Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - AMSA in the News
No. 129
Friday, July 5, 2002 Page A-7
ISSN 1521-9402
News
Hazardous Waste
EPA to Reply to Research Council Report On Sewage by April 2003, Official Says
The Environmental Protection Agency intends to develop by April 2003 a plan
of action to respond to a National Research Council report that said additional
research on the land application of treated sewage sludge is needed, EPA
officials told BNA July 3.
Ben Grumbles, deputy assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Water, said the
agency will use the research council report released July 2 as a roadmap to
update and modernize the "scientific underpinnings" of a 1993 federal rule that
regulates sewage sludge.
"We believe our regulations are protective of human health, but recognize the
need to update the science of the 1993 regulation because there are data gaps,"
Grumbles told BNA. "It's not that the regulation was based on flawed science,
but the science is evolving," he added.
EPA officials said their goal is to publish in the Federal Register in April
2003 the agency's plan of action and response to the report. Public comments on
EPA's response and proposed actions on sludge regulations will be sought at that
time.
The report, Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and Practices, said
EPA should conduct improved risk assessments to assess the sludge's effect on
humans and the environment, carry out a national survey of chemicals and
disease-carrying microorganisms found in the sludge, investigate alleged
illnesses and deaths associated with the sludge, and increase funds and
resources for the sludge program (138 DEN A-10, 07/03/02 ). The report was
prepared by the research council, an arm of the National Academies.
EPA Urged to Act Quickly
Environmental groups and some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are urging EPA to act
quickly on the recommendations.
"I agree with the report that there's a critical need to update the science
behind the regulations [for sludge or biosolids as it is also called]," said
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee.
"The EPA has maintained that sludge is safe without conducting any scientific
studies of exposure on farmers and others who handle sludge and without
conducting a national survey of pathogens and chemicals in sludge," Grassley
added.
In a Feb. 7, 2002, letter to EPA, Grassley raised concerns about the federal
rules that regulate sludge, and in a July 2 press release said the rules were
based on "decade-old science" that was inadequate for the agency to use in
forming regulations for pathogens and chemicals found in the sludge.
Although research council committee members said they found no documented
evidence to conclude that current EPA sludge regulations do not protect the
public and environment, they agreed with Grassley that improved scientific data
and research needs to be used in determining if agency regulations are adequate
or need to be revised.
Grassley to Follow Up
"I intend to follow up with the EPA to make sure this report and its
recommendations don't sit on the shelf like the National Research Council's last
report on sludge in 1996, which the agency has largely ignored," Grassley said.
Research council committee members also pointed out that similar findings in the
2002 report were made in the 1996 report that Grassley referred to--many of
which the new report said have not yet been addressed by EPA.
"I don't know if its accurate to say we didn't do anything on the 1996 report,"
Grumbles said. "One thing is clear is that within this administration, we
believe that land application of biosolids is a local determination. We're not
saying its something we're going to aggressively promote, but it's a local issue
that should be based on sound science and consistent with sewage sludge
regulations."
Additionally, Grumbles added that the agency will work immediately on the
report's recommendation that additional resources and funds are needed for EPA's
sludge program.
"We're going to give careful consideration to their recommendations and we will
specifically consider the ... recommendation for more resources in our current
budget planning process," Grumbles said.
Lewis Not Convinced
David Lewis, the EPA microbiologist who filed a whistle-blower complaint against
the agency that stemmed from the sludge regulations, is not confident that
adequate changes will be made by EPA.
"I have no confidence whatsoever that EPA will fix this situation as long as the
past people are still in charge," Lewis told BNA. "Attitudes have not changed,
so I see no hope of EPA fixing the problem."
Officials from the Sierra Club, which opposes the land application of treated
sewage sludge as an agricultural fertilizer or for other soil improvement uses,
said they hope the research council report will lead to tougher regulations.
"Unless sludge illnesses are thoroughly and impartially investigated, unless
sites where sludge is spread are better managed, and unless rules and guidelines
are strengthened and strictly followed, communities are fully justified in
wanting sewage sludge spreading to be severely restricted to protect their
health, their farm land, and their drinking water," said Doris Cellarius, chair
of the Sierra Club's sewage sludge task force.
Officials from the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies and Water
Environment Federation said they were not surprised by the committee's findings
and endorse the report's call for additional scientific research to close data
gaps.
However, AMSA Executive Director Ken Kirk said, "The report, as it should,
leaves the details to EPA, which recognizes the agricultural and environmental
benefits of reusing this abundant, environmentally safe resource."
The National Research Council report, Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing
Standards and Practices, can be found at
http://ww.nas.edu on the World Wide Web.