November, 18 2015, 11:30am EDT

New Report: Water Quality Trading Schemes Quietly Upending Clean Water Act in More Than 20 U.S. States
One scheme in Ohio allowed for a 600 percent increase in wastewater discharge beyond Clean Water Act limits
WASHINGTON
oday Food & Water Watch released a report outlining how overly complex programs of water pollution trading (also known as water quality trading, or nutrient trading) are being quietly implemented across the country with the active endorsement and funding of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The report, which looks closely at the implementation of water pollution trading in Pennsylvania and Ohio, is based on over 1,000 documents obtained by Food & Water Watch through the states' Right to Know Law and Freedom of Information Act, respectively. The analysis reveals a broken system of inherently unaccountable and highly questionable practices, through which agricultural operations such as confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs, or factory farms) will only continue to pollute our waterways, while power plants and other pollution sources that purchase credits will get to discharge more.
"Water pollution trading proponents trumpet successes, but scrutiny of these programs tells a different story," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. "Pollution trading destroys accountability and the rights of citizens to protect their waterways -- cornerstones of the Clean Water Act -- yet some, astonishingly, continue to hold up the practice as the future of pollution control."
Some of the findings of the report, Water Quality Trading: Polluting Public Waterways for Private Gain, include:
- In Pennsylvania, all of the authority, verification and trading of water pollution credits has been placed in the hands of for-profit companies like Red Barn. A significant number of pollution credits in the state is being generated through what can only be described as a shell game, whereby piles of manure move from place to place to pollute local waterways while middlemen brokers skim profits from sales of highly questionable credits.
- Water pollution trading has put an end to accountable Clean Water Act permitting at Brunner Island, the 59th most polluting power plant in the United States. Brunner Island now operates under a fictitious "net zero" nutrient discharge permit, whereby the facility is free to discharge as much nutrient pollution as it can purchase credits for. It was the third largest buyer of nitrogen credits in Pennsylvania in both 2013 and 2014, purchasing 87,000 credits in 2013 and 78,000 in 2014 -- amounting to almost 10 percent of all credits purchased statewide in those years.
- Under its expansion and subsequent participation in the Ohio River Basin trading program, Alpine Cheese Company was permitted to increase its phosphorous discharge levels to 36.4 million gallons per year -- a 600 percent increase in wastewater discharge over what should have been allowed to protect local water quality. Between 1999 and 2014, the company had 1,251 permit violations -- the bulk of them occurring between 2005 and 2011, while the nutrient trading pilot program was being developed and later implemented.
According to the report, with the use of water pollution trading, our transparent, accountable Clean Water Act system of point source regulation is being replaced with one that makes it virtually impossible for anyone to ever properly track point source compliance. The credits that these facilities rely on are not the product of any measured decrease in pollutant loads from credit-generating agricultural sources like factory farms, but from complex models filled with variables and from questionable manure transport programs that simply move pollutants from one impaired waterway to another.
"I've spent many years confronting factory farms and their irresponsible waste disposal practices that are poisoning waterways and communities, including Toledo, Ohio, where 500,000 people lost their drinking water in the summer of 2014 because of unchecked agricultural pollution," said Lynn Henning, regional associate for the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project and recipient of the 2010 Goldman Environmental Prize. "To clean up these facilities, we need mandatory reductions, not another voluntary scheme like pollution trading where factory farms can profit from the sale of unverified pollution credits."
Regional water pollution trading programs are taking off in the watersheds of the Chesapeake Bay and the Ohio River Basin, currently covering nine states: Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Trading programs are also active in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Oregon and Wisconsin, and are under consideration in several other states.
"I work every day with communities across the Bay states, including Pennsylvania, who struggle to get access to clean water," said Maria Payan, regional consultant for the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project. "Now, with pollution trading, one of our most important tools in that struggle -- the Clean Water Act -- is being taken away. We can no longer hold polluters accountable, when they simply buy their way out of permit compliance."
The report includes the following recommendations:
- Congress needs to reaffirm that the Clean Water Act does not allow for point source pollution trading.
- Federal agencies, particularly the U.S. Department of Agriculture, need to stop spending taxpayers' dollars to promote these pay-to-pollute schemes across the country.
- State and federal governments need to replace voluntary pollution control approaches with mandatory measures in the nonpoint source sector.
- Federal agencies must fund agricultural Best Management Practices without compromising current point source controls.
