Click here for previous updates.
To:
Members & Affiliates
From:
National Office
Date:
July/August 2000
The National Office is pleased to provide you with the July/August 2000 Regulatory Update. This Update provides an overview of relevant regulatory issues current to August 31, 2000. A narrative summary of activities or actions that have occurred during the past month is provided in this cover, while attached is a Regulatory Digest summary of all regulatory activities that are currently being tracked by AMSA.
EPA Issues Final Rules on Distribution of Accidental Release Information
On August 4, 2000 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) promulgated a final rule that provides for access to information concerning the potential off-site consequences of hypothetical accidental chemical releases from industrial facilities. Under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), facilities, including POTWs, handling large quantities of extremely hazardous chemicals are required to include that information in a risk management plan (RMP) submitted to EPA. As required by the Chemical Safety Information, Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act, this rule provides members of the public and government officials with access to that information in ways designed to minimize the likelihood of accidental releases, the risk to national security associated with posting the information on the Internet, and the likelihood of harm to public health and welfare. The rule is effective on August 4, 2000. A copy of final regulations can be found at http://www.access.gpo.gov/sudocs/fedreg /a000804c.cfml.National Academy of Science to Review Part 503 Land Application Standards
On August 3, 2000, EPA announced that it has requested a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) review of the science and methodology behind the Agency's biosolids land application standards. The U.S. Center for Disease Control - National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has also agreed to work with EPA and the NAS on the review. EPA indicates that the NAS review is designed to ensure that such standards are based on the best and most current science possible and that biosolids management policies are responsive to that science.In its proposal to EPA, NAS indicates that the study will review the risks and risk assessment methods used by EPA for establishing regulatory standards for chemical pollutants and pathogens in sludge applied to lands as fertilizer. NAS notes that new information relevant to toxicological and pathogenic risks of sludge following land application has been generated, and that the study will review these data to determine their applicability to the 503 rule. Specifically the study is expected to:
n Review the risk assessment methods and data used to establish concentration limits for chemical pollutants in sludge to determine whether they are still the most appropriate approaches. In particular, the committee will consider the National Research Council's 1996 review of the practice of using reclaimed water and sludge in the production of crops for human consumption, and determine whether that report's recommendations have been appropriately addressed and whether there are additional improvements that can be made. Issues the committee will consider include: a) how the relevant chemical pollutants were identified; b) whether all relevant exposure pathways were identified; c) whether exposure analyses, particularly from indirect exposures, are realistic; d) whether the default assumptions used in the risk assessments are appropriate; and e) whether the calculations used to set pollutant limits are appropriate.n Review the current standards for pathogen elimination in sludge and their adequacy for protecting public health. The committee will consider: a) whether all appropriate pathogens were considered in establishing the standards; b) whether enough information on infectious dose and environmental persistence exists to support current control approaches for pathogens; c) risks from human exposure to pathogens from Class B sludge, and; d) new approaches for assessing risks to human health from pathogens in sludge.
n Explore whether approaches for assessing risks from chemical and pathogenic pollutants should be integrated and, if so, approaches for integration will be recommended.
NAS plans to form a Committee of approximately 12 experts to author a consensus report within 18 months. In conjunction with the first meeting of the Committee, NAS will convene a public workshop to obtain outside input, help develop a study plan, and properly delineate study questions. EPA originally planned for the NAS study following the findings of an Inspector General report released March 22 (see April 2000 Regulatory Update). AMSA expects to provide recommendations for Committee nominees and significant input to the NAS review.
EPA, NRC Release Draft Modeling Methodology for Radionuclides in Biosolids
On August 8, the Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation Standards (ISCORS) met with AMSA and National Biosolids Partnership (NBP) representatives to discuss progress in parallel modeling efforts for estimating the potential incremental increases in radiological exposure to the public and others from biosolids handling and disposal/reuse. AMSA and NBP officials questioned the assumptions and inputs used in the ISCORS radionuclide dose model and helped EPA, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Department of Energy officials understand assumptions in NBP's own modeling efforts. ISCORS has developed a draft technical support document (TSD) to support its radiological does model, which can be found at http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/whatare.cfm. AMSA members will be requested to comment on the ISCORS draft TSD in a forthcoming Regulatory Alert.The Sewage Sludge Subcommittee of the ISCORS has also been assisting the EPA and NRC in developing a guidance document on radioactive material in sewage sludge and ash. The first draft of this guidance document was made available for review and comment in 1997. The Subcommittee has just finished revising this document, and made it publicly-available at a June 12 ISCORS meeting. The document is titled Guidance on Radioactive Materials in Sewage Sludge and Ash at Publicly Owned Treatment Works, (Revised Draft, June 2000). This revised draft guidance document is intended to inform POTW authorities of the possibility for radioactive materials to concentrate in sewage sludge and incinerator ash, and to help the POTW authorities determine what they may want to do about any radioactive materials present in their sewage sludge or ash. This document is a draft, available for review and comment. The Subcommittee prefers that comments be provided by October 13, 2000. The guidance document is available on the AMSA website, at: http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org.
