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

Water Plan Creates a Flood of debateA Standards Overhaul in Iowa, Which Could Cost Up to $960 Million, is Not Going Over Well With Some.

Posted on: Monday, 12 December 2005, 18:00 CST

By Elizabeth Ahlin

CLARINDA, Iowa -- A short expanse of grass lies between the wastewater treatment plant in Clarinda and the West Nodaway River. Where the treated water pours into the river, the waterway is wide but shallow.

"Would you want to swim in that?" said John Veach, gesturing to the water. "It's just not that kind of stream."

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources may decide that Veach is wrong, and that's what he's afraid of.

New water quality standards proposed by the state have brought strong opposition from agriculture and rural groups, including the Iowa Farm Bureau, Iowa Cattlemen's Association and the Iowa Rural Water Association.

Under the proposed standards, which the state will consider adopting early next year, all perennial streams in Iowa would be given blanket designations of "fishable, swimmable" -- making them safe for fish and people by removing harmful bacteria and ammonia carried in human wastewater.

The new standards would add up to 14,000 miles of protected streams, said Adam Schnieders, a senior environmental specialist at the Department of Natural Resources.

The agency has estimated a statewide cost that could reach $960 million to upgrade, maintain and manage all of the affected wastewater treatment facilities -- a list that is more than 14 pages long.

Opponents say the changes would force small towns to throw money at a problem they can't fix.

"In my opinion, they're asking taxpayers to spend $1 billion to accomplish nothing," said Veach, who runs Clarinda's wastewater treatment plant.

Veach called the state's approach "nonsensical," saying the plan cracks down on the pollution from wastewater treatment plants, but ignores everything in between -- miles of land where watershed pollution flows into the stream unregulated.

For environmentalists, the proposed changes are a long time coming. They have lobbied for years to push the state into compliance with the 1972 federal Clean Water Act. Iowa is one of only a few states that have not adopted the "fishable, swimmable" guideline.

"Iowa is way, way behind the curve," said Albert Ettinger, a Chicago-based lawyer who represents the Sierra Club.

Pressure from environmental groups, along with the threat of a lawsuit that would put the power of stream designation in the hands of the Environmental Protection Agency, accelerated the Iowa Department of Natural Resources' plans to make changes to the water quality standards, Schnieders said, but changes were already in the works.

Only 6.5 percent of the estimated cost would be spent on disinfecting newly designated recreational use streams. As much as $900 million could be needed to remove ammonia and make some streams "fishable'' for the first time. New treatment plants might be required in many cases, making it a costly venture.

But the actual cost to Iowans probably will never reach the estimate of nearly $1 billion, according to a federal official.

The state "assumed the worst case in a lot of situations," said John DeLashmit of the Kansas City, Kan., office of the EPA.

Most likely, he said, the cost estimate will drop as the state examines streams individually. Some waters probably will be exempted from such stringent protection. The $960 million figure also includes the price of new treatment plants. In some cases, modifying existing plants could be enough to meet the new requirements.

The DNR will offer temporary variances to towns that can't afford the changes, Schnieders said.

"It's not the department's intention to run anybody out of town. It has to be fiscally achievable," he said.

Gov. Tom Vilsack has said he will ask the Legislature for $50 million to address water quality, which will include nointerest loans for towns to improve their treatment plants. Susan Heathcote of the Iowa Environmental Council said grant money will be available to some communities.

Small towns want guarantees that they will not endure financial hardships, but environmentalists say it's time to focus on the state's rivers.

The Iowa Environmental Council estimates that 54 percent of the state's perennial streams, those that flow year-round, have been called nonperennial or intermittent streams in the past.

Under the new standards, many of those streams would be relabeled perennial and given new aquatic and recreational use protection. Wastewater treatment plants that have not had stringent ammonia nitrogen limits might need to build new facilities.

The West Nodaway River is currently protected for aquatic life use, a designation commonly called "fishable." But the proposed new standards single out the stream as one that must be made safe for recreational use as well.

The DNR said that although the proposed standards are more rigorous, it will continue to assess each site individually before enforcing changes to treatment facilities. The current wording of the standards gives the department authority to do that, but it does not require it.

In Clarinda, the wastewater discharge is already treated for ammonia nitrogen. If the West Nodaway is declared "swimmable," a disinfection process will be added to the treatment plant.

The term "swimmable" simply means that people can wade in or splash around in a stream. Veach objects to that, saying that even if the West Nodaway meets recreational use criteria, it just isn't used that way.

The disinfection process would require new pumps for the facility. The city estimates it would cost Clarinda $500,000 to $750,000, which would be passed along to residents. City Manager Gary Walter said water bills could go up as much as $70 per month. Schnieders said the projected cost per resident for most towns is much lower.

The DNR is currently studying more than 300 public responses it has received regarding the proposed water standards.

Schnieders said officials will take those into account before finalizing the proposed changes, which must be adopted by both the state and the EPA before they can be implemented.

Source: Omaha World - Herald

More News in this Category