The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control ...neiwpcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/WC_Fall2002.pdf · sis of some 300 stream channels shows that for every stream type in

The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission Newsletter

Water ConnectionVolume 18, Number 3

Boott Mills South, 100 Foot of John Street, Lowell MA 01852-1124 Fall 2002

There was a time when just looking at a river or stream in our cities and towns should have beenevidence enough of how much we had sacrificed in order to make the economic gains achieved beginning with the Industrial Age. Raw sewage, industrial wastes, oil slicks, and other pollutantsmarred the once beautiful and vital water bodies of our nation.

We had disrespected the very water sources that provided us with drinking water, commerce, andrecreational uses. We can’t live without water, no living being can and yet we had taken this vitalresource for granted for so long, bringing our water bodies to the brink of disaster and putting ourselvesat risk.

Though NEIWPCC has been working towards improving water quality since 1947, the passage ofthe Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972 was the first collective admission that we had done serious damageto our waters, nearly exhausting them, and that our future was on the line. In 1972 a spotlight was caston our degraded water bodies and no one liked what they saw. Fish were dying, habitats were beingdestroyed, and pollution was creating unsafe drinking water. It was clear to everyone that we alldepended on these water sources and that we were responsible to preserve and protect them.

In celebration of this Year of Clean Water, which marks the 30th anniversary of the CWA, thisissue of Water Connection highlights some of NEIWPCC’s efforts in controlling water pollution. Youwill learn about the great lengths that we have traveled to improve water quality in New England.Read about how much more work still lies ahead of us so that we may never again return to the daysof pre-CWA.

2

Over 50 Years . . .

◆ Coordinating Interstate WaterQuality Programs

◆ Training EnvironmentalProfessionals

◆ Providing Public Education &Outreach

Boott Mills South100 Foot of John StreetLowell, MA 01852-1124Tel: 978.323.7929 Fax: [email protected]

Who We AreFor more than 50 years, NEIWPCChas coordinated regional waterpollution control programs, trainedenvironmental professionals andraised public awareness of waterquality issues in the six NewEngland states and New York.NEIWPCC’s Environmental TrainingCenter provides training coursesthroughout the region to helpcommunities meet their water pollution control goals.

SubscriptionsSubscription information for NEIW-PCC publications is available bycontacting us at the address above.

This publication may be copied.Please give credit to NEIWPCC.

The opinions and information statedherein are those of the authors anddo not necessarily reflect the opin-ions of NEIWPCC.

Volume 18, No. 3 ◆ Fall 2002

Water Connection is NEIWPCC’s newsletter. It is free of charge and ispublished three times per year. Articles are submitted by NEIWPCCstaff, as well as other environmental professionals. Water Connection isfunded by a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency.

Table of ContentsArticlesNEIWPCC and the Clean Water Act, p. 31972: A Year of Firsts, p. 5Goals of the Clean Water Act, p. 5Clean Water Act Benefits Wastewater Treatment Facilities, p. 6Environmental Milestones, p. 7The Path to Clean Water, p. 8Wet Facts, p. 9Clean Water Act(ions) in Vermont: Looking Ahead to the

Next 30 Years, p.10Maine: A Water Quality Profile, p. 14What Can You Do to Help Protect Water Resources?, p. 14Protecting Wetlands Under the Clean Water Act, p. 15The Clean Water Authority Restoration Act of 2002, p. 17The Year of Clean Water: Reigniting the Public Stewardship Spark, p. 17

Available from NEIWPCCGuide to Hydric Soils in New England, p. 20Source Protection: A National Guidance Manual for Surface Water

Supplies, 2000, p. 19TR-16 Guides for the Design of Wastewater Treatment Works, p. 20

Eileen Bromley, EditorRicki Pappo, LayoutRonald F. Poltak, Executive DirectorSusan J. Sullivan, Deputy Director

Water Connect ion/Fa l l 2002

Water ConnectionC

on

ne

cti

cu

t ◆

Ma

ine

◆M

assa

ch

use

tts ◆

Ne

w H

am

psh

ire

◆N

ew

Yo

rk ◆

Rh

od

e I

sla

nd

◆V

erm

on

t

8 Printed on recycled paper.

WWW.NEIWPCC.ORGFor more information about NEIWPCC, visit our Web- site. There you will find information about

NEIWPCC’s history, projects, and training courses.Newsletters, the Training Catalog, reports, and fact

sheets are available for download. Visitors will also findhelpful links to related federal, state, and other

environmental sites.

WWW.NEIWPCC.ORGFor more information about NEIWPCC, visit our Web- site. There you will find information about

NEIWPCC’s history, projects, and training courses.Newsletters, the Training Catalog, reports, and fact

sheets are available for download. Visitors will also findhelpful links to related federal, state, and other

environmental sites.

3

NEIWPCC Responds to a Distress CallThough the Industrial Revolutionbrought prosperity to many in NewEngland, it had a detrimental effect onthe region’s water bodies. It was thecombination of ignorance about theways in which human activity impactsthe environment and a single-mindedambition of building wealth that set thestage for the water pollution crisis thatlater emerged. Mills and factories thatcropped up along waterways dischargedraw sewage, oils, and other wastes tonearby waters. By the early 1900s the sit-uation had become quite bleak. One lookat our rivers, streams, lakes, and wet-lands of the time revealed the shamefulstate of our nation’s waters.

The New England InterstateWater Pollution Control Commission(NEIWPCC), established in 1947, wasborn out of a need to take back our dis-tressed water bodies and to acknowl-edge that while individual efforts wereat best fragmented, united effortsmade a powerful impact. NEIWPCCprovided the New England states andNew York with a regional forum foraddressing water quality problems. Atfirst, its role was to assign water useclassification for interstate streams. Itwas an arduous labor of love classify-ing uses for 75,000 miles of streamsand 4,600 miles of coastline but it wasthe crucial first step necessary in orderto prevent water pollution.

At that time, the field of water pol-lution control was still in its infancyand there was a scarcity of experts.NEIWPCC established a TechnicalAdvisory Board (TAB) that filled thatleadership role. The TAB evaluatedinformation relating to water pollutioncontrol. The board became recognizedas an authority on water pollution con-trol issues and was sought after toreview research proposals and reportsand to provide direction on a widevariety of pollution issues.

In the early 60s, NEIWPCC’santennae sensed that wastewater treat-

ment would play a much moresignificant role in water quality. Inthe past, it had been commonpractice to discharge untreatedwastes into receiving waters butafter 1965, more and more treat-ment plants were being con-structed. Realizing that there wasvirtually no guidance available onplant design, NEIWPCC’s TABserved an advisory role in thedesign of most new constructionand also prepared a guide calledTR-16 Guides for the Design ofWastewater Treatment Works,which has since become an indus-try standard. NEIWPCC’s dedica-tion to the wastewater field didnot stop there. NEIWPCC hasbeen committed to training waste-water professionals since 1969.

A National Crisis AddressedThough there were pockets of con-cerned citizens scattered throughout theregion and a few half-hearted attempts

by the federal government to tidy uppollution problems, for the most part,NEIWPCC’s work in water pollutioncontrol was a lonely endeavor in itsearly years. NEIWPCC had beenactively working towards solutions tothe biggest perils threatening waterquality: habitat destruction, bacterialcontamination, and the discharge of oil,garbage, and other wastes, but it wasn’t

until 1969 that the rest of the countryfinally understood how serious theproblem was and that immediate actionwas critical.

An oil slick, a common occurrencein many rivers of the time, burst intoflames on the Cuyahoga River inCleveland, Ohio, on June 22, 1969.There had been other fires on the river(and other water bodies across thecountry) in years past, but the fire of1969 captured national attention afterappearing in Time magazine. Thoughenvironmentalists had been trying todraw attention to the plight of thenation’s waters for years and the fed-eral government had already begun tofeel pressure to act, it was this fire thatbecame the catalyst of the creation ofthe Federal Water Pollution ControlAct Amendments, also known as theClean Water Act (CWA) of 1972.

Introduced into the Senate bySenators Edmund Muskie (ME) andHoward Baker (TN), the Act, like theformation of NEIWPCC in 1947, was aresponse to serious environmentalissues which threatened the future ofour water resources. In both instances,


NEIWPCC and the Clean Water Act

continued on page 4

NEIWPCC, established in1947, was born out of a need

to take back our distressedwater bodies and to acknowl-

edge that while individualefforts were at best

fragmented, united effortsmade a powerful impact.

