If you use fertilizer for lawns, playing fields, open spaces or
for agriculture; if you use a septic system; if you are responsible
for large paved areas, or are concerned about storm water runoff in
your community; and, if you live or do business anywhere in the
Great Bay Estuary watershed, then you may not realize it but time
is running out to submit comments to the New Hampshire Department
of Environmental Services (NHDES) on a draft report of critical
significance. NHDES has established August 16, 2013 at 4 PM as the
deadline for the public to comment on its draft Great Bay
Nitrogen Non-Point Source Study, a report likely to form the
basis for imposition of future regulatory controls.
Discharges of waste water that cause impacts to Great Bay have been
in the news for several years. Significant attention has been
focused on infrastructure costs that will need to be expended to
upgrade public waste water treatment plants in order to reduce the
level of nitrogen and other pollutants that are discharged into
Great Bay pursuant to federal and State permits. It has been
estimated that the costs associated with that infrastructure
upgrade process could reach $1 Billion region-wide. Those waste
water treatment plant discharges are referred to by the law and by
regulators as "point source" discharges, meaning in most
instances that they emanate from a pipe. It is the pipe that is
subject to federal and State permitting, and upgrade costs will
largely be paid for through increased user fees.
Now, NHDES has issued a draft report evaluating non-point
(non-pipe) source discharges of nitrogen into and affecting Great
Bay. Here, NHDES is focusing here not on pipes or other channeled
discharge, but instead from sources such as atmospheric deposition
(rain and Stormwater), fertilizer runoff, septic systems, and
animal waste. The NHDES non-point source study, in its current
draft form is available for public review on the NHDES Website at
HTTP://des.nh.gov//organization/divisions/water/wmb/coastal/great-bay-estuary.html.
The draft report describes a model used by NHDES to determine the
non-point source "nitrogen load" entering Great Bay
on a yearly basis. Once the "nitrogen load" is finally
determined, regulations may be enacted to reduce or eliminate
components of that "load" over time.
The draft report finds that approximately 900 tons per year of
nitrogen enters Great Bay from non-point sources: 33% from
atmospheric deposition; 27% from septic systems; 27% from
fertilizer runoff from lawns, agricultural and recreational fields;
and, 13% from animal waste. NHDES is accepting written comments on
this draft, its methodology and conclusions only through
mid-August. This is a critical opportunity for the public, industry
groups, municipalities and others with an interest in non-point
source nitrogen issues to make their voices heard and perhaps
change aspects of the report.
The importance of this report can be seen in economic projections
of the types of steps that may need to be taken in the future to
reduce non-point nitrogen in Great Bay. Preliminary estimates are
that septic system upgrades needed to reduce human waste
contributions to the nitrogen load may cost $20,000 per septic
unit. Storm water upgrades and other infrastructure retrofits are
estimated to cost between $10,000 and $30,000 per acre of
impervious land. Significant costs may also be seen with regard to
fertilizer use for agricultural areas and on recreational
fields.
During the public comment period, any issues that anyone opposing
or supporting the draft wants to raise must be submitted. If issues
or concerns are not raised during this window, with limited
exceptions, those issues will not be considered by NHDES. No one
can wait to see what the final report looks like, and then decide
to raise concerns. The more detailed, specific, and scientifically
supported the comments are, the better the chances those comments
will have of being taken account of in the final report.
This is a point in the regulatory process where all citizens have
the ability to affect the final outcome and language of a critical
regulatory process. This is an opportunity that cannot be taken
lightly, and a deadline that cannot be missed.
Michael Quinn is a Director in the McLane Law Firm's Portsmouth office and former chair of the New Hampshire Bar Association's Environmental Law Section.
Published in the Portsmouth Herald, July 2013
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.