April, 11 2023, 01:50pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project, tpelton@environmentalintegrity.org
Hannah Connor, Center for Biological Diversity, hconnor@biologicaldiversity.org
EPA Sued Over Unregulated Water Pollution From Oil Refineries, Plastics Plants, Other Industries
Environmental groups sued the Environmental Protection Agency today for failing to set limits on harmful chemicals like cyanide, benzene, mercury and chlorides in wastewater emitted by oil refineries and plants that produce chemicals, fertilizer, plastics, pesticides and nonferrous metals.
The Clean Water Act requires the EPA to limit discharges of industrial pollutants based on the best available wastewater treatment methods, and to tighten those limits at least once every five years where data show treatment technologies have improved. But the agency has never set limits for many pollutants and has failed to update the few decades-old limits that exist — including limits set almost 40 years ago for oil refineries (1985), plastics manufacturers (1984) and fertilizer plants (1986).
Outdated pollution-control technology standards meant that, for example, 81 oil refineries across the United States dumped 15.7 million pounds of nitrogen and 1.6 billion pounds of chlorides, sulfates and other dissolved solids (which can be harmful to aquatic life) into waterways in 2021.
Twenty-one nitrogen fertilizer plants discharged 7.7 million pounds of total nitrogen, which causes algae blooms and fish-killing "dead-zones," and proposed new plants will add millions of additional pounds to that load. The EPA estimates that 229 inorganic chemical plants dumped over 2 billion pounds of pollution into waterways in 2019.
"No one should get a free pass to pollute. It's completely unacceptable that EPA has, for decades, ignored the law and failed to require modern wastewater pollution controls for oil refineries and petrochemical and plastics plants," said Jen Duggan, deputy director of the Environmental Integrity Project, which coordinated the action by the 13 environmental groups. "We expect EPA to do its job and protect America's waterways and public health as required by the Clean Water Act."
"For decades the EPA has let these dirty industries pollute our rivers and bays instead of making them keep pace with advances in technologies that tackle water pollution, as the Clean Water Act demands," said Hannah Connor, environmental health deputy director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Forcing people and wildlife like endangered Atlantic sturgeon to bear the weight of toxic water pollution while industries rake in record profits isn't just morally wrong, it's also legally indefensible. The EPA needs to bring pollution standards into the 21st century."
Despite the legal mandate for regular reviews and updates to keep pace with technology, the guidelines for 40 of 59 industries regulated by the EPA were last updated 30 or more years ago, with 17 of those dating back to the 1970s. Outdated standards mean more water pollution is pouring into U.S. waters than should be allowed because some plants are using technology standards from the Reagan era — before common use of the Internet, email or cell phones.
The lawsuit was filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco by the Environmental Integrity Project, the Center for Biological Diversity, Clean Water Action, Waterkeeper Alliance, Food & Water Watch, Environment America, Bayou City Waterkeeper, Black Warrior Riverkeeper, Healthy Gulf, San Antonio Bay Estuarine Waterkeeper, San Francisco Baykeeper, the Surfrider Foundation and Tennessee Riverkeeper.
The lawsuit challenges the EPA's decision in January not to update outdated and weak water-pollution control technology standards (called "effluent limitation guidelines" or ELGs and pretreatment standards) for seven key industrial sectors: petroleum refineries, inorganic and organic chemical manufacturers, and factories that manufacture plastics, fertilizer, pesticides, and nonferrous metals.
A January report by the Environmental Integrity Project, "Oil's Unchecked Outfalls," revealed that 81 refineries across the United States discharged into waterways 15.7 million pounds of algae-feeding nitrogen in 2021 — as much as from 128 municipal sewage plants — along with 60,000 pounds of selenium (which can cause mutations in fish), among other pollutants.
The six other industries with weak and outdated EPA effluent guidelines targeted in the lawsuit filed by the environmental groups are:
- Organic chemical and plastics plants: The EPA estimates that 609 facilities across the nation manufacture plastic resins, PFAS" forever chemicals," synthetic fibers (rayon, polyester, etc.), and other chemicals and discharge pollution to waterways. These plants release millions of pounds of pollution every year, including nitrogen, benzene and lead. The effluent guidelines for the sector have not been updated since 1993 and have no limits on, for example, stormwater pollution or on plastic pellets — called "nurdles" — that often escape in stormwater or wastewater.
