• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Water Quality Issues Loom As State Grows

Posted on: Thursday, 28 July 2005, 12:00 CDT

Jul. 28--GUNNISON -- The easy water quality questions have been solved, leaving new challenges ahead for cities and farms, the state's top water quality official said Wednesday.

"Most people are not too concerned about water quality and we are at risk of becoming too complacent," said Paul Frohardt, administrator of the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission.

Frohardt gave an overview of the national push for clean recreational and drinking water at the 30th Colorado Water Workshop at Western State College. He compared the state's clean water problems in the mid-1970s with those Colorado faces today, and those expected over the next 30 years.

While there were water treatment facilities in the early 1970s, many plants were aging and raw sewage often was dumped directly into rivers. Mines discharged dissolved metals directly into rivers. Farms used pesticides and fertilizers indiscriminately, he said.

But with the federal Clean Water Act of 1972, the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 and EPA clean water standards in 1975, Colorado, like other states, began to clean up its waters.

"Lots of money became available for sewage treatment plants," Frohardt said.

Today, more than 90 pollutants are monitored, compared with 20 in 1974. Some of the worst mining sites have been cleaned up and agricultural chemical use is more sophisticated. Nearly all sewage is treated.

Some cities, like Pueblo, have started stormwater management programs to prevent nonpoint source pollution, such as gasoline or oil from streets.

But the future will require substantial commitment, he said.

"More people coming into the state will threaten past water-quality gains and present new challenges," Frohardt said.

On top of that, new technology has created new problems.

Traces of perfumes, detergents and other compounds can be more accurately measured, possibly creating the need for new standards for chemicals whose effects are still poorly understood. Cities that have built reverse-osmosis plants for desalinization are faced with the problem of disposal of brine.

"Nutrient loading concerns used to be limited to a handful of reservoirs, because there were no broad levels for streams. But there are no good standards," Frohardt said.

The process of linking water quality with water quantity is progressing slowly, he said. The state's water management system is driven by case-law, while federal clean water policies are based in regulation. Today, quantity concerns still trump quality issues, Frohardt said.

A member of the audience asked whether cities should be required to locate water intakes downstream from their treated sewage discharge points to ensure water quality, a suggestion frequently heard in Pueblo in the days following a major sewage spill by Colorado Springs into Fountain Creek last month.

"I don't think that's going to happen," Frohardt said.

In an interview later, Frohardt explained his comment. In some cases, cities may be forced to take water from below another city's sewage release point. But he said intentionally moving water intakes below sewage-discharge points needlessly increases risks to public health.

"It's kind of an interesting concept," he said. "But from a water management standpoint, it maximizes exposure to anything that happens to be in the water. Overall, we're doing a good job (cleaning water), but we're having more unknowns increasingly showing up."

-----

To see more of The Pueblo Chieftain, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.chieftain.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, The Pueblo Chieftain, Colo.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

Source: The Pueblo Chieftain

More News in this Category