NIOSH Releases Hazard Identification Report for Class B Biosolids
On July 28, the National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH) released a report titled, NIOSH Hazard ID #10: Workers Exposed to Class B Biosolids During and After Field Application which provides recommendations to workers for preventing illness associated with exposure to Class B biosolids. The report establishes recommendations for personal protective equipment, proper hygiene and sanitation, hazard communication and training, and engineering controls to reduce worker risks while handling Class B biosolids.On August 10, AMSA and representatives of the Water Environment Federation (WEF) met with NIOSH officials to share concerns regarding the issuance of NIOSH's Hazard ID for biosolids workers. AMSA and WEF expressed several concerns with the Hazard ID's development process, overly-broad recommendations, and other circumstances surrounding the report's release. AMSA also informed NIOSH of the serious impacts the Hazard ID has already had upon public wastewater treatment agencies, citing recent moves by legislators and other interests who have used the report to support calls to ban the land-application of Class B biosolids.
AMSA and WEF noted the flaws inherent in NIOSH's Hazard ID process because it excluded a review by industry experts and relied upon a hazard review of one facility. Problems were noted with NIOSH's broad recommendations to establish engineering controls which reduce worker risks, including recommendations to minimize storage time of Class B materials and requiring soil incorporation. The recommendations fail to adequately account for site-specific factors. It was emphasized that by not accounting for varying methods for treating biosolids, the recommendations may conflict with safe biosolids handling procedures already in place. NIOSH officials expressed interest in AMSA and WEF's concerns and requested a detailed letter delineating areas in which the report can be improved. Based on these specific comments NIOSH officials said they would consider revising the existing Hazard ID.
AMSA, WEF and NIOSH also noted concerns with USA TODAY's July 13, 2000 article that mischaracterized a draft of the report. In a letter to AMSA on August 14, NIOSH indicated that the USA Today article "incorrectly relates the NIOSH Hazard ID #10: Workers Exposed to Class B Biosolids During and After Field Application to environmental issues surrounding biosolids and incorrectly suggests that the NIOSH document evaluates the EPA biosolids program." The NIOSH response and admission came as a direct result of an August 10 meeting arranged by AMSA and the Water Environment Federation (WEF). A copy of the letter is being transmitted to the membership via a forthcoming Regulatory Alert. AMSA and WEF are also drafting a set of formal recommendations for revising the Hazard ID.
AMSA to Meet with EPA Concerning Proposed Dioxin Survey
On February 4, 2000 AMSA's Board of Directors approved a request from the AMSA Biosolids Committee to conduct a member survey of dioxin levels in municipal biosolids and a request to use Technical Action funds to hire a contractor to assist in the survey effort. The proposed survey is expected to help support AMSA's comments on EPA's December 23, 1999 proposed rulemaking to limit dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in biosolids that are land applied.While AMSA had planned to initiate the survey this past July, several issues have arisen that require resolution prior to initiation of the survey, including:
n EPA's assertion that the AMSA dioxin survey data cannot be used for rulemaking since it would not be random. Also, should AMSA's data be used, will it be used to adjust the 95th percentile dioxin levels in biosolids, and decrease the risk level used in the proposed rule, or will it be used to further justify that dioxin levels in biosolids are well below the currently determined acceptable risk levels?n Appropriate detection limits for test methods 1613B, 1668 and 1668A, including the use of 50% of the detection limit for all non-detects.
n Use of unapproved test method 1613B to determine dioxin and furan concentrations in biosolids, and unapproved test method 1668A to determine PCB concentrations in biosolids. (EPA will not be able to validate test method 1668A or 1613B in biosolids, due to a lack of funds -- how will POTWs do compliance monitoring?)
AMSA plans to meet with EPA officials on August 31 to discuss these issues and will make a determination on whether to proceed with the survey. For more information contact, Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106.