- Plastics molding and forming: 120 plants that mold and form plastic products discharge into U.S. waterways, according to an EPA estimate. But the agency has not revised its technology-based limits for this sector since the EPA first set the limits in 1984, almost 40 years ago, even though the standards are supposed to reflect "best available technology." The toxic pollutants discharged by this industry without any federal limits include phthalates, PFAS, nitrogen, N-N-Dimethylformamide, and microplastics.
- Fertilizer manufacturing: The EPA estimates that 59 chemical fertilizer manufacturing plants discharged nearly 90 million pounds of pollution into waterways in 2019. Among these are 21 plants that make nitrogen-based fertilizer and release millions of pounds of nitrogen into U.S. waterways. The EPA has set no limits on several fertilizer plant pollutants, including selenium, total chromium, zinc, iron, nickel, cadmium, cyanide and lead. The current effluent guidelines for fertilizer factories have not been updated since 1986.
- Nonferrous metal manufacturing: 56 facilities in this manufacturing sector (metals excluding iron and steel) dumped over 100 million pounds of pollution into waterways in 2019, according to an EPA estimate. But pollution-control guidelines for this industry have not been updated since 1990 and the current limits for this industry do not include any controls on stormwater pollution, for example.
- Inorganic chemicals plants: Inorganic chemical plants, which make products like vinyl chloride, are one of the largest industrial dischargers of toxic pollution in the United States, with 229 factories dumping over 2 billion pounds of pollution into waterways in 2019, according to an EPA estimate. But the EPA has not updated pollution limits for this sector since 1984.
- Pesticide manufacturing: The EPA estimates that 31 pesticide chemical plants discharge pollution into U.S. waterways, including insect-killing ingredients, as well as nitrogen, benzene, cyanide and more. But the EPA has not updated the guidelines for pesticide manufacturing since 1998.
"Outdated standards allow far too many industries, from plastic producers to oil refineries, to pour their pollution into our rivers, bays, lakes and streams," said John Rumpler, senior clean water director at Environment America. "It's time for the EPA to rein in this pollution, as the public would expect and the Clean Water Act demands."
"The Clean Water Act is our best defense against unregulated industrial water pollution, but we continue to be exposed to large volumes of dangerous, toxic pollutants in our drinking water supplies, fisheries and recreational waters because EPA is not fully implementing the law," said Kelly Hunter Foster, Waterkeeper Alliance senior attorney. "EPA must update pollution standards consistent with modern technologies that can reduce or even eliminate the discharge of hazardous pollutants like heavy metals, benzene and mercury."
"Louisiana's waterways have been burdened by water pollution from refineries and chemical plants, and so there are no excuses for EPA to continue missing opportunities to improve standards for these industries," said Andrew Whitehurst, water program director at Healthy Gulf. "Technology-based guidelines for pollution-control systems must evolve with improvements in water cleanup technology."
"Those of us living in Houston are sick of sacrificing our health and ecosystems to inadequately regulated industries," said Kristen Schlemmer with the Houston-based Bayou City Waterkeeper. "These burdens are heaviest on our lower-wealth, Black and brown neighbors living in the shadow of industrial facilities along the Houston Ship Channel, who face increased risks of cancer and don't have equal access to our natural bayous and bays. Through this lawsuit, our hope is to get better regulations in place so our home can stop being treated as a sacrifice zone."
"Oil refinery pollution doesn't belong in San Francisco Bay or in any of the nation's waterways, and it certainly doesn't belong in our neighborhoods," said Eric Buecher, managing attorney at San Francisco Baykeeper. "It's high time we held the EPA accountable and compel the agency to crack down on the toxic pollution from oil refineries that's threatening both wildlife and human health around San Francisco Bay and across the country."
"Once again, EPA has failed to update the antiquated and ineffective water pollution regulations for these industrial dischargers, including plastics plants and fertilizer and pesticide manufacturers, allowing them to continue wreaking havoc on the environment," said Erin Doran, a senior attorney with Food & Water Watch. "Enough is enough — we're taking EPA to court."
"Regardless of where a person lives, they should be able to fish or swim in their local river or lake without fear of getting sick from pollution, and they shouldn't be burdened with a higher water bill because a refinery or plastics plant upstream contaminated their drinking water source," said Jennifer Peters, national water programs director at Clean Water Action. "EPA must do its job and update these archaic pollution standards as required by the Clean Water Act as soon as possible."
