Environmental Protection Agency officials can’t ensure that water resources are safe from the hazardous waste that emanates from sewage facilities, according to a government watchdog.
The report released Monday by the EPA’s inspector general said the agency has “limited monitoring requirements” for public sewage treatment facilities and that officials have no unified system for tracking the notifications it requires facilities to submit if they plan to release hazardous waste.
“The EPA regulates chemical discharges to and from sewage treatment plants, but these regulations are not effective in controlling the discharge of hundreds of hazardous chemicals to surface waters such as lakes and streams. Sewage treatment plant staff do not monitor for hazardous chemicals discharged by industrial users,” the report said.
The agency currently monitors discharges of 126 chemicals from treatment plants, but the IG said there are as many as 300 that should be monitored. The list of monitored chemicals hasn’t been updated in 32 years, according to the report.
News of the “limited effectiveness” of EPA efforts to keep sewage chemicals out of surface water comes just months after the agency began a push to expand its oversight authority to smaller and “seasonal” bodies of water.
The Clean Water Act, a 1972 law intended to regulate water pollution, gives the federal government authority to monitor navigable bodies of water for the pollutants on which the EPA focuses.
A regulatory proposal unveiled by the agency in March to the same law would broaden the definition of the types of water sources that fall under its regulatory umbrella to include ponds and streams that only fill with water after rainfall.
Critics argue that the EPA’s attempt to widen the scope of the Clean Water Act conflicts with a pair of Supreme Court decisions — SWANCC v. Army Corps. of Engineers in 2001 and Rapanos v. United States in 2006 — that sought to narrow the law.
“In both cases, the court emphasized the need for federal environmental officials to show the body of water at issue meets the Clean Water Act’s definition of ‘navigable waterway’ that triggers federal jurisdiction,” said James M. Taylor, a senior fellow at the Heartland Institute, a right-leaning think tank that opposes the proposed regulation.
Along with the Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA estimates an additional 3 percent of the country’s waterways will become subject to regulations if the proposal is adopted. The EPA rule change proposal is open to public comment until Oct. 20.
Go here to read the full EPA IG report.
