Industry groups said the E.P.A. had exceeded its authority in requiring the drinking-water cleanup. The chemicals, known as PFAS, are linked to cancer and health risks.
I do like how their argument basically boils down to "You obviously don't understand how much it will cost us to clean up the giant toxic mess we spent so much money trying to hide."
The fact that they're leaning on the "arbitrary and capricious" argument means that they don't have another grounded legal theory for why it's an exceedance of EPA's authority. They're throwing A&C at the wall to see if it sticks because the alternative is willingly take on a liability that's going to potentially peek into the billions of dollars. It's a hail mary, plain and simple.
It sounds like their only argument is “it’s expensive”, which I find somewhat comforting because then it sounds like they at least agree with the science.
It’s a shame lawmakers don’t put stipulations in that they cannot trickle down those costs to the consumers. It’s not our fault, and we shouldn’t be put in a damned if you do and damned if you don’t position.
Can we form a class-action lawsuit to sue anybody who raises our rates over this? Legit question.
Doing the right thing is expensive, and the only thing in the world that actually matters is money, therefore we should be allowed to do the evil thing, otherwise you hate freedom…or something.
This crime will last for generations - will its reward last generations too? These assholes should die penniless, and have literally nothing to leave their heirs. And those heirs should be audited for the source of any money they make.
Enough of letting these guys have a legacy. Their names should be dragged through the mud and their children sent to public school.
"The businesses in our state, including those in manufacturing, have a proven track record of supporting North Carolina’s economic vitality and doing so responsibly. It is important that we do not hastily pass regulations without fully accounting for both the positive benefits and potential negative impacts proposed rules would have on the state and its business community."
"If only the pesky government would stop intervening in the free market, we mega-corps would've all signed up years ago to voluntarily fix the pollution problems we've spent decades covering up... But because you're telling us to, we don't want to." /s
Paraphrasing of course, but this is basically their defence - which is just a tad bit shoddy if you ask me.
If they didn't need this law to get their act together, then why is this law having to be made because they didn't get their act together?
The government could just auction off the rights to pollute and make sure that the amount up for auction is within nature's carrying capacity. Then let the companies bid and let the markets do their thing. Then the government can say the market has spoken and come down hard on those polluting to much and defrauding the market.
Utilities have also challenged the stringent new standard, questioning the underlying science and citing the cost of filtering the toxic chemicals out of drinking water.
Unless your well is drawing from an uncontaminated aquifer that isn't recharged by rainwater, that doesn't really help you. This class of chemicals wound up pretty much everywhere.