2 Events
 Ta-Nehisi Coates
 Thursday, March 5, 7pm,
 The Case for Reparations
 Fear of a Black President
 Majorca Carter
 Tuesday, March 10, 5:30pm Gannett
 “The Department of Home(town) Security”
 TED Talk, Greening the Ghetto
Command and Control
Regulation in Action
REGULATING INDUSTRIAL WATER
POLLUTION IN THE US
WITH SOME HELP FROM DANTE PETRI,
MOLLY NOWAK, AND KATHLEEN MCCONKEY
(ES CAPSTONE 2008)
Command and Control
Regulation in Action
RULE-MAKING, ABATEMENT COSTS,
COMPLIANCE, PERVERSE INCENTIVES,
POINT AND NON POINT SOURCES, PUBLICLY
OWNED TREATMENT WORKS, NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION
SYSTEM, BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
AND TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS,
REGULATORY STRINGENCY
Command and Control Regulation.....
Why Command and Control, Reason #1
 “Despite the vigorous and often telling criticisms of the
regulatory status quo, and despite the some successful or
promising use of alternative regulatory strategies, we
remain stuck I the same basic regulatory system that was
established in 1970s, when all of the major federal
regulatory statues that we currently have were enacted….
During the entire 30 year period from 1970-2000, there
have been only 2 instances in which Congress adopted
legislation that has made significant use of alternatives to
the command system.”

Richard Stewart A New Generation of Environmental Regulation? 2001
Reason 2: Reformist; Managerial Discourse
 “A discourse is a shared way of apprehending
the world. Embedded in language, it enables those
who subscribe to it to interpret bits of information
and put them together into coherent stories or
accounts. Each discourse rests on assumptions,
judgments, and contentions that provide the basic
terms for analysis, debates, agreements, and
disagreements”
 Managerial Discourse



Environmental problems are “technical”
Technical and Political Issues
Professional bureaucracy
Political Division of Responsibility
 Congress defines goals
 CAA 1972 – NAAQS for air pollutants to protect public health
and welfare with an adequate margin of safety”
 EPA sets standards
 6 air pollutants: SO2, PM2.5 and PM10), nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone,1 and lead
 ozone -as 0.12 parts per million averaged over a 1-hour period,
to 0.08 parts per million averaged over an 8-hour period,
 States implement rules
 State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to meet statutory
requirements.
 State imposes additional controls on existing sources to ensure
that emissions do not cause “exceedances” of the standards
And.....
 Judicial oversight
 Administration Procedures Act
 Reasonableness of interpretation (aka is CO2 an air pollutant)
 Executive Administration
 Presidential Appointees affect rulemaking, implementation
 aka Alternative pathways
Politics-Administration Dichotomy
 “The field of administration is a field of business. It
is removed from the hurry and strife of politics....
Administration lies outside the proper sphere of
politics. Administrative questions are not political
questions. Although politics sets the tasks for
administration, it should not be suffered to
manipulate its offices.”


Critique of patronage system
Woodrow Wilson, The Study of
Administration, 1887
Why doesn’t command and control work?
 “Each command and control element opens the
potential for politics where statutory language has
more impact than formal language of the law.
Technical language conceals extent of political
forces. Political pressure and conflict flow to
wherever administrative discretion exists in
regulatory process.” Rosenbaum 2009
Congress  Clean Water Act of 1972
 Pre 1972, water quality is a state and local issue
 Use based approach
transportation
 waste disposal
 drinking recreation

 CWA of 1972- national goals
 zero-discharge of pollution by 1985
 2 Main Policy Tools
 Construction grants program $$
 Technology based regulations for discharge of water pollution
from point sources
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
 EPA- establishes Federal Effluent Guidelines
 Main Targets
 Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD); total suspended
solids (TSS); 15 pollutants of concerns, (metals i.e.
arsenic and mercury)
 States– write, monitor, and enforce NPEDS
permits

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit program controls water pollution by
regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into
waters of the United States
Do you know where your water
goes?
1900
1972
1977
1977
Treated Water (Million Gallons/Day)
Saratoga WWTP Current Flow vs Upgrade
50
45
45
40
35
30
25
20
25
21.3
15
15
10
10
5
0
0
Current
Permitted Capacity
After Upgrade
Average Daily Flow
AMD Contribution
$52,000,000.00
POTW publicly owned treatment works
POTW
POTW
 Tech Regulation
 Primary treatment (skimming, screening, settling) 65%
 Secondary treatment - 80-90%
 Criteria on uses for sludge
 ensuring effective operation and maintenance
Direct Discharges from Industrial Plants
Direct Discharges from Industrial Plants
 EPA guidelines for 30 designated industries
 best practicable technology by 1977
 Best Available Tech by 1983
 New Source Performance Standards
 “Waste Treatment Management Plans and
Grants. The Act is intended to require and assist in
the development and implementation of waste
treatment management plans and practices to
achieve the goals of the Act. Plans and practices must
provide for treatment of waste using the best
practicable technology before there is any discharge
of pollutants into receiving waters, as well as the
confined disposal of pollution so that it will not
migrate to cause water or other environmental
pollution. To the extent practicable, waste treatment
management is to be on an areawide basis and is to
provide for the control or treatment of all point and
non-point sources of pollution.” CWA
 Effluent Limitations and Water Quality
Standards. The Act prohibits the discharge of
pollutants except in compliance with the effluent
limitations and other provisions of the Act. Effluent
limitations from point sources other than POTWs
must be treated using best practicable control
technology. Toxic pollutants, defined and otherwise
described in the Act, require treatment using the best
available technology which is economically
achievable. If the source discharges into a POTW, it
must comply with applicable pretreatment
requirements. Notwithstanding any other provisions,
the Act makes it unlawful to discharge any
radiological, chemical, or biological warfare agent,
any high-level radioactive waste, or any medical
waste into navigable waters.
Complexity
 Dairy Standards
 Different standards for subcategories
 Acceptable pollutant discharge rates vary
 BOD 30 day standard for large facilities Butter .55kg per
1000 kg of BOD input; Cottage cheese 2.6, Ice bream
1.84, Condensed Milk 1.38, Dry Milk .65
 Separate limits for one day maximum discharge, 30 day
average, for small and large facilities.
Indirect discharges from industrial plant
 Industrial plants to POTW
 Pretreatment guidelines
Rulemaking Process
 Information Requirements
 Writing of direct discharge standards
 How to operationalize best, practicable, economically
achievable
 Need information on production techniques, location,
waste products, and waste treatment tech
 heterogeneity --360 industrial subcategories among first
30 industries requiring effluent guidelines
 separate BPT, BAT, NSPS< and pretreatment regulations
 In specifying BPT, EPA looks at a number of factors.
EPA first considers the total cost of applying the
control technology in relation to the effluent
reduction benefits. The Agency also considers the
age of the equipment and facilities, the processes
employed and any required process changes,
engineering aspects of the control technologies, nonwater quality environmental impacts (including
energy requirements), and such other factors as the
EPA Administrator deems appropriate.
Traditionally, EPA establishes BPT effluent
limitations based on the average of the best
performance of facilities within the industry of
various ages, sizes, processes or other common
characteristics.
Rulemaking Process
 Role of consulting firms
 Proposed standards, industry comment
 250 lawsuits
Regulatory Output
 BPT - 1 year
 BAT standards – 1/3rd done by 1995
 Zero Discharge – still waiting
EPA Industry Effluent Guidelines
Type of
BPT
Sites
Regulated
Existing
⊗
Direct
Dischargers
New Direct
Dischargers
Existing
Indirect
Dischargers
New Indirect
Dischargers
BCT
BAT
⊗
⊗
Pollutants
Regulated
Priority
Pollutants
Nonconventi
onal
Pollutants
Conventional
Pollutants
BCT
BPT
NSPS
PSES
PSNS
⊗
⊗
⊗
BAT
NSPS
PSES
PSNS
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
Airport Deicing Effluent Guidelines
 Airports are required to obtain stormwater discharge
permits under the NPDES program and ensure that
wastes from deicing operations are properly collected
and treated.
 Airports that conduct aircraft deicing operations,
have 1,000 or more annual jet departures, and
10,000 or more total annual departures, would be
required to collect spent aircraft deicing fluid and
treat the wastewater. They may either treat the
wastewater on-site or send it to an off-site treatment
contractor or publicly owned treatment works.
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/guide/airport/index.cfm
Airport Deicing Effluent Guidelines
 Support Documents
 Technical Development Document (PDF) (EPA-821-
R-09-004, July 2009) (224 pp, 3.73MB)
 Economic Analysis (PDF) (EPA-821-R-09-005, July
2009) (135 pp, 377K)
 Environmental Impact and Benefit Assessment
(PDF) (EPA-821-R-09-003, July 2009
 Preliminary Data Summary on Airport Deicing
Operations (PDF) (447 pp, 2.1MB) (EPA-821-R-00016, August 2000)
Abatement Costs
 Big variation in incremental costs
 $ per kg p. 14; Implication?
 Table 3 Estimate of costs > than actual
 why?
 Distribution of Costs
 Table 4
Compliance
 Assumption- 97% reduction in discharge of
priority pollutants
 Compliance – mixed
6% of major direct dischargers -significant
noncompliance
 % of US served by POTWs increases from 42% to 74%
 POTW pretreatment- 54% of significant indutstrial users
were in significant noncompliance (1992)

Treated Water (Million Gallons/Day)
Saratoga WWTP Current Flow vs Upgrade
50
45
45
40
35
30
25
20
25
21.3
15
15
10
10
5
0
0
Current
Permitted Capacity
After Upgrade
Average Daily Flow
AMD Contribution
$52,000,000.00
But is the water cleaner?
 Some big successes- Potomac, Delaware
 Lack of data,
Perverse Incentives
 Expansion of POTW Construction Grants Program
 shift from direct discharge towards indirect
discharge
A Sewer Success Story From 1977
Location &
Nutrient
Reductions
1982-2000
Saratoga Lake:
Nitrogen loading
20%
Saratoga Lake:
Phosphorous
loading
50%
Uwmarx.com
Town of Halfmoon Water Treatment Facility, Halfmoon, NY
Kayderosseras
Creek:
Phosphorous
Loading
40 - 50%
–Land to Lake Perspective; A
Watershed Management Plan
for Saratoga Lake (2002)
Map 1
Location of Septic
Systems in the Saratoga
Lake Watershed
Population Growth in Selected Unsewered Towns in the
Saratoga Lake Watershed
18,000
16,000
14,000
Galway
Population
12,000
Greenfield
10,000
Malta
8,000
Milton
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
1960
1970
1990
Year* (1980 N/A)
Census Data (1970-2000)
2000
Map 2 Septic Hotspots in the Saratoga Lake Watershed
The Hidden Costs of Septic System
 Septic Systems are out of
sight and out of mind
until they smell
 Down stream residents
bear the environmental
costs
 Failing systems are hard
to detect
Cheater pipe in the Saratoga Lake Watershed
Why would companies favor regulation?
 Public interest theory of
regulation
 Political economy theory
of regulation
 What do companies
want?
George Stigler, Nobel Laureate
EPA Industry Effluent Guidelines
Type of
BPT
Sites
Regulated
Existing
⊗
Direct
Dischargers
New Direct
Dischargers
Existing
Indirect
Dischargers
New Indirect
Dischargers
BCT
BAT
⊗
⊗
Pollutants
Regulated
Priority
Pollutants
Nonconventi
onal
Pollutants
Conventional
Pollutants
BCT
BPT
NSPS
PSES
PSNS
⊗
⊗
⊗
BAT
NSPS
PSES
PSNS
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
⊗
Adler, Heat Expands All Things
 Argument
 Evidence
 Implications
 Names of Regulatory Agencies
 Amount of Administrative Discretion
 Information/Complexity
 Industry Heterogeneity
 Political consequences
 Environmental impact
EPA
 Significant Rulemaking
 EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
MPG car standards
 “new source performance standards” for stationary sources



as coal‐fired steam turbines,44 cement kilns,45 copper smelters,46
or pulp
States are required to establish and impose emission standards
Title V- major sources- 250 tons of CO2
PSD - 280-- > 40,000 new sources
 Title V- 15,000 to about six million sources


State Implementation Plans – “controlling localized, ambient
pollution problems”... CO2???
 Clean Water Act
 CARB
 Executive Order 13514
 DOE- Energy Policy Act
of 2005
 National Environmental
Policy Act
 Climate Change
Response Council
 SEC- “interpretative
guidance”
 Reducing emissions by 80% below 2005 levels by
2050....



2.4 tons per capita aka Botswana
1910 emissions, 92 million, pci $6,200
If the United States and other nations are to have any hope of
stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of GHGs at a desirable
level, dramatic technological innovation is required. Therefore,
climate policy efforts should focus, first and foremost, on spur‐
ring and facilitating precisely that type of innovation. Such
regu‐ latory mandates being pursued by the EPA under the
Clean Air Act divert limited public and private resources and
emphasize measures that provide few climate mitigation
benefits