In order to remove the exemption, all of these requirements must be met: the discharge, the purpose of the project to put an area in a use to which it was not previously subject, and the deterioration or reduction of navigable waters. States and Native American tribes adopt general guidelines regarding water quality standards that are subject to EPA review and approval. These water quality standards provisions include mixed zones, deviations and low flow guidelines. The Mixed Areas Directive is a defined area surrounding a point source where waste water is diluted by water. The methodology of the mixed zone procedure determines the location, size, shape and quality of mixed zones. The deviation policy temporarily relaxes the water quality standard and is an alternative to removing a particular use. States and tribes may include deviations in their water quality standard. Derogations are publicly reviewed every three years and justify development to improve water quality. The low flow policy refers to state and tribal water quality standards that identify procedures for determining critical low water conditions. [20] The quality of sewage sludge is controlled in Section 405(d), which sets out restrictions on how pollutants are used or removed from sludge.
The EPA has established a containment approach to limit pollutants rather than numerical constraints in accordance with Section 405(d)(3). This methodology makes more sense than digital constraints and includes design standards, equipment standards, management practices and operational standards, or a combination of these. Sewage sludge quality limits allow for treatment operations that produce fewer contaminated pollutants and those that do not meet sludge quality standards for use and disposal practices must purify input streams, improve sewage sludge treatment and/or choose a different disposal method. The EPA has established standards for appropriate practices for the use and disposal of biosolids to protect public health and the environment, but the choice of use or disposal practices is reserved for local communities. According to Article 405(e) of the CWA, local communities are encouraged to use their sewage sludge for its beneficial properties rather than dispose of it. [67] Section 316 prescribes standards for discharges of thermal pollutants and standards for cooling water sampling devices (e.g., fish sieves). [46] These standards apply to power plants and other industrial facilities. [47] Under water quality standards regulations, tribes/nations and state-approved states are required to determine appropriate uses of water. The identification of appropriate water uses takes into account the use and value of the public water supply, the protection of fish, wildlife, recreational waters, agricultural, industrial and marine waterways. The suitability of a water body is studied by states and tribes/nations based on their physical, chemical and biological properties. States and tribes also consider geographic environments, landscape qualities, and economic considerations to determine whether designated uses of water bodies are appropriate.
If these standards indicate that designated uses are lower than those currently realized, states or tribes should revise the standards to reflect the actual uses actually realized. For all waters with designated uses that do not include an “exploitable/floating” target use in accordance with CWA Section 101(a)(2), a “usability analysis” must be conducted. Every three years, these waters must be reviewed to verify new information requiring revision of the standard. If new information indicates that “exploitable/floating” uses are possible, the use should be identified. [20] As of 2020, wastewater guidelines and categorical pretreatment standards have been published for 59 categories and apply to approximately 40,000 plants discharging directly into the country`s waters, 129,000 plants discharging into POTWs and construction sites. These regulations are responsible for preventing the release of nearly 700 billion pounds of pollutants per year. [36] CEPOL has updated some categories and added new ones since its promulgation. [37] Point sources must not discharge pollutants to surface waters without an NPDES permit.
The system is managed by the EPA in collaboration with state environmental agencies. The EPA has authorized 47 states to issue permits directly to disposal facilities. The CWA also allows strains to issue permits, but no strains have been authorized by the EPA. In the other states and territories, approvals are granted by a regional office of the EPO. [15] (See Titles III and IV.) Clean Water Act (CWA), also known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, U.S. laws enacted in 1972 to restore and maintain clean and healthy waters. The CWA was a response to growing public concern about the environment and the state of the country`s waters. This was a fundamental revision of the Federal Water Protection Act of 1948, which had proved ineffective. The CEA itself was amended in 1977 to regulate the discharge of untreated wastewater from municipalities, industry and businesses into rivers, lakes and coastal waters. The story of the Clean Water Act begins with its predecessor, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948, the first major water pollution control law in the United States. This law, administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), created a number of comprehensive water quality programs and provided some funding to state and local governments. A 2017 working paper notes that “most types of water pollution have declined [during the 1962-2001 period], although the rate of decline has slowed over time.
Our finding of a decrease in most pollutants implies that the prevalence of such violations was even greater prior to the passage of the Clean Water Act. “Several studies have estimated that the costs of the CWA (including expenses for the Title II construction grant program) are higher than the benefits. An EPA study yielded similar results, but acknowledged that several types of benefits were not measured. [110]:2 A 2018 study argues that “available estimates of the costs and benefits of water pollution control programs [including the CWA] are incomplete and do not conclusively determine the net benefits of surface water quality.” [115] In the 1980s, the law was amended again. The EPA made the municipal grant-making process more efficient in 1981, which supported the treatment plans created under the program. A few years later, in 1987, the EPA phased out the building assistance program and replaced it with the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which expanded on existing partnerships among EPA states to address water quality issues. Nearly 50 years after its passage, the Clean Water Act continues to evolve and be debated. Many activists are pushing for the EPA to strengthen its influence in today`s industries. During its lifetime, the settlement had a significant impact on the United States. Waterways, especially the Cuyahoga River in Ohio, one of the environmental scandals that helped create legislation in the first place. While a city official noted that there was still a lot of work to be done, EPA officials in Ohio announced in 2019 that it was safe to eat fish caught in moderation from the river.6 In the Water Quality Act of 1987, Congress responded to the stormwater problem by defining industrial stormwater discharges and separate municipal storm sewers (often referred to as “MS4”) as point sources.
and require them to obtain NPDES permits within specified time frames. The exemption from agricultural discharge permits continued, but Congress created several programs and grants, including a demonstration grant program at the EPA, to expand research and development of diffuse controls and management practices. [24] Mountain tops mining requires a Section 404 permit when soil and rock from mining operations are introduced into streams and wetlands (commonly referred to as “valley filling”). Discharges of pollutants from valley embankments into waterways also require an NPDES permit. [64] The Federal Water Pollution Control Act was the first major U.S. regulation to address water pollution. It came after the massive growth and expansion after World War II, when waterways in the United States felt the effects of industrial and urban pollution. Previously, smaller laws, such as the Garbage Act, tried to solve the problem, but the corpses were still contaminated. However, when the final version of the federal Water Protection Act was passed, it only protected interstate waterways, which many said meant it was still too weak to be effective.1 The Clean Water Act does not directly address groundwater pollution. Groundwater protection provisions are found in the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Superfund Act.
As a result of the CWA, many communities in the United States received federal funding to build and upgrade wastewater treatment plants. Revisions made by the CWA in 1987 removed the original building subsidy program and replaced it with a state water pollution control revolving fund. The CEA was also amended to address specific environmental issues such as wetland protection or Great Lakes water quality. While significant improvements in public health and the environment have been achieved through EPA`s application of the CWA, the CWA still faces challenges related to pollution from non-point sources, such as motor oil in rainwater drainage; Sanitary wastewater overflows; continued improvement of water treatment infrastructure; and the use and disposal of municipal sewage sludge.