Many Colorado companies don’t pass pollution standards
While Colorado permits 39 major industrial facilities to release thousands of tons of pollutants into waterways each year, 17 of them exceeded their legal limits a total of 241 times in an 18month period, an analysis of federal compliance data shows.
The pollution discharged above permitted amounts included cadmium, copper, chlorine, ammonia nitrogen, arsenic and E. coli bacteria spilled into such waterways as the South Platte River and Boulder Creek.
State and federal enforcers in Colorado rarely penalized the polluters.
Local leaders on Thursday lamented the lack of action and warned that proposed federal funding cuts could hurt the ability of enforcers to do more. Trump administration officials
have proposed cutting the roughly $ 230 million a year sent annually to states in recent years to about $ 150 million.
“Clean water is a fundamental necessity for a strong state and country. The cleaner the water is, the cheaper it is to treat, safer it is to drink, better it is to use for agriculture, and the more fun it is to recreate in,” Clear Creek County Commissioner Tim Mauck said Thursday. “We all need to be rowing the same direction to provide clean water. That includes having a strong EPA to ensure we get the water quality we all deserve.”
The environment advocacy and research group Environment Col- orado commissioned the analysis of Environmental Protection Agency data, a compilation of information states must collect under the 1972 Clean Water Act, which aimed at ending industrial pollution of rivers and streams. The California- based contractor Frontier Group conducted the analysis and Environment Colorado unveiled it Thursday in Golden.
Water pollution researchers looked at releases from 2,772 major industrial facilities nationwide and found more than 8,100 instances where polluters exceeded their Clean Water Act discharge permit limits. Many facilities also failed inspections or did not report fully as required. About onethird of the releases worsened pollution of waterways that state agencies already had designated as impaired for wildlife, recreation or drinking. Texas had the most permit exceedances with 938, followed by Pennsylvania at 633, Arkansas with 562, and 535 in Louisiana.
In Colorado, 10 facilities released contaminants in volumes more than twice as high as their permitted limits and five released contaminants in volumes five times above limits, the analysis found. When compared with other states, Colorado had the fourthhighest number of higher- thanpermitted releases per industrial facility, an average of 5.49.
“We had a goal in this country of eliminating pollution of our waterways by 1985. And technology has advanced since then. But we are still polluting our waterways,” said Environment Colorado research director Garrett GarnerWells.
“We need better enforcement,” he said.
Major Colorado facilities identified in the study include the Western Sugar plant in Fort Morgan, listed as releasing fecal coliform, ammonia nitrogen and sulfidehydrogen sulfide contaminants into the South Platte River in excess of permitted limits 91 times between January 2016 and September 2017.
Water pollution in excess of limits also came from the London Water Tunnel in Park County 45 times with contaminants including zinc, cadmium, oil and grease that spilled into South Mosquito Creek.
The Erie North Water Reclamation Facility in Weld County polluted Boulder Creek in excess of limits 29 times, the data show.
The JBS meat- packing plant in Greeley and the MillerCoors brewery in Golden also ranked among the significant polluters.
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment officials said they have taken formal enforcement action against Western Sugar and the London Water Tunnel. The agency imposed a $ 925,000 penalty in the London Water Tunnel case and is in settlement talks with Western Sugar.
The state relies heavily on federal funds for programs designed to protect people and the environment, with about a third of its enforcement budget, or about $ 30 million coming from EPA grants.
“We will be watching the final budget closely to see what Congress approves, and are hopeful it will restore funding to important programs that are critical for the protection of public health and the environment.” an agency spokesman said in a written statement.