December 14th 2024.
Environmental advocates are concerned about potential changes to Colorado's state regulations that would allow polluted groundwater to be discharged into rivers and streams. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) has proposed eliminating a system that regulates how contaminated groundwater is dealt with by building owners. This change would permit the direct discharge of groundwater containing harmful chemicals like PFAS, arsenic, and other pollutants into stormwater systems without any treatment.
The proposed change has raised alarms for many environmental advocates and former staff members of the CDPHE's Water Quality Control Division. They fear that this change could have a detrimental impact on the already polluted urban waterways in Colorado, particularly the South Platte River and its tributary, Cherry Creek, as they flow through Denver and other Front Range communities.
According to Josh Kuhn, the senior water campaign manager for Conservation Colorado, the potential discharge of these "nasty toxins" is a cause for concern. Currently, the permits in question regulate a process called subterranean dewatering, which involves removing groundwater from underground structures such as parking garages and basements. The CDPHE oversees 113 long-term dewatering permits that require building owners to measure the amount of water being discharged, test it for pollutants, and treat it if necessary.
However, if the proposed changes are approved, all permitting, reporting, and treatment requirements for dewatering systems will be removed. State officials claim that the current permitting system is burdensome for building owners and that undoing the regulations would not significantly impact water quality. The CDPHE is currently seeking public feedback on the proposed changes before making a final decision.
Most of the 113 permitted buildings are located in downtown Denver, with some also found in Boulder and other Front Range communities. Notable buildings such as the Colorado Convention Center and the Hyatt Regency Denver hotel have permits for their dewatering systems. These systems are responsible for removing groundwater and sending it to stormwater systems, which eventually flow into the South Platte River, a source of drinking water for downstream communities. Unfortunately, the river has long suffered from poor water quality.
In urban areas, groundwater often becomes contaminated with chemicals from everyday activities such as using fertilizers, toxic PFAS, firefighting foam, and gasoline, as well as naturally occurring metals like arsenic and selenium. According to data compiled by Meg Parish, an attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project and former manager of Colorado's water quality division, many of the facilities with dewatering systems are treating water that far exceeds water quality standards. Without the current permit system, these facilities would no longer be required to treat the water and could instead discharge it directly into the stormwater system, eventually reaching the river.
For example, one apartment building in Highland is currently discharging water into the stormwater system with a level of arsenic that is over 10,000 times higher than the water quality standard for aquatic and human life. Similarly, a retirement home for priests in southeast Denver is treating water with nearly four times the allowable amount of uranium. Additionally, a parking garage on Wewatta Street next to Cherry Creek is treating water with about 15 times the concentration of PFAS allowed by state guidelines, which are already less stringent than newly announced federal drinking water standards.
Nicole Rowan, director of the CDPHE's Water Quality Control Division, claims that eliminating the permits would have a minimal impact on the South Platte's water quality. She argues that there are only a small number of permitted buildings discharging water, and the amount is not significant. Rowan also stated that the groundwater would eventually make its way into the river, regardless of the permitting system.
However, Parish disagrees with this reasoning, stating that concerns about affordability should not lead to the cancellation of the entire permitting process. She explains that the current system allows for exceptions to be made in cases where required treatment is too expensive or technically impossible. Parish believes that developers and building owners should be responsible for addressing these concerns and that prioritizing short-term convenience over long-term environmental health is not the solution.
Overall, the proposed changes to the permitting system for dewatering systems in Colorado have sparked concern among environmental advocates and former staff members of the water quality division. They fear that allowing the discharge of contaminated groundwater into stormwater systems could have severe consequences for the state's already polluted urban waterways. The CDPHE is currently seeking public feedback on the issue before making a final decision.
Colorado environmental regulators are considering getting rid of regulations that prevent contaminated groundwater from being discharged into the state's rivers and streams. This has caused concern among environmental advocates who believe that this change could further harm already polluted urban waterways.
The proposed change, put forth by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's Water Quality Control Division, would eliminate a permitting system that currently regulates how owners of underground structures handle contaminated groundwater. This means that building owners would be able to release groundwater contaminated with PFAS chemicals, arsenic, and other pollutants directly into stormwater systems without any treatment.
This has sparked fear among environmental advocates and former staff members of the Water Quality Control Division, who worry about the potential impact on the South Platte River and its tributary, Cherry Creek, as well as other Front Range waterways. "We're talking about some really nasty toxins," said Josh Kuhn, senior water campaign manager for Conservation Colorado.
The permits in question are for subterranean dewatering, which is the process of removing groundwater that seeps into underground structures like parking garages and basements. Currently, the CDPHE oversees 113 long-term dewatering permits that require building owners to measure the amount of water they are discharging, test it for pollutants, and treat it if necessary.
If the policy changes are approved, all permitting, reporting, and treatment requirements for dewatering systems would be removed. State water quality officials argue that the current permitting system is too burdensome for building owners and that undoing the regulations would not have a significant impact on water health. The water quality division is currently accepting public comments on the proposed change until Saturday.
Most of the 113 permitted buildings are located in downtown Denver, with a few in Boulder and other Front Range communities. Some notable buildings with permits include the Colorado Convention Center, the nearby Hyatt Regency Denver hotel, and various other large downtown buildings.
These buildings use dewatering systems to remove groundwater and redirect it to stormwater systems. In Denver, all stormwater eventually flows into the South Platte River, which is used as drinking water by communities downstream. The river has long suffered from poor water quality.
In urban areas, groundwater is often contaminated by chemicals used in modern life, such as fertilizers, toxic PFAS (known as "forever chemicals"), firefighting foam, and gasoline. It can also contain naturally occurring metals like arsenic and selenium.
According to data from the CDPHE compiled by Meg Parish, an attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project and former manager of permitting for Colorado's water quality division, many of the facilities with dewatering systems are treating water that far exceeds water quality standards. Without the permit system, these facilities would not be required to treat the water and could instead release contaminated water directly into the stormwater system, and eventually, the river.
For example, one apartment building in Highland is currently discharging water into the stormwater system with 202 micrograms of arsenic per liter, which is more than 10,000 times the water quality standard for aquatic and human life. A retirement home for priests in southeast Denver is treating water with nearly four times the acceptable amount of uranium.
In addition, a parking garage on Wewatta Street next to Cherry Creek is treating water with about 15 times the concentration of PFAS allowed by state guidelines, which are more lax than the recently announced federal drinking water standards.
However, the director of the water quality division, Nicole Rowan, argues that eliminating the permits would have a minimal impact on the South Platte's water quality. She claims that the number of permitted buildings is low and that they are not discharging large amounts of water. "We do think that this proposed policy change in dewatering permits represents a very low risk to overall water policy," said Rowan.
She also notes that the change would only affect a small number of the thousands of water-quality permits the division oversees. Additionally, she argues that the groundwater will make its way to the river eventually, with or without the permits. In Denver, buildings typically discharge about 5 gallons per minute, which amounts to about 8 acre-feet per year per building. However, the South Platte contains about 342,000 acre-feet of water, so this amount is relatively small. (An acre-foot is the amount of water it takes to cover an acre with one foot of water, which is approximately the size of a football field.)
Rowan says that the water quality division has received concerns over the past year about the affordability of complying with the permit requirements, particularly for affordable housing projects. However, Parish argues that concerns about affordability should not result in the entire permitting process being canceled. She points out that the current system allows for developers and building owners to apply for exceptions to the requirements, such as when the required treatment is excessively expensive or technically impossible.
"I think this is something that developers should be spending their money on," said Parish. "But if the argument is that this treatment is too expensive and they can't afford it, there are legal ways to address that." She believes that eliminating the permit system prioritizes short-term convenience over the long-term health of the environment and public safety.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
