Features

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration wants to put on hold and re-examine a Clinton-era program spelling out federally required state cleanup plans for thousands of lakes and rivers around the nation, two administration officials said Monday. 

The broad cleanup plans issued last year were intended to reduce storm water and agriculture runoff polluting about 21,000 lakes, ponds, streams and rivers across the country. 

A National Academy of Sciences panel said last month the Clinton administration had put the program into place without enough evidence to assure the right bodies of water were being targeted. 

The Environmental Protection Agency planned to ask the U.S. Court of Appeals in a filing late Monday to delay deciding on a legal challenge to the program and to put off its implementation for 18 months, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. 

Environmentalists said Monday they were alarmed by the action. Under the program, states would have eight to 13 years to develop plans and start cleanup and water quality restoration programs. 

“They’re going to try to roll back this entire program,” said Joan Mulhern, a Washington attorney for the San Francisco-based Earthjustice law firm. 

The appeals court has before it a suit by the American Farm Bureau challenging the cleanup program, alleging that the EPA overreached its authority under the Clean Water Act in halting a California family from harvesting timber from their land. 

Farm Bureau spokesman Dave Salmonsen had no comment on the filing Monday but said the group was encouraged by the National Academy panel’s report last month. 

“Those are some the changes we’re looking for, a lot better emphasis on monitoring and better data collection to see exactly what’s going on in these water bodies before they’re put on lists,” he said. 

The National Academy panel said water pollution from agriculture and storm water runoff remains a serious problem in the United States. But it said EPA’s selection of contaminated rivers, streams and lakes lacked sufficient scientific basis. 

The scientists also criticized using the suitability of a lake or river for swimming or fishing as the criteria for deciding if it should be put on the cleanup list.