AMSA Releases Report on Domestic Mercury Sources
On August 14, AMSA released a new report indicating that mercury levels in household wastewater are sufficiently high to pose Clean Water Act compliance problems for the nation's wastewater treatment plants. The findings of the AMSA study, developed by the Association's Mercury Workgroup, underscore the need for a comprehensive, priority-based, cost-effective national strategy to reduce mercury in the environment. The complete report, "Evaluation of Domestic Sources of Mercury," was distributed to the membership via Regulatory Alert RA 00-16 and is also available on AMSA's web site, www.amsa-cleanwater.org.To better understand the relative contributions of mercury in domestic wastes and potential source control options, AMSA initiated the study to collect information on concentrations of mercury in domestic wastewater, to identify the sources of mercury in domestic wastewater, and to evaluate the feasibility of controlling those mercury sources. Sources evaluated included common household products and food items, as well as research on mercury contributions from individuals with amalgam fillings. The results of this study offer some important observations for sources of mercury in domestic wastewater and the feasibility of effective control options. The major findings include:
n Significant amounts of mercury at the average concentration of 138 parts per trillion were consistently found in strictly domestic wastewater in various parts of the country. This was wastewater that contained no industrial or commercial inputs, dental offices included. POTWs remove 99 percent of mercury that is discharged into sewage systems.n Several common household and toiletry items were found to contain substantial concentrations of mercury when examined using sensitive analytical techniques. Although these products individually do not contribute significantly to a total concentration in wastewaters, their cumulative effect accounts for approximately 15 percent of the mercury concentration in domestic wastewater. The feasibility of controlling these sources would require a broad national effort.
n Although several sources contributing to the domestic mercury concentrations have been identified, human wastes (feces and urine) from individuals with dental amalgam fillings are believed to be the most significant source - greater than 80 percent. These results were corroborated by the results from chemical toilet and septic wastes that showed that a significant portion of the mercury in domestic wastewater is from uncontrollable sources such as dental amalgam fillings.
n While controlling human wastes is impractical, the long-term outlook is promising inasmuch as the trend in dental health is for fewer cavities and resulting in smaller and smaller populations of amalgam-loaded individuals over time.
n Based on this information, domestic waste contributes appreciable concentrations of mercury to POTW influent wastestreams and must be considered when addressing mercury control strategies and the likelihood of virtual elimination of mercury. Background mercury concentrations averaging more than 100 parts per trillion can be expected in POTW wastewater influents, even if complete elimination of industrial point source discharges is accomplished.
In EPA's cost analysis for the Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative, and in subsequent discussions with wastewater representatives, the Agency has supported the use of pollutant minimization programs as a way for achieving compliance. AMSA strongly endorses and promotes pollution minimization efforts, but is concerned that these efforts may not be adequate to produce the desired level of permit compliance sought by regulatory authorities, highlighting the need for a national mercury compliance strategy for POTWs. AMSA has promoted national permit compliance approach for mercury in its discussions with high level officials at U.S. EPA. For more information on AMSA's Mercury Workgroup or to obtain additional copies of AMSA's Mercury report, please contact the AMSA National Office at 202/833-2672.
AMSA Urges Top Water Office Official to Validate Mercury Method 245.7
During an August 3 meeting with Chuck Fox, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water, AMSA urged EPA to re-initiate the approval process for draft mercury analytical method 245.7. This analytical method is nearly as sensitive as the recently approved method 1631, but can be performed at a fraction of the cost. During the meeting, AMSA presented data to show that if method 245.7 were to be approved, the nation's POTWs could save an estimated $17.6 million a year in laboratory costs. Fox committed to looking further into the issue, and indicated that it would be worth investing a modest amount of EPA resources to approve the draft method to create such a significant savings for POTWs.AMSA had petitioned the Agency on March 3, 2000 to conduct a formal rulemaking process to validate and approve EPA's draft Method 245.7, Mercury in Water by Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry as an alternative to EPA Method 1631 for the analysis of low-level mercury. This request was denied on April 5, 2000 and also May 24, 2000 by officials in the Office of Science and Technology, who cited EPA's budget constraints for fiscal year 2000. In response to these denials, AMSA requested the August 3 meeting with Assistant Administrator Fox.
