FW: Land Application of Bio-Solids Draws Flak
Subject: Land Application of Bio-Solids Draws Flak


Headline News
Land application of biosolids draws flak; EPA neutralizes stance

WASHINGTON (March 4) -- A report due this year has resurrected
concerns regarding the safety of land-applying biosolids and has
gained the attention of at least one U.S. senator.
The Environmental Protection Agency may not have adequate
resources to manage the program, according to a draft report by the
EPA Inspector General´s Office on the land application of biosolids.
State biosolids coordinators are worried that the lack of financial
support available at the state and federal levels is affecting regulatory
oversight.
"At a time when there is public concern about pathogens and vector
attraction and allegations of human and animal death due to biosolids
land application, EPA is providing states with less support and
assistance," the report states.
The Inspector General´s Office finished the draft in October and plans
to release the final version some time this year.
The report raises the question of whether the EPA is committing
enough funding and manpower to the biosolids program. "The answer,
of course, is no on both levels," said Terry Logan, president of N-Viro
International Corp. of Toledo, Ohio. "No new blood coming in, and no
new resources."
N-Viro International licenses systems to wastewater treatment plants to
convert sewage sludge to Class A biosolids.
The EPA report caught the eye of Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa,
who sent a letter to EPA Administrator Christie Whitman last month to
voice his concerns.
"As a farmer and senator who has many constituents living in rural
areas, I am especially concerned that EPA´s regulations could put
such people at risk," Grassley said in the letter. "It is also alarming that
the internal report suggests EPA´s policies and regulations for such
hazardous materials are not based upon thorough, scientific
examinations."
The EPA no longer promotes land-applying biosolids and is neutral on
the concept, the report states. During the Clinton administration, the
EPA supported the practice as a form of recycling. "State coordinators
are confused, concerned, and some are angered by EPA´s shift from
advocacy of land application to a practice-neutral position," the report
states. "The EPA has decided that regulators should not be
promoters."
Nationwide, there are about 140 people working on state biosolids
programs, but the numbers are deceiving, according to the report.
Twenty-four states have one or fewer full-time employees devoted to
biosolids. Five states -- Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas
and Wisconsin -- have 57 full-time employees, or 42 percent of the
total.
The EPA has less than the equivalent of 16 full-time employees at its
headquarters and regional offices devoted to biosolids issues. The
number of full-time employees responsible for enforcing the biosolids
program has been cut almost in half since 1998. In 1998, there were
seven employees involved in enforcement compared with less than
four in 2000.
In contrast, the generation of biosolids and the number of land
application sites have increased. "Increasing also are the potential for
improper land application and illegal dumping, which should be
identified and punished if necessary, and complaints from concerned
citizens relating to adverse effects, which should be investigated," the
report states.
Bob O´Dette, vice president for technical services for Synagro
Technologies Inc. in Houston, has a different take on the issue.
O´Dette said he believes the EPA´s use of its limited resources
elsewhere proves that land application is not a threat to the
environment. "They recognize the safety and benefits of biosolids
recycling," he said. "I have no doubt that they still support it and
believe that it´s the best thing to do."
There is no evidence that anyone has gotten seriously ill or died from
exposure to biosolids, O´Dette said. Many states have stepped up their
oversight of biosolids programs just as they have on other issues such
as water quality, he said.
"[Those] who are trying to stop biosolids recycling are going to spin
these things in their favor," O´Dette said. "We´re confident that if we
have a chance to give Sen. Grassley the correct information, he´s
going to be a supporter of biosolids and organic recycling."
Land-applying Class B biosolids is safe when it is done properly,
N-Viro´s Logan said. Small cities have effective programs applying
small amounts of digested material to land near treatment plants.
But large cities generating large amounts of sludge can create
problems. Some contractors and city crews move undigested biosolids
into other communities and store them on-site for weeks or months, he
said. They add just enough lime to the material to reach the proper pH
requirement for 24 hours.
"A lot of what I see today on Class B does not fall into that category,"
Logan said.
Sen. Grassley´s stance may be overstated, said Ned Beecher,
executive director of the New England Biosolids and Residuals
Association. "It isn´t a surprise that this senator suddenly wrote this
letter because a former aide asked him to sign this letter," Beecher
said.
David L. Lewis, a former research microbiologist who worked at the
EPA for 30 years, is at the center of the debate. He has testified in
court cases that the land application of biosolids resulted in at least
one death. Lewis, who claims the EPA accused him of violating ethics
rules and took away any opportunity for promotion, is serving as a
visiting scientist at the University of Georgia in Athens.
The National Whistleblower Center in Washington has sided with Lewis
and his fight against the EPA. Kris Kolesnik, executive director of the
NWC, served as director of investigations for Grassley´s Judiciary
Subcommittee and as a legislative assistant for the senator.