EASTON — Town Engineer Rick Van Emburgh answered questions about an illicit discharge ordinance before the Easton Town Council Monday.
The ordinance, once passed, will restrict certain discharges from entering storm drains and authorize the town to perform inspections at sites where it has “reasonable cause” that an illicit discharge violation is occurring.
“It’s only rainwater that can go into the storm drain,” Van Emburgh said. “You’re not allowed to dump any other chemicals, bleaches, detergents or anything into the storm drain.”
He clarified that chemicals put down drains in houses are fine, since those would go to the sanitary sewer line and a wastewater treatment facility.
Due to EPA requirements that were passed down to the Maryland Department of the Environment at the state level, the town is required to restrict certain discharges. It comes since Easton is in its sixth year in the municipal separate storm sewer system program.
When the ordinance was first presented at a June 17 town council meeting, council members questioned if power washing would be feasible with the regulations.
“It doesn’t mean that you can’t power wash,” Van Emburgh said Monday. “It just means that you need to use the best management practices to contain the runoff.
“If you’re power washing the side of a house and it goes into the grass, and it doesn’t leave the yard, that’s okay. We’re looking for water that leaves the property (and) gets out onto the street.”
Van Emburgh said placing mats in a driveway is an example of how to prevent power washing chemicals from going into the street.
The ordinance does include exemptions, such as residential car washing, irrigation water and dechlorinated swimming pool discharges that fall in line with MDE regulations. Car wash businesses are not included in the exemption list.
“So a commercial car wash has to recycle their water,” Van Emburgh said. “The ones that I know of do that, they recycle their water.”
Multiple council members brought up concerns about the ordinance.
“I’m quite concerned, because I think the community needs to know about this legislation and what they can and cannot do,” Ward 4 Council Member the Rev. Elmer Davis said. “ … I’m not quite sure the community understands this document holistically. There has to be some more public relations regarding these changes.”
“My concern is, what is Public Works going to do once we pass this?” Ward 2 Council Member Don Abbatiello said, referencing the work the town does to spray weeds. Van Emburgh responded that “it does seem on the surface that that’s something we have to change,” adding that he would look into that concern.
Van Emburgh said the town was in “no rush” to approve the illicit discharge ordinance during Monday’s meeting. Ward 1 Council Member Maureen Curry said she was not ready to vote on the ordinance. Ward 3 Council Member David Montgomery said he was “perfectly happy with it the way it is,” but was content deferring to others who have outstanding questions.
The council elected not to vote on the ordinance Monday, leaving the public hearing section open for the next council meeting on July 15.
“There are some violations occurring around town that we’re aware of,” Van Emburgh said. “We want to have the law to be able to enforce that.”
Most Popular
Comments / 0