di-n-butyl phthalate to an error at a third-party
laboratory performing an analysis sample.
Rankin acknowledged
the plant’s responsibility for the three other instances, each of which
he said were only slightly over the permitted quantities.
Rankin said that environmental stewardship is a “core tenet” of the company’s operations.
The
City of Baytown was cited for four instances of violations at its
central wastewater treatment plant, ranging from October 2003 to
January 2004.
City Manager Gary Jackson said that in each case,
the violation was one of the amount of treated water released during a
two-hour period (daily and monthly measurements are also taken), and
that each of the instances was during periods of heavy rainfall.
Jackson
attributed the problem to the longstanding issue of inflow and
infiltration of rainwater into the city’s aging wastewater system.
Assistant City Manager Kelvin Knauf said that in none of the instances cited was raw sewage released.
The
city is in the fifth year of a five-year, $28 million capital
improvement plan to replace or repair approximately 200 miles of sewer
pipes. Last year, the plan was extended to a 10-year time frame, at a
total outlay of $110 million, Jackson said.
In addition to the
replacement of pipes, the city plans to build a fourth wastewater
treatment plant in the northwest portion of the city, which will take
much of the pressure off the landlocked central plant, he said.
