Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - AMSA in the News
EPA sewer overflow enforcement prompts House rebuke
Marty Coyne, Greenwire senior reporter
Confronting the possibility of a string of U.S. EPA enforcement actions
against municipalities for sewer overflows, the House Appropriations Committee
challenged the agency last week to demonstrate greater regulatory flexibility as
required under a 1994 sewer overflow policy directive.
More than 700 U.S. communities with combined storm and sanitary sewer systems
could be forced to spend billions of dollars in coming years to virtually
eliminate combined sewer overflows (CSOs) -- essentially mixtures of raw sewage
and rainwater. Such overflows are considered by EPA to be a leading cause of
water pollution in the nation's lakes, streams and inland bays.
Local officials, however, are concerned that EPA enforcement staff is ordering
cities and counties to take expensive steps of expanding the capacity of their
wastewater collection systems rather than using treatment methods allowed under
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program.
Those concerns culminated just before the August congressional recess with the
Appropriation Committee's calling on the agency to show restraint on CSO
enforcement orders. The call came as part of the committee's approval of EPA's
fiscal year 2005 budget.
Congress first made reference to EPA's sewer overflow control policy in the 2000
Wet Weather Water Quality Act, and last week's directive is the lawmakers' first
interpretation of that statute.
Wastewater treatment plant managers believe the 1994 policy is aimed at dealing
with CSOs through the NPDES program, not enforcement actions. According to the
policy, communities must implement "nine minimum controls" ranging from proper
operation and maintenance of sewers to monitoring of how overflows and
controlling them affect water quality. In addition, they must develop a
long-term control plan for capturing 85 percent of pollution caused by overflows
and limiting the number of annual overflows to six.
"We're spending the money," said Chris Hornback, the regulatory affairs director
for the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies. "A lot of people don't
want the stigma of a judicial order hanging over their heads as the enforceable
document for implementing the CSO policy."
Alexandra Dunn, AMSA's attorney, believes the committee's directive "clarified
that there is supposed to be a permit program for combined sewer communities,
not an enforcement program."
An EPA spokesman said the agency does not comment on pending legislation. Agency
officials familiar with CSO enforcement orders were not available for comment at
press time. EPA believes that swimming in bacteria-laden waters -- caused by
pollution sources ranging from sewer overflows to agricultural runoff --
presents a significant health risk to humans.
EPA enforcement staff believe orders are required because most communities will
need more than five years -- the length of an NPDES permit -- to develop
long-term CSO control programs and comply with water quality standards, Dunn
said. This view of the law ignores the fact that most NPDES permits are
accompanied by schedules for complying with pollution limits and/or water
quality standards, she said.
The committee language also is intended to send EPA a message that the job of
enforcing the CSO control policy should largely be left to the states, Dunn
said. "A state enforcement order should be an acceptable vehicle," he said. "A
CSO doesn't require this direct federal involvement all the time."
Small- and medium-sized communities in Indiana and several other states have
been told to expect EPA enforcement orders on CSOs in coming months, according
to Dunn. Most of the cities being investigated by EPA have implemented the nine
minimum controls and are developing their long-term control plan, she said.
Before Congress passed the Wet Weather Water Quality Act, EPA ordered numerous
large cities -- including Atlanta, Washington, D.C., and Portland, Ore. -- to
spend billions of dollars on controlling CSOs.
In some instances, resulting rate hikes have strained the budgets of homeowners
and small businesses, according to Hornback. For example, officials in
Cincinnati are concerned that complying with its CSO order will force ratepayers
to shell out a higher percentage of their income on water bills than what EPA
recommends, Hornback said.
The sewer overflow control costs faced by Cincinnati and other cities have
prompted AMSA to begin work on an "affordability white paper," which the group
hopes to finish by the end of 2004.