Norman Mineta: “the idea of waiving secondary treatment standards sounds alarms because the successes of the Clean Water Act over the…”

“the idea of waiving secondary treatment standards sounds alarms because the successes of the Clean Water Act over the past 23 years are attributable in large part to the act's requirements for a baseline level of treatment--secondary treatment, in the case of municipal dischargers. There are several reasons that these waivers should be stricken from the bill: First, they are not based on sound science; second, they threaten to degrade water quality and devastate the shoreline; third, they are unfair; and, fourth, they are unnecessary. Not Based on Sound Science Several of the bill's secondary waiver provisions abandon the basic requirement that the applicant demonstrate that a waiver will not harm the marine environment. The bill abandons this requirement, even though it makes sense, and has been met by more than 40 communities that have obtained waivers. This congressional waiver of scientific standards is at direct odds with the themes of sound science and risk analysis that were embraced in the Contract With America. The consequences could be devastating to the environment.”