11.07.2015 Views

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy - Joint Ocean Commission Initiative

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy - Joint Ocean Commission Initiative

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy - Joint Ocean Commission Initiative

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

sources, such as industrial facilities and wastewater treatment plants, whose discharges canbe m<strong>on</strong>itored as they emerge from the end of a pipe. Even so, opportunities remain tofurther reduce point source impacts <strong>on</strong> U.S. coastal waters and improve compliance withexisting envir<strong>on</strong>mental requirements.Existing Management ToolsPoint source polluti<strong>on</strong> is primarily addressed through a few EPA programs, including theNati<strong>on</strong>al Pollutant Discharge Eliminati<strong>on</strong> System (NPDES), the Total Maximum DailyLoad (TMDL) Program, and the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.The Nati<strong>on</strong>al Pollutant Discharge Eliminati<strong>on</strong> SystemOver the past thirty years, the Clean Water Act, including its NPDES program, has led todramatic reducti<strong>on</strong>s of polluted effluents. EPA typically delegates administrati<strong>on</strong> of thisprogram to the states, and the state or EPA then regulates polluters by issuing permits thatreflect federal standards for discharges. If the regulatory agency determines that a particularwater body is not meeting water quality standards, permittees discharging to those watersmay be required to implement more stringent c<strong>on</strong>trols.The Total Maximum Daily Load ProgramThe TMDL program, which is carried out by states, territories, and authorized tribes withoversight and technical assistance from EPA, establishes the maximum amount of a pollutant,from point and n<strong>on</strong>point sources, that can be present in a water body while stillmeeting water quality standards. States must list waters that c<strong>on</strong>tinue to exceed waterquality standards even after applicati<strong>on</strong> of required levels of polluti<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>trol technology,and then establish TMDLs for these listed water bodies. States are directed to develop aTMDL for each pollutant of c<strong>on</strong>cern and then implement plans to achieve and maintainthose TMDLs by allocating reducti<strong>on</strong>s am<strong>on</strong>g all sources. EPA must review and approvestate lists and TMDLs. To include a margin of safety, states are required to take seas<strong>on</strong>alvariati<strong>on</strong>s into account.Clean Water State Revolving FundsUnder the Clean Water Act, the federal government has provided significant financialsupport for water quality infrastructure improvement. From 1970 to 1995, funding wasprovided under the Federal C<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong> Grants Program to build wastewater treatmentplants and collecti<strong>on</strong> systems, without any requirement for repayment. In 1987, in amajor shift in policy, C<strong>on</strong>gress established and began to target federal funding toward theState Revolving Funds, in which the federal government provides capitalizati<strong>on</strong> grants fora more self-sustaining, state-administered revolving loan fund (Figure 14.3). States arerequired to provide 20 percent in matching funds. States decide which projects are thehighest priorities for funding, the borrowers repay the loans, and the program loans them<strong>on</strong>ey again to other borrowers. States provide below-market interest rates and otherfinancial incentives to towns, counties, n<strong>on</strong>profit organizati<strong>on</strong>s, farmers, and homeownersfor water quality improvement projects. The funds finance capital c<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong> costs—notoperati<strong>on</strong>s and maintenance—and are mostly used to build or improve wastewater treatmentplants and related sewer systems.This program is widely c<strong>on</strong>sidered a cost-effective, l<strong>on</strong>g-term mechanism for meetinginfrastructure demands. From 1998 to 2002, the funds provided an average of $3.8 billi<strong>on</strong>per year for water quality improvement. Since the program’s incepti<strong>on</strong>, the federal government’sinvestment of $22.4 billi<strong>on</strong> has resulted in a total of $43.5 billi<strong>on</strong> being providedfor infrastructure projects. 1 State Revolving Funds are crucial to restoring, maintaining,and improving the nati<strong>on</strong>’s water quality.C HAPTER 14: ADDRESSING C OASTAL WATER P OLLUTION207

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!