EPA Releases Nutrient Guidance for Rivers and Streams
On July 27, EPA published a notice of availability of its nutrient criteria technical guidance manual for rivers and streams in the Federal Register. This document provides state water quality managers and others with guidance on how to develop numeric nutrient criteria for rivers and streams. Under EPA's 1998 Nutrient Strategy states are required to develop water quality criteria for nitrogen and phosphorus by 2003. EPA is requesting comments on the document by September 25. AMSA's Nutrient Workgroup is leading a review of the document.AMSA has significant concerns regarding both the general approaches identified in the guidance and the potential impacts of criteria that are developed based on these approaches. These concerns arise because no distinction is made between enrichment and impairment of uses. AMSA believes that EPA's nutrient guidance could result needlessly identifying rivers or river segments across the country as "impaired" based simply on nutrient concentration or chlorophyll levels. While nutrient concentrations, chlorophyll, and other water quality measurements could be used as a screening tool to identify river stream segments that may require a more detailed evaluation, AMSA recommends more flexible regulatory approaches so that response actions are limited to those cases where site specific data show that the resident living resources or other defined beneficial uses have been adversely impacted by nutrients. AMSA is seeking an approach that better links nutrient criteria to impacts upon aquatic life or other beneficial uses. AMSA is extremely concerned that POTWs could spend billions of dollars meeting effluent limitations that are driven by non-existent environmental problems. The guidance is available online at http://www.EPA.gov/OST/standards/nutrient.cfml
EPA Publishes Final Transportation Equipment Cleaning Rule
On August 14, EPA published final effluent guidelines, pretreatment standards, and new source performance standards for the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States and into POTWs by existing and new facilities that perform transportation equipment cleaning operations. Transportation equipment cleaning (TEC) facilities are defined as those facilities that generate wastewater from cleaning the interior of tank trucks, closed-top hopper trucks, rail tank cars, closed-top hopper rail cars, intermodal tank containers, tank barges, closed-top hopper barges, and ocean/sea tankers used to transport materials or cargos that come into direct contact with the tank or container interior. Facilities which do not engage in cleaning the interior of tanks are not considered within the scope of this rule. EPA is subcategorizing the TEC Point Source Category into the following four subparts based on types of cargos carried and transportation mode: Subpart A--Tank Trucks and Intermodal Tank Containers Transporting Chemical & Petroleum Cargos; Subpart B--Rail Tank Cars Transporting Chemical & Petroleum Cargos; Subpart C--Tank Barges and Ocean/Sea Tankers Transporting Chemical & Petroleum Cargos; Subpart D--Tanks Transporting Food Grade Cargos.During finalization of the rule, AMSA helped to obtain a voluntary best management practice (BMP) alternative to achieving numeric pretreatment standards. Based on AMSA's June comments that supported the BMP alternative concept, EPA adopted an approach similar to that in the industrial laundries effluent guidelines. TEC facilities may opt for the "pollutant management plan" in lieu of numeric pretreatment standards in the truck chemical/petroleum and rail chemical/petroleum categories. The preamble also clarifies that POTWs are not captured under this rule. The rule can be accessed on line at www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2000/August/Day-14. This regulation shall become effective September 13, 2000.
EPA Releases Guidance Documents on Whole Effluent Toxicity Methods
On July 18, EPA announced the availability of a final document, titled "Understanding and Accounting for Method Variability in Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Applications Under the NPDES Program." The document was issued in response to questions on WET test method variability and to satisfy a requirement of a July 1998 settlement agreement between EPA and litigants for the Western Coalition of Arid States (WestCAS) and industry groups. The document describes three goals EPA has defined to address issues surrounding WET variability. These three goals are: 1) to quantify the variability of the promulgated test methods and report a coefficient of variation (CV) as a measure of test method variability; 2) to evaluate the statistical methods described in the Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control (TSD) for determining the need for and deriving WET permit conditions; 3) to suggest guidance for regulatory authorities on approaches to address and to minimize test method variability. In addition, the document is intended to provide guidance to regulatory authorities, permittees, and WET testing laboratories on conducting the biological and statistical methods and evaluating test effect concentrations. A copy of the document can be found at http://www.epa.gov/owm/npdes.cfm.On July 28, EPA announced the availability of a document titled, Method Guidance and Recommendations for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing (40 CFR Part 136). This guidance document updates recommendations and suggestions (with additional technical clarification) regarding WET test methods published by EPA and incorporated by reference into regulations. The document includes specific technical guidance on nominal error rate adjustments, confidence intervals, concentration-response relationships, dilutions series selection, and dilution water. A copy of the document can be obtained by calling the EPA Water Docket at 202/260-3027.
