Federal Lawsuit Reveals Louisiana Threatens Million-Dollar Fines for Community Air Monitoring
In Sulphur, a southwestern Louisiana town encircled by over 16 industrial facilities, Cynthia “Cindy” Robertson would raise a red flag on days with significant air contamination to alert her neighborhood about potential health risks due to elevated amounts of particulate matter and contaminants.
However, she ceased flying the flag following Louisiana’s enactment of a law in May last year, which imposed penalties as high as $1 million for disseminating air-quality data failing to comply with stringent criteria.
On Thursday, Robertson’s organization, Micah 6:8 Mission, along with various Louisiana-based environmental groups, filed a lawsuit against the state in federal court. They argue that this law infringes upon their right to freedom of expression and hinders their efforts to advocate for community well-being.
heavily industrialized communities
.
“When neighbors inquired about the disappearance of the flags, I would respond with ‘According to the state of Louisiana, they won’t disclose that information to you,’” Robertson stated.
Although the government claims the legislation guarantees that precise information reaches the public, organizations such as Micah 6:8 Mission argue that it aims to stifle them through “burdensome limitations” and infringes upon their right to freedom of expression, as stated in the legal complaint.
Even though they had been receiving support from the Environmental Protection Agency for many years to track Sulphur’s emissions with advanced air monitoring equipment, Michah 6:8 Mission ceased sharing updates on their social media following the enactment of the new law in May, according to Robertson.
While federal law requires publicly disclosed monitoring of major pollutants, fence-line communities in Louisiana have long sought data on their exposure to hazardous and likely carcinogenic chemicals like
chloroprene
and
ethylene oxide
, which were exempt from these same regulations.
In the Biden administration, the EPA strengthened the rules governing these pollutants; however, the Trump administration pledged to reverse those changes.
The Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has allocated funds to back community-led air quality monitoring initiatives, particularly in areas bordering industrial facilities that release contaminants which aren’t mandatorily tracked under federal regulations. Certain organizations express skepticism about the accuracy of the information provided by the state and welcome this opportunity to conduct their own air surveillance using these federal resources.
“These initiatives assist in identifying contamination levels in regions of the nation where conventional and expensive air surveillance systems are inadequate,” the lawsuit noted.
Following an increase in local efforts for air quality surveillance, Louisiana’s Legislature enacted the Community Air Monitoring Reliability Act, known as CAMRA. This legislation mandates that community organizations conducting pollution monitoring “to allege violations or noncompliance” with federal regulations adhere to Environmental Protection Agency guidelines. These include using certified equipment, which may cost several hundred thousand dollars.
You cannot discuss air quality without utilizing the specific equipment they insist upon,” stated David Bookbinder, who serves as the director of law and policy at the Environmental Integrity Project, representing the plaintiffs. Additionally, he mentioned that there’s no necessity for community organizations to invest in costly devices since more affordable technologies can offer “completely sufficient outcomes… allowing you to inform your community and loved ones if the air they breathe is indeed safe.
Groups within communities that share data obtained through less expensive air-monitoring devices failing to comply with these standards might be subject to daily fines of $32,500 and potential maximum penalties of $1 million for deliberate infractions, as highlighted by an analysis conducted by the Environmental Integrity Project.
We’re a tiny non-profit organization; we didn’t have the funds to cover even a single day of that cost,” Robertson stated. “Moreover, the legislation is worded in such a vague manner that it leaves you uncertain about what actions are permissible and which ones aren’t.
No cases have been documented where the state has enforced these penalties; however, community organizations claim that the legislation discourages their activities.
“The aim of this action was quite straightforward: to suppress the science, stopping individuals from utilizing it, sharing it in whatever manner they could,” stated Caitlion Hunter, who serves as the director of research and policy at Rise St. James, one of the parties involved in the litigation.
“I’m uncertain as to how overseeing community air monitoring programs ‘contravenes their constitutional rights,’ ” responded Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill in a written statement.
The lawsuit points out that industry groups are not subject to the law’s provisions.
The lawsuit claims that “the law assumes ‘air monitoring data is inaccurate when provided by community-led air monitoring organizations, yet considers such data reliable when shared by industrial entities or governmental bodies,'” as stated in the document.
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality along with the Environmental Protection Agency chose not to comment, referring to ongoing legal proceedings.
___
Brook is part of the corps for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative.
Report for America
Is a non-profit national service initiative that assigns reporters to local newsrooms to cover underreported topics.
Jack Brook, The Canadian Press