Search

Clean Water Advocacy Newsroom

Clean Water Advocacy - Newsroom - AMSA in the News

'No Feasible Alternative' Showing Needed
To Justify Blending Practice, Conference Told

BOSTON--Enforcement officials in the Environmental Protection Agency want a rigorous analysis of "feasible alternatives" before they would allow sewage treatment facilities to blend partially treated wastewater with fully treated effluent, municipal officials said at a conference July 15.
The feasible alternatives concern was one of several issues raised by the top EPA officials, including those in the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, regarding guidance being drafted to establish policy on the practice known as "blending."

The practice is used during wet weather and allows wastewater treatment plants to route excess flows around the biological, or secondary treatment, process after they have undergone primary treatment. These flows are then blended with the treated flows before being discharged.

This practice is done to keep the biological treatment process, which is used to remove biochemical oxygen demand compounds, from being overwhelmed by the high volumes of water. The rerouted flows are blended with the treated flows and meet permit limits once they are discharged.

EPA has been working on a policy outlining specifically when this practice can be allowed and not violate the Clean Water Act. Representatives from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) want a clear policy stating that the practice is allowed.

They discussed the subject at a conference of the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies and shared information from a May meeting they held with EPA officials. The theme of the conference was "Water Quality and the Wastewater Community--Emerging Pollutants, New Challenges."


Possible Conflict With CWA

OECA officials said they were concerned the practice of blending may run counter to Clean Water Act regulations prohibiting bypasses of any phase of the treatment process except in extreme situations such as someone's life may be at risk or if there are "no feasible alternatives."
While the Office of Water has generally agreed that blending is an acceptable way to handle excess flows, the enforcement side of the agency is concerned that the practice is not enforceable without certain restrictions and that permitting the practice can be too confusing and complex.

To help address these problems, the enforcement officials support requiring treatment facilities to do rigorous analyses indicating there are no feasible alternatives to the practice. They do not want blending to become the "natural default" for treating wastewater during wet weather events, AMSA officials said of the meeting with EPA.

David Williams, director of Wastewater for the East Bay Municipal Utility District in Oakland, Calif., said most POTWs already do these analyses as part of their master planning. EPA enforcement officials also said they were concerned about the lack of science on the impacts to human health and environment caused by blending.

AMSA officials told the agency that blending has been going on since the early 1970s with no scientific studies pointing to a problem. The Clean Water Act mandates that all discharges from wastewater treatment plants be treated to secondary treatment standards, which AMSA officials said is a performance standard.

The act should not be interpreted to mean permit writers should dictate "what is going on inside the treatment plant" to meet the standard, as they said would be happening if blending were allowed.

"If you need to change the standard, change the standard. Don't get inside the treatment works," Williams said.


More Data Sought

The AMSA officials agreed with the agency's enforcement personnel that not enough data is available regarding whether blending causes an increase in pathogens. AMSA said it has several factors on its side in support of the practice, including that many large treatment facilities were built using federal money under the now-defunct construction grants program.
The money was authorized for treatment plants specifically designed to blend, Chris Hornback, AMSA's director of regulatory affairs, said at the conference.

"It was approved by the federal government in the 1970s because they gave us the federal money to build it," he said.

AMSA is also beginning work on a report about the human health and environmental impacts of pathogens from sewer overflows. The report will be released near the time EPA submits its mandated report to Congress Dec. 15 on the impacts from combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows.


EPA Report Coming

Based on meetings with EPA and information from two agency-sponsored sessions, AMSA representatives are concerned EPA is going to release a report attempting to link sewer overflows to outbreaks of illness and other adverse effects.
However, they argued the data is not there to make that connection and cited only two documented cases where people were made sick as a result of a sewer overflow.

"EPA has a clear end result, and they're looking for data to support it," Chris Westhoff, assistant city attorney for the Los Angeles Department of Public Works, said.

Publicly owned treatment works were urged to supply AMSA with pathogen concentration data and other information to counter the claims.

"It's imperative that we lay out the real truth that there isn't any data to make that connection," Westhoff said.

In Philadelphia, wastewater officials collected information from their public health department and found that illnesses from waterborne pathogens, such as cryptosporidium, mostly came from exposures in swimming pools and hot tubs, David Katz, deputy water commissioner for the Philadelphia Water Department, told the conference.