ABOUT JOHN REEDER:
Before joining EWG, John Reeder was an executive in residence at American University’s School of Public Affairs, where he taught American government and environmental policy, and led several research projects focused on the environmental challenges of the future. He has worked at the Environmental Protection Agency, where he served as deputy chief of staff, and held several senior executive positions, including director of congressional affairs and director of environmental cleanup at federal Superfund sites. John was invited to serve along with Senate committee staff on two special assignments to Capitol Hill to help negotiate agricultural and environmental legislative reforms, for which he was awarded the EPA administrator’s Gold Medal.
He graduated from the University of Minnesota with a bachelor’s degree in agriculture and applied economics and a master’s degree from the Humphrey School of Public Affairs. Before college, he served oversees on active duty in the U.S. Army, and was awarded the Army’s Commendation Medal for exceptionally meritorious service.
ABOUT LISA WOZNIAK:
Lisa’s career spans over two decades of environmental and conservation advocacy in the political arena. She is a nationally- recognized expert in non-profit growth and management and a leader in Great Lakes protections. Lisa is a three-time graduate from the University of Michigan, with a bachelor's degree and two ensuing master's degrees in social work and Education.
Lisa serves a co-host and content partner in 89.1 WEMU's '1st Friday Focus on the Environment.'
RESOURCES:
Michigan League of Conservation Voters
Michigan PFAS Action Response Team: Former Wurtsmith Air Force Base
"The Supreme Court Ends Chevron Deference—What Now?"
TRANSCRIPTION:
David Fair: This is 89 one WEMU, and welcome to First Friday Focus on the Environment. I'm David Fair, and this monthly conversation series is produced in partnership with the Michigan League of Conservation Voters. My conversation partner each month is the executive director of the organization. That, of course, is Lisa Wozniak. And, Lisa, it's always good to see you! And happy belated birthday to you!
Lisa Wozniak: Oh, it's good to be here, Dave, as always! And thank you for the birthday wishes! You and I are both proud 1964 babies!
David Fair: Indeed, we are!
Lisa Wozniak: But let's get to the real topic at hand. There's been a real setback at the federal level in addressing PFAs contamination. The Supreme Court came out with a decision recently to overturn what's called the Chevron Doctrine, and this move alarmed many in the environmental community for its potential to limit government agencies' ability to establish critical safeguards for human health and the environment. So, to learn more about the potential ramifications, I've invited John Reeder to join us today. And John is vice president of federal affairs with the Environmental Working Group. Welcome, John! We really appreciate your time with us today!
David Fair: We do indeed!
John Reeder: Hello! Good morning! And good morning to your listeners!
David Fair: Well, John, for our listeners, would you define the Chevron Doctrine? What exactly is that?
John Reeder: Well, the Chevron Doctrine was a well-established precedent by the Supreme Court that courts should defer to the expertise of federal agency in the rulemaking. And that's held for many, many years, and its underlying principle that helped agencies withstand lawsuits of all manner against their rulemaking.
Lisa Wozniak: So, let's talk a little bit about what this means, then. With the announcement on the part of the Supreme Court, what are the broad implications of this decision? Because, as I noted, the environmental community is quite alarmed by the decision.
John Reeder: Well, one of the more recent issues has been, actually, on a military site. And you have a number of military sites in Michigan and the Midwest and nationally--over 500 military installations--that have contamination by PFAs, which are known as "the forever chemicals," because they don't break down in the environment. And they accumulate in the human body over time, which can lead to serious health issues, including cancer and developmental problems and children. It's an important issue because PFAs contamination is confirmed, as I mentioned, at 500 military installations in the country and, at least 100 of these, contamination is spread to offsite drinking water wells. So, in Tucson, Arizona, the Air Force is resisting a lawful and necessary emergency order to protect Tucson's water supply. And they invoked the number of specious legal arguments to argue against this order by EPA. This is a water system that serves over 240,000 people. And as the EPA said in its decision ordering the Air Force take action to protect the water, Tucson is in the desert. It has limited sources of water, and it needs this water supply. So, EPA is right to demand action, and the Air Force, in our view, should step up, take responsibility and protect Tucson's water supply. Unfortunately, the Tucson case is just the most recent example of military neglect of the first crisis. And you have a similar pattern that's demonstrated closer to home in Michigan, at the Wurtsmith former Air Force Base and others. These communities need to be protected at the Wurtsmith Air Force Base. It's not just drinking water. Like places across the Great Lakes, people like to hunt and fish. And deer are contaminated. The fish are contaminated. And the state advises limited fish consumption. So, what we're seeing with the Air Force and the military in general is a lot of delay, denial and deflection while the contamination continues to spread. And remember, because of the forever chemicals, these will linger in the environment for some time.
David Fair: WEMU's First Friday Focus on the Environment continues today. We're talking about the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn the so-called Chevron Doctrine and what that means moving forward. Our guest today is Environmental Working Group Vice President John Reeder.
Lisa Wozniak: So, John, you've been pretty clear about what the potential impacts are here, I mean, if the EPA's ability to hold polluters accountable is compromised. Obviously, there's great concern about what will happen with the recent advancements in dealing with PFAs contamination because there have been some advancements. So, even before this Supreme Court decision, we've seen the Department of Defense refusing to take full responsibility for a variety of locations where pollution and contamination on military bases has been found. And, as you noted, Oscoda, Michigan and the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base is a prime example. So, what does this mean for Wurtsmith, in terms of the delay and the inadequate design, and now the Supreme Court decision? Where do we go from here?
John Reeder: Well, the D.O.D. has a duty to clean up this contamination. In the end, it's about people's lives. And every day that the military delays cleanup, the risk to people and the risk to their drinking water continues to grow. The Air Force should comply with EPA's order, just as large and small companies must comply with EPA's orders. Just over a year ago, EPA issued the same type of order to the 3M company, a notorious PFAs polluter in Cordova, Illinois, to protect public and private wells. And instead of making these legal arguments instead of challenging EPA's order, 3M complied with the order. That's what the Air Force should to. It should comply with the order. These orders are used to address serious situations where inaction is causing harm or may present future harm. And here we have the Air Force--part of the U.S. government, mind you--refusing to comply with a lawful and necessary order. It's outrageous!
David Fair: And it's a decision that has potentially further impacts. Should the Defense Department and Air Force continue to refuse to comply with the EPA and properly conduct its cleanups, is there the potential that we're going to see those private and publicly held businesses like 3M do the same and challenge that through the court system instead of conducting the cleanup?
John Reeder: Well, the Air Force needs to comply. There's no provision of law that says federal agencies are exempt from such orders. And the public has every right to expect that the government will protect them and not expose them to dangerous chemicals. Congress gave EPA this authority because EPA has the knowledge and the expertise to safeguard water supplies. I don't care to speculate about what may happen, because we are expecting that the Air Force will comply with this order. And certainly, we do not expect to see more of these specious legal arguments to try to avoid a legal necessary order in the case of Tucson. And I certainly hope that that won't be extended to other sites.
David Fair: Once again, our conversation with John Reeder from the Environmental Working Group continues on 89 one WEMU's First Friday Focus on the Environment.
Lisa Wozniak: So, John, with the Chevron ruling and other Supreme Court decisions potentially impacting protections for human health and the environment, what steps can communities and organizations on the ground in states all across this country take to ensure that polluters are held responsible for cleaning up these toxic sites?
John Reeder: One of those things is happening right now. Getting the word out, radio shows like this that talk about this problem and expose this recalcitrance by the military, I think are extremely, extremely valuable and helpful. A lot of communities are beginning to contact their members of Congress. That word is starting to get out and a lot of places, in part, because Congress required the military to do testing at all of these facilities. So, as these tests begin to roll in, people are starting to realize that this is happening in their own community. And so we urge them to participate in the cleanup meetings that happened locally. But probably more importantly, make sure that their members of Congress are aware of the situation and simply demand that the Air Force and the rest of the military follow the law.
David Fair: Do you think that in the delays that the Air Force and Department of Defense continue to enact, that this Chevron Doctrine ruling from the Supreme Court will impact the EPA's overall capabilities to craft new regulations, particularly in cases involving emerging contaminants like PFAs?
John Reeder: It probably does not matter regarding the emergent contaminant, because the Superfund law is pretty clear that any pollutant or contaminant is covered by the cleanup action at a site. So, that may not be an issue. I would expect this word to prevail that others would make a similar attempt. But we're a long way from accepting this outcome, frankly. The order is still several a couple of months away from full compliance. And during that time, we are urging that the Air Force step down and that the Air Force comply with this legal and lawful order that EPA has issued to them, just as private companies need to do.
Lisa Wozniak: What do you believe should be the next steps for both federal and, very importantly, state governments at this point?
John Reeder: Well, the next step, in my view, is the military ought to begin complying with EPA's new national drinking water standards for PFAs. EPA issued these standards in April. I mentioned earlier 100 locations where offsite water has been contaminated by PFAs from military locations, the number one thing is that D.O.D. must commit to providing safe, alternative water. That is an issue that needs to be dealt with most urgently. It has to do with the health of people that are drinking this water right now.
David Fair: John, I'd like to thank you for taking time and sharing your perspective today. I'm certainly appreciative of your insights.
John Reeder: Thank you for having me!
David Fair: That is John Reeder. He is president of federal affairs with the Environmental Working Group. And if you'd like more information on the work of EWG and the Supreme Court decision overturning the Chevron Doctrine, just pay a visit to our website at wemu.org. Lisa Wozniak is the other voice you've heard today. Lisa is executive director of the Michigan League of Conservation Voters, and my co-host for WEMU's First Friday Focus on the Environment. Lisa, always a pleasure! And I'll see you in the fall for the October edition!
Lisa Wozniak: I look forward to it, David!
David Fair: I'm David Fair, and this is your community NPR station, 89 one WEMU FM, Ypsilanti.
Non-commercial, fact based reporting is made possible by your financial support. Make your donation to WEMU today to keep your community NPR station thriving.
Like 89.1 WEMU on Facebook and follow us on Twitter
Contact WEMU News at 734.487.3363 or email us at studio@wemu.org
