« Ind. Gov't. - Governor Daniels' business appointees | Main | Ind. Decisions - City to contest 'no protest zone' ruling »
Monday, April 11, 2005
Environment - Kentucky sludge dispute spurs closer looks at laws regulating sewage
"Sludge dispute spurs closer looks at laws regulating sewage" is the headline to a story today in the Louisville Courier Journal. This story about Kentucky is also relevant in Indiana, both to the "no more stringent" bill now under consideration in the General Assembly, and in light of the NW Indiana/Chicago "blue bag waste" stories reported here earlier this year.
The Louisville Courier Journal story reports:
When BioReclamation LLC withdrew its application on Tuesday to truck as much as 500 tons a day of sludge from Nashville, Tenn., to a Hopkins County site for processing and subsequent use for reclaiming strip-mined land, county residents viewed it as a victory.The proposal died after some people complained that the company was trying to sneak the sludge project through cracks in state regulations.
Some said there was not enough public notice and others said they feared the partially treated sludge that was to be buried in trenches at a former strip mine for final treatment would pollute groundwater, create odor and draw flies.
The stink raised may also have some long-term effects.
Hopkins County Fiscal Court pushed ahead last week toward approving an ordinance regulating sludge treatment and disposal. And a leader of a joint House-Senate environmental committee said last week that he's concerned state rules would allow such a project with no public notice or involvement.
"We're going to look at this," said Rep. Jim Gooch, D-Providence, co-chairman of the joint Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources. Gooch said he is concerned about "expedited permits … without local people's input." * * *
In the aftermath of the controversy, the endless flow of sludge from the nation's wastewater treatment plants continues, as does a debate over what to do with it.
Communities produce more than 7 million tons annually, sending it to landfills, farms or -- in some cases -- to strip-mined sites to reclaim damaged land. Some, including Louisville, process it into dry pellets for possible sale as commercial fertilizer.
Bill Toffey, who manages the use of sludge -- sometimes called biosolids -- for the Philadelphia Water Department, said coal mining companies began working with Philadelphia in the late 1970s. That city was under a federal order to stop dumping sludge into the ocean, and coal miners faced rules forcing them to rehabilitate strip mines.
"The land was in really rough shape," Toffey said, adding that mining companies used the sludge to replace the topsoil, not to treat it.
Nationally, about 60 percent of sludge is reused under terms allowed by state and federal rules. But the practice is loosely regulated compared with disposal of other material, such as solid or hazardous waste, because sludge is presumed safe if state and federal regulations for treating, monitoring and applying it to land are followed.
But environmentalists and some industry insiders said that state and federal rules are out of date and that enforcement is often sketchy.
"There is a virtual circle of neglect when it comes to the use of these sludges," said Tom FitzGerald, director of the Kentucky Resources Council. They are often not adequately tested for pollutants or properly managed "by state and federal regulators in light of their potential to affect public health and the environment," he said.
No federal permit is required, even though sludge typically contains some level of potentially toxic chemicals or metals, and, if not fully treated, disease-causing pathogens, such as E. coli bacteria.
"We tend to be a lot more focused on raw sewage going into waterways," said Doug Mundrick, water enforcement branch chief of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Atlanta.
He said his office has the equivalent of two inspectors covering eight states, including Kentucky, to enforce the EPA's so-called "self-implementing" sludge rules.
Uneven regulations. Kentucky, Indiana and the EPA set limits on some -- but not all -- of the potential pollutants in sludge. Each imposes restrictions on how it can be applied to the land, but some critics say they may not adequately protect public health. Both Kentucky and Indiana require permits for applying sludge to land, but Kentucky doesn't always require public notice, while Indiana does. * * *
The company was planning to bring in sludge that was not fully treated, and it proposed a method of reducing pathogens that environmentalists and some Kentucky experts in the industry said had the potential to threaten groundwater, create explosive gases and produce strong odors.
Some provisions of Kentucky's biosolids rules are more stringent than federal rules, others are not -- and both sets have some gaps, said Gordon Garner, executive director of the Metropolitan Sewer District in Louisville and a member of the Kentucky Environmental Quality Commission and biosolids partnership volunteer. So it's important that projects for handling sludge exceed regulatory requirements, Garner said. If that isn't done, Hadeed said, "You may be in compliance with the EPA and the state, but not be in compliance with your community." * * *
Kenneth Rudo, North Carolina's state toxicologist in its public health division, said skin rashes and respiratory ailments can occur in people if they live too close to sludge. He recommends sludge be kept 2,500 feet from homes -- more than 10 times the distance required in Kentucky.
He also said frequent testing of sludge is needed to make sure contaminant levels routinely meet health standards. Kentucky requires large treatment plants to test sludge once a month. Smaller treatment plants can test just twice a year. The Metropolitan Sewer District in Louisville voluntarily tests its sludge daily to be confident the fertilizer pellets it produces are safe, said Bud Schardein, the agency's head.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 11, 2005 10:45 AM
Posted to Environment