Usually that’s a big yawn, given that for most of the past decade prosecuting
polluters was not high on the must-do list of the former administration. But in
2009 not only was there a much more enforcement-minded EPA administrator in
Washington (in the person of Lisa Jackson), the agency for the first time created a Google
map mashup of its enforcement actions<\/a> for the year.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The map lets you zoom in on your city, county, or state and see the civil and
criminal cases filed by the EPA for violations of its clean air and water laws and other
environmental statutes. Click on the air, water, land, and criminal buttons and
colored markers start to populate the map showing you the location of various violations.
When you click on a marker a link to detailed information about the case pops
up. You can also review any past violations.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/a><\/a>The EPA’s new interactive enforcement map could launch a new era of digital transparency.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n “EPA mapped the locations of more than 90 percent of the <\/p>\n Clicking around the EPA map, I learned that in Alameda County, Calif., where <\/p>\n Okay, so why does this matter? Knowledge, as the saying <\/p>\n In contrast, the EPA’s new map and its successors will allow a quick visual <\/p>\n Still, the new interactive map is a work in progress. First, it is not comprehensive. “While these large cases are a vital part of our work to <\/p>\n Second, the information that is available on <\/p>\n I had a similar experience when I came across an air <\/p>\n After a few minutes of clicking around the EPA database I <\/p>\n Making the map a real-time snapshot of environmental cases <\/p>\n The ‘09 map mashup could just be the start of a new era of digital <\/p>\n Better yet, if the EPA really wants to tap the power of social media in the new year, let people create their own mashups. Just imagine an army of iPhone-toting citizen enforcers geotagging and reporting suspected environmental violations to a database monitored by their local EPA office.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Related Links:<\/strong><\/p>\n Broken promises follow Tennessee coal ash disaster<\/a><\/p>\n Why the Copenhagen Accord boosts the odds for Senate passage of bipartisan climate legislation<\/a><\/p>\n Could AlertMe be the Apple of energy efficiency?<\/a><\/p>\n
facilities that were the subject of enforcement actions last year,” the agency
said in a statement. (Note that you won’t find any drinking water treatment
facilities hit with lawsuits or complaints; the EPA did not map them “due to
potential security concerns.”)<\/p>\n
I live, an Oakland recycling company called California Waste Solutions paid
fines totaling $172,200 for failing to comply with storm water permits at two of
its local facilities. (The Bay Area was relatively law-abiding compared to,
say, greater Seattle, where the map was purple with environmental violations.)<\/p>\n
goes, is power and the average citizen is unlikely to sift through thousands of
pages of government data to find out if local companies or government
facilities have been polluting their air and water in violation of
environmental laws. And as metropolitan newspapers continue to gut their staffs
and environmental reporters become an endangered species, you’re unlikely to
read about such transgressions unless they reach oil-spill proportions or
involve big money.<\/p>\n
comparison of the government’s enforcement actions from year to year. In fiscal
2009, the EPA said it filed 387 new criminal cases—the most in five years—and reached settlements that require polluters to spend $5.4 billion to comply
with environmental laws.<\/p>\n
protect public health and improve compliance, they do not reflect the totality
of the annual environmental enforcement activities,” the agency said.<\/p>\n
violations is inconsistent, ranging from detailed to sketchy. Click on a big enforcement action
or high-profile case, and you’ll get plenty of data. But many other cases just offer
cryptic references to violations of environmental statutes, making it difficult
to ascertain if a company is guilty of dumping toxins into a local waterway or just bad record-keeping. I couldn’t tell, for example, what that Oakland recycling
company had done to violate its storm water permit.<\/p>\n
violation by an Alameda County Trader Joe’s, that Costco for the bobo set. When I tried to get details on the violation I came up short. Clicking on the map marker took
me to an “Enforcement Case Report” that listed the violation as “Air Emissions
Not Otherwise Specified.”<\/p>\n
found that the violation was deemed “minor” but no other information was
available. (The EPA could take some cues
from The New York Times’ ongoing investigative series on water pollution that features an
interactive database<\/a> that lets readers identify polluters near their
homes.)<\/p>\n
as they are filed rather than a static end-of-year review would make good on the
EPA’s promise to “increase transparency, improve access to data, and provide the
public with the bigger picture of enforcement activity occurring in communities
around the country.”<\/p>\n
transparency. One can imagine an app that would tap the iPhone’s GPS to geotag
polluters or issue alerts of enforcement actions.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/a.rfihub.com\/eus.gif?eui=2223\"\/)
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"