www.eenews.net/Greenwire/2009/12/18/23
WATER POLLUTION:
EPA enforcement plan must address runoff, utilities say
Greenwire 12/18/09
EPA enforcement plan must address runoff, utilities say
(Friday, December 18, 2009) Taryn Luntz, E&E reporter U.S. EPA's
Clean Water Act enforcement plans should be revised to address
contaminants washing off farms, parking lots and other diffuse
pollution sources, according to a white paper from publicly owned
water utilities.
The paper responds to EPA's announced plan to toughen water
oversight by targeting the most significant polluters and
compelling states to improve enforcement rates that have hovered
below 3 percent (E&ENews PM, Oct. 15).
The National Association of Clean Water Agencies says EPA's plan
focuses too much attention on water treatment facilities and other
"point sources" of pollution, the only facilities the agency has
the authority to regulate under the Clean Water Act.
"Agricultural runoff and pollution from other nonpoint sources are
the leading causes of water quality impairment in the vast
majority of assessed waters across the nation but are not
currently targeted under the existing enforcement regime," the
group says.
Money that utilities spend complying with consent decrees and EPA
enforcement actions often yields little environmental benefit
because other major sources are ignored, according to the paper.
NACWA advocates updating the Clean Water Act to provide EPA the
authority to regulate agricultural nonpoint pollution.
The group also says EPA is inconsistent in its regulation of
utilities, sometimes approving one treatment technology or
practice in one state but deeming it illegal in another.
The problem is acute in the agency's handling of sanitary sewer
overflows (SSO), the group says.
"The lack of a national SSO rule creates a tremendous amount of
uncertainly and has forced communities to make costly
infrastructure investment decisions to deal with SSO issues,
oftentimes with EPA or state approval, only to later face the
possibility of enforcement action because EPA has suddenly
reversed its position and determined a particular technology or
practice to be illegal," the paper says.
The agency also must modernize its approach to water quality,
NACWA says, by looking at whole watersheds instead of narrow areas
and encouraging green infrastructure and low-impact development to
curb storm-water runoff.
The paper urges EPA to recraft its "woefully out of date" 1997
guidance for determining what Clean Water Act measures a community
can afford.
"It is not reasonable to assume that communities can afford to pay
2 percent of their median household income to combined sewer
overflow control while the enforcement office then steps in and
mandates additional controls for sanitary sewer overflows, total
maximum daily loads, stormwater control, nutrient control,
emerging contaminants, climate change mitigation and adaptation,
and the many other environmental concerns municipalities must
contend with."
The federal government also must recommit to funding clean water
projects, the paper says.
The federal government contributes 3 percent of the nation's
overall investment in water and wastewater, down from about 78
percent in the 1970s.
Meanwhile, water and wastewater infrastructure constitutes the
second-largest budget expense for municipalities after education.
"In short, any efforts to improve water quality through
enforcement efforts will be unsuccessful without a return of the
federal government to its proper role as an investment partner in
clean water with local governments," the paper says.
NACWA said it distributed the paper to EPA offices, members of
Congress and public clean water agencies.
|