4


it was recognized that without thecooperation of various groups, states,and the government, water pollutionissues could not be resolved. With thepassage of the CWA, NEIWPCC couldbreathe a sigh of relief knowing thatnow the entire nation was not onlyaware of the problem but would alsosupport the cleanup of water bodies.The Act not only validated NEIW-PCC’s efforts, but also injected theseefforts with renewed energy.

The purpose of the CWA was to“to protect and restore the physical,chemical, and biolog-ical integrity of thenation’s waters.” TheAct was a necessarypiece of legislation toaddress an urgentproblem but it wasvery complicated.Once again, NEIW-PCC rolled up itssleeves and got downto the business athand. It coordinatedwith the U.S. En-vironmental Pro-tection Agency (EPA)and the states todevelop guidelinesand policies to imple-ment the legislation.

No Signs of StoppingNEIWPCC has a long history of figur-ing out not only where the problems liebut also how to create the tools that willrectify those problems. TR-16 Guides forthe Design of Wastewater Treatment Works,Guide to Hydric Soils in New England,which assists field personnel in the iden-tification and documentation of hydricsoils and their boundaries, and SourceProtection: A National Guidance Manualfor Surface Water Supplies, which pro-vides guidance on the amendments tothe 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act andaddresses national source protectionissues, are a few examples of tools NEI-WPCC developed to guide profession-als in the field.

Since 1947 the environmentalmovement has evolved and NEIW-PCC has adapted to the changes. Asthe environmental field began tobranch into specialties, NEIWPCCrealized that the TAB needed toaccommodate for this diversity. TheTAB metamorphosed into individualworkgroups that each focused on dif-ferent water pollution issues. Some ofthe current workgroups are: ground-water, nonpoint source pollution, wet-lands, and underground storage tanks.

NEIWPCC organizes and facili-tates interstate meetings of appropri-ate federal and state staff, acts as aninformation clearinghouse, prepares

public outreach materials and newslet-ters, negotiates subcontracts, anddrafts regional policy on issues forstate/federal review and consensus-building. Education and training havealso been a focus. NEIWPCC’s role ineducation and professional traininghas grown over the years to includecourses and workshops on waste-water, drinking water, biosolids man-agement, and underground storagetanks.

NEIWPCC coordinates interstatewater quality improvement efforts,working closely with EPA and thestate environmental agencies. NEIW-PCC is proud of its strong relation-ships with EPA and the states. Since its

inception, NEIWPCC has shared thestates’ positions on pending legislationwith federal subcommittees.

“Certainly over its 55 years, theCommission has seen, anticipated, andresponded to considerable change,and its list of activities has grown sig-nificantly at both the regional and thenational levels. Yet, the Commission’smission of coordinating, promoting,and facilitating interstate water qualityimprovement remains steadfast. Butthe job, as they say, is not done,” saidRon Poltak, NEIWPCC’s ExecutiveDirector.

This Year of Clean Water, the 30thanniversary of the Clean Water Act, is

an opportune timeto celebrate theaccomplishments inimproving waterquality but we can-not hang up ourhats yet. “The goalsof the Clean WaterAct have yet to berealized in manywater bodies. Evenwhere those goalshave been met, ourresponsibility formaintaining andprotecting waterquality for succeed-ing generations willpersist without end.And to that end,NEIWPCC will con-

tinue to serve as an effective facilitatorand coordinator for EPA and its mem-ber states,” Ron continued.

“The Commission will continue tofocus on the major water quality chal-lenges that the states face, includingsignificantly reducing nonpoint sourcepollution, establishing comprehensivewatershed protection programs,implementing effective stormwatercontrols, eliminating combined seweroverflows, and developing compre-hensive low flow policies. NEIWPCCis fully prepared to continue its leader-ship role in pollution abatement wellinto the 21st century.”

NEIWPCC AND THE CLEAN WATERACT from page 3

5


GOALS OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT

The overall objective of the Clean Water Act (CWA) is “to protect and restore the physical, chemical, and biologi-cal integrity of the nation’s waters.” In order to accomplish this broad objective three smaller, more precise goalswere established. First, the Act called for the elimination of toxic discharges in amounts that harm people or wildlife.

Second, the Act endeavored to ensure that all of our rivers, lakes, and coastal waters are safe for people to swim and fishin and habitable for fish, shellfish, and wildlife. Lastly, the Act called for a stop to the practice of discharging pollutantsinto the waters of the United States.

Provisions of the Clean Water Act Upon its enactment, the CWA made four major transformations regarding the water quality of our nation. It required vir-tually every U.S. city to build and operate wastewater treatment plants in an effort to end the discharge of raw sewageinto waters. The Act called for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to administer federal funding and offer tech-nical assistance in the construction of wastewater treatment plants. It ensured that states adopt water quality standardswith federal oversight to make certain that communities everywhere can expect clean water. Lastly, it established a per-mitting system that limits industrial and municipal discharges into waterways and protects wetlands from destruction.

Success of the Clean Water ActSince its enactment the CWA has greatly helped improve the quality of our nation’s waters. So far, tens of billions of dol-lars have been devoted to building municipal wastewater treatment plants. The construction costs have been covered pri-marily by federal investments made under the CWA. As a result of these investments, over the last 30 years the numberof Americans served by at least secondary wastewater treatment plants has increased by over 50 million people.

The CWA has also succeeded in reducing toxic flows. More than one billion pounds of toxic pollutants each year havebeen removed from our nation’s waters. As a result of the cleaner water, large-scale fish kills have declined. The CWAhas also helped the rivers of our nation begin their much-anticipated recoveries.

The passage of the 1987 Water Quality Act further strengthened the CWA by tightening regulation of toxic chemi-cals discharges from industry. It focused on tightening regulation of water pollution from sources such as agriculturalrunoff and urban runoff from city streets. These new stricter guidelines have improved the effectiveness of the CWA.Through their enactment they have helped reduce the pollution in many lakes, rivers, wetlands, and coastal areas.

The Year was 1972; the VietnamWar was winding down andthe U.S. had just returned

Okinawa to Japan. The first fiveWatergate suspects were arrested,marking the beginning of whatwould later become one of thenation’s largest political scandals. OnBroadway, Fiddler on the Roof had justclosed but not before becomingBroadway’s longest running showever with 3,242 performances. Themovie The Godfather first opened.Apollo 17 astronauts set new recordsfor the amount of time spent walkingon the surface of the moon. 1972 wasthe year RCA developed the compactdisc. It was also the year NolandBushnell invented Pong, the world’sfirst video game. 1972 was a year ofmany firsts, not the least of whichoriginated in Congress—the nation’sfirst major water regulatory act.

The Clean Water Act was devel-oped in response to growing healthconcerns regarding serious and wide-spread water pollution. After years ofadvancement in every imaginablefield from politics to space explo-ration, the focus shifted to the envi-ronment. The careless disregard forthe environment that was once preva-lent had finally transformed intoawareness. It was in 1972 that peoplerealized water pollution was not aproblem that could remain ignored.Congress overrode President Nixon’sveto and passed the Clean Water Act.Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME) evenwent so far as to call the act “literally alife-or-death proposition for thenation.”

The Clean Water Act is the pri-mary law that protects the health ofour nation’s waters including lakes,rivers, and coastal areas. As a result of

this significant legislation, water qual-ity has made numerous advance-ments. Today, over two-thirds of thenation’s surveyed waters are safe forfishing and swimming, the annuallosses of wetlands have been reduced,soil erosion due to agricultural runoffhas been reduced, phosphorus andnitrogen levels in water sources aredown, the number of people servedby modern wastewater treatmentfacilities has more than doubled, andthe list of improvements becomeslonger each year. However, it isimportant to remember that these areongoing challenges and that we allmust play a role in protecting ournation’s waters.

Amy Chalifoux was a 2002 summerintern with NEIWPCC’s WaterQuality Department. For informationabout NEIWPCC’s water qualityprojects, contact Bethany Card at978/323-7929 or [email protected].

1972: A Year of Firsts

6


Clean Water Act Benefits Wastewater Treatment Facilities

Prior to 1972, pollution had takenover the rivers, lakes, andstreams throughout the United

States. Dead fish were washingashore, lakes were catching on fire,and drinking water was contami-nated. A big contributor to the pollu-tion crisis was the fact that few citiesand towns at that time treated wastesbefore discharging them to surfacewaters. The government had torespond to these issues while balanc-ing the social, economic, legal, andenvironmental ramifications.

To address these issues, the gov-ernment passed the Clean Water Act(CWA) in 1972. From 1972 until 1990,under the CWA, the ConstructionGrants Program funded more than $60billion for the construction of publicly-owned wastewater treatment facilities.This program was established for thepurpose of maintaining and improv-ing the quality of the nation’s water-ways. The funds provided the meansto build and repair sewage treatmentplants, pump stations, and collectionand interceptor sewers. The Act forcedstates to create water quality standardsthat were subject to federal review andapproval. These standards wereupheld to protect public health andimprove the overall quality of water.The program led to the improvementof water quality in thousands ofmunicipalities nationwide. This sameprogram however, was drawing fromthe national wallet a little too deeply sostate and federal governments wereassigned the task of how to make thisless costly while still abiding the provi-sions of the CWA.

In 1987, an amendment was madeto the Act which would phase out theConstruction Grants Program by 1990.A loan assistance program, madeavailable by the State Revolving LoanFund Program (SRF), replaced the oldprogram. This new program was splitinto two branches: the Clean WaterState Revolving Fund (CWSRF) andthe Drinking Water State RevolvingFund (DWSRF). These programs have

The SRF programs provide assistance to municipalities and wastewaterdistricts in the financing of water pollution abatement projects. In addition,the programs help community public water suppliers comply with federal andstate drinking water requirements. To find out about your state’s program,visit one of the sites below:

CONNECTICUT – http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/cwa/cwfund.htmMAINE – http://janus.state.me.us/dep/blwq/docgrant/srfparag.htmMASSACHUSETTS – http://www.state.ma.us/dep/brp/mf/srf.htmNEW HAMPSHIRE – http://www.des.state.nh.us/wwe/srf.htmNEW YORK – http://www.nysefc.org/srf/CWSRF/CWSRFhome.htmRHODE ISLAND – http://www.state.ri.us/ricwfa/whatwedo.htmVERMONT – http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/fed/FMS.htm

NEW ENGLAND STATES’ REVOLVING LOAN FUND PROGRAMS

been recognized as the most successfulfederal water quality programs in theUnited States.

Through the SRF, states makeloans to high priority efforts. Theseloans have low interest; about 2.4 per-cent compared with the market valueof 5.3 percent. As these loans arerepaid, the money goes back into thefund and becomes available for loansto new recipients. Cities and statesbenefit by not having to dig into theirown coffers to update or rebuild newfacilities while taxpayers and ratepay-ers benefit by not having to pay largefees in order to have clean waterwaysbecause the money is continuouslypaid back. The loans can be grantedfor as much as the total cost of a projectand can be paid back for as long astwenty years.

According to the CWSRF’s report,“Financing America’s Clean WaterSince 1987: A Report of Progress andInnovation,” this program has loanedan average of $3.2 billion annuallyover the past few years to wastewatertreatment facilities. The report alsoindicates that loan repayments andinterest earned provides another $1 billion annually for new projectassistance. (This report can be down-loaded from http://epa.gov/OWM/ cwfi-nance/cwsrf/progress.pdf.) States usingthese funds have made over 10,919loans totaling over $34 billion. This

system offers a boost to both the econ-omy and the environment by provid-ing jobs while at the same timemaintaining our nation’s water bodiesunder the CWA. Currently, theCWSRF has $37.7 billion available fornew projects.

The Act and the subsequentamendments have led to a rebirth ofcountless lakes, streams, rivers, andcoastal areas. High levels of drinkingwater and wastewater treatment arenow considered the norm in the UnitedStates. The United States claims one ofthe highest levels of water quality in theworld however, where old pollutionissues have for the most part beenresolved, new issues have cropped up.The effort now has to shift to nonpointsources, stormwater discharges, andcombined sewer overflows. Steps havebeen taken in the right direction withthe passing of the Nonpoint SourcePollution Management Program thatallows the U.S. Environmental Pro-tection Agency to award grants to thestates to implement nonpoint sourcepollution. Then in 1994 the CombinedSewer Overflow Control Policy waspublished which implemented nineminimum controls that did not requiremajor financial costs, constructionactivities, or engineering studies.Despite the passing of all of this legisla-tion and establishment of policies, thefederal, state and local governments

7


1899 River and Harbors Act – First federal legislation protecting the nation’s waters to promote commerce.1947 New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission originates.1948 Water Pollution Control Act – The federal government offers state and local governments technical assistance and

fund to promote efforts to protect water quality.1965 Water Quality Act – Charges states with setting water quality standards for interstate navigable waters.1970 New York Department of Environmental Conservation is created.1970 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is established.1970 First Earth Day celebration.1971 Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection is created.1972 The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act) – The quantum leap of environmental

protection. A federal program designed to achieve the goal of protecting and restoring the physical, chemical, andbiological integrity of our nation’s waters. In addition to strengthening the nation’s water quality standards system,this landmark legislation makes illegal the discharge of pollution without a permit, encourages the use of bestachievable pollution control technology, and provides billions of dollars for construction of sewage treatment plants.

1972 Maine Department of Environmental Protection originates.1972 Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act – Prevents unacceptable dumping in oceans.1974 Safe Drinking Water Act – The main law that ensures the quality of America’s drinking water. Protects public health

by regulating the nation’s public water supply.1977 Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management is established.1977 Clean Water Act Amendments – Strengthens controls on toxic pollutants and allows states to assume responsibility

for federal programs.1986 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments – Allows EPA to establish maximum contaminant levels of 83 identified

harmful contaminants, gives EPA authority over groundwater, and requires water agencies to monitor groundwater.1987 New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services originates.1987 Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation is created.1987 Water Quality Act – Establishes a renewed focus on achieving the Act’s water quality goals. Supports new state and

local efforts to deal with pollution runoff, creates revolving loan funds to provide ongoing support for theconstruction and treatment of plants, catalyzes action to address pollution from urban runoff, and creates programsto protect estuaries of national importance.

1989 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection originates.1990 Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments – Focuses efforts on reducing polluted runoff in 29 coastal states.1998 Clean Water Action Plan – Builds on clean water successes and addresses three major goals: enhanced protection

from public threats posed by water pollution, more effective control of polluted runoff, and promotion of waterquality protection on a watershed basis.

2001 Water Conservation and Quality Incentives Act (S.285.IS) – Pending. Intent is to authorize the use of staterevolving loan funds for construction of water conservation and quality improvements.

2001 Water Quality Research, Development, and Technology Demonstration Act (H.R.3996.IH) – Pending. Intent is toauthorize EPA to provide funding to support research and development of projects for the security of waterinfrastructure.

2002 Water Quality Financing Act of 2002 (H.R.3930.IH) – Pending. Intent is to authorize appropriations for state waterpollution control revolving funds and other purposes.

2002 The Year of Clean Water – The Clean Water Act celebrates 30 years of progress.

commitment to the field ofwastewater treatment, contact TomGroves at 978/323-7929 [email protected].

cannot relax. They must continue to fol-low developing technologies and tofind solutions to the ever-changingwater pollution issues that threaten thewaters of the United States.

John Murphy is an intern withNEIWPCC’s Wastewater and On-site Programs Department. Forinformation about NEIWPCC’s

Environmental Milestones

8

For more than two hundred years,New York’s waters have suf-fered from the impact of the evo-

lution of population, technology, andlifestyle, with corresponding changesin the landscape and in water quality.More than thirty years ago, New Yorkled the way in a national effort torevive these troubled waters.

Progress has been dramatic.Today, most of the state’s waters arefishable and swimmable. Striped bassand shad are again abundant. TheMohawk River, once coated with asheen of oil and filth, is now a world-renowned bass fishery. Populations offish-eating raptors and furbearers arerebounding after being decimated bycontaminants in the food chain. Citiesand towns that had once turned theirbacks on rivers that ran like open sew-ers were now making restored water-ways the focal points of theircommunities.

Setting CourseTo the earliest European settlers inNorth America, the waters of the newland seemed boundless with infinitecapabilities to serve all of humanity’sneeds: drinking water, irrigation, indus-try, navigation, fishery, and even wastedisposal.

It didn’t take long for the Europeanconvention of disposing of waste inwatercourses to become a deadly prac-tice. By the end of the nineteenth cen-tury, the annual death toll fromwaterborne diseases like typhoid andcholera was in the thousands. Whencommunities began protecting theirdrinking water supplies the death ratefell but other waters remained pollutedwith the debris and sewage of a boom-ing industrial society.

More than fifty years ago, pol-luters were prosecuted only if theycaused a public health hazard. NewYork’s 1949 Water Pollution ControlAct tightened regulations but by the1960s, much more needed to be done.Schools of dead fish drifting on rivercurrents, streams contaminated with

industrial waste tak-ing on strange tints,and shellfish bedsclosed due to bacteriac o n t a m i n a t i o nbecame almost com-mon occurrences.

At a time whenthe entire nationstruggled with similarproblems, New Yorkblazed a trail towardcleaner water with its1965 Pure WatersProgram that put $1billion into statewide efforts to elimi-nate polluted discharges. GovernorNelson Rockefeller traveled toWashington, DC to push the federalgovernment to enact a comprehensivewater pollution law to regulate sewageand industrial discharges, control pol-luted runoff from urban and ruralareas, and halt habitat destruction. Themost critical need was funding for themassive job of building and improvingsewage treatment facilities.

When enacted in 1972, the CleanWater Act (CWA) called for settingwater quality standards and providingtechnical tools and financial assistanceto address the causes of poor waterquality. New York implemented theAct’s provisions with specific waterquality criteria and pollution controlprograms to meet them. Federal andNew York State funds were combinedfor a sweeping program of buildingand upgrading sewage treatmentplants and establishing pretreatmentof industrial wastes across the state.

Liquid AssetsNew York’s Clean Water tradition con-tinues today under the leadership ofGovernor George Pataki. The $1.75 bil-lion Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act,proposed by Governor Pataki and rati-fied by the voters of New York State in1996, provided an unequaled opportu-nity to make lasting improvements toour environment. Governor Pataki wasalso the first governor to call for full

funding of the New York StateEnvironmental Protection Fund, whichprovides $125 million annually for envi-ronmental projects.

The Clean Water portion of theBond Act authorizes $790 million,including:

• $420 million for water qualityimprovement projects in NewYork’s eight Management Planareas, funding wastewater treat-ment improvement, nonpointsource abatement, and aquatichabitat restoration

• $30 million for small communitieswastewater treatment and floodcontrol projects

• $320 million for open space andfarmland protection

Remaining ChallengesSince the 1970s, New York State’s waterprograms have cleaned up most of thedischarges of sewage and industrialwaste that accounted for about 90 per-cent of the water pollution that existed.New York’s discharge permit compli-ance rate for U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) major dis-chargers continues to rank among thehighest in the nation.

In the last six years alone, 1,390miles of rivers, 19,800 acres of lakes,and 270,000 acres of estuaries haveimproved significantly. Our watershave improved dramatically but thework is not finished yet. We need to


The Path to Clean Water

9

protect and maintain our hard-wongains and tackle the remaining prob-lems, such as acid rain and contami-nated sediments (which togetheraccount for more than 60% of impair-ments in New York’s waters).

Acid precipitation from smoke-stacks in the midwestern United Statesand Canada has turned manyAdirondack lakes and ponds into clearbut lifeless waterbodies. New York’sefforts to control acid rain are thetoughest in the nation and the statecontinues to fight on the federal battle-field for control of out-of-state sourcesof pollution.

Contaminated sediments are thesource of many of the fish consump-tion advisories in state waters. Onewell-known example is the HudsonRiver, where sediments in both theupper and the lower river were conta-minated by PCBs discharges. Underthe coordination of the EPA, work hasbegun to restore the health of aquaticlife by removing and treating the cont-aminated river bottom sediments.

With the approach of a federaldeadline for implementing the Phase IIstormwater program, stormwatermanagement is of great concernthroughout the country. New YorkState has gone beyond EPA regula-tions in tailoring a program that willensure considerable progress in one of

the major remaining nonpointsources.

To control polluted runoff fromfarms, New York State created thenationally recognized AgricultureEnvironmental Management Pro-gram, which now involves more than1,000 farmers in farm managementplans that protect water quality.

Work groups, established toaddress hydrologic and habitat modi-fication, onsite wastewater treatmentsystems, and agricultural andstormwater runoff, are ensuring asteady march of progress towardresolving these environmentalthreats.

Conquering these remaining chal-lenges will require vigilance, hardwork, and dedication. The Year 2002marks the 30th anniversary of theClean Water Act, the landmark federallaw that began the clean up of thenation’s waters and envisioned theideal conditions we still strive toward.More than thirty years of restoring ourwaters has proven that New York haswhat it takes to leave a legacy of cleanwater for future generations.

For more information, contact ElaineBloom at the New York StateDepartment of EnvironmentalConservation, 518/402-8274 [email protected].


Most of the Earth’s water, 97%,is stored in the ocean as

salt water.

Nearly all of the fresh water isfrozen in polar ice sheets.

Less than 1% of the Earth’swater is fresh and accessible inrivers, lakes, or underground.

Half of the U.S. populationobtains its drinking water fromrivers and lakes; the other halfobtains its drinking water from

underground water sources.

The five Great Lakes representabout 95% of all fresh water

above ground.

The U.S. has 3.5 million milesof rivers and streams.

The U.S. has 41 million acresof lakes.

The U.S. has nearly 300 millionacres of wetlands (most of

which are in Alaska).

Clean water is vital tocommerce.

The 45 billion dollarcommercial fishing and

shellfish industry relies onclean water for products that

are safe to consume.

The 50 billion dollar soft drinkindustry uses over 12 million

gallons of clean water annuallyto produce its products.

10

Since the Clean Water Act (CWA)was enacted in 1972, Vermonthas experienced dramatic

improvements to the quality of its sur-face waters. Tales of our rivers andstreams devoid of fish, taking on dif-ferent colors depending on the dye-of-the-day used by various woolen mills,or serving as conduits of untreatedhuman sewage hardly seem believ-able in today’s world. Over the last 30years, Vermont has constructed morethan 90 municipal facilities that treatsewage and other wastes before beingdischarged. There are also some 100other facilities that treat industrial-related waste. Efforts continue todaywith treatment plant refurbishment,upgrades, and separation of combined

sewer overflows. The CWA has beenand continues to be the driving forcebehind those infrastructure accom-plishments. These actions are respon-sible for the improvement in qualityand protection of the use of about 60rivers and three lakes, including LakeChamplain and Lake Memphre-magog.

Along with the elimination ofthese large, obvious point source-typepollution problems through treatmentfacility construction, the Act has alsoincreased awareness of other pollutionsources that impact the continuedhealth, use, and enjoyment of theState’s surface waters. It is now widelyrecognized that surface waterimprovement and protection into the

future is a complicatedundertaking, one thathinges upon the rela-tionships of land useand ownership, educa-tion, scientific or engi-neering uncertainty,cooperation, and part-nerships. There arethree focal points con-sidered by many to becentral to the restorationand protection ofVermont’s waterwaysover the next thirtyyears of the CWA –watershed planning,addressing channelinstability, and manag-ing stormwater.

Watershed and RiverBasin PlanningIn the words of ThomasJefferson, “People …areinherently capable ofmaking proper judg-ments when they areproperly informed.”This timeless observa-tion is the keystone of

Vermont’s basin planning process andis fundamental in helping communitiesdecide how to restore and protect thewaters most affected by polluted runoff.

Voluntary action, public involve-ment, adequate funding to clean upwaters, and common senseapproaches are the foundations uponwhich watershed plans must be based.The job of minimizing polluted runofffrom the land within the next 30 yearscan only occur if watershed residentsunderstand the techniques availableand do their part. Industry, residences,commercial uses, farms, and forestlands continue to have importantplaces on the Vermont landscape yeteach also has a responsibility to do itsbest to control water and pollutantswashing into rivers and streams.People need information about pol-luted waters and recommended solu-tions. These can be significant parts ofa basin plan.

To meet this challenge and pro-vide needed information, the basinplanning process envisioned forVermont includes the following majorsteps and progression:

1. Issue identification includingwater quality and quantity, aquatichabitat, wetlands, access to andassessment of waters

2. Issue prioritization including acommon understanding of whyone issue may be a higher prioritythan another

3. Strategy and solution develop-ment including the identificationand discussion of alternatives

4. Allocation of resources and funding

5. Implementation and follow-upmonitoring

Local watershed associations arevital in developing basin plans. Manyassociations already exist (currently,


Clean Water Act(ions) in Vermont: Looking Aheadto the Next 30 Years

The 76 Vermont towns/cities served by a treatmentfacility discharging to surface water are illustrated.

11

about 120 river and lake groupsthroughout Vermont). These associa-tions are engaged with landownersand have specific projects underwayfor restoring water quality or water-related resources. The VermontDepartment of EnvironmentalConservation (VT DEC) not only sup-ports the ongoing efforts of locallandowners, communities, and com-munity organizations, but is eager tohelp new locally-based organizationsbecome established where they seeimportant work to be done in regard toour water resources.

