Sewer overflows during rain and illicit dumping of raw sewage directly into the river contribute to bacterial pollution, Webster said.

Water cloudiness is also only partially determined by industry.

“A lot of the controversy is scientific interpretation,” Webster said. “But embedded in that is how confident you want to be in numbers.”

The draft permit has sparked so much public interest that the EPA extended a public comment period to Oct. 14.

“We received voluminous comments from both sides, and we’re very happy with their thoughtfulness,” Webster said.

“This is fascinating stuff....[t]here is a lot of good scientific debate.”

The EPA will review the draft comments in the next few months and produce a final permit in 2005, Webster said.

If there are “significant changes” from the draft version, the EPA will hold another public comment period.

Webster acknowledged the challenge of crafting a permit acceptable to everyone.

“It’s a little like setting a speed limit,” he said. “50 miles per hour is always safer than 55 or 60. The problem is finding the right balance.”

Dissenting parties will be able to make legal challenges, both within the EPA and in circuit court.

If water quality were to decline, Brian C. Aldrich ’07, a member of the men’s lightweight crew, said “[The sport] wouldn’t be affected too much.”

But “the interaction with the river would be changed....[i]t’s nice to jump in on a warm day,” said Aldrich, who has rowed on the river for eight years.