The Cost of Clean. . . Meeting Water
Quality Challenges in the New Millennium
Massive funding gaps are jeopardizing
America's hard-won water quality gains. Despite a
significant national commitment to curb water pollution, America
finds itself challenged by a disturbing dilemma: local governments,
our front-line defense against water pollution, are being forced to
choose between maintaining their basic wastewater treatment programs
and meeting a new generation of water quality requirements. While
some communities are holding their own as they face this dilemma,
others are losing ground. Unless we, as a nation, act now, we risk
losing the battle against water pollution.
Simply put, the job is vastly more complex and expensive today
than it was in early days of the Clean Water Act. A significant
gap exists between the money we have adn the money we need to do the
job. Funding needed to meet stringent national requirements to
address urban wet weather challenges are compounded by exisiting
wastewater treatment plants' increasing operations and maintanence
expenses. The situation is stretching local budgets beyond their
breaking point.
To aid local governments in solving this funding crunch, we must
convene a dialogue among America's clean water partners to ensure
that we meet the water quality challenges of the new millinnium.
Most Americans agree that clean water is an investment that is
essential to our quality of life, an investment we need to protect
for the future.
There have always been challenges to clean water funding, and
federal, state and local champions have always met these challenges
head on to help achieve the Clean Water Act's goals. But these
heroic efforts can no longer keep pace with the skyrocketing cost of
clean. We must go further, and we must act now.
Since the 1972 passage of the Clean Water Act, hundreds of
billions of federal, state and local dollars have been invested to
achieve our national clean water goals. Our investment in wastewater
treatment has revived America's rivers and streams, and the nation
has experienced a dramatic resurgence in water quality. In cities
across the country, restored harbors, riverfronts, and waterways are
hubs for culture, commerce and recreation. The investment spurred by
the Clean Water Act and the efforts of federal, state and local
governments have, indeed, reaped enormous economic and environmental
benefits.
From the outset, all levels of government recognized that the
cost of clean would be high. With the passage of the Clean Water
Act, Congress demonstrated true leadership by matching federal
funding with the ambitious scope of the law's mandates and goals.
From 1974-1994 the Federal Construction Grants Program invested $96
billion in new construction and upgrades of municipal wastewater
treatment plants. Local governments followed suit with an investment
of $117 billion. The federal, state and local funding strategy
worked, and we made remarkable environmental progress.
But today, as the nation nears the 30th anniversary of
the Clean Water Act, we face a different situation. In the first
decade of our national clean water program, federal and state
governments contributed more than 80 percent of the funds need to
build the facilities necessary to assist local communities in their
efforts to clean their rivers and streams. By contrast, local
governments are now shouldering at least 90 percent of the capital
investment burden — not to mention rising operations and maintenance
costs. And although the federal government continues to contribute
to clean water infrastructure, rising costs and more stringent
standards have rendered this contribution woefully inadequate.
The cost of clean is a daunting figure — no matter who adds it
up. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that $139.5
billion will be required to fund municipal treatment works and other
related needs over teh next 20 years (In March 1999, EPA revised its
1996 needs estimate for sanitary sewer overflows from $10.3 to $81.9
billion, increasing total needs to nearly $200 billion.). America's
cities have a different perspective. They must finance — and their
citizens must pay for — new facilities plus the costs to
replace aging treatment plants and collection systems. From this
perspective, future wastewater investment costs are more than twice
as high as EPA's estimate — at least $330 billion over the next 20
eyars. This $330 billion needs estimate does not include rising
operation and maintenance costs, which could increase by an average
of 3.8 percent per year over the next 20 years, putting more
pressure on the ability of local governments — and ratepayers — to
fund capital requirements along with other vital city services.
Regardless of which numbers are used, we clearly need more
federal funding, not less, to address these needs. The funding
gap is huge and growing, and local governments alone can't pay the
cost of clean. The capital needs associated with combined and
sanitary sewer overflows, stormwater and polluted runoff have taken
a back seat since 1972, but now they command — and deserve — our
attention. We must explore how best to ensure funding for these
essential components of our nation's clean water program.
Maintaining the status quo will not be enough. An increase in
federal funding will allow us to protect our valuable infrastructure
investment, target high priority water pollution problems, and
continue to realize real progress.
Leaders at all levels of government — the White House, governors,
mayors, members of Congress and EPA officials — have recognized the
gravity of the dilemma facing local governments.
A dialogue on how to solve the dilemma is beginning to take shape
among the nation's clean water partners. It promises better
definition of the issues. It promises innovative solutions. It
promises nothing less than a revitalization of America's clean water
program in preparation to meet the water quality challenges in the
new millennium. We must demonstrate our commitment today. If we work
together, nothing is beyond our reach. The cost
of clean is worth every penny.
|