In order for the watershed plan-ning process to continue to be success-ful, the people involved must continueto feel as though they have a part in it,that their opinions are being heard,and that they are able to have an effecton the outcomes and actions that resultfrom the process. Successfully creatinga meaningful, effective, and enduringplanning process is the key to solvingwater quality problems in Vermont’swatersheds. Such participation anddecision-making, with an emphasis oncollaboration and consensus, willentail a significant level of staff time bywater and land use agencies.

Applying planning experiencesfrom the mid-1980s and early-1990swith the principles mentioned above,Vermont has launched its 21st centurybasin planning process in threedrainages which are highlighted inFigure 2. Also shown in the figure arethe boundaries of Vermont’s seven-teen river basins. Basin numbers 3, 5and 14 are being considered the nextplanning areas.

Addressing Stream ChannelInstabilityThe Vermont Agency of NaturalResources (ANR) is embarking on sev-eral new watershed initiatives inresponse to statutory mandates, identi-fied public need, and a growing con-stituency for watershed protection andrestoration. The Agency and the DEChave become better equipped and moreproficient with the tools necessary toformulate, implement, and sustain theseinitiatives. One of today’s problems is

pervasive stream instability. To be effec-tive, basin planning and other initiativesmust go beyond the enumeration ofsymptoms and use the analysis of phys-ical, chemical, biological, and social datato explain the root problems affectingthese troubled waters.

Watershed assessments havedescribed erosion/sedimentation andphosphorus as the largest categories ofpollution in the state. These two con-cerns are related in that eroding streambank soils may be one of the largestsources of sediment and phosphorusimpacting our watersheds. The causesfor eroding stream bank soils includethe removal of riparian vegetation,hydrologic modifications, flood plainand channel encroachments, and thein-channel management practices thathave been conducted to address thesymptoms of instability. These activi-ties have caused stream instability atthe watershed scale, wherein bank ero-sion at one location triggers furtherstream bed and bank erosion in anupstream or downstream direction or

in both directions simul-taneously. A recent analy-sis of some 300 streamchannels shows that forevery stream type inVermont, a river withouta riparian buffer is almosthalf again as wide as asimilar stream with ariparian buffer.

The ANR has begunto implement the princi-ples and applied methodsof fluvial geomorphologyin stream alteration per-mits, river channelrestoration, public hazardidentification, and rivereducation programs.Initial success withexplaining complexstream problems andrestoring stream reachesusing a geomorphicapproach presents animportant opportunityfor resource managersand watershed con-stituents. Fluvial geomor-

phology, a science that seeks to explainthe physics of flowing water and sedi-ment in different land forms, will be anessential tool and organizing principalfor community-based watershed pro-tection and restoration over the nextthirty years of clean water efforts.

To effectively address streamchannel instability and to supportother on-going critical water resourceprotection and management initia-tives, Vermont’s water resource man-agers, scientists, and policy makers aretaking actions towards:

1. Supporting an approach based onapplied fluvial geomorphology whichfocuses on improving stream stabilityand function as a central managementgoal. This approach is effectivebecause it addresses the multipleobjectives of various stakeholdergroups and it can be understood andapplied by such diverse individuals astown planning board members, roadforemen, landowners, and local,


Statewide map with 17 basins; 3 of 17 highlighted.

continued on page 12

12

ers of geomorphology as the LaneScale, is provided to illustrate thisdynamic balance.

Managing StormwaterWhen discussing stormwater and asso-ciated impacts, one typically does notthink of the Green Mountain State.Nonetheless, due to changes inVermont’s population and landscapesince the CWA was established, thereare some two dozen streams known tobe impaired primarily due to stormwa-ter runoff. These impairments arecaused by stormwater discharges thatare not receiving adequate treatment(such as projects that pre-date the state’sstormwater permitting program) andpreviously permitted stormwater dis-charges that are not in compliance withtheir original permits. This means thatwhen base-level stormwater treatmentrequirements, known as BestManagement Practices, are designed,installed, maintained, and working cor-rectly, the water quality impairmentsshould be eliminated. Over the nextthirty years, the centerpieces ofenhanced stormwater managementwithin Vermont will occur throughWatershed Improvement Permits andthe creation of municipal stormwaterutilities.

The DEC has begun to implementa three-part solution to the problem ofstormwater impaired waters, imple-mented through the issuance of awatershed-specific general permits,referred to as Watershed ImprovementPermit (WIP). A WIP will be individu-ally crafted for each watershedimpaired by stormwater. Three groupsor categories of stormwater dischargeswould be covered under the applicableWIP, including:

Group 1: All previously permittedstormwater dischargers areincluded under the WIP. Thisincludes all discharges that havepreviously been permitted, regard-less of whether such permit is cur-rently valid or expired. To obtaincoverage under the WIP, theseexisting discharges need to provideDEC with a written certification


CLEAN WATER IN VT from page 11

The so-called Lane Scale.

county, state, and federal resourceagencies.

2. Developing databases to supportriver corridor and watershed manage-ment, public education programs, andto provide indices of program accom-plishments and effectiveness. Theresults of this physical data collectioneffort will provide benchmarks to eval-uate stream threats and impairments.Reference data will also provide geo-morphically-based design specifica-tions to complement traditionalengineering approaches to projectssuch as streambank stabilization,transportation infrastructure invest-ments, flood recovery or prevention,flood plain management, andstormwater controls. In addition, thesedatabases will provide a commonframework for assessing the effective-ness of stream management projects inmeeting their stated goals.

3. Developing and implementing basinplans and establishing a network ofstream stability restoration demonstra-tion projects throughout Vermont toadvance public understanding of flu-vial processes and to engender supportof protection and management pro-grams at the state and local levels.Basin plans should identify and priori-tize problem areas and provide a

schedule for attaining long-term goalsfor stream corridors. Each componentof a basin plan should directly or indi-rectly address water quality concernsarising from stream instability. Basinplans should strive to target futurestream protection, restoration, andmanagement projects using a set offour priorities that recognize conserva-tion reaches, strategic sites, reacheswith high recovery potential, andmoderate to highly degraded sites.

Rivers and their movementsbecome easier to understand once werealize that the volume of water andthe amount of sediment being carriedare in dynamic balance. Rivers aredynamic systems that adjust withinnormal limits. Stable rivers have theability to move water and sediment inbalance, have no large deposits of sandor gravel, have minor natural erosion,and their riverbank location changesvery little from year to year. Unstablerivers, on the other hand, are found onmany miles of Vermont rivers andstreams. These rivers can change theircourse by many feet annually, havelarge sections of collapsing riverbanksthat widen and/or cut deeper intotheir channel and sediment fills nat-ural pools. Understanding the causesof instability and working to bringthose reaches into balance will be along-term opportunity for clean wateractions. Figure 3, known to practition-

13

that the existing stormwater man-agement system was built asdesigned and is currently operat-ing in compliance with the previ-ously issued permit. If suchcertification cannot be made, theWIP will specify a reasonable time-frame for taking corrective action(typically inclusive of two buildingseasons) to construct and/or bringthe previously permitted stormwa-ter management system into com-pliance with the previously issuedpermit. Once this corrective actionis taken, an engineer’s certificationwill be provided to DEC.

Group 2: Stormwater dischargesdesignated by DEC as “selectedstormwater discharges” to thereceiving impaired water will beincluded under the WIP. Withineach impaired watershed there areseveral entities that, by virtue oftheir size, location, age, and lack ofadequate treatment, have an inor-dinate detrimental impact on thereceiving water. Some of these mayhave permits issued previously,others may pre-date the permittingprogram altogether. The formulaused to identify “selected dis-charges” takes into account certainfactors, such as the extent of imper-vious surfaces, the presence andefficacy of any existing stormwatertreatment, and degree of connec-tivity to the receiving water. DECbelieves that it is necessary to selec-tively require optimized stormwa-ter treatment for these dischargesin order to improve impairedwaters. Requiring optimized treat-ment for these notable dischargesis very efficient with regard to ben-efits versus costs, particularly whenconsidered on a watershed basis.The top tier of these dischargeswithin a watershed will be requiredto engineer treatment solutionsdesigned to achieve the water qual-ity, recharge, and channel protec-tion requirements of The VermontStormwater Management Manual forWatershed Improvement Permits.

Group 3: While improvements toexisting stormwater managementsystems are ongoing, the WIP willminimize water quality impairmentfrom new stormwater dischargesby requiring treatment solutions tomeet the state-of-the-art require-ments specified in the newly devel-oped Manual. This manual, whichrelies on five elements of an inte-grated management concept, pro-vides designers with an overviewof how to size, design, select, andlocate stormwater treatment prac-tices to comply with State stormwa-ter performance goals. The Manualis available for download fromwww.anr.state.vt.us/dec/waterq/Stormwater/VermontStormwaterManual.pdf

Stormwater management willassume an increasingly important role,especially for the large proportion ofthe state’s residents and businessesfound in the more confined urban orsuburban areas of Vermont. In order tomore efficiently manage this aspect ofwater quality, one can anticipate thecreation of municipal stormwater utili-ties as a likely outcome. A stormwaterutility, whether established to serve asingle town, a collection of towns or

portions of several towns within a par-ticular watershed, has considerablepromise for the state, municipalities,and development community.

As a result of the CWA, significantprogress has occurred to improve andsafeguard the quality of Vermont’ssurface water resources. With thatprogress however, has come recogni-tion and appreciation for the types ofpollution sources and the manner inwhich our lives and activities can neg-atively impact those achievements inwater quality. Without question, ourability to monitor and assess waterquality conditions will improve overthe next thirty years of the Act. We canexpect greater certainty about the toolsand measures we apply to control,reduce, or prevent undesirable chemi-cal, physical, or biological changes tothe resource.

Local concerns and citizen-basedwatershed planning will play an evenlarger role in reaching agreement onthe implementation of clean watersolutions. Understanding channel sta-bility improves our collective knowl-edge regarding stable river systems.Stable systems are ones where thevalue of riparian vegetation is pro-tected and where the river has accessto its flood plain. These have positiveimplications not only for fisheries andother wildlife but also towards mini-mizing risk from flood damage to pub-lic and private developmentinvestments. Finally, as Vermontbecomes more populated and changesoccur to its landscape, demands forstate-of-the-art stormwater controlsand management are likely to increase.The challenge in this arena will be tocreate seamless yet effective stormwa-ter management between the state andthe various programs and bylaws oftowns.

For more information aboutVermont’s water quality efforts,contact Rick Hopkins at the VermontDepartment of EnvironmentalConservation: 802/241-3770 [email protected].


As a result of the CWA, signif-icant progress has occurred to

improve and safeguard thequality of Vermont’s surfacewater resources. With that

progress however, has comerecognition and appreciation

for the types of pollutionsources and the manner in

which our lives and activitiescan negatively impact those

achievements in water quality.

14


Maine’s historyis tied toclean and

abundant rivers, lakes,and shorelines. Thirty-five years ago, ourrivers emitted foulodors and fish killswere common. Wehave spent consider-able money and effortto improve them; theresults are telling.Water quality trendsfor 224 Maine lakesthat have been trackedfor at least 8 yearsshow that 67 percentof those lakes havestable water quality, 25 percent are improving, and only 8 percent are declining.Maine’s major rivers and streams are also improving with 70 percent of theirlength fishable and 94 percent of their length swimmable.

Society is releasing less pollution to the environment. Sewage treatment plantdischarges, in terms of the amount of total suspended solids and biochemicaloxygen demand, are down 20 percent in the past 8 years. This decrease meansthat Maine’s rivers can reclaim their integrity and that we can expand how weuse our rivers.

More acreage open to shellfish harvesting illustrates improving marine water qual-ity, important not only for commercial fishing but also as an indicator of ecolog-ical improvements. Sewage discharges from malfunctioning septic systems, straightdischarge pipes, and nonpoint source pollution are responsible for closing shell-fish areas to harvesting. Over 500 residential and commercial discharges to coastalwaters have been removed since 1995.

Although there are warnings for fish consumption throughout the U.S., the emis-sion of mercury into the environment is decreasing. The bad news is that oncemercury is in the environment, it is very persistent and does not break down.PCBs and dioxin levels in fish tissue samples taken from Maine rivers have alsodecreased, but the toxicity of these chemicals remains very high.

To improve water quality, we have focused on point sources: discharges comingfrom a pipe leading directly into the water. Those major sources masked otherwater quality problems that are pervasive but harder to control. Now that largesources are better controlled, we are finding that our major problems are persis-tent chemicals in the environment and nonpoint source pollution, which is con-tained in runoff coming from the land.

This article is an excerpt taken from Maine’s Environment 2002. The entire publication can be viewed at

http://www.state.me.us/dep/environment2002.pdf.

What Can YouDo to HelpProtect WaterResources?Before you pour, spray, or dumpanything on the street, yourlawn, or at the side of the roadask yourself, ”Will this end up inthe water?” People oftenwonder what they can do tosupport clean water. Promotingclean water is actually very easy;simply exercising some commonsense can do it.

Here is a list of things you cando to help prevent water

pollution in your area.

➤➤ Use only the directed amountof lawn treatment and do nottreat your lawn when heavy rainis forecast.

➤➤ Choose native plants that canwithstand local soil and moistureconditions without requiring extrafertilizer or water.

➤➤ Clean up after your pets,even in your own yard.

➤➤ Keep your septic system ingood repair.

➤➤ Never pour anything downstorm sewers as they often drainstraight into surface waters.

➤➤ Dispose of chemicals asdirected on the container or callyour waste management companyfor instructions.

MAINE: A WATER QUALITY PROFILE

15

Wetlands play a vital role inthe environmental and eco-nomic health of our nation.

These unique areas act as natural fil-ters that purify water by sifting outsediments and pollutants. After stormevents, wetlands help control floodingand reduce coastal storm damage byabsorbing stormwater and releasing itgradually. Wetlands can help maintainstream and river flows during dryperiods and can replenish groundwa-ter supplies. They also maintain habi-tat for fish and wildlife and providepopular places for hunting, canoeing,and fishing.

Although the Clean Water Act(CWA) was designed to protect theintegrity of all of our nation’s waterbodies, many people associate the Actwith rivers and do not realize that wet-lands included in the definition of“waters of the United States” are alsocovered by the Act. In the informationbelow you will read about how someof the key sections of the Clean WaterAct apply to wetlands and about cur-rent issues and controversies related towetlands regulation under the Act.

Section 303: Water QualityStandardsSection 303 of the Clean Water Actrequires states to “designate uses,”which means they must specify appro-priate water uses, such as drinkingwater, recreational use, propagation offish and shellfish, for each regulatedwater body and establish water qualitystandards to support those uses. Moststates have completed this task for lakes,streams, and rivers but few have estab-lished standards for wetlands. In 1990,the United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA) issuedguidance on developing water qualitystandards for wetlands. This guidancerequired states to:

• Include wetlands in the definitionof “State waters”

• Designate uses for all wetlands

• Adopt aesthetic narrative criteria

and appropriate numeric criteriafor wetlands

• Adopt narrative biological criteriafor wetlands

• Apply the state’s antidegradationpolicy and implementation meth-ods to wetlands

EPA’s 1994 Water QualityStandards Handbook stated that “EPAbelieves that some states may not beproviding the same protection to wet-lands that they provide to other sur-face waters. Therefore, EPA wishes toemphasize that wetlands deserve thesame protection under water qualitystandards.” However, little progresshas been made. A recent EPA factsheet (USEPA, 2001) states that “fewstates or tribes have fully incorporatedwetlands into their water quality pro-grams, and even fewer have devel-oped designated uses and criteriaspecifically for wetlands.”

Section 305(b): Water QualityAssessmentsSection 305(b) of the CWA requires thatthe states report to EPA every two yearson whether water quality standards arebeing met in their water bodies. Evenwith this requirement in place, in the1998 Water Quality Report to Congress,states and tribes reported on the desig-nated use support of a total of only 4%of the nation’s wetlands (USEPA, 2001).

EPA be-lieves that thestates want tomonitor wet-lands but lackresources andknowledge ofa p p r o p r i a t ea s s e s s m e n ttechniques. Toassist states, in1997 EPAformed theB i o l o g i c a lAssessment ofW e t l a n d sWork Group

(BAWWG) to improve methods andprograms to evaluate the biologicalintegrity of wetlands. The group con-sists of federal, state, and academicwetland scientists from around thecountry. BAWWG developed a seriesof “Methods for Evaluating WetlandCondition” modules as well as factsheets, databases, and literaturesearches regarding wetland bioassess-ment (all available at http://w w w . e p a . g o v / o w o w / w e t l a n d s/bawwg/publicat.html). EPA’s newlyformed National Wetland MonitoringWorkgroup (see http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/monitor/) incorpo-rates the BAWWG, and other groups,to further wetlands monitoring pro-grams and initiatives.

In 1998, the New EnglandBiological Assessment of WetlandsWork Group (NEBAWWG), a regionalcounterpart to the national work-group, was organized by EPA Region1 to develop a regional wetland bio-monitoring network, to sponsor andoversee state pilot projects, and tocoordinate with and complementefforts of other biomonitoring groups(see http://www.epa.gov/region1/ eco/wet-land/index.html). NEIWPCC has beenactive in NEBAWWG since its incep-tion and has supported its efforts bysponsoring workshops and confer-ences. These workshops and confer-


Protecting Wetlands Under the Clean Water Act


16

to uplands for farming. This programis jointly administered by USEPA andUSACOE. Permit applicants must provethat they have taken steps to avoid wet-land impacts where possible, minimizedpotential impacts to wetlands, and pro-vided compensation for any remainingunavoidable impacts through activitiesto restore or create wetlands. Large pro-jects require individual permits whilemost discharges that will have only min-imal adverse impacts fall under generalpermits issued by the USACOE. Section404(f) exempts some activities from reg-ulation including many ongoing farm-ing, ranching, and silviculture practices.

Definition of “Waters of theUnited States”So, which wetlands are waters of theUnited States? Currently this is a vig-orously contested question that has beenthe subject of litigation, Supreme Courtdecisions, and recently introducedCongressional legislation. USEPA andUSACOE have historically taken abroad view of their jurisdiction overwetlands; however, a recent SupremeCourt decision (Solid Waste Agency ofNorthern Cook County v. U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers) cut back federal reg-ulatory authority over isolated wet-lands. The Clean Water AuthorityRestoration Act of 2002 seeks to estab-lish a statutory basis for this authority,but in the meantime, responsibility forwetlands protection falls more heavilyon states.

States and EPA are starting tofocus more on application of therequirements of the Clean Water Act towetlands. There are currently manyopportunities for states to move for-ward on wetlands protection; how-ever, most states are facing revenueshortfalls. Now more than ever,actions taken by citizens, volunteerorganizations, and private companiesto partner with states are crucial in theeffort to protect wetlands.

For more information on wetlandsissues, please contact Rebekah Lacey,NEIWPCC, at 978.323.7929 [email protected].

References and ResourcesUSEPA. 2002. Wetlands.

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlandsThis home page has links to wetlandsfact sheets, the text of the Clean WaterAct, guidance documents, etc.

USEPA. 2001. Fact Sheet: Methods forEvaluating Wetland Condition. EPA-822-F-01-008.http://www.epa.gov/ost/criteria/wetlands/facts.html

USEPA. 1994. Water Quality StandardsHandbook: Second Edition. EPA-823-B-94-005a.http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/policy.htm

USEPA. 1990. National Guidance: WaterQuality Standards for Wetlands.http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/regs/quality.html

USEPA. 1989. Wetlands and 401Certification: Opportunities andGuidelines for States and Eligible IndianTribes. (This publication can be orderedfrom EPA’s Wetlands Information Hotlineat 1-800-832-7828.)


PROTECTING WETLANDS from page 15

ences have included presentations anddiscussions on volunteer monitoring,national wetlands monitoring strat-egy, state pilot projects, data manage-ment, and related topics. NEIWPCCalso has a Wetlands Workgroup thatpromotes the exchange of ideas aboutprotecting and regulating wetlands.

Section 401: State CertificationSection 401 of the CWA requires that anapplicant for a federal license or permitto conduct any activity that may resultin a discharge to navigable waters pro-vide the federal agency with a Section401 certification. The state in which thedischarge originates or will originatemust certify that the discharge will com-ply with applicable provisions of theCWA, including the water quality stan-dards provisions. States may waive theirSection 401 certification authority, inwhich case the applicant does not needto provide a Section 401 certification.

The major Federal licenses andpermits generally reviewed underSection 401 are Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission hydropowerlicenses and dredge-and-fill activitiesrequiring permits from the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers (USACOE) underSection 404 of the CWA and Sections 9and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.States and tribes can use their Section401 authority to deny, certify, or condi-tion permits or licenses; typically, thedecision is based on whether the activ-ity will comply with state water qual-ity standards but other provisions ofthe CWA can also be applied. In 1989,EPA issued guidance to states onapplying Section 401 certification toprotect wetlands.

Section 404: Dredging and FillingSection 404 of the CWA establishes aprogram to regulate the discharge ofdredged and fill material into waters ofthe United States, including wetlands.Activities regulated under this programinclude fills for development (such asbuildings, highways, and airports),water resource projects (such as damsand levees), and conversion of wetlands

17

Public awareness and interest inthe quality of the nation’s waterresources intensified through-

out the 1960’s. As a result of a devel-oping economy, population growth,and other factors, water resourceproblems were readily observable bythe public and directly impacted theirdaily lives. Pollution in the form ofscum, oil, debris, discoloration, andodor was readily observable in thenation’s rivers, streams, andlakes. Reductions in fish populationsand other aquatic life were noticeableas were more numerous fishkills. Swimming beaches were fouledby pollution and debris and publicwater supplies were at risk of beingcontaminated. State water quality pro-

grams evolved and responded tothese problems in various waysaccording to the limits of available sci-ence, technical and institutional capa-bility, and funding. As a result of thepublic’s interest in and demand formore effective measures to protectand clean up the nation’s waterresources and the varying stateresponses, in 1972 Congress enactedthe Federal Water Pollution ControlAmendments (Public Law 92-500)known as the Clean Water Act (CWA).

The Act, one of the first and mostsuccessful national environmentallaws to be passed by Congress, set thegoal of restoring and maintaining thechemical, physical, and biologicalintegrity of the nation’s waters. In the

three decades since its passage, CWAprograms have yielded measurableimprovements in water qualitythroughout the nation. Streams thatwere once devoid of fish and otheraquatic life now support numerousand varied aquatic populations. Lakesthat were once choked by pollution arenow vastly improved. Point sourcedischarges from municipal and indus-trial sources are being controlled. Yet,much remains to be done to achievethe goals of the CWA and ensure thatthe nation’s waters are “fishable” and“swimmable”.

The progress that has beenachieved must be maintained as thenation’s population and economy con-


The Year of Clean Water: Reigniting the PublicStewardship Spark

THE CLEAN WATER AUTHORITY RESTORATION ACT OF 2002

T he Clean Water Act (CWA) states that it applies to “navigable waters,” which are defined elsewhere in the Act as“waters of the United States.” The USEPA and the USACOE have defined “waters of the United States” broadlyin their regulations to include interstate and many intrastate water bodies and wetlands. In 1986, the USACOE issued

the Migratory Bird Rule, which states that when isolated intrastate waters are visited by migratory birds, the waters fallunder the jurisdiction of the Corps.

In January 2001, the Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County(SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The case challenged the power of the USACOE to require a dredge/fill per-mit under Section 404 of the CWA for an isolated wetland in Illinois. The Court found in favor of SWANCC, strikingdown the Migratory Bird Rule. Although this case applied specifically to Section 404 and the Migratory Bird Rule, thedecision has significant implications regarding Congress’ authority to regulate non-navigable, isolated, intrastate watersunder the CWA.

In response to the SWANCC decision, the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act of 2002 was introduced into the House(H.R. 5194, by Rep. Oberstar) and the Senate (S. 2780, by Sen. Feingold) on July 24. The Restoration Act contains along “Findings” section, which in part offers various justifications for Congressional authority over intrastate waters. TheRestoration Act goes on to amend the CWA by replacing “navigable waters” with “waters of the United States” anddefining “waters of the United States” as “all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and allinterstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mud-flats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments ofthe foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or activities affecting these waters, are subject to the legislativepower of Congress under the Constitution.”

Information and updates regarding Congressional legislation can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov.

Information on the SWANCC case is available at http://www.epa.gov/wow/wetlands/swanccnav.html.


18


been specifically chosen for its simplic-ity and safety for first-time moni-tors. These test kits may be purchasedthrough the Year of Clean Water website, www.yearofcleanwater.org.

Participants will register theirmonitoring locations before October18th on a database system designed tosupport this event. After completingtheir tests, participants will enter thedata that they have collected into thissame database. Data will be availableonline and will be used to issue a“snapshot” report summarizing theevent and celebrating the role andaccomplishments of the participants.

Seniors Watershed SummitACWF is cooperating with theEnvironmental Alliance for SeniorInvolvement (EASI) as they host anational forum to bring together seniorvolunteers from across the nation forwork group and plenary sessions onwatershed protection topics on October28-30, 2002, at Sandy Cove, Maryland.The objective of this forum will be tofocus public and private sector atten-tion on the nation’s watershed resourcesthrough the involvement and partici-pation of America’s senior citizens.

World Watershed SummitIn cooperation with the Association ofState and Interstate Water PollutionControl Administrators, the Associationof Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, theSmithsonian Institution, the UnitedNations Environment Programme, theUnited Nations University, and others,ACWF is hosting a World WatershedSummit October 30 through November1, 2002 in Washington, DC. This forumwill bring together national and inter-national government and private sectorleaders for educational, work group,and plenary sessions that will focus onhow to protect and enhance the world’sprecious water resources.

General Public Awareness ACWF is working to secure proclama-tions that 2002 is the “Year of CleanWater” from the President of the UnitedStates, Congress, and the 50 state gov-

National Youth Watershed SummitACWF and the Smithsonian Institutionare hosting a national forum to bringtogether students and teachers from all50 states and the District of Columbia,on October 6-10, 2002, at theSmithsonian Environmental ResearchCenter in Edgewater, Maryland. ThisYouth Watershed Summit will consistof a series of educational, work group,and plenary sessions on technical andpolicy issues concerning watershed pro-tection. Additionally, a teacher work-shop will be conducted in order thatteachers can receive continuing educa-tion credit for participation. The objec-tive of this forum will be to focusattention on and encourage support forthe protection of the nation’s watershedsthrough the involvement and partici-pation of America’s youth.

National Water Monitoring Day(NWMD)The first National Water Monitoring Daywill be held on October 18, 2002. Thisevent will bring water quality monitor-ing staff from federal, state, interstate,tribal, and local government agenciestogether with established volunteermonitoring organizations and first-timecitizen monitors to conduct a nationwidewater testing activity. This first year’stesting will focus on the four basic para-meters of temperature, pH, dissolvedoxygen, and clarity/turbidity.

Professional water monitors andvolunteer monitoring organizationswill use their existing monitoringequipment. Citizen monitors includ-ing families, classrooms, civic organi-zations, and service clubs can sampleusing an inexpensive test kit that has

The public stewardship ethicneeds to be rekindled in orderto address the intricate web of

human activity thatconsistently affects the

nation’s water resources.

STEWARDSHIP from page 17

tinues to grow. Science has given usthe ability to detect pollutants in everdecreasing amounts. Technologicaladvances, while providing solutionsto pollution problems, also pose newpollution concerns. Nonpoint sourcesof pollution from urban, suburban,and rural areas are posing a more sig-nificant threat to the nation’s waterresources. Many of these pollutionthreats are caused by the general pub-lic themselves as they carry out theirdaily lives.

Large numbers of the general pub-lic assume that water pollution prob-lems have all been resolved and as aresult public attention to waterresource issues has waned. Ironically,even with the priority Americans con-sistently place on clean water, therehas been a steady decline in publicunderstanding, commitment to, andsupport for efforts to protect thenation’s water resources. Yet, it willtake these very same elements to fullyrealize the goals set in the Act. Thepublic stewardship ethic needs to berekindled in order to address the intri-cate web of human activity that consis-tently affects the nation’s waterresources.

October 18, 2002 is the 30thanniversary of the enactment of theCWA. This date represents a milestonein the efforts to protect our nation’swater resources and it also presents anopportunity to enhance the public’sappreciation for the importance of ourwater resources. The America’s CleanWater Foundation (ACWF), a Wash-ington, DC, based nonprofit organiza-tion, is leading a series of events tocommemorate the 30th anniversary ofthe CWA. These events are designed tocelebrate our successes as a nation inaddressing water quality issues, build abetter understanding of the remainingwater quality challenges and solutions,rekindle the public’s stewardship ethic,encourage public involvement in andsupport for watershed protection pro-grams, and build a base of commitmentand cooperation that will carry on andgrow in subsequent years.

19


Water Connection

❏ Please add my name to your mailing list.If you would like to receive our newsletter, please fill out this form and return it to us.Water Connection is distributed free of charge.

For our records, please indicate your employment or organization association:

❏ Treatment Plant Operator ❏ Library ❏ Education ❏ Industry ❏ Consultant ❏ Other

GOVERNMENT AGENCY

❏ Local ❏ State ❏ Federal

❏ Please take my name off your mailing list.If you would like to be removed from our mailing list, please let us know. Paper conservation is important to us.

❏ Please send me a NEIWPCC Resource Catalog.

Fill out this form and return it to us or call 978.323.7929

Name _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Address____________________________________________________________________________________________Street City/Town State ZIP

New England Interstate WaterPollution Control Commission Boott Mills South100 Foot of John StreetLowell, MA 01852-1124Phone: 978.323.7929Fax: 978.323.7919E-mail: [email protected]

ernors. ACWF has also developed a website that provides information onnational, state and community water-related events. Educational materialsare available including: What Is AWatershed, And Your Point Is, TurningThe Tide, Murky Water Caper, G-WhizWater Quiz, and Student InformationKit. These materials can be ordered fromthe web site, www.acwf.org.

To learn more about the Year ofClean Water events, National WaterMonitoring Day, registering monitor-ing locations, ordering test kits for theNational Water Monitoring Day, orordering publications or posters, visitthe Year of Clean Water web site atwww.yearofcleanwater.org.

Roberta Savage is the ExecutiveDirector of the Association of Stateand Interstate Water PollutionControl Administrators(ASIWPCA). She is also President ofAmerica’s Clean Water Foundation(ACWF) and an adjunct professor atthe Lyndon B. Johnson School ofPublic Policy at the University ofTexas.

Source Protection: A National

GUIDANCE MANUAL FORSURFACE WATER SUPPLIES,2000This manual is the updated and revisedversion of Source Protection: A GuidanceManual for Small Surface Water Suppliesin New England, 1996. NEIWPCC createdthe new edition to incorporate changesbrought about by the 1996 Safe DrinkingWater Act (SDWA) Amendments and toaddress national source protection issues.

The manual includes new SDWA require-ments, information on microbial and disin-fection rules, case studies from across the

country, new funding and implementation assistance information, and anexpanded chapter on source protection, planning, and implementation. Theconcepts in the Manual are fairly basic and can be applied to systems of allsizes. Sections on cost savings, acceptable secondary uses, pollutants, landuses, best management practices, and implementation and assistance providewater suppliers with the information and tools they need to advance their plan-ning and implementation processes.

To order your copy of the Manual, contact NEIWPCC at 978/323-7929 [email protected]. The Manual costs $5.00.

Available from NEIWPCC

Non-Profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDWilmington, MA

Permit No.200

Water ConnectionNew England Interstate Water Pollution Control CommissionBoott Mills South100 Foot of John StreetLowell, MA 01852-1124

Forwarding and return postage guaranteed.Address correction requested.

Source Protection: A National

GUIDE TO HYDRIC SOILS IN NEW ENGLANDThis guide helps field personnel identify and document hydric soils and their boundaries.These field indicators provide consistent and reliable evidence as to whether a certain soilmeets the definition of a hydric soil. To correctly interpret and apply this guide, users musthave practical experience and a working knowledge of soils. When properly applied, thisfield guide yields results that are consistent with the identification of hydric soils as per the1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.

NEIWPCC provides updated pages for the Manual as needed. To access this information,visit www.neiwpcc.org/wetlands.html.

Hydric Soils is available for $5. To order a copy, contact [email protected] or 978/323-7929.

TR-16 GUIDES FOR THE DESIGN OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKSTR-16 as it is commonly known, is intended to serve as a practical guide to thedesign of wastewater treatment works. Each section covers important elements ofwastewater treatment that must be considered in the design process. The intendedaudience includes engineers responsible for designing wastewater treatmentplants, state regulators responsible for reviewing and approving the designs, andmunicipalities that may need assistance with the solicitation of professionaldesign services for their wastewater treatment plants.

To order your TR-16 Guide, contact NEIWPCC at 978/323-7929 [email protected]. TR-16 costs $50.

Available from NEIWPCC

Prepared by the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control CommissionTR

-16

TECHNICAL REPORT #16

1998EDITION

GUIDES FOR THEDESIGN OF

WASTEWATERTREATMENT WORKS

GUIDES FOR THEDESIGN OF

WASTEWATERTREATMENT WORKS

Documents

The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control ...neiwpcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/WC_Fall2002.pdf · sis of some 300 stream channels shows that for every stream type in