"Surfrider is pleased to join our coalition partners and Environmental Integrity Project in calling for EPA to fulfill its statutory duties to protect clean water and public health and ensure that technology-based standards for industrial polluters like petroleum refineries and pesticides plants reflect the realities of 2023," said Staley Prom, senior legal associate at Surfrider Foundation. "Surfrider members surf, swim, snorkel, fish and recreate in waters impacted by EPA's failure to act and deserve the protections of modern technology to minimize water pollution."
"It is a shame EPA has allowed industrial polluters such as chemical plants and oil refineries to escape accountability under the Clean Water Act by operating for decades without proper pollution controls in place," said Nelson Brooke with Black Warrior Riverkeeper (in Alabama). "It is imperative EPA swiftly right these wrongs by requiring modern pollution controls for industrial facilities in order to protect rivers and all the people and critters who depend on them to be clean and safe."
"Pollution from plastics, pesticides, petroleum and a grim litany of other toxins continue to plague public water supplies," said David Whiteside, founder of Tennessee Riverkeeper. "The Clean Water Act requires factories to use the best available methods to treat their pollution, but the EPA has failed to enforce this provision. Our lawsuit seeks to reduce a vast array of toxins in our environment from numerous industries by requiring polluters to finally use modern technology and obey the law."
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
128 House Democrats Join GOP to Kill Trump Impeachment Resolution
Rep. Al Green's measure calls the president "a threat to American democracy."
Jun 24, 2025
Over half of the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted alongside all Republicans present on Tuesday to kill Rep. Al Green's impeachment resolution spurred by President Donald Trump's attack on Iranian nuclear sites.
The vote to table the Texas Democrat's five-page measure was 344-79, with 128 Democratic members of the House—including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.)—and 216 Republicans coming together to block the effort.
While Green has pushed to impeach the Republican president over various actions, his new resolution accuses Trump of abuse of presidential powers by disregarding congressional authority to declare war.
"President Trump's unilateral, unprovoked use of force without congressional authorization or notice constitutes an abuse of power when there was no imminent threat to the United States, which facilitates the devolution of American democracy into authoritarianism, with an authoritarian president who has instigated an attack on the United States Capitol, denied persons due process of the law, and called for the impeachment of federal judges who ruled against him—making Donald J. Trump a threat to American democracy," the resolution states.
"In starting his illegal and unconstitutional war with Iran without the constitutionally mandated consent of Congress or appropriate notice to Congress, President Trump acted in direct violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution," it continues.
The vote came after Jeffries faced criticism for telling reporters he had not looked at a bipartisan resolution that would require congressional approval for military action against Iran—and as Democratic leaders are under fire for their tepid response to Trump and GOP lawmakers.
In a statement after Tuesday's vote, John Bonifaz, a constitutional attorney and president of the advocacy group Free Speech for People, commended Green "for his courage and his leadership," and praised all 79 Democrats who "abided by their oath to protect and defend the Constitution and voted no on the motion to table this article of impeachment."
"Those who voted yes on that motion will be recorded in history for ignoring their oath and standing on the sidelines while this lawless president tramples on the Constitution," he argued. "They will now need to answer to their constituents on why, in the face of this attack on the Constitution, they did not stand up."
Bonifaz also noted his group's campaign to oust the Republican leader and predicted that "this was the first vote on impeaching Donald Trump in this presidential term, but it will not be the last." Trump was impeached twice during his first term.
"More than 700,000 people across the country have already joined us at www.impeachtrumpagain.org to demand that members of Congress do their job and impeach and remove Trump from public office for his multiple abuses of power," he said. "This movement will only continue to grow, and we will continue to stand up in the defense of our democracy and our Constitution at this critical moment in history."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Performative Bullsh*t': 16 House Republicans Get Cold Feet Over Medicaid Cuts
However, one critic noted that the lawmakers "already voted for the largest cut to Medicaid in American history—and when the time comes, they'll cave... once again to give their billionaire donors a massive tax break."
