2000 ANNUAL REPORT
TAX/LEGAL

WSPA Fights Fire with Fire: Files Five Legal Challenges

As environmental organizations began to employ aggressive litigation tactics throughout the year, the industry responded in the only way that it was able. In the spring, WSPA filed five separate legal actions in an effort to stimulate better use of sound science in rulemaking, consolidate decision-making in suits filed by environmentalists and others, and ensure that member interests are represented in the final outcomes.

Highlights are as follows:

WSPA vs. EPA -- WSPA filed a lawsuit asserting that the EPA has engaged in "drive-by rulemaking" -- forcing the San Francisco Water Quality Control Board to impose sweeping prohibitions in renewing permits for refinery discharges to the Bay, costing businesses and taxpayers billions. The suit seeks to overturn the application of rules that have not gone through the proper rulemaking procedures, and by the EPA and Regional Board's own admission will not yield any environmental benefit.

Tosco Avon NPDES -- WSPA filed an administrative appeal arguing that the implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loading (TMDL) is flawed and that the EPA is using data other than its own. Further, WSPA asserts that the TMDL is to be developed by the government and must have measurable interim limits that can be achieved.

In two other related activities, WSPA has filed a complaint in support of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA) lawsuit against EPA, and a similar application to intervene in the Baykeeper litigation against the EPA.

WSPA vs. State Department of Health Services -- WSPA asserts that the agency erred in developing its Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) for MTBE, a controlling factor in clean up requirements. WSPA asked that the SCML be set aside until a new standard can be adopted using correct statutory criteria.

|| Top of Page ||