TMDL Rule Released -- Effective Date October 2001
On July 13, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published final revisions to its controversial total maximum daily load (TMDL) program - titled, "Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation and Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program in Support of the Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation." The rules, designed to revamp the way the nation addresses impaired waters, were originally proposed in August 1999 and have come under intense scrutiny from Congress and those potentially impacted by the TMDL program. Farmers, forestry interests, States, and industry mounted an intense lobbying campaign over the past year to prevent EPA from finalizing these rules. Lobbying efforts to strike down the rule continue to be debated in Congress and are expected to heat up when Congress returns after Labor Day (see AMSA Legislative Update). Due to limitations already imposed by Congress, EPA promulgated an effective date for the new TMDL rule in October 2001. Until that time, the current TMDL rules will be in effect. AMSA distributed the final rule to the membership via Regulatory Alert RA 00-15.Throughout the rule development process, AMSA has been a key participant in the debate with the Agency and Congress. From AMSA's initial involvement with TMDL Federal Advisory Committee in 1997 to recent letters and a resolution that have been sent to the Administration and Congress, AMSA has consistently advocated for continuing water quality improvement in the Nation through the inclusion of nonpoint sources in the TMDL process. The final rule, while not perfect, does promote a strong regulatory stance on nonpoint source pollution, encourages comprehensive watershed planning efforts, and requires state implementation plans; all of which look favorable for publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) - especially those on waters impaired by nonpoint source pollution. AMSA's recent summer conference in Louisville, KY highlighted a variety of perspectives on TMDLs, including those of EPA, state and local officials, industry, environmental representatives and agriculture. AMSA continues to monitor related TMDL developments, including development of guidance to permitting authorities on interim permitting and consolidated assessment and listing methodologies.
EPA to Propose Modifications to Ocean Discharge Criteria
On July 25, EPA held the first of five public meetings to present the Agency's plans to revise the implementation of Clean Water Act Section 403, which specifically addresses the development of ocean discharge criteria. On May 26, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13158 which among other things explicitly directs EPA to take action to better protect marine and coastal areas. Section 4(f) of the Executive Order on Marine Protected Areas states: "to better protect beaches, coasts, and the marine environment from pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), relying upon existing Clean Water Act authorities, shall expeditiously propose new science-based regulations, as necessary, to ensure appropriate levels of protection for the marine environment."Specifically, the Agency may reconsider revising the existing scientific standards for protecting coastal and ocean waters under section 403 of the Clean Water Act, and propose a list of Special Ocean Sites for additional protections. During public meetings, EPA has indicated its desire to require water quality criteria to be met in ocean waters, including beyond the three mile territorial limit defined by Section 502 of the Clean Water Act. Potential water quality criteria applicable for ocean discharges include 11 metals, pentachlorophenol, alpha-endosulfan, beta-endosulfan, and chloropyrifos. EPA also appears to be considering broad criteria for designating these Special Ocean Sites including all National Marine Sanctuaries, endangered/threatened species areas, and essential fish habitat areas). Proposed regulatory revisions are expected by December 2000. AMSA's Water Quality Committee is preparing comments on EPA's draft approach.
EPA Releases Draft Strategy to Reduce Hypoxia in Gulf of Mexico
On July 11, EPA on behalf of the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force (Task Force), published a draft Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (Action Plan) as required by section 604(b) of Public Law 105-383, the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998. The Task Force is comprised of senior policymakers from eight Federal agencies, nine States, and two Tribal governments.The Action Plan describes a national strategy to reduce the frequency, duration, size and degree of oxygen depletion of the hypoxic zone of the northern Gulf of Mexico (the Gulf). The Action Plan cites that a significant portion of the nutrients entering the Gulf from the Mississippi River come from human activities: discharges from sewage treatment and industrial wastewater treatment plants and stormwater runoff from city streets and farms. The Action Plan also notes that nutrients from automobile exhaust and fossil fueled power plants also enter the waterways and the Gulf through air deposition to the vast land area drained by the Mississippi River and its tributaries. It is estimated that about 89% of the nitrate load to the Gulf comes from non-point sources, while 11% is derived from municipal and industrial point sources.
The primary approaches to reduce hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico as outlined in the Action Plan include: 1) reduce nitrogen loads from watersheds to streams and rivers in the Basin and 2) restore and enhance denitrification and nitrogen retention within the Basin. Current model simulations suggest that a 40% reduction in total nitrogen flux to the Gulf is necessary to return to average loads comparable to those during 1955-70. The Action Plan includes several short-term actions and recommendations that may impact POTWs in the Mississippi Basin, including, "...by Fall 2001, permitting authorities within the Mississippi and Atchafalaya River Basin will identify point source dischargers with significant discharges on nutrients and undertake steps to reduce those loadings...." and recommendations to "standardize monitoring and reporting of nutrient loading by point source dischargers...."
A copy of the plan can be found at http://www.epa.gov/msbasin. Comments must be received by September 11, 2000. AMSA's Water Quality Committee is developing comments on the draft Action Plan. All comments received by EPA during the formal comment period will be reviewed and delivered to the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force for their consideration prior to the development of the final Action Plan.
AMSA Meets with OMB on Proposed SSO Regulations - Highlight Satellite Systems
On August 8, AMSA met with White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) officials to discuss issues relating to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) soon-to-be-proposed sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) regulations. Members of AMSA's leadership provided OMB officials with further information on the implications of Clean Water Act permitting alternatives for satellite collection systems that send wastewater to regional agencies for treatment. AMSA and OMB also discussed peak excess flow facilities as management options for SSOs and further clarifications to the general prohibition of SSOs. As a result of the meeting, AMSA gained considerable ground in ensuring changes to the proposal that will aid municipalities in effectively implementing the SSO rule, once it is finalized.OMB has nearly completed its review of EPA's SSO proposal, which is expected to be released in September. As the rule nears proposal, finding an appropriate permitting structure for satellite collection systems has emerged as a significant issue. EPA and OMB are seeking a way to avoid imposing unnecessary burdens upon permitting authorities or regional wastewater treatment agencies while ensuring that all collection systems are covered by National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits. The alternatives range from individually permitting every collection system within a regional sewerage authority to applying one "unified" permit to all jurisdictions within a regional agency's service area.
AMSA representatives recommended that wastewater treatment agencies should make the determination on the appropriate permitting structure for the collection systems within their regions. EPA's draft proposal currently gives this discretion to permitting authorities. The best permitting approach will vary depending largely upon local agreements and jurisdictions, AMSA told OMB officials, and regional sewerage authorities are in the best position to make the determination. States, given the option, would likely favor the unified approach because it would simplify the permit issuance procedure. The Association representatives also informed OMB that requiring a unified permit for all the jurisdictions within a regional sewerage authority might spur unnecessary litigation due to the limited legal authority of most regional agencies. AMSA, OMB, and EPA officials also discussed a compromise approach where a joint permit would be issued that separates legal responsibilities among interconnected jurisdictions. AMSA will continue to engage EPA and OMB on the SSO proposal, providing further information as warranted.
ELI Publishes Case Studies of Enforceable Mechanisms for Nonpoint Sources
On July 21 the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) released its newest publication, Putting the Pieces Together: State Nonpoint Source Enforceable Mechanisms in Context. The document is intended to illustrate available mechanisms for States in implementing nonpoint source pollution programs. The document presents case studies of eight states - Georgia, Maine, Maryland, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin - providing examples of how they are using enforceable mechanisms to supplement more traditional approaches of encouraging voluntary action and providing financial and technical assistance. The new report builds on two previous ELI publications, Almanac of Enforceable State Laws to Control Nonpoint Source Water Pollution, 1998 and Enforceable State Mechanisms for the Control of Nonpoint Source Water Pollution, 1998 which identified the types of enforcement mechanisms available in all 50 states and described their legal advantages and limitations. It is expected that these documents can help AMSA members ensure that States fairly allocate pollutant load reductions among all sources of water quality impairment in the total maximum daily load (TMDL) process. For a copy of the report, visit www.eli.org/research.cfm or call ELI at 1-800-433-5120.WERF To Hold Workshop Assessing PBT Fate, Regulation, and Management
On October 14-15, 2000, during WEFTEC 2000 in Anaheim, California, the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) will host a workshop to evaluate information on the environmental fate of persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals and their regulation and management. Participants will help develop information to support fact-based decision-making for utilities and industry, and the workshop will examine future research needs. It is hoped that this workshop will begin the debate on research needs for regulations and a basis for consistent, scientific decisions regarding chemical controls. EPA is pursuing a number of initiatives concerning the identification and management of PBTs that may impact POTWs. These initiatives deal with solid waste management, changes in reporting levels, screening compounds submitted for listing approval, and an overall strategy for coordinating PBT compound management and research within EPA. For information or to sign up for the workshop visit http://www.wef.org/weftec/index.cfm, or call Margaret Stewart, WERF at 703/684-2470.
Attachments:
AMSA Meetings Schedule Regulatory Digest For this downloadable file, you must have the Acrobat Reader. If you don't have the Acrobat Reader, click on the icon below to download a copy. After you download and install a copy, return to this page and click on the link above for the downloadable file.
