New water regulation future murky

All 11 of Fayetteville’s amendments rejected

CAVE SPRINGS — Board members from three other Northwest Arkansas cities rejected Thursday all 11 amendments proposed by Fayetteville to a draft state water quality regulation.

All four cities comprising the Northwest Arkansas Nutrient Trading Research and Advisory Group — Bentonville, Fayetteville, Rogers and Springdale — must agree on a draft regulation for the measure to advance. Its next stop would be the state Pollution Control and Ecology Commission, which could adopt the proposal as a regulation.

Thursday’s action makes approval by Fayetteville doubtful, said Teresa Turk, Fayetteville City Council member.

Turk attended Thursday’s meeting to support the amendments. Asked about the chances the full City Council would approve the regulation as it stands, Turk replied: “slim.”

The advisory group agreed to wait until Oct. 7 before forwarding its proposed regulation to the state. The delay will give each of the four city councils time to make any objections. If any city objects to the draft proposal, the advisory group agreed to schedule another meeting and try to work out the differences.

The regulation in question would let operators of wastewater treatment plants engage in nutrient trading. Some plants already remove more nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen out of their discharge than required by the plant’s state-issued permit.

Operators of those plants would be allowed to let another treatment plant in the

same watershed use the deficit in return for payment or something else of value if the nutrient trading regulation is approved.

To use an analogy, suppose two homeowners have the same size garbage can. One homeowner, Jones, often has more bags of trash than will fit, while Smith rarely fills his up. So Smith lets Jones toss his extra trash in his container for a small price.

Every one of Fayetteville’s proposed amendments Thursday died for lack of a second from any other board member. Fayetteville’s proposals ranged from defining terms in the proposed regulation to setting requirements for water monitoring.

It’s impossible to know if a regulation is improving, maintaining or making water quality worse if the water quality isn’t measured, Turk said to the group before the vote.

Members of the group discussed the monitoring issue at an Aug. 16 meeting. Neither the state nor local authorities have the staff to take measurements in streams across the state, they said, so requirements for such measuring would effectively block all nutrient trading.

The group unanimously adopted an amendment restricting any nutrient trading to publicly owned entities such as city wastewater treatment plants for the first five years after the regulation is adopted. A private manufacturer treating its own waste couldn’t trade nutrient allowances with another private manufacturer or city under the amendment.

The board decided against adopting extensive additions and revisions proposed by the Beaver Water District, the region’s largest water supplier.

The board did agree in the Aug. 16 meeting to restrict trading to trades within the same watershed as defined by a U.S. Geological Survey standard, which was requested by the water district.