Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
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