No preview available
2000-047 Supports APWA Position on Clean Water ActRESOLUTION NO. 47-2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, REQUESTING THAT THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES APPROVE AND ADOPT THE • AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION'S POSITION STATEMENT ON THE CLEAN WATER ACT REAUTHORIZATION ,WHICH POSITION IS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Board of Directors of the American Public Works Association on 17 April 1999, unanimously adopted and published a position paper on the Clean Water Act Re authorization legislation: and ... WHEREAS, The Village Council of the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida, representing the residents of the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida, are sworn to provide protection for the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Village; and ... WHEREAS; Amendments to the Clean Water Act are necessary to increase the effectiveness of a successful water pollution abatement program; and ... WHEREAS; Amendments to the Clean Water Act generally should reflect a shift from regulating water pollution on a point-by-point basis to managing the natural resource at the watershed level; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA; Section 1. The Village Council of the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida, does hereby adopt the position of the American Public Works Association as published and as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached, Section 2. The Village Council of the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida, hereby respectfully requests that the Congress of the United States amend the Clean Water Act to accomplish the end result as stated in Exhibit "A". Section 3. The Village Clerk is directed to forward this Resolution to the United States Senators and Congressmen representing the Treasure Coast of Florida, the Palm Beach County League of Cities, Inc., The Florida League of Cities, the Florida Chapter of the American Public Works Association and the American Public Works Association. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ~7tn DAY OF ,llll v 2000 (Village Seal) • ATTEST: _~`-~-~ >«~~~~ ~//'!C~ VILLAGE CLERK l/ VILLC Nheslciearmater •` YO • American Public Works Association Position Statement Clean Water Act Reauthorization Advanced by the Waterltesources Management Committee, February 20, 1999 Approved by the Govttnment AffalIS Committee, March 5, 1999 Adopted by the Board of Duectors April 17, 1999 Position The American Public Works Association believes the Clean Water Act should be amended to reflect the contemporary understanding ofwater pollution and its abatement. to recogrtize the water quality improvements achieved under the law dut ircg the pact quarter-century, and to set priorities and allocate resources for solving the nation's remaining water quality problems. There is an urgent need for change. In many eases, the cturent law and its implementing regulations reflect an outdated technical understanding of the water quality problem and, in turn, encourage ineffective approaches to water resource protection. Furthermore, federal financial resources authorized to support water quality programs are inadequate. As a result, regulatory requirements often draw inefficiently on limited state and local resources to achieve relatively small, incremental improvements in water quality. New and costly federal requirements continue to be promulgated in this framework, while the funds available nre not adequate to support even existing programs. The public works community is committed to water quality protection, indeed it is the livelihood of the profession. APWA applauds the important progress made under the Clean Water Act and believes the law largelyhas bees successful in achieving its initial goals. Given that progress and the knowledge gained, now is the proper time to assess priorities and provide common sense fixes to problems in the law. Therefore, APWA supports amendmrnu to the Clean WatcrAct as follows: Regarding federally mandated municipal stormwater programs, clarify that: (a) fulfillment of approved best management practices, not numeric effluent limits, constitutes compliance with the water quality provisions of the law, (b) "maximum extent practicable" means 8pplying practical and affortiablc management practices intended to protect water quality, and (c) such requirements do not preempt local land use authority and, therefore, aze prohibited from regulating the flow of wet weather discharges. Rationale: While the U.S. Environmental protection Agency has supported management practices as the basis for stomtwater permits under current regulations, third parties have sued permitting authorities for excluding numeric end-of--pipe limits • from municipal pcnnits. There has not been aprecedent-setting decision by a court. This situation is creating uncertainty and is a financial strain on the goverrmtents involved in litigation. Exhibit "A" Page 1 of 4 In the federal advisory committee process for stotmwater regulation development, the • EPA discussed a "no net increase" policy for wet weather flow volumes. APWA opposes such a policy, since it would infringe on what the association has affumed as local governments' sole authority over land use decision-making. 2. Provide regulatory flexrbility for the I~TPDES pemtitting of municipal wet weather facilities. Recognize the infrasttuctwe-related and technical and fnaneial limitations of local govc.*nmtints to abating sepazate sanitary sewer overflows. Describe, using a presumptive approach, the general conditions under which certain unavoidable sanitazy scw•er overflows would be legal, Rnrianale: While soma sanitary sewer overflows generally are recognized as unavoidable to protect public health and prevent property loss, the EPA has failed to establish a consistent national policy, and enforcement of the water quality provisions of the law for unavoidable overflows continues. Fines aze being levied against municipal facilities, and uncertainty about what is legal and appropriate remains, Codify the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy, published is the Federal Register on Apri119,1994. The policy, agreed to by a federal advisory committee, outlines nine minimum CSO control measwes to be implemented by publicly owned treatment works and requires long- ternt planning for further control of combined sewer overflows. Provide for a compliance schedule of at least 15 years. Rarionale.• A wide range of stakeholders reached consensus on this approach to controlling combined sewer overflows, and APWA continues to support it. Codifying the policy would provide regulatory certainty to municipal pemtit holders. 4. In establishing and implementing total maximum daily loads for impaired waters, provide asswances that regulatory authorities will allocate pollutant load reductions to all sowces, point and non-point, based on the proportionate share of the sowces' relative contribution to the water body. TIvIDL allocations also should recognize the contribution of naturally occurring pollution. Offer effluent trading within a watershed as a tool for achieving water quality improvements. Specifically prohibit regulatory authorities from diverting responsibility for load reductions attributable to unregulate8 non-point sources to iVPDES•permitted municipal sowces. Rationale: As the EPA begins to require implementation of the TMDL program, it appeazs municipal pemtit holders may be held responsible for cleaning up water pollution caused by other sowces. This scenario is unfair, not cost-effective and presents an additional drain on municipal resowces. 5. Establish a wetlands classification system, which recognizes that not all wetlands are • of equal environmental value. Codify a wetlands mitigation banking system. Exhibit "A" Page 2 of 4 • Rationale: These systems would help to balance the need for resource protection with the public mandate to develop and maintain in&astmcture. G. Provide an exemption from the permitting program for wetlands disturbed during the routine or emergency maintenance of flood and stotmwater management facilities. Instruct the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to establish a general permit for flood control and stormwater management facilities and other publicly owned and mamtamed infrastructure. Clarify, as a federal appeals court ruled in 1998, that "incidental fallback" resulting from dredging activities is not a "dischazge to U.S. waters" within the meaning of the law. Rationale: Mutticipal public works managers are required to obtain Section 404 permits for the maintenance cf flood convol and stormwater management facilities, These are activities intended to protect human health, property and the environment and generally cause little or no envirotunental disturbance. However, the process of acquiring the pernut in many cases results in months of delay. 7. Reauthorize the state revolving loan fund to continue to support capita] projects. Supplement the existing 5RF by authorizing a new fund to make grants to municipal governments or other appropriate authorities for lheplanning, design, implementation and construction of wet weather water pollution control programs and facilities, including non-structural measures. Extend eligibility for funds to urban watershed planning activities, and to reseazch and demonstration projects for the management of urban wet weather flows. Rationale: Revolving loans are an appropriate financing mechanism to capitalize projects which ultimately become revenue-generating operations, such as treatment facilities. The SRF should continue to be capitalized. However, more recent water quality regulations require the planning, design, construction, and operation and management of programs that do not generate local revenue as easily. While APWA has supported stotmwater user fees as a selfhelp tool, such fees can be dif5cult to establish, often requiring ballot approval. As a resµlt, the structure of some stormwater fees has been invalidated by the courts on constitutional grounds. Therefore, federal water quality grants to support reseazch, plaruting and some operation and maintenance costs aze the appropriate financing mechanism to support these programs. Finally, amendments to the Clean Water Act generally should reflect a shift from regulating water pollution on a point-by-point basis to managing the natural resource at the watershed level. APWA believes assessment, planning and management on a watershed basis is the best approach to achieve the most environmental benefit from our investment. Options for regional collaboration and coordination across programs should be provided - to he utilized at the discretion of perrrtit holders. • Exhibit "A" Page 3 of 4 As such, local Bove • ri k of cxp sue o e~ 4 ~ ~ terms of~iv~ the flexibi&ty to n, anti-bac on ~h~gProvisron 9uality~provemeatwitbou~theco~ant ack °~d & ationale . p ]loon A mcmbcrship is )az$elyre control programs res sP°ustble for the local membershi P cribed by the Clcan Water ~1°'stration of water p,49%areresponslbleforstomtwatermana '°,ct.OftheAptyA are responsible for wastewater collection and trea g`ra`nt and flood control and 32% t:nent. Ina 1998 survey of members, APWA identi5ed the major challenges facing municipal public works and the public wotics profession at large. The responses reflect our mounting concerns about the ability to implement federal water quality rrquirements, end the urgent need for changes to the Clean Water Act. The top three challenges were: funding, financing and limited budgets (41%), ittfrazltucture (39%) and environmental mandates/regulatiotu (33%). • Exhibit "A" Page 4 of 4