Saturday, September 24, 2011

IS A PICTURE WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS?

Earlier this month, my wife and I attended an outdoor auction of possessions of an artist who was moving to a smaller home. One of the auctioneer's farm wagons was mounded with piles of the artist's unsold oils, watercolors and sketches. About mid afternoon, a ring man hoisted a framed oil of a water hand pump popping up in the middle of a farm field of wheat-a pump similar to the one pictured in this blog. It was well done and rather autumnal, matching the sunny cool of our actual day.

The auctioneer vigorously chanted, seemingly at a thousand words a minute. But to my utter surprise, there was no bidding interest in the painting. Since then, I have been wondering why. Perhaps for the younger bidders pressing against the wagon, the painting had no significance for their reality. On the other hand, for the older bidders gawking over the younger ones, perhaps such nostalgia may not have been a positive memory. And perhaps for most bidders, who no doubt receive water from faucets, a hand pump--who cares?

However, in the water and wastewater industry, particularly, for litigation, a picture may well be worth a thousand words or even more. Whenever a client has asked me to assist with an issue involving its facilities, I always have made it a point to view and understand the plant and operations involved. Whether one is a lawyer, engineer, consultant or even an accountant, seeing the plant components involved in an issue can result in enhanced comprehension and development of solutions. Of course, early in my career, I learned never to wear a wool suit when visiting a wastewater treatment plant.

Oh yes, I did not bid on the hand pump painting either--because I already have a similar one hanging on my office wall!

Sunday, September 18, 2011

BEAM ME UP, SCOTTIE

Looking for water in all the wrong places? Scientists report finding a cloud of water surrounding a giant black hole in a galaxy. It is said to be the oldest and largest amount of water in the universe, holding an amount equal to the mass of at least 100,000 suns. The vapor disk is estimated to be 3,500 light years across (Science, September 10, 2011, p.4).

Although no one has yet found clear evidence of water on Mars, some scientists have concluded that salt water oozing from rocks causes seasonal dark streaks at some locations on that planet. The assumption is that the water freezes below ground and later boils above ground (Id. at p. 8)

Studies in California and Wisconsin reportedly suggest that many urban sanitary sewers are leaking and permit raw sewage to enter into storm sewers that drain into waterbodies that serve as sources of water supply (Id. at p.13).

I am not sure what all this means. But these stories could suggest that if we continue to avoid needed upgrade of sewer infrastructure, and if we want to avoid brine water on Mars, maybe we should seek water in another galaxy.

Monday, September 12, 2011

INTIMIDATION AND THE REGULATORY PROCESS

Regulatory agencies permeate daily living, including the operations of water and wastewater utilities. Administrative agencies not only make rules but they also enforce them. Accordingly, they may exercise both legislative and judicial type functions, although they are neither a legislature nor a court. Moreover, they generally are not bound by precedent or the strict rules of evidence.

In reality, the administrative processes of regulatory agencies can be subjected to, and affected by, pressures outside the scope of any record before them. Consider, for example, the current toxicology review being conducted by U.S. EPA as to whether to establish a drinking water compliance standard for hexavalent chromium (chromium 6).

California, on its own, in July established a "public health goal" for chromium 6. While a "goal" is not yet a compliance standard in California, the action suggests a "tail wagging the dog" attempt which may offer pressure on U.S. EPA. Indeed, it has been reported that one of California's U.S. senators has filed a bill in Congress to force U.S. EPA to set a compliance standard for chromium 6 and will hold hearings on the bill in January.

The California developments apparently have given rise to media pressure as well. Recently, a major newspaper carried an article alleging that testing of Chicago water found levels of chromium 6 substantially higher than the California "health standard" adopted in July. The article acknowledged potential pressure on U.S. EPA from the California action. Of course, California has not yet adopted a compliance standard for chromium 6.

The article also alleged that U.S. EPA has been slow to act because municipal utilities and industrial polluters object to a new standard that could cost them money. In point of fact, several water associations have urged U.S. EPA simply to include in its risk assessment for chromium 6 important current research on health effects of chromium 6, expected to be completed shortly.

In this one example, there appear to be efforts by an activist state, a senator and media to pressure an administrative agency to adopt a compliance regulation. None of these efforts, it would seem, are a matter of the record before the agency.