The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948

1
1
2
2
3
3
4
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948

• First comprehensive statement of federal interest
  in clean water programs
• Provided state and local governments with
  technical assistance funds to address water
  pollution problems, including research
• Water pollution was viewed as primarily a state
  and local problem
• When it came to enforcement, federal involvement
  was strictly limited to matters involving
  interstate waters and only with the consent of
  the state in which the pollution originated.

5
Water Quality Act of 1965

• Required states to set standards for interstate
  waters that would be used to determine actual
  pollution levels and control requirements
• By the late 1960s, there was a widespread
  perception that existing enforcement procedures
  were too time consuming and that the water
  quality standards approach was flawed because of
  difficulties in linking a particular discharger
  to violations of stream quality standards
• Mounting frustration over the slow pace of
  pollution cleanup efforts and a suspicion that
  control technologies were being developed but not
  applied to the problems.

6
6
7
The Clean Water Act of 1972

• The cornerstone of surface water quality
  protection in the United States
• The Act does not deal directly with ground water
• Employs a variety of regulatory and
  non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct
  pollutant discharges into waterways, finance
  municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and
  manage polluted runoff

7
8
Changes Brought by the 1972 Act

• Brought about the most significant change in the
  law
• Instituted a shift
• From reliance on violations of water and quality
  standards as the primary enforcement tool,
• To establishment of specific technology-based
  effluent limitations that are enforceable as
  permit conditions

8
9
Under the 72 Clean Water Act,

• All discharges into the nations waters are
  unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a
  permit.
• More than 65,000 industrial and municipal
  dischargers must obtain permits from EPA or
  qualified states
• Industries were given until July 1, 1977 to
  install best practicable control technology
  (BPT) to clean up waste discharges.
• Municipal wastewater treatment plants were
  required to meet an equivalent goal, termed
  secondary treatment, by July 1, 1977
• According to EPA, 86 of all cities met the 1988
  extended deadline
• The remainder were put under administrative or
  court-ordered schedules requiring compliance as
  soon as possible.

10
Permits

• Permits specify the control technology applicable
  to each pollutant, the effluent limitations a
  discharger must meet, and the deadline for
  compliance.
• Sources are required to maintain records and to
  carry out effluent monitoring activities.
• Permits are issued for five-year periods and must
  be renewed to allow continued discharge

11
Best Practicable Technology (BPT)

• The primary focus of BPT was on controlling
  discharges of conventional pollutants, such as
  suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demanding
  materials, fecal coliform and bacteria, and pH
• These pollutants are substances which are
  biodegradable (i.e., bacteria can break them
  down), occur naturally in the aquatic
  environment, and deplete the dissolved oxygen
  concentration in water which is necessary for
  fish and other aquatic life

12
From BPT to Best Available Technology (BAT) by
March 31, 1989

• Industry use the best available technology
  (BAT) that is economically achievable
• BAT level controls generally focus on toxic
  substances

13
1972 Clean Water Act

• Its objective was the restoration and maintenance
  of the chemical, physical, and biological
  integrity of the nations waters
• Two goals were established
• Zero discharge of pollutants by 1985
• Water quality that is both fishable and
  swimmable by mid-1983
• Goals not yet reached

14
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)

• Defined Amount of a specific pollutant that a
  water body can receive and still meet water
  quality standards
• States are required to develop TMDLs for waters
  on their 303(d) lists
• EPA approves or disapproves state TMDLs
• If disapproved, EPA sets the TMDL
• EPA estimates that nearly 34,000 U.S. waters are
  impaired and require preparations of TMDLs.

