It has been 27 years since the Clean Water Act was passed. Twenty-seven years since states were to implement an important provision of the Act called "anti-degradation." But after all that time, West Virginia still hasn’t done so [bold added by editor]..

Properly implemented, "anti-degradation" gives citizens the opportunity to speak out against proposed pollution when private gain outweighs public good. Rivers and streams from which we draw drinking water, and in which we swim, boat and fish are greatly threatened without anti-degradation measures in place.

The federal Clean Water Act has two main goals, basically: (1) how to clean up dirty waters, and (2) how to keep clean waters clean. Keeping the clean waters clean – that’s the anti-degradation focus.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made several attempts to get an anti-degradation policy implemented in West Virginia, and last year West Virginia’s Environmental Quality Board tried to comply. However, "industry and other groups strongly opposed it, so the Board backed off," with intense resistance from coal, timber, and chemical interests, and organizations like the WV Farm Bureau, WV Manufacturers Association and even the WV Department of Agriculture.

In West Virginia, the Board oversees standards relating to water quality issues, and is charged with submitting an anti-degradation implementation plan to the state legislature. The state Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) is the main agency responsible for implementing the policy once the legislature passes it. The EPA has federal oversight and ultimate responsibility to see that the duties of the Board are carried out. EPA has the power to either approve or disapprove any plan the legislature passes.

Environmental groups backing the Board’s efforts suffered a defeat when the Board withdrew their plan. The groups then threatened to sue the EPA. Since then EPA has put West Virginia’s implementation plan on the fast track. EPA instructed the Board to put together a proposal for the legislative agenda. EPA said that, should the state fail to get together an implementation plan, EPA itself would set the rules by which the policy would be put in place. Over the past couple of months, state officials have been scrambling to put a draft plan together for public comment to meet August deadlines for the legislative agenda.

The Board has come up with an innovative, workable approach to define "degradation" -- a decline in water quality by 5%. This would trigger an agency review of its justification with the public good the primary consideration.

It is important that the WV Legislature and Governor do not believe that they can weaken the Board’s proposed law which would surely be just barely acceptable to the EPA.

Having anti-degradation provisions in place is important for it would restrict stream pollution to only that which is necessary only for the public good, not private gain for a privileged few. Plus, companies have to look at lesser-polluting alternatives, and stream degradation would be a last resort. Also, anti-degradation gives a great deal of protection to high-quality waters.

You can write the EPA and plead [I would say "demand!" Ed.] for a continued insistence on a truly adequate "Anti-degradation" Law and Regulations in West Virginia, at EPA Region III, 841 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107. Write the WV Environmental Quality Board at the WV Department of Environmental Protection, Water Resources, 1201 Greenbrier St., Charleston, WV 25311. Also write to your legislators in Washington and Charleston, and our Governor.

Editorial comment: It is clearly a disgrace that our political process has been so corrupted by those primarily motivated by greed, thereby compromising the health of the general population of West Virginians! It is also a disgrace that the EPA has taken so long to move on this important issue!