CONNECTICUT WATER POLLUTION

ABATEMENT ASSOCIATION

P.O. Box 765 Vernon, CT 06066-0765

September 30, 2000

Mr. J. Charles Fox

Assistant Administrator for Water

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20460

Dear Mr. Fox:

The Connecticut Water Pollution Abatement Association wishes to express its concern that various factions within EPA have, without providing for public participation and rulemaking, reinterpreted the federal bypass regulation in a manner that will result in significant costs to municipalities, including municipalities in Connecticut. Ever since the advent of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, municipalities across the country have been authorized and permitted (with EPA or delegated state approval) to design their treatment systems to allow for the "blending" or "slip streaming" of peak wet weather flows to protect the performance of the biological components of the municipal system. Moreover, EPA provided grant funding to construct many facilities that incorporated blending. Such approach provided for a commonsense cost-effective means of addressing peak flows while assuring that applicable effluent limitations were being met.

Now, suddenly, EPA enforcement personnel are claiming that blending can no longer be authorized but, instead, construction of larger facilities would be required in order to achieve the same effluent quality currently achieved through the blending process. We strongly object to EPA’s new mandate. At a minimum, if EPA is to impose new costly requirements upon local governments, EPA must subject such mandates to the public rulemaking process.

Moreover, the new ban on "blending" is directly at odds with the nutrient removal initiative being undertaken by municipalities in Connecticut. If all peak weather flow must be run through every unit of the municipal plant, it would severely compromise the ability of publicly owned treatment works to achieve their nutrient removal goals due to significant construction cost increases and risks to upsetting the plant operations.

The design of nutrient removal facilities are proceeding, and EPA’s new rule interpretation may render these facilities designs inadequate or unlawful. Therefore, we request your immediate response to this question: under EPA’s regulations can blending still be authorized by EPA or NPDES approved States in permits issued to municipal facilities as a cost-effective wet weather management option? If blending cannot be authorized, or can only be authorized in conformance with the federal bypass rule prerequisites, then we request that you provide us specific references to the EPA rulemaking, which informed the public (and provided the requisite cost-analysis) that the bypass rule prohibited blending.

Your prompt response to this request would be appreciated. If you have any questions please contact me at (860) 441-6736.

Sincerely,

Carl Almquist

President CWPAA

Cc: CWPAