Approved July 26, 1991, by the WEF Executive Committee

Long before the term "pollution prevention" became fashionable, the Clean Water Act set the stage for the development of a program of pollution prevention through its stated goal of eliminating the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters. Over the last 20 years, significant strides have been made in reducing such discharges. Discharge limits based upon best available technology (BAT) requirements and water quality needs have become lower and lower.

While technology improvements and sophisticated water quality criteria will continue to drive allowable discharge levels lower, we do not expect that they will create the breakthroughs necessary to achieve actual elimination of a significant number of pollutant discharges within the next decade. The Water Environment Federation (WEF) advocates the addition of a new goal to the Clean Water Act specifically recognizing the role pollution prevention can play in protecting water quality. WEF also believes that the reauthorized Act should build upon the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 and EPA's 1991 Pollution Prevention Strategy which sets forth a water quality program to achieve the Nation's pollution prevention objectives within a reasonable time frame.

Pollution Prevention Concepts
Pollution prevention concepts under the Clean Water Act should embody a holistic approach to the maintenance of a clean environment. Wherever possible, the control or management of natural and man-made chemicals (especially toxicants) should be directed toward not creating it in the first place. If it must be created, it should then be removed as close to the source as possible to prevent escape into the environment, or it should be destroyed or directed into a state that poses the lowest possible risk to the natural environment. This approach will limit the shifting of pollutants from one receiving medium to another when such shifting does not significantly lower the overall environmental risks.

Pollution prevention and related initiatives under the Clean Water Act must incorporate multi-media and/or cross-receiving media provisions. Appropriate changes to the Act, as well as other federal environmental laws, will allow scientifically sound decisions to be made regarding the ultimate disposal medium for those waste streams which cannot be fully eliminated. The Clean Water Act should provide new authority to EPA and the states to stimulate innovative approaches to pollution prevention. Regulatory latitude in granting deadline flexibility and targeting certain pollutants for greater or lesser degrees of reduction may be necessary to achieve the ultimate water quality objectives embodied in the pollution prevention goal.

Pollution prevention can be accomplished in a variety of ways. New and innovative methods continue to be identified and utilized. Because of this, WEF believes that pollution prevention/waste minimization concepts should be incorporated as an integral part of the required activities under the Act, but that specific methodologies and uniform reduction levels should not be mandated. Likewise, it will be important to allow states and permittees to implement pollution prevention programs that are specifically relevant to the discharges/regions to which they are being applied.

Incentives for Pollution Prevention
WEF believes that financial and/or other incentives should be provided to stimulate pollution prevention activities. The following should be considered as possible incentives:

1. Create markets for wastewater treatment byproducts (i.e., "clean sludge") by providing tax incentives or other financial inducements to entities which utilize wastewater treatment byproducts for land reclamation, reforestation projects, and sludge ask reuse such as in concrete products and brick manufacturing. This would reduce the need to dispose of sludge in landfills.
2. Encourage implementation of innovative techniques and approaches to pollution prevention by reducing disincentives to risk taking, such as penalties which may arise from missing a permit deadline because an innovative technique did not work as well as expected.
3. Authorize the creation of EPA awards or recognition programs for innovative approaches above and beyond current technology and/or water quality requirements.
4. Allow trading of discharge limits between receiving media - as long as the net results include both an overall reduction in the amount of the contaminant discharged and a reduction in the potential environmental/public health risk from the combined discharge.
5. Provide tax benefits, loan subsidies, etc. for significant and/or successful pollution prevention activities.
6. Reduce permit-related fees for documented pollution prevention achievements.

RCRA and the Clean Water Act
WEF urges Congress to coordinate the reauthorizations of RCRA and the Clean Water Act to ensure the amended laws complement rather than conflict with each other. Nowhere will the need for this be more pressing than in the area of pollution prevention, where, unless closely coordinated, mandates under one statute can seriously restrict the potential pollution prevention benefits called for by the other Act.

For example, RCRA definitions of "recycle" and "reuse" could be modified to facilitate pollution prevention activity. RCRA requires a full Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility permit for all hazardous waste treatment, preventing generators from practicing many waste minimization and toxicity reduction operations.

Congress also should maintain the Domestic Sewage Exclusion (DSE) during reauthorization of RCRA. Many wastes listed or characterized by RCRA as hazardous wastes can, in fact, be treated in POTWs in a manner which reduces their quantity, toxicity, and/or mobility.

Finally, the definition of "solid waste" under RCRA should not include wastewater treatment residuals which meet EPA's Park 503 biosolids criteria, and which are suitable for land spreading, composing, distribution and marketing, and incineration. The ability to beneficially use this material will provide incentives for implementing pollution prevention technology and other methods of ensuring a high-quality, marketable resource.

Research and Education
The federal government should take the lead in conducting basic and applied research in pollution prevention, promoting public education, and acting as a clearinghouse for pollution prevention information.

Federal funding should be provided for state and local programs for technical information, assistance, and training in pollution prevention. Training should be made available to both environmental professionals and non-professionals. Research should be conducted in such areas as consumer product life cycle analyses, toxicity evaluation, and use and environmental fate. To make advances in pollution prevention as a nation, public education on a wide range of pollution prevention issues is needed, including:

• What pollution prevention is, and why it is necessary.
• Why everyone must be involved in pollution prevention (industry, citizens, utilities, government, etc.)
• How individuals can reduce the amount of pollution they generated, and how to reuse, recycle, and properly dispose of the rest.
• How to reduce water use.