15
Control of Toxic Pollutant Discharges

• A key focus of water quality programs
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues
  regulations containing the BPT and BAT effluent
  standards applicable to categories of industrial
  sources
• In addition to the BPT and BAT national standards
• States are required to implement control
  strategies for waters expected to remain polluted
  by toxic chemicals even after industrial
  dischargers have installed the best available
  cleanup technologies required under the law

16
In Addition to BPT and BAT,

• EPA has issued water quality criteria for more
  than 115 pollutants, including 65 named classes
  or categories of toxic chemicals, or priority
  pollutants
• These criteria recommend ambient, or overall,
  concentration levels for the pollutants and
  provide guidance to states for establishing water
  quality standards that will achieve the goals of
  the act

17
Before 1987.and After 1987

• Before 1987 Programs aimed at point sources
  of water pollution
• After the 1987 Amendments to the CWA New focus
  of programs was non-point source water
  pollution
• Storm water runoff from farm lands, forests,
  construction sites, and urban areas

18
NPDES Permits for Point Sources

• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
  (NPDES) Permits
• Must be applied for and obtained by anyone
  discharging pollutants into U.S. waters (from any
  point source)
• Specify the discharge standards and monitoring
  and reporting requirements that a facility must
  achieve for each point source or outfall

18
19
NPDES Permits for Point Sources

• Require more stringent controls when toxic
  pollutants are discharged
• Regulations for toxics are based on best
  available and economically achievable technology
  (Section 307)

19
20
NPDES Permits for Point Sources

• Can be made more stringent if the specific water
  body requires lower discharges to meet water
  quality standards under Total Maximum Daily Load
  (TMDL) regulations

20
21
NPDES Permits for Non-Point Sources Section 319

• NPDES permit program expanded in 1992 to include
  storm water and other non-point source
  discharges, including
• parking and storage lots
• agricultural storm water discharges
• As much as 50 of U.S. water pollution comes from
  non-point sources (l987 estimate)

21
22
Are Permits Required for Nonpoint Sources of
Pollution?

• Nonpoint sources of pollution are not subject to
  CWA permits or other regulatory requirements
  under federal law
• They are covered by state programs for the
  management of runoff, under Section 319

23
NPDES Permits for Non-Point Sources

• Section 303(d) requires states to list waterways
  that do not meet federal or state water quality
  standards
• These listed waterways are subject to TMDL
  standards
• Federal grants cover up to 60 of program
  implementation costs

23
24
Sanctions (Enforcement Options)

• EPA may issue a compliance order or bring a civil
  suit in U.S. district court against persons who
  violate the terms of a permit.
• The penalty for such a violation can be as much
  as 25,000 per day
• Stiffer penalties are authorized for criminal
  violations of the act for negligent or knowing
  violations of as much as 50,000 per day, three
  years imprisonment, or both.
• A fine of as much as 250,000, 15 years in
  prison, or both, is authorized for knowing
  endangerment violations that knowingly place
  another person in imminent danger of death or
  serious bodily injury
• In addition, EPA is authorized to assess civil
  penalties administratively for certain
  well-documented violations of the law

25
States Do Most of the Enforcing

• The majority of actions taken to enforce the law
  are undertaken by states
• States issue the majority of permits to
  dischargers
• The federal government lacks the resources for
  day-to-day monitoring and enforcement
• EPA has oversight of state enforcement and
  retains the right to bring a direct action where
  it believes that a state has failed to take
  timely and appropriate action or where a state or
  local agency requests EPA involvement
• The federal government acts to enforce against
  criminal violations

26
Controversies with the CWA

• EPA's approach  Focuses on point-source
  pollution, almost ignoring non-point source
  pollution
• Little state-level incentives to look at
  non-point source pollution such as agricultural
  pesticides
• TMDLs  States are required to set the maximum
  amount of pollution that a water body can receive
  without violating water quality standards. 

26
27
Controversies with the CWA

• Sewage Sludge  EPA was slow to issue regs for
  disposal of municipal sewage sludge (finally
  proposed in l989, with final regs issued in late
  l992). 
• Industrial Pretreatment  Industries that
  discharge wastes into city sewers must first
  remove toxics that would interfere with operation
  of the city's wastewater treatment plant. 
• Many cities fail to bring strong enforcement
  actions against industries that violate
  pretreatment standards.

27