"Public knowledge," she insists, "is a very powerful thing."
King is one of thousands of Americans who are criticizing new regulations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to cut back on the data companies must submit for the annual Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Their main complaints: The public will have less information with which to protect itself because fewer companies will be reporting the toxic chemicals they release into the environment and many companies that do report will have to provide less detail.
"The TRI is one of the most cost-effective ways to provide information to regulators and the public," said King, whose most recent campaign has been in the North Salt Lake community surrounding the Stericycle hazardous waste incinerator.
The EPA implemented the changes this month, saying they would reduce the paperwork burden on businesses by about $6 million a year without sacrificing much information available to the public. Under the new regulation, facilities will be free to release up to 2,000 pounds of pollutants before they have to detail those releases. The previous trigger was 500 pounds.
The agency made the changes over the objections of more than 120,000 individuals, 23 state governments, 60 members of Congress, 30 public health organizations, 40 labor organizations and 200 environmental and public interest groups, according to OMB Watch, a Washington D.C.-based advocacy organization. Just 33 commentators, all but four of them from industry, supported the changes.
One critic was longtime state Air Quality Board member and air pollution researcher Richard Kanner.
"In the wake of Hurricane Katrina," says his Nov. 18 letter to EPA opposing the changes, "the EPA should recognize that there is a need for more, not less, reporting on the toxic hazards in our environment."
Utah ranked sixth in the latest nationwide toxics report, which is based on data on nearly 650 chemicals that were reported by 191 industrial facilities for 2004.
But Salt Lake County, thanks to mining waste reports for several Kennecott facilities, ranked second nationally in the ranking.
Tom Natan, research director for the National Environmental Trust, estimated that 30 to 35 Utah facilities will no longer be required to report their toxic releases under the latest changes. He calls the changes "monumentally ill-conceived" and asserts that they will provide companies with an incentive to pollute more.
"If you don't know what [quantities of toxic chemicals] they are putting out, " he said, then you can't take steps to protect yourselves."
In contrast, the agency insists the move will benefit the public by driving companies to recycle waste and take other measures that will reduce their production of toxic materials to levels under the new threshold.
"EPA is delivering a cleaner, healthier nation by encouraging businesses to make environmental improvements now and in the future," said Deputy Administrator Marcus Peacock in a Dec. 18 news release.
"Cleaner businesses are more efficient businesses, which is good for the environment, good for the economy and good for the American people."
Whether the new TRI regulations will stand is uncertain. As Democrats prepare to take over both houses of Congress, some critics of the new law wonder if lawmakers will force the agency to restore the reporting system or even get it beefed up.
fahys@sltrib.com