- The environmental community needs to wake up to the dangers of water pollution trading.
- Advocacy groups need to legally challenge water pollution trading programs.
"We cannot leave the fate of our waterways to the vagaries of the market," said Hauter. "Handing over pollution management to the same industry that brought us the mortgage crisis will spell the end of environmental protections that have helped keep our drinking water safe."
The report will is available at https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/insight/water-quality-trading-polluting-public-waterways-private-gain.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
Trump CFPB Cancels $95 Million Settlement With Credit Union Accused of Charging Illegal 'Junk Fees'
"How many millions did this CFPB just take from servicemembers?" wrote one consumer financial protection advocate.
Jul 02, 2025
According to an order published Tuesday, the country's top financial protection watchdog nixed a $95 million settlement reached in 2024 with Navy Federal Credit Union, which serves military servicemembers, veterans, Department of Defense employees, and their families. The President Joe Biden-led Consumer Financial Protection Bureau last year accused the bank of illegally charging overdraft fees to customers and ordered the credit union to refund consumers and pay a civil penalty.
Multiple observers, including a former Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) employee, said that the move appears to run counter to the CFPB's stated priority of focusing "its enforcement and supervision resources on pressing threats to consumers, particularly service members and their families, and veterans."
The Tuesday order means that Navy Federal will not have to pay $80 million to impacted customers, or a $15 million civil penalty.
In November 2024, the CFPB under then-President Joe Biden said that from 2017 to 2022, the credit union charged customers "surprise overdraft fees on certain ATM withdrawals and debit card purchases, even when their accounts showed sufficient funds at the time of the transactions," in a statement announcing the $80 million refund and the civil penalty.
Then-CFPB Director Rohit Chopra accused the credit union of "illegally harvested tens of millions of dollars in junk fees, including from active duty servicemembers and veterans."
The order on Tuesday is not the first time the Trump administration has canceled enforcement actions brought under the Biden-led CFPB. The Trump administration has sought to drastically cut personnel at the CFPB, which is currently led by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought.
Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, a non-profit association of pro-consumer organizations, wrote on X on Tuesday that "it doesn't square when the CFPB gives a free pass to Navy Federal for charging illegal overdraft fees AND claims it cares about servicemembers."
"How many millions did this CFPB just take from servicemembers?" he asked.
Allison Preiss, a former senior advisor to the director at the CFPB, reacted to the news by writing on X that "for months, Trump's CFPB has insisted it is focusing its efforts on protecting servicemembers and veterans," and included some screenshots of statements from the CFPB, such as a statement from May 2025 announcing that the bureau will not prioritize enforcement action related to Buy Now, Pay Later loans.
"The bureau takes this step in the interest of focusing resources on supporting hard-working American taxpayers, servicemen, veterans, and small businesses," according to that statement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Spineless Capitulation to Extortion': Paramount Caves to Trump With $16 Million Settlement
Critics characterized the payment as a bribe in exchange for federal approval of Paramount's pending merger with Skydance.
Jul 02, 2025
The parent company of CBS News, Paramount Global, announced Tuesday that it has agreed to pay U.S. President Donald Trump $16 million to settle what legal experts called an entirely meritless lawsuit over the media organization's handling of a pre-election "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris.
Under the reported terms of the settlement, the money will go toward Trump's legal fees and his future presidential library. Paramount said the settlement deal does not include a formal apology, but the company agreed to release written transcripts of future "60 Minutes" interviews with presidential candidates.
Critics responded with outrage to news of the settlement, which one observer characterized as "spineless capitulation to extortion." Some posted screenshots to social media showing they canceled their Paramount+ subscriptions in response.
As Paramount engaged in talks with Trump's legal team over the lawsuit in recent weeks, press freedom advocates and members of Congress implored the organization not to settle, warning that caving to the president would reward and embolden his attacks on media outlets he views as his political enemies.
"If you settle cases, you're going to send a message to your news team to not push the envelope for fear of people being sued," media attorney Edward Klaris toldThe Washington Post, "and you're going to court more cases against your company because they might think that if they sue you they're going to collect."
"A line is being drawn between the owners of American news media who are willing to stand up for press freedom and those who capitulate to the demands of the president."
Paramount's controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, supported a settlement with Trump in the hope that it would "clear the way" for federal approval of the company's merger with the entertainment company Skydance, according to The Wall Street Journal, which cited sources familiar with the internal discussions. Bloombergreported that Redstone could reap $180 million in "severance and other benefits on top of hundreds of millions from the sale of her stock" if the merger goes through.
