Court Says Housing Must Follow Erosion Guidelines The U.S. District Court has ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency and NAHB in a suit over whether the residential construction industry should be required to follow effluent limitation guidelines (ELG). Not subject to these guidelines, home builders instead have been following stringent erosion and sediment control rules set by state and local authorities. “NAHB is disappointed in the court’s decision,” said David Pressly, the association’s president. “NAHB agreed with EPA’s 2002 decision not to issue the guidelines because the data did not support their adoption and the duplicative regulation ends up being reflected in the price of a new home without offering additional protection for our nation’s waterways.” While the decision will have no immediate impact on homes under construction, the stage has been set for a time-consuming round of proposals and counterproposals to adopt and implement the ELGs. NAHB intervened in the lawsuit, supporting EPA when the National Resources Defense Council sued over the agency’s decision. Effluent limitation guidelines limit the amount of pollutants in wastewater discharges from specified industries, usually involving numerical limits for specific pollutants. Sediment is the pollutant of greatest concern for home builders, and the industry will be forced to meet ELGs through a combination of approaches, such as silt fences, rock filters or the preservation of existing trees and grass — measures that builders and developers already use to meet existing regulations. “We want to protect our environment and we are happy to offer our expertise, but I can think of more efficient ways to meet that goal than another layer of rulemaking,” Pressly said. Additionally, new storm water rules under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System have resulted in significant improvements in water quality and in the control of discharges of construction site storm water runoff. All parties are still reviewing the case, so a decision on whether to appeal the court’s decision has not yet been made, Pressly said. | 
