For many years, a number of farmers, gardeners and homeowners across the United States has used a by-product of treated sewage as a soil-conditioning agent to fertilize property. The waste-treatment residue commonly called sludge or biosolids cuts down on fertilizing costs for the landowner. When used to treat soil, it also benefits public waste treatment facilities as a means of disposing of tons of residual waste. In fact, roughly 60 percent of the 5.6 million tons of sewage sludge processed each year in the United States is applied to land.
But whether it’s used for agricultural application in rural America or for suburban landscaping that includes lawns, parks and golf courses, recycled sewage ought to pass the most up-to-date scientific and health code standards available before it is unleashed on precious natural resources.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency, which is charged with setting regulatory policies and enforcing the nation’s clean water laws, has a critical responsibility to protect one of life’s most basic essentials. The safety and purity of drinking water must come first. Critics fear the environment and human health may be compromised by the use of sledge and treated biosolids.
According to a report issued in July by the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, the EPA is using outdated and unreliable information to identify hazardous chemicals and pathogens found in sewage sludge when it originally set its standards 10 years ago.
In February, I wrote to the EPA expressing concern about the integrity of the scientific process for setting the rules on biosolids. Detectable levels of pathogens that can be traced in Class B sewage, the least processed form of raw sewage, include listeria, hepatitis, cryptosporidium and tape worms.
After reviewing the NRC’s July report, I’m concerned the EPA is not taking appropriate steps to protect public safety. The science for sludge regulations is so old that the EPA has no idea if the rules for pathogens, chemicals and metals in sludge are accurate. I agree with the team of scientists who wrote the report that a "critical need" exists to update the science behind the regulations.
Without conducting any scientific studies of exposure on farmers and others who handle sludge as well as the potential effects on nearby residents, how can the EPA certify its safety to human health? Without conducting a national testing of pathogens and chemicals found in sludge, is it possible for the EPA to assert these toxins will not contaminate drinking water, harm the environment and pose a risk to humans, livestock and endangered species?
This doesn't mean the EPA needs to slap farmers and wastewater treatment plants with costly, new regulations. We have to get all the facts using modern-day technology to make any judgements. The EPA hasn't done this yet. More research and stepped up enforcement is necessary to ensure the public’s safety. The federal government must set a high bar to protect Americans from hazardous material and toxins that may pose risk to their health and well-being.
With all of the impressive advances in health sciences and technology now available, the EPA must use 21st century research and tools to close the "data gaps" that may allow dangerous levels of toxins, chemicals and metals to seep into our natural resources and jeopardize public health.