43
N
ACWA hit the ground running in 2014 with comments
on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)
proposed
Water Quality Standards Regulatory Clarifications,
EPA’s Climate Change Implementation Plan
, and the
Agency’s Draft
Fiscal Year 2014-2018 Strategic Plan
, all filed within the
first three days of the year.
Concerns Raised over EPA’s Proposed
WQS Regulation Revisions
NACWA’s January 2 comments on EPA’s proposed
Water Quality
Standards Regulatory Clarifications
provided input on all six of EPA’s
focus areas: 1) administrator’s determination; 2) designated uses; 3)
triennial reviews; 4) antidegradation; 5) variances; and, 6) compli-
ance schedules. In addition, the Association suggested that, to the
extent EPA finalizes the rule revisions, the Agency should take the
opportunity to include language that reinforces the value and ap-
propriateness of water quality trading as a regulatory tool to facili-
tate implementation of water quality standards.
Consistent with its comments on an earlier notice, NACWA’s January
2 letter notes that there is no urgent need for regulatory changes
to address the issues laid out in the proposal. The Association un-
derstands that many of the changes are intended to facilitate more
consistent implementation among the states, but NACWA’s letter
stressed that EPA should instead work to address such issues directly
with its state partners rather than attempting to achieve more con-
sistency through additional regulatory requirements.
Consultation with Utilities Urged on
EPA Adaptation Implementation Plan
NACWA sent comments to EPA on January 3 about the Agency’s
Draft Office of Water Climate Change Implementation Plan
, which
was written in response to Executive Order (EO) 13514,
Federal
Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance
. The
Implementation Plan
draws on and helps implement the
National Water
Program 2012 Strategy: Response to Climate Change
that was published in
December 2012. The
Strategy
contains 19 goals and 53 strategic ac-
tions that provide a long-term approach to deal with the challenges
that climate change will present to the nation’s water resources and
to utilities in particular.
In addition to providing recommendations to more closely align
the
Implementation Plan
and the
2012 Strategy
, NACWA urged EPA
to engage local utilities in climate adaptation work. Although the
Implementation Plan includes a ‘priority action’ to “[e]ngage key
stakeholders in climate change adaptation work by continuing to
support the State and Tribal Climate Change Council that advises
the National Water Program,” the Association stressed that “there
is no similar action for engaging local utilities or the associations
that represent them – a serious omission since these utilities will be
the most significantly impacted.” NACWA also expressed concerns
about the Office of Water’s (OW) goal to include climate change sci-
ence or trend information in a major rulemaking prior to 2015. The
Association stated that “utilities should consider all relevant site-
specific data in their planning and decisions, but local-level climate
science and trend data varies considerably across utilities and model
projections, and it will be difficult for OW to incorporate this type of
information into a national rule.” NACWA will continue to discuss
these issues with EPA and encourage them to seek utility input into
the Plan.
Importance of Cross-Media Impacts
Highlighted in Comments on Strategic Plan
Also on January 3, NACWA commended EPA for its continued focus
on nonpoint sources in comments on the Agency’s
Draft Fiscal Year
2014-2018 Strategic Plan
. The Association’s comments underscored
that while the
Draft Plan
reiterates the Agency’s focus on controlling
pollution from nonpoint sources, it fails to acknowledge that, as
EPA’s clean water programs are implemented, point sources remain
under constant pressure from state and EPA regulatory and enforce-
ment actions – and are often the only sources required to do any-
thing substantive to improve water quality. This ongoing pressure is
coming at an ever-increasing cost for consistently decreasing water
quality benefits.
The
Draft Plan
promises a new era in partnerships. EPA has taken
an important first step toward restoring its partnership with lo-
cal government through development of the
Integrated Planning
Framework
. NACWA’s comments highlighted that the Draft Plan’s
water goal should more expressly recognize the role local govern-
ment plays in implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA) – and the
importance of the Integrated Planning Framework and the corre-
sponding Affordability Framework that is still under development.
The Association also highlighted the work under way at clean wa-
ter agencies across the country to improve their operations, reduce
energy consumption, recover resources, and generally improve the
sustainability of their operations. EPA’s increasingly stringent wa-
ter quality mandates, however, can run counter to these efforts and
NACWA urged the Agency to look for ways to address these hurdles
to facilitate more innovation.
The issue of cross-media impacts was a major focus of NACWA’s
comments. On the climate front, the
Draft Plan
highlights the im-
portance of evaluating the impacts of climate change when imple-
menting the Agency’s air and water programs – but lacks any con-
sideration of the greenhouse gas impacts associated with certain
clean water mandates. NACWA’s comments highlighted the need
for the Agency to evaluate “how actions under one EPA goal area
may run counter to objectives under another goal.” For example,
limit of technology controls that are being imposed on clean water
agencies to address nutrient discharges under the CWA require large
amounts of energy and/or chemical use. NACWA also highlighted
that clean water agencies are now facing the potential for regula-
tions designed to limit the discharge of substances, such as triclo-
san, that EPA’s toxic substance and pesticide office continues to ap-
prove and allow in products. The Association’s comments stressed
that “EPA’s chemical safety and pollution prevention goals should
acknowledge this growing problem and identify actions to help pre-
vent” these conflicts between its regulatory programs.
2014 Off to a Busy Start on the Regulatory Front
