Filter By:
Type
State
Priority
Posted On
Search Results
Put Drinking Water First: Time to Curb Power Plants' Toxic Pollution
Clean Water Action’s analysis of supporting documents for the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category confirms that power plant discharges to surface water often include contaminants that experts consider to be “contaminants of concern” when found in drinking water.
Comments on Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category
Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819
Comments on Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category
The undersigned organizations appreciate the opportunity to comment on EPA’s proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. Our organizations urge EPA to select Option 5 for the final rule. Option 5 would eliminate almost all toxic discharges from power plants, reducing pollution by more than 5 billion pounds a year. Strong rules are urgently needed because
Closing the Floodgates
Coal-fired power plants are the largest source of toxic water pollution in the United States, dumping billions of pounds of pollution into America’s rivers, lakes, and streams each year. These pollutants, including lead and mercury, are dangerous to humans and wreak havoc in our watersheds even in very small amounts. It’s time for power plants to stop using our rivers, lakes and streams as open sewers to dump their waste!
"Raise the Roadway" Bayonne Bridge Project
New Jersey Environmental Federation staff testified this February at the U.S. Coast Guard hearing in Newark on the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s (PANYNJ) “Raise the Roadway” project for the Bayonne Bridge. The a project would raise the bridge 64 feet to make room for the new generation of supersized Panamax ships. Project proponents claim it will be a tremendous economic achievement and feat of engineering brilliance, yet have failed to conduct a thorough review of the project’s environmental and public health impacts.