There have been significant improvements in our nation's waters since passage of the Federal Clean Water Act in 1972. In general, industrial and municipal wastewater dischargers are no longer the major polluters they once were. The Federal Clean Water Act, EPA regulations, and state laws and regulations have contributed greatly to improvements in water quality.
However, individual facilities may still be causing violations of water quality standards and strong actions must be taken by EPA and state water quality regulatory agencies to enforce compliance. To do otherwise would represent a step backward in time and jeopardize gains made over the last 30 years. Additional regulatory activities also need to focus on stormwater and nonpoint source runoff issues, which now account for about 80 percent of the nation's impaired lakes and streams.
Part II: The Economic Importance of Clean Water
It is important to consider the economic and recreational values of our nation s waters that are directly related to their ability to support designated public uses. Of these, the most important is protecting domestic water supplies, both surface and non-surface.
Recreational uses are also important. For example, in 1996, 35 million recreational anglers 16 years of age and older (17 percent of the U.S. population) spent more than 625 million days fishing, and spent nearly $40 billion in pursuit of their sport. Included in this amount are nearly $600 million in state and federal license and user fees that support state fishery management programs nationwide.
These figures above reflect direct expenditures for recreational fishermen only. They do not include economic multipliers that indicate the true contribution of this resource to the Gross National Product (GNP), nor do they include recreational boaters and other user groups (including industry) that benefit from clean water.
The Statistical Abstract of the United States provides additional information about the potential economic impacts of water quality deregulation. In summary, for the year 1997:
-
U.S. residents owned over 16 million recreational boats, Americans spent over $19 billion each year in retail boating expenses, and fishing was the third most popular outdoor recreational sport in the U.S., surpassed only by walking and swimming.
-
Commercial landings of fish and shellfish from U.S. waters had a dockside value of $3.5 billion. Applying a modest economic multiplier of 5.0 provides a total contribution to the GNP of $16.5 billion for commercial fishing. Approximately 274,000 individuals were employed in the commercial fishing industry, and 90,000 additional workers were employed to process the commercial catch.
Part III: REP's Water Quality Positions
A. Clean water protection is a basic responsibility of government.
Clean water must be considered a basic constitutional and civil right of all Americans. Government's responsibility is to ensure this right, just as it ensures others. Exercising authority to protect our waters is clearly one of the powers that we, the people, have vested in our federal and state governments.
Republicans stand for limited government, value personal freedom when accompanied by self-discipline, and support imposition of government regulation only where demonstrated needs exist. The reason our country has needed environmental regulations is that some sectors of our society and some individuals have failed to maintain self-discipline. Instead, they felt they had inherent rights to use public resources for their own benefit, but assumed no responsibility to ensure such use did not adversely impact either other industries or the health and welfare of the general public. This attitude placed short-term profits ahead of civic and personal responsibility, and led to substantial water pollution problems across the nation.
This lack of self-discipline resulted in the need for government regulation. Government began to impose discipline in the form of anti-pollution laws and regulations; first to protect public health and welfare, then, as our scientific knowledge of waters increased, to protect aquatic life.
Republicans for Environmental Protection believes that protection and enhancement of public waters is a basic responsibility of all levels of government.
B. Limited changes to the Clean Water Act are recommended.
As a nation, we have made great progress in reducing point source pollutants from municipal sewer systems and industrial facilities under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). However, the states have still reported to Congress that urban runoff and storm sewer discharges contribute significantly to impairment of the quality and public uses of our rivers, streams, lakes, beaches and estuaries.
Congress recognized the continuing problems when it revised the Clean Water Act in 1987, directing EPA to promulgate new rules to reduce pollutants from storm water runoff. EPA responded by implementing the NPDES storm water permitting program. However, application of this program has been limited to larger municipalities operating storm sewer systems and specific types of industry.
EPA finalized a rule on July 13, 2000, requiring development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) designed to restore waters currently listed by the states as being impaired by pollution. This rule requires identification of and reductions in both point and nonpoint sources that either cause or contribute to impairment of the listed waters. The goal of this rule is to restore water quality on impaired waters so they will once again support their designated beneficial uses without restriction. This regulation serves as a long-needed starting point to address nonpoint sources of pollution. However, these rules are not effective until FY 2002.
Republicans for Environmental Protection suggests...