Jun 24, 2025
Under pressure from millions of constituents who would be stripped of healthcare coverage under the GOP's slash-and-burn reconciliation package, more than a dozen House Republicans claimed Tuesday that they would not back the Senate's version of the legislation if it contains proposed cuts to the Medicaid provider tax.
"Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent. Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers," wrote 16 House Republicans led by Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.)—whose largely rural Central Valley district has one of the highest concentration of Medicaid recipients in the nation—in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
"Throughout the budget process, we have consistently affirmed our commitment to ensuring that reductions in federal spending do not come at the expense of our most vulnerable constituents," the lawmakers' letter continues. "We write to reiterate that commitment to those we represent here in Washington."
"We support the Medicaid reforms in H.R. 1, which strengthen the program's ability to serve children, pregnant women, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities," the letter states, referring to provisions in the House version of the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" that would still slash federal Medicaid spending by billions of dollars, introduce work requirements for recipients, and impose other conditions that critics say would result in millions of vulnerable people losing their coverage in order to pay for a massive tax cut that would disproportionately benefit the wealthy and corporations.
The letter continues:
The Senate proposal also undermines the balanced approach taken to craft the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1—particularly regarding provider taxes and state directed payments. The Senate version treats expansion and nonexpansion states unfairly, fails to preserve existing state programs, and imposes stricter limits that do not give hospitals sufficient time to adjust to new budgetary constraints or to identify alternative funding sources.
We are also concerned about rushed implementation timelines, penalties for expansion states, changes to the community engagement requirements for adults with dependents, and cuts to emergency Medicaid funding. These changes would place additional burdens on hospitals already stretched thin by legal and moral obligations to provide care.
"Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent," the lawmakers concluded. "Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers."
Both chambers of Congress are scheduled to be on recess next week for the Independence Day holiday. Senators still have not voted on the package—and both chambers must pass identical versions of the megabill before it will reach President Donald Trump's desk.
Trump impatiently said on his Truth Social network Tuesday: "To my friends in the Senate, lock yourself in a room if you must, don't go home, and GET THE DEAL DONE THIS WEEK. Work with the House so they can pick it up, and pass it, IMMEDIATELY. NO ONE GOES ON VACATION UNTIL IT'S DONE."
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Justin Chermol dismissed the 16 GOP lawmakers' letter as "performative bullshit."
"These so-called moderates already voted for the largest cut to Medicaid in American history—and when the time comes, they'll cave to their D.C. party bosses once again to give their billionaire donors a massive tax break," Chermol added.Keep ReadingShow Less
Three Years After Roe Reversal, Abortion Rights Defenders Say Dobbs Legitimized Extremism
"These anti-choice fanatics will stop at nothing. They don't think their work is finished even after such a horrible and wide-ranging decision as Dobbs," warned the Senate's top Democrat.
Jun 24, 2025
Reproductive freedom advocates on Tuesday marked the third anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court reversingRoe v. Wade by calling out Republican decision-makers—including President Donald Trump—for the harmful impacts of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.
"Three years after the Supreme Court's devastating Dobbs decision stripped away constitutional protections for reproductive freedom, we face not only the predicted economic catastrophe but a terrifying escalation of political violence targeting women's rights advocates," said Equal Rights Advocates executive director Noreen Farrell, pointing to the recent assassination of former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (DFL-61) and attempted murder of state Sen. John Hoffman (DFL-34).
"Equal Rights Advocates warned that Dobbs would unleash more than legal restrictions—it would legitimize extremism. Now we see the tragic fulfillment of that prediction," Farrell continued. "This administration's policies represent calculated economic warfare against women, particularly low-income women and women of color. The case of Adriana Smith last week illustrates the extreme consequences of the Dobbs decision—a pregnant Black woman denied medical care, becoming a brain-dead incubator for a fetus against her medical directive and her family's wishes."
"In the 21 states with abortion bans and extreme restrictions, women continue to die, and along with their providers, are being threatened, targeted, and criminalized."
The Georgia law doctors at Emory University Hospital cited to keep Smith on life support—allegedly without the input or consent of her family—until her fetus could be delivered is one of various anti-choice state laws that took effect after Dobbs.
"For the last three years, we have witnessed firsthand what happens when politicians try to control the rights of people to practice basic bodily autonomy—with dire results," said Dr. Jamila Perritt, an OB-GYN and abortion provider who serves as president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health, in a Tuesday statement.
