News

By Sara Goodman

The tremendous growth of the bottled water industry has prompted calls for some federal oversight of the ways in which companies withdraw the water, as well as an overhaul of state and local regulations of water ownership and management.

The House Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee yesterday met with experts, industry professionals and activists to assess the environmental risks the bottling industry poses to water supplies, and to evaluate what role the federal government should have in regulating such activity.

While water use and extraction is primarily the responsibility of the states, including how much to pump and how to manage the resources, the government needs to become involved at a national level, said subcommittee Chairman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio).

“Although groundwater management is mostly a state concern, and many of the important decisions about locating a particular plant are local, the federal government does have a role,” Kucinich said.

Noah Hall, assistant professor of law at Wayne State University Law School, said one of the reasons water pumped for bottled water companies is so harmful to the environment is because of an FDA rule that requires any bottled water labeled “spring water” to come from directly from a spring or from groundwater that is directly connected to a spring. That has a negative impact on the health of the water system, he said.

“This regulation has had the unintended consequence of putting tremendous demand and pressure on springs, which are typically some of the most fragile and vulnerable water resources,” Hall said.

Although Hall emphasized the importance of state dominance in water regulation, he said the federal government could act in several ways, including changing the definition of spring water so that there could be scientific evaluations of the best areas to put pumping sites where they will have minimal impact.

He also said it was critical the federal government provided adequate funding for research and data monitoring of water sites for environmental impact assessments. “The research isn’t sexy, so it doesn’t capture the public’s attention, and [the research] is often overlooked — but it is the foundation for making good decisions.”

Joseph Doss, president and CEO of the International Bottled Water Association, said he agreed better access to data was critical in deciding where to pump water, and that water bottling companies should be required to follow the scientific evidence.

“Everyone wants the decision to be science-based,” Doss said. “The bottom line is all decisions should be based on sound science. If the state decides [a location] is not sustainable for bottled water, deny the permit.”

But, he said, those standards should be across the board for water users, not just bottled water companies.

Heidi Paul, vice president of corporate affairs for Nestle, said the company always used water that was replenishable and based its pumping decisions on scientific data showing sustainable use, pointing out that bottled water only uses 0.02 percent of groundwater and 0.001 percent of freshwater used in the United States.

“Our operations are specifically managed for long-term sustainability … To accomplish this, we rely on an environment and geological monitoring program, collection of data and scientific analysis of that data,” she said.

But Terrill Swier, president of Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation, argued that Nestle Waters North America, the largest bottler, has been involved with several communities where it pumps spring water, and because of Nestle’s pumping in Mecosta County, Mich., “irreparable harm would occur and does occur to the waterways.”

Swier said state laws need to be improved and regulations enforced to protect local communities from major bottled water corporations who start projects in their areas. She also said the federal government should implement higher standard requirements for bottled water.

This hearing offered local communities who have been affected by pumping to come forward and explain their concerns about water rights and sustainability at a national level, which might lead to clarification of overall water ownership and governmental management, according to Deborah Lapidus of Corporate Accountability International.

“It’s a good step forward that community activists that have been using their own time and resources have finally gotten the national forum that they deserve,” said Lapidus, who added it was key to determine who controls access to water, the major bottled water corporations or the local residents.

But Stephen Kay, vice president of communications for IBWA, said he worried that by focusing on just the bottled water industry instead of all groundwater users, the subcommittee was missing an opportunity for a broad-range approach that could lead to a comprehensive policy decision.

“To focus so narrowly is to miss an opportunity to make changes that would lead to sustainable water over the long-term,” Kay said.

Source: http://www.earthportal.org/news/?p=731