Kansas Health Institute | Information For Policy Makers. Health for Kansans.

TOPEKA — If an environmental group wins its bid to have the federal government force different standards for measuring pollution in the Kansas River, cities and agriculture could bear the cost, according to Kansas environmental regulators.

"If we are required to use a numeric standard to assess the effect of our work, it is likely that costs would increase for cities as well as the agricultural sector of the state’s economy," said Katie Ingels, a spokesperson for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. "Cities would likely be required to use more advanced treatment methods in their wastewater treatment facilities. Additionally, increased control or limits might be required for all fertilizer use including animal waste. It is also likely that land use changes would be required in groundwater sensitive areas including the use of passive buffers."

Friends of the Kaw, a group that guards against pollution in the Kansas River and its tributaries, sent notice June 2 to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that it intends to sue in an effort to force EPA to push KDHE into using numeric measurements of phosphorus, nitrogen and other "nutrients" that wash into the stream generally as run-off from farm fertilizers or feedlots, but also other sources.

“What this lawsuit will eventually enable us to do is to hold agriculture, businesses and communities' feet to the fire to fix the problem,” said Kansas Riverkeeper Laura Calwell and an active member of Friends of the Kaw. “The Kansas River watershed is predominantly industrial agriculture, which does contribute a lot of non-point pollution to the waters. There are a few cities that contribute to the problem. But it's mainly agriculture. I think a lot of our (Kansas) waters are impaired and that needs to be addressed...not just for our health but for the Gulf of Mexico.”

Excess nutrients from run-off into streams can lead to fish kills, algae blooms and so-called "dead zones" in water bodies, such as the one about the size of New Jersey that currently exists in the Gulf of Mexico resulting from nutrients discharged into it by the Mississippi River, the watershed for the nation's most fertile agricultural regions.

The Kansas River drains into the Missouri River, which drains to the Mississippi.

Kansas currently does not have numeric standards for the amount of nutrients allowed in streams. Instead, its regulations have “narrative” standards that Calwell said were inadequate because they don't provide for accurate measurement of the pollutants.

But Ingels said the state's current standards are working well and have been condoned by EPA.

"KDHE has been working diligently the past 12 years and the track record shows great progress without the use of numeric patrols. The narrative standards are more cost effective than a numeric standard," Ingels wrote in an email. "The narrative standard allows for more flexibility and for more use of local initiatives within local communities, such as the WRAPS projects. The EPA has been supportive of KDHE efforts the past several years and the narrative standards program. They have noted how well it has worked in Kansas and encouraged the ongoing progress of this standard."

The WRAPS program relies on voluntary efforts by farmers and others to curb pollution run-off.

"A lot of water quality laws in Kanas are voluntary and we'd like to see it be more mandatory," Calwell said. "So when they violate a standard they have to fix it or take corrective action."

Ingels said KDHE had not been notified by EPA or Friends of the Kaw about the group's plan to litigate. The June 2 letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson gave the requisite 60-day notice before a lawsuit can be filed. The group, in the letter, also signaled it might be interested in a settlement. EPA recently ordered the state of Florida to use numeric instead of narrative standards for measuring nutrients.

Ingels said it was still unclear what, if any, role KDHE might have in the litigation.