If EPA is to complete its Congressional mandate to restore impaired waters so that they fully support legally defined and protected beneficial uses, Congress must pass legislation that clearly authorizes EPA to regulate all non-point sources of pollutants. Failure to do so will allow continuation of the contentious atmosphere that has surrounded regulation of nonpoint source pollutants since the CWA was first established. This atmosphere does not serve the best interests of either the public or regulated entities, and is contrary to the clear and unchallenged intent of the Clean Water Act to restore the nations impaired waters.
Congress should provide sufficient funding to states for implementing water quality protection programs, and hold the states accountable for enforcing existing laws and regulations designed to protect water quality and human and ecological health. The current level of funding is inadequate.
C. National Uniform Baseline Standards for toxic substances and nutrients are needed, while allowing for state and local rules to be more restrictive.
- Toxic Pollutants
The Clean Water Act requires EPA to identify and list "priority pollutants". The EPA has already adopted criteria for a large number of priority pollutants which many states have used in adopting state standards. Because of a state s authority to determine acceptable levels of risk to its citizens from toxic pollutants that are carcinogenic, different standards and values have been adopted by states. Even though EPA has authority to approve or disapprove state standards, if EPA disapproves a state standard for a specific pollutant it must go through a cumbersome federal process of promulgating a standard for that state.
Republicans for Environmental Protection suggests...
Congress should amend the Clean Water Act to require development of baseline national water quality standards for carcinogenic chemicals identified by EPA as priority pollutants. These priority pollutants would likely have similar toxic impacts nationwide. Therefore, national standards are appropriate.
Baseline narrative standards should also be developed containing
language such as, "Under no circumstances shall the US EPA allow discharge to surface waters that causes or contributes to increases in loadings of toxic chemicals", or "Under no circumstances shall the US EPA allow discharges that adversely impact aquatic life". This language would also serve to define congressional intent in mandating specific regulations.
- Nutrient Standards.
Some pollutants are not on the national priority pollutant list but still require standards. One such group of pollutants is excess nutrients that over-enrich or fertilize lakes and estuaries, adversely effecting biological communities and public uses. EPA has been working for years on development of final recommendations for nutrient standards in lakes, but progress has been very slow.
Recent studies released by the National Academy of Sciences indicate that excess nutrients from upstream sources are creating serious problems in our nation s estuaries, which serve as breeding grounds and nursery areas for recreationally and commercially valuable fish and shellfish species.
Republicans for Environmental Protection suggests...
These nutrient discharge studies should be used as a springboard for Republican leadership to become more active on the issue of water quality.
REP also believes that numeric baseline standards for nutrients must be site-specific to be effective. For example, "Point-source discharges to the Indian River shall not contain concentrations of total phosphorus that exceed 0.05 mg/l, and the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) of total phosphorus (including both point and nonpoint) allowed shall not exceed 20 kilograms per day." National numeric standards would result in over-regulation in some areas and under-regulation in others.
Republicans for Environmental Protection urges Congress to direct the EPA to establish general narrative nutrient criteria and recommendations for specific nutrient concentrations that would permit no degradation in waters of the U.S.
D. Increased Federal funding is needed for state water quality programs.
Unfortunately, Congressional funding of state water pollution control programs, including ambient monitoring, permit compliance, enforcement, and water quality planning and management efforts has been poor in the last decade. The only exception is funding for implementation of non-regulatory Non-Point Source (NPS) programs. Some Republican members of Congress have embarrassed our Party and reflected poorly on our image by their overt efforts to reduce EPA s enforcement efforts through severe budget cutbacks and riders to reduce environmental protection efforts. Compliance and monitoring efforts are dismal because of poor funding, especially in the area of storm water permit compliance monitoring.
Congressional funding for operation of state programs dealing with monitoring, permit compliance, enforcement, permitting (including storm water permitting), and planning is severely underfunded. States have generally been required to raise their own funds for NPDES storm water permitting programs, and absorb the cost increases in all of their programs due to inflation. In general, the capability of individual states to deal with water quality problems and issues has either stagnated or deteriorated during the last decade.
Republicans for Environmental Protection suggests...
REP America believes that our Republican leadership should increase grant funds available to individual states for state and local water quality improvement initiatives.
