Inside EPA

Some EPA Regions and states are said to be blocking issuance of permits that allow utilities to blend treated and partially treated wastewater during heavy precipitation events, heightening the concerns of utilities that the agency may adopt such a policy nationwide despite a long-stalled agency policy to allow blending in some cases.  

Senior EPA water and enforcement officials are not aware of the issue, though some industry officials are vowing to challenge the agency actions in court and lobby state and federal officials to address the issue, warning that the approach is blocking implementation of innovative treatment technologies.

Aimee Davenport, an attorney from Lathrop & Gage, L.C. from Jefferson City, MO, told a conference in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) Nov. 11 that EPA Regions VII and X have been objecting to some major permits because they believe “blending is illegal and there’s nothing you can do about it,” she said in her presentation.

A Source with Region X in Seattle says that the region recently raised concerns, in its oversight capacity, about a newly proposed permit for the city of Portland, Oregon. The permit allows for a bypass of secondary treatment of the combined sewer system flow during significant wet weather events, the source says.

“It was a concern to us. Under EPA policy, in order to do that you need to have developed a no feasible alternative analysis. That has been absent,” the source says. The agency has asked for a “rigorous” review of costs and benefits of expanding the plant to prevent the need for blending, the source says.

Meanwhile, in Region VII, sources with the agency say that they have filed both objections and interim objections to water discharge permits, at least in Lawrence, Kansas and in Blue Valley, Missouri, questioning blending allowances in permits as part of the agency’s review process.

At issue is whether to allow publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) to blend treated and partially treated wastewater during wet weather events.

Industry Says Blending 'Necessary'
Wastewater treatment industry officials have long said blending is necessary to meet discharge permit limits during heavy rains because they lack water storage capacity. But the proposed policy would be a departure from EPA’s bypass rule, which generally prohibits the diversion of wastewater from secondary treatment unless there is no feasible alternative and it is necessary to prevent personal injury or property damage. The bypass rule has, in some cases, forced POTWs to install costly storage capacity to hold the increased flow.

In 2005, EPA sought to finalize a draft policy -- based on an agreement between the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and NACWA which allows utilities to blend when there are no “feasible alternatives” to prevent overflows of raw sewage into nearby waters. EPA’s “Draft Guidance on Preparing a Utility Analysis” is intended “to provide guidance to permitees that are identifying and evaluating feasible alternatives to peak wet-weather diversions at a treatment plant,” the document says. But the White House never approved the policy in part because of opposition from POTWs that had been required to install additional treatment technologies to prevent bypasses.

Earlier this year, some regions began quietly requiring facilities to conduct feasibility analysis and EPA headquarters also quietly floated draft guidance to implement the stalled policy. Both measures drew widespread concerns, with many saying it is premature before White House approval of the policy and could result in expensive treatment requirements. Some states, however, said the guidance was not strict enough.

In her talk to the NACWA conference, Davenport warned of significant confusion among POTWs and vowed that the industry would launch judicial challenges and political lobbying of state and federal officials to address the issue, according to her presentation.
Despite the growing controversy, top EPA political officials are said to be unaware of the issue. At the NACWA conference Nov. 11, EPA wastewater Director Jim Hanlon said that EPA water chief “Pete Silva’s been on board for a little over 90 days,” and the staff members “have not had time to tee up those issues for him.” Similarly, when asked about the issue at the same conference Nov. 13, enforcement chief Cynthia Giles said that she was not aware of the issue.