|
In a letter to Ohio EPA dated May
21, 2003, the US EPA rejected the Ohio EPA/Columbus plan
for sewer and water development in the Central Ohio
area. Harlan Hirt, Manager of WQM [Water Quality
Management] Planning for US EPA Region V, who wrote the
letter of determination, also ordered the City and Ohio
EPA to review and address the concerns of both concerned
citizens and the US EPA. Hirt noted in his letter that
he would be continuing to review comments made by the
Sierra Club. Hirt’s determination was a big victory for
the environment.
An areawide WQM plan is supposed
to include comprehensive planning for sewage treatment,
septic and storm water management, and prevention of
contamination of Waters of the State. Ohio EPA had been
designated as the planning agency responsible for the
update, and in that sense it co-authored the plan with
Columbus.
The US EPA pointed to inaccurate,
inconsistent and incomplete information in nine
specified components of the plan. US EPA stated, "Based
upon the material provided, it is difficult to
understand how a process that does not reach finite
decisions in a certified WQM plan could be acceptable.
Review of this WQM plan again raises the issue of what
control OEPA has over the discharges of failed
septic…(systems). USEPA does not agree...that OEPA has
no regulating authority (over septic systems).
US EPA noted that information on
effluent (sewage and pollutant overflow) limitations,
future population growth, green way development, sludge
management, stormwater, and wetlands protection is
incomplete or non-existent in the plan.
The Central Ohio Sierra Club and
Prairie Township provided extensive comments on the plan
to US EPA. Pat Marida and Jeff Cox, who each provided
Hirt with comments, noted that adequate public input was
not sought for the plan. They also warned that the plan
did not address sewage treatment issues, which have been
the subject of ongoing legal actions in Columbus. The
rejection of the OEPA/Columbus plan underscores the
Club's long-standing argument that a real, comprehensive
plan must be in place in Columbus to deal with
quality-of-life issues – green space, stream and
wetlands protection, planning for development, and
sewage and stormwater management.
Townships complained that the
OEPA/Columbus plan did little more than give the city
authority to extend its sewage treatment area.
The Club is arguing that a
genuine areawide planning agency, responsible to the
pubic, should be formulating this plan. OEPA became the
“planning agency” by default because Columbus refused to
work with outlying jurisdictions. OEPA does not have the
staff, time or structure to do this big job.
The Sierra Club has brought legal actions against
Columbus for its illegal discharges of raw, untreated
sewage, including 3 billion gallons of sewage bypassed
each year from Columbus' two treatment plants, and over
10,000 reported basement sewage backups in the last 5
years. According to the rejected plan, Columbus would
add 300,000 more residents to its sewage system without
expanding its treatment facilities.
|
US EPA rejected the Ohio EPA/Columbus plan for sewer
and water development in the Central Ohio
|