E. Ballast discharge water from ships is a great risk.
Ocean vessels that travel worldwide can transfer aquatic species from one ecoregion to another via ballast water and bilge water. Introduction of invasive species can cause severe economic damage and disruption to the ecology of regions where they are not indigenous. These nonindigenous species can also carry disease organisms that can destroy native populations of important aquatic species.
There are no existing Federal laws that require or mandate management in all U.S. waters of ballast water discharge to prevent transfer of nonindigenous species by vessels. The present Federal program is that required by the Aquatic Nuisance and Control Act of 1990. Under this Act the U.S. Coast Guard provides voluntary guidelines for management of ballast water for vessels operating in U.S. waters. States are also authorized to develop programs and submit them for approval and possible Federal funding. Only a few states have developed programs, with the most interest being in Great Lakes states where the Zebra Mussel has caused billions of dollars in damage. There is also legislation pending in Congress (HR4191 introduced by Michigan Representative Hoekstra) which requires further regulation of the introduction and spread of nonindigenous species in the Great Lakes. However, adverse impacts continue to increase in all coastal waters (the total economic impact has been in the several billion dollar range).
More aggressive federal action is needed to prevent further economic and ecological damage to coastal and fresh water aquatic environments from invasive, nonindigenous species transported and discharged in ballast water.
Republicans for Environmental Protection suggests...
Congress should enact broad legislation that requires prevention of introduction of non-indigenous species to all waters of the U.S.
F. Individuals, corporations, and local governments can help too.
There are a number of innovative techniques that could be used to improve the quality of our nation's water.
Republicans for Environmental Protection suggests...
- REP believes there is a great need for zero-impact developments. This is a form of land use development that minimizes impervious surface, retains native vegetation, and avoids entirely the need for expensive storm drain collection and treatment systems, letting nature handle the water management chores.
- REP supports the idea of carefully designed, site-specific, effluent trading experiments. These are analogous to atmospheric sulfur dioxide emissions trading, and would be a way of harnessing market forces to decrease water pollution at the source.
- REP believes that it is time to stop the discharge of persistent, bioaccumulative toxins (PBT). These pollutants can be transferred from water to air to land, and accumulate or bioconcentrate in animals and plants. For example, mercury is a PBT that is present in warm water fish all over the nation. Likely sources are coal-fired power plants and incinerators.
- REP strongly supports national water efficiency standards. Water efficiency and water quality are joined at the hip. We do not need more water waste that will increase the costs for water and wastewater infrastructure. Government bodies at all levels should lead water efficiency efforts by requiring maximum water efficiency at all their facilities, including military bases.
Part IV: Glossary of Technical Terms
Ballast water is water (which often contains aquatic life) that is pumped on board a ship or vessel to ensure stability and balance during a voyage. It may be discharged untreated at points all across the globe.
Bioaccumulative refers to potentially toxic chemicals in aquatic systems that are incorporated in the tissues of aquatic organisms, with concentrations increasing in fish or other predators that consume smaller animals.
Impaired waters are polluted because levels of specific pollutants are too high to fully protect environmental health or designated beneficial use, water quality standards established by law are not met, or because of habitat degradation. Specific pollutants may be from either point or nonpoint sources.
Nonindigenous refers to species of aquatic organisms not naturally found in the local or native environment. They are brought in from outside the native ecosystem.
Nonpoint source pollution (NPS) refers to water pollution that originates from widespread, diffuse sources. It is caused by contaminants carried in water runoff from the land or through the ground, and reduces the quality of lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, estuaries, and groundwater.
A nutrient is any substance that stimulates the growth of organisms in the water column. In excessive amounts, nutrients can result in excessive growth of phytoplankton and other aquatic vegetation that depletes oxygen in water bodies and may encourage growth of pathogenic microorganisms, both of which can threaten human and wildlife health.
Point source pollution refers to water pollution that originates from specific, identifiable sites.
Priority pollutants are toxic substances listed by the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as required by Section 307(a) of the Federal Clean Water Act. EPA is required to develop "effluent standards" for point source discharges for these listed substances.
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is the quantity of a pollutant which can either be safely discharged to or received by a water body without causing it to become impaired, violate water quality standards, fail to meet its designated public use, or cause a deterioration in environmental health.
This paper was written in 2001 by REP members Chester Sansbury, John Whitescarver, and Vince Williams, all of whom are water quality professionals.