"We have seen countless people forced to leave their communities to get basic healthcare, forced to remain pregnant when they wouldn't have otherwise, criminalized for experiencing pregnancy loss, and ultimately, we have seen people dying after being turned away when seeking emergency abortion care," Perritt detailed.
The Guttmacher Institute on Tuesday released new data about the 155,000 abortion patients who traveled out of state to obtain care last year. The group said that "similar to 2023, Illinois remained a critical access point in 2024, with 35,470 patients traveling from across the South and Midwest to obtain abortion care in the state."
Guttmacher Institute data scientist and study lead Isaac Maddow-Zimet noted that "while these findings show us where and how far patients are traveling, they are not able to capture the numerous financial, logistical, social, and emotional obstacles people face. In addition to the travel costs, driving or flying across state lines often requires taking time off work, navigating complex logistics and arranging childcare, not to mention paying for the abortion itself."
As states continue to pass restrictions post-Dobbs, patients' options are dwindling. For example, Guttmacher director of state policy Candace Gibson explained that "Florida had been an important access point for abortion in the Southeast, so when the state's six-week ban went into effect in May 2024, it was not just Floridians who were impacted, but also the thousands of out-of-state patients who would have traveled there for care."
While running to retake the White House last year, Republican President Donald Trump—who appointed three of the Supreme Court's six right-wing justices during his first term—came out against a Florida ballot measure that would end his state's strict abortion ban and bragged about his role in reversing Roe but also tried to downplay the importance of reproductive rights to voters.
"It's been three years since people in the United States have lost their federal constitutional right to abortion; three years since President Trump's handpicked Supreme Court justices stripped Americans of this fundamental right to freedom," Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a Tuesday statement. "The consequences have been devastating, even lethal."
"We can't know all the names of the women who have died because of abortion bans, but we will never forget that people have endured injury, pain, and suffering because of the Dobbs decision," she declared. "We continue to fight President Trump and his backers' attacks on reproductive rights, including their effort to 'defund' Planned Parenthood in Congress and end abortion access for everyone, everywhere. Planned Parenthood Action Fund will never stop advocating for a country where all people have the power to control their own bodies, lives, and futures."
Reproductive Freedom for All president and CEO Mini Timmaraju was similarly determined on Tuesday, launching a campaign to mobilize against Trump and the GOP.
"In the 21 states with abortion bans and extreme restrictions, women continue to die, and along with their providers, are being threatened, targeted, and criminalized," Timmaraju said. "And while the Trump administration continues to gut our fundamental freedoms, we continue to fight against the GOP's attacks on Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, and essential reproductive care."
Congressional Democrats—who have minorities in both chambers—joined advocacy group leaders in using the Dobbs anniversary to direct anger at the president and Republican policymakers working to strip away reproductive freedom from people nationwide.
During a Tuesday press conference, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the high court's June 2022 ruling "will go down in history as one of the worst, most harmful, most regressive decisions in modern history" and stressed that "people are dying as a result of the Dobbs decision."
Noting that many patients have had to travel or wait for care, Schumer said that "this is abominable. We know that this is what Republicans want, a total ban on abortion. These anti-choice fanatics will stop at nothing. They don't think their work is finished even after such a horrible and wide-ranging decision as Dobbs. Reproductive freedom is under attack on all sides. Extremists are banning and restricting abortion, criminalizing providers, defunding care, and interfering with lifesaving medicines."
"These attacks are also devastating our economy. With fewer reproductive healthcare protections, fewer women are participating in the workforce. State-level restrictions on abortion access combined with the lack of federal protection cost the economy more than $133 billion nationally," he continued. "The 16 states with the most restrictive abortion policies were responsible for $64 billion in economic loss."
The Senate's top Democrat also called out his GOP colleagues for what he called "a Republican backdoor abortion ban done in the reconciliation bill," taking aim at "two nasty provisions to defund Planned Parenthood and eliminate coverage for comprehensive reproductive care" from the Affordable Care Act marketplace.
"I'm here to say that Democrats are going to fight like hell to strip these cruel provisions from the Republican bill, including in the Byrd bath, which will be occurring today or tomorrow," he pledged, referring to the Senate parliamentarian's review of the GOP megabill. "Just as we fought back against attacks on abortion before, we will fight these nasty provisions with every fiber in our being."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular