美國環保署與環保團體近日達成一項庭外和解協議，可能 會影響該國整個肉品產業。環保署同意著手鑑別並調查數千家的工廠式農場(factory farm)，這些農場過去一直規避政府有關動物排泄物污染水源的法規。
該和解協議要求環保署在未來12個月內，蒐集更多有關工廠式農場的資料，以研擬出法規。這項任務將會需要美國國內約2萬家的工廠式農場回報相關的資 訊，也就是它們如何處理糞便或其他的動物廢棄物。
自然資源保護協會(NRDC)、山巒俱樂部與護水聯盟(Waterkeeper Alliance)在2009年針對一項法規提出這項訴訟，在該法規的豁免下，數千家工廠式農場可不採取措施把動物產生排遺所造成的水污染減到最小。
非營利組織自然資源保護協會的委任律師迪瓦恩(Jon Devine)表示：「數千家工廠化農場污染源是以可能使人生病的動物廢棄物、細菌、病毒與寄生蟲，威脅著美國的水源。」「這些龐大的廠房設施當中有很多 完全未受到控管。環保署甚至不知道它們在哪裡。」迪瓦恩說。
美國國會在30多年以前便認定工廠化農場是水污染源，應依照淨水法案許可計畫進行規範。但在布希總統執政時期頒布的一項法規中，大型農場設施藉由聲 稱他們不會把排放廢水到淨水法案保護的水道，就可以逃避政府規範，毋須政府查核。現在獲得調解的訴訟，即是當時環保團體針對此項法令所提出。
依據 5月26日達成的和解內容，環保署將會開始進行一項全國性的新任務，即追查未獲許可而營運的工廠化農場，並決定它們是否須受到規範。
全國豬肉製造商會對於美國環保署持續投入「發展花錢的農業法規卻幾乎沒有產生任何額外的環境效益」，表達「深切挫折與憤怒」。
「為了這個立場偏頗的和解，環保署給美國畜產養殖農民突然間製造了麻煩。」全國豬肉製造商會首席環境顧問佛米卡(Michael Formica)說：「全國豬肉製造商會正在尋求所有適當的法律途徑來回應環保署令人失望的政策。」
護水聯盟的委任律康納(Hannah Connor)則表示：「事實很清楚：大型集中餵養動物的作業(CAFO)，以及許多中型、小型的集中餵養作業，通常是把污染物直接排放到週遭環境中。」 「一樣清楚的是，假如我們想要繼續飲水、垂釣，並且享受到沒有遭受動物未經處理的排泄物污染的水源，就必須要遏止這些污染排放。」
康納說：「我們相信，藉由改善執行情況並加強執法，這項調解案中的條件將協助扭轉這個行業素行不良的歷史。
這3個團體提出的訴訟，已經迫使環保署在過去十年間2度修改「集中餵養動物作業」的規定，以強化對廠房設施污染控制的要求。
In a legal settlement that could affect the entire U.S. meat industry, the Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to identify and investigate thousands of factory farms that have been avoiding government regulation for water pollution with animal waste.
The settlement requires the agency to propose a rule on greater information gathering on factory farms within the next 12 months. It will require the approximately 20,000 domestic factory farms to report such information as how they dispose of manure and other animal waste.
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and Waterkeeper Alliance filed the suit in 2009 over a rule that exempted thousands of factory farms from taking steps to minimize water pollution from the animal waste they generate.
"Thousands of factory farm polluters threaten America's water with animal waste, bacteria, viruses and parasites that can make people sick," said Jon Devine, an attorney with the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.
"Many of these massive facilities are flying completely under the radar. EPA doesn't even know where they are," said Devine.
More than 30 years ago, Congress identified factory farms as water pollution sources to be regulated under the Clean Water Act's permit program.
But under a Bush administration regulation challenged by the environmental groups in this lawsuit, large facilities were able to escape government regulation by claiming, without government verification, that they do not discharge into waterways protected by the Clean Water Act.
Under the settlement reached May 26, the EPA will initiate a new national effort to track down factory farms operating without permits and determine if they must be regulated.
The National Pork Producers Council expressed "deep frustration and anger" over the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's continuing efforts "to develop costly agricultural regulations that provide few if any additional environmental benefits."
"With this one-sided settlement, EPA yanked the rug out from under America's livestock farmers," said Michael Formica, NPPC's chief environmental counsel. "NPPC is looking at all appropriate legal responses to EPA's disappointing course of action."
"The record is clear - large CAFO operations, and many medium and small operations, commonly discharge pollutants into the surrounding environment," said Waterkeeper Alliance attorney Hannah Connor. "What is also clear is that if we want to continue to drink, fish and enjoy water that is not contaminated with raw animal excrement, these discharges must be stopped."
"We believe that the terms of this settlement will help reverse this industry's history of bad behavior by improving implementation and enforcement of the law," Connor said.
Litigation brought by these three groups has forced the EPA to revise its CAFO rules twice within the past decade to tighten the pollution control requirements on these facilities.
摘譯自2010年6月1日，ENS美國，華盛頓特區報導；謝雯凱編譯；蔡麗伶審校
from:環境資訊中心
留言列表
綠書架 (4)