In May, the Freedom of the Press Foundation—a Paramount shareholder—cautioned that a settlement with Trump "could amount to a bribe" to the Trump administration in exchange for approval of the merger. The advocacy group said it would sue Paramount if the company caved to the president, arguing that "a settlement of Trump's meritless lawsuit may well be a thinly veiled effort to launder bribes through the court system."
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) similarly warned Paramount that a settlement with Trump could run afoul of federal anti-bribery laws.
"Paramount appears to be attempting to appease the administration in order to secure merger approval," the senators wrote in a May 19 letter to Redstone.
Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders USA, said in a statement Wednesday that the settlement was "a shameful decision by Paramount."
"Shari Redstone and Paramount's board should have stood by CBS journalists and the integrity of press freedom," said Weimers. "Instead, they chose to reward Donald Trump for his petty legal assault against both. A line is being drawn between the owners of American news media who are willing to stand up for press freedom and those who capitulate to the demands of the president."
"Paramount's leaders chose to be on the wrong side of that dividing line, but they'd be mistaken to believe appeasing Trump today will stop his attacks in the future," Weimers added. "News media owners are much better off standing strong than acquiescing."
This story has been updated to include a statement from Reporters Without Borders USA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Will Not Accept This Intimidation,' Mamdani Says of Trump Threat to Arrest Him
"That Trump included praise for Eric Adams in his authoritarian threats is unsurprising, but highlights the urgency of bringing an end to this mayor's time in City Hall," said the New York City mayoral candidate.
Jul 01, 2025
Democratic New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani made clear on Tuesday that he would not be intimidated by Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to arrest him.
A journalist who falsely described Mamdani—a democratic socialist—as a "communist" asked Trump about the candidate's pledge not to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), whose agents are working to carry out the president's promised mass deportations.
"Well then, we'll have to arrest him," said Trump, a former New Yorker who has taken aim at Mamdani since his victory in last Tuesday's Democratic primary. "Look, we don't need a communist in this country."
Mamdani, who currently serves in the New York State Assembly, was born in Uganda to Indian parents and moved to NYC as a child. He was naturalized as a U.S. citizen in 2018. Throughout his campaign, the 33-year-old has faced numerous Islamophobic attacks, and after his primary win, Congressman Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) urged the Trump administration to target him with "denaturalization proceedings," in line with a broader effort at the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Trump said Tuesday that his administration would be watching Mamdani "very carefully." The president, a well-documented liar, added that "a lot of people are saying he's here illegally—you know, we're gonna look at everything... and ideally he's gonna turn out to be much less than a communist, but right now he's a communist, that's not a socialist."
Trump also blasted Congressman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), a supporter of Mamdani, and praised the city's current mayor, Eric Adams, who is seeking another term as an Independent. After Trump returned to office in January, the DOJ instructed prosecutors to drop federal corruption charges against Adams, triggering widespread outrage over the attempted "illegal quid pro quo," as some critics called it.
Responding to Trump's remarks in a lengthy statement, Mamdani said Tuesday that "the president of the United States just threatened to have me arrested, stripped of my citizenship, put in a detention camp, and deported. Not because I have broken any law, but because I will refuse to let ICE terrorize our city."
"His statements don't just represent an attack on our democracy but an attempt to send a message to every New Yorker who refuses to hide in the shadows: If you speak up, they will come for you," Mamdani continued. "We will not accept this intimidation."
"That Trump included praise for Eric Adams in his authoritarian threats is unsurprising, but highlights the urgency of bringing an end to this mayor's time in City Hall," he asserted, directing attention to the GOP budget bill advanced by the U.S. Senate on Tuesday.
Mamdani said that "at this very moment, when MAGA Republicans are attempting to destroy the social safety net, kick millions of New Yorkers off of healthcare, and enrich their billionaire donors at the expense of working families, it is a scandal that Eric Adams echoes this president's division, distraction, and hatred. Voters will resoundingly reject it in November."
In addition to Mamdani and Adams, the general election candidates are Republican Curtis Sliwa, Independent Jim Walden, and disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is now running as an Independent after losing the Democratic primary. According to results released Tuesday, Mamdani got 56% of the vote compared to Cuomo's 44%.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular