DEQ Turns a Deaf Ear to
Citizens' Water Pollution Concerns
by Steve Jones
|
The opportunity for ranchers, irrigators
and other concerned citizens to learn
about what is going on in their own
back yards is severely curtailed.
|
|
The Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ)
is revising Chapter 2 of the
Wyoming Water Quality Rules and
Regulations. The third round of proposed
revisions was approved by
the Water and Waste Advisory
Board in June. Now the
Environmental Quality Council will
examine the proposal and possibly
make additional changes.
This is the first time the DEQ
has tackled the job of revising
Chapter 2 since it was first adopted
in 1974. It's an ambitious task, and
one that poses serious threats to
water quality in Wyoming.
The department is trying to
collapse four different chapters into
one all-encompassing chapter that
deals with all aspects of permitting
surface water discharges into our
streams and rivers. These discharges
include pollution from sewage
treatment plants, oil and gas drilling
and production operations, mining
and coalbed methane operations,
siltation and run-off caused by
construction activities, industrial
and chemical plants and agricultural
operations. Such pollutants can
contain heavy metals, bacteria,
chemicals, minerals and salts that
threaten public health, fisheries,
crops and livestock throughout
the state.
Wyoming's wetlands are at particular
risk. The DEQ could promulgate
rules to offer at least minimal
protections against environmental
harm caused by dredging or filling
activities in wetlands, but it has
neglected to do so. While federal
law covers many of the state's wetlands,
those that do not come
under the jurisdiction of the Clean
Water Act must be protected under
state regulations if they are to be
protected at all. Under the new proposed
regulations, "isolated wetlands"
- those that are not under
federal jurisdiction - are hardly
protected at all, containing only a
minimal requirement for mitigation
plans, and only if at least an acre of
wetlands will be affected by dredging
or filling.
One of the more disturbing
aspects of the proposed new chapter
involves "general permits."
General permits are authorizations
that do not apply to any one site,
but cover the treatment, monitoring
and disposal of the same type of
eff luent being discharged into the
state's waters. Any person or company
that qualifies may discharge
pollution at any number of sites
without obtaining an individual
permit, as long as the eff luent
meets the criteria specified in the
general permit. All that is needed is
a general permit "authorization" for
each discharge location.
Not only do general permits
remove water-quality protections
provided by permits that are
individualized to the unique
characteristics of each discharge
location, but such authorizations
have the additional effect of cutting
the public out of the permitting
process. When general permits
are issued, citizens are not notified
of any individual site where a
polluting facility is to be built. So
the opportunity for ranchers, irrigators
and other concerned citizens
to learn about what is going on
in their own back yards is
severely curtailed.
Public involvement in the decisionmaking
process is under attack
in other ways as well. Currently,
concerned citizens can request a
hearing before the Environmental
Quality Council regarding any proposed
permit that has been issued
for public comment. However,
whether a hearing is actually scheduled
is a matter of discretion, to be
determined by the administrator of
the DEQ's Water Quality Division.
In the past, former DEQ Water
Quality Administrator Gary Beach
has made it clear that he does not
want any hearings on discharge permit
applications to come before the
Environment Quality Council.
WOC has recommended that the
regulation be changed so that if 50
signatures are collected requesting a
public hearing before the
Environmental Quality Council on
any proposed discharge permit
application, such a hearing would
be mandatory rather than left to the
discretion of the administrator. |