Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - AMSA in the News
Sewage 'Blending' Stirs Anger
Feb 18, 2004 Seattle Post Intelligencer
Wednesday, February 18, 2004
Sewage 'blending' stirs anger
EPA wants to sanction practice that allows bypassing some steps
By ROBERT McCLURE
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER
A good-sized storm can send upwards of 400 million gallons of sewage and filthy
drainage water gurgling into the West Point Water Treatment Plant at Discovery
Park. But there's a catch: The plant can handle only 300 million gallons a day.
So plant operators route the excess around the slowest part of the treatment
process. The result: In these rainy days of winter, more than 100 million
gallons of partially treated water can get dumped into Puget Sound in a single
day.
The Bush administration is poised to bless this practice here and at thousands
of treatment plants around the country. Critics include the Washington
Department of Health and the Washington Department of Ecology, which
characterized the idea as "environmental backsliding. "
"We have some serious reservations with the policy as proposed," said Kevin
Fitzpatrick of Ecology's water-quality program, which has itself been criticized
by environmentalists as being too lax.
At issue is a practice known as "blending," usually implemented when it's
raining hard and lots of extra water seeps into sewage pipes. It allows
sewage-plant operators to route a portion of the flow around a chunk of the
treatment process, hit it with extra chlorine, then mix it with fully treated
sewage before discharging it into streams, bays and other water bodies.
The move skips a portion of the treatment process in which the sewage is aerated
and special bacteria introduced to digest pollutants in the water.
Sewage-plant operators defend the practice, saying they've been doing it for
years, that it's safe and the alternative would be extraordinarily expensive --
for negligible environmental benefits. Fixing it would mean building huge lakes
or vaults where the excess water could be stored and then treated later.
"The idea that there's something wrong with blending is just wrong-headed," said
Donald Thieler, director of King County's Wastewater Treatment Division.
"Blending is a very good way to handle wastewater flows. "
The new rules proposed by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency outline
principles that would guide the practice.
"You have to meet your permit whether you blend or not," said Jim Hanlon,
director of the EPA's wastewater treatment branch. "How you manage the flow
within the plant is a matter of local decision. "
But environmentalists point out that most permits require water-treatment plants
to check for just a handful of general pollution indicators, such as oxygen
content and acidity. They fear that blending could lead to additional output of
pathogens that sicken people, such as giardia and cryptosporidium, that
typically are not monitored.
Environmentalists say cities facing crumbling sewer systems, some built early in
the last century, are just looking for a way to put off costs.
"They want this because it's expensive to fix the sewer system and the federal
government is not giving them the assistance to do the job right," said Nancy
Stoner of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "What the EPA is proposing to
do here is basically change the law to suit the practice -- as opposed to
enforcing the law that's on the books. "
Washington's Ecology Department was among those who complained to the EPA that
its proposed rule allows the blending practice during "wet weather," but doesn't
define the term.
"The problem here in Puget Sound is that the definition of these rainy seasons
could be construed as being nine months long," said Sue Joerger, executive
director of the Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, a Seattle-based environmental group.
"It's a fairly significant loophole. "
Also lined up against the idea are shellfish growers. About two-fifths of the
nation's oysters, clams and other shellfish come from Washington.
"We see some really serious long-term economic effects from this," said Robin
Downey, executive director of the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association.
"Wouldn't it be nice if we could actually come up with some funding for these
municipalities to upgrade these systems? "
King County's West Point plant processes more than just sewage. Some water that
drains off streets, parking lots and lawns after a rain is purposely flushed to
the sewage-treatment plant. That's a good thing -- up to a point -- because it
helps keep pollutants out of local streams and Puget Sound.
That's during a moderate rainstorm. But when a big rain hits the area, even with
the blending practice, the plant can't handle all the dirty water. Some of it
backs up as raw sewage directly into local waterways. Blending allows more to
receive at least some treatment, including chlorination.
Trying to process too much wastewater, plant operators say, would literally wash
away or "blow out" the bacteria that are a key part of the treatment process. It
could take a plant weeks to recover.
Critics say eliminating the infiltration of rainwater through cracks in most
system's pipes would go a long way toward solving the capacity problem. And for
systems like Seattle's, big water-storage facilities are the way to go,
detaining the dirty water until the rains end and a plant has capacity, they
say. Nationally, municipalities and other local governments have spent about $1
trillion over the past 20 years improving drinking-water and sewage-treatment
facilities.
Over the next 20 years, EPA figures sewage systems nationwide already face some
$120 billion or more in catch-up work.
Ending the practice of blending, the agency estimates, could cost an additional
$20 billion to $100 billion. The Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies,
which represents sewage-treatment plants, pegs the cost at up to double that.
Is it worth it?
"If you ask what's the benefit to public health and the environment, we're not
sure there is any," said EPA's Hanlon.
Ken Kirk, executive director of AMSA, faults critics for taking an "Alice in
Wonderland" approach to the blending question. The alternative, he says, is
cutting loose raw sewage.
The rules currently allow sewage-plant operators to release raw sewage in some
cases. They have to show, though, that there is no feasible alternative and that
the alternative would endanger people's personal safety or property. The new
rules allow release of partially treated sewage under gentler restrictions.
The new proposal came about because different EPA offices in different parts of
the country had taken varying views on blending, from embracing it to banning
it.
"People asked us to provide guidance, and that's what we did," said Cathy
Milbourn, an EPA spokeswoman.
AMSA, the organization representing sewage plants, was among those pushing for a
national policy. AMSA says its sewage-treatment-plant operators know best, and
they should be allowed to blend.
"It's been an established management practice in the industry for 35 years,"
said Ken Kirk, AMSA's executive director.
Kirk points out that the new rules would, unlike the current situation, at least
offer principles to govern when the partially treated discharges should take
place.
But Kirk acknowledges that critics have a point when they say wastewater systems
are in need of upgrades. From the local city council up to Congress, it's never
a popular message.
"The federal government needs to get involved and lay some serious money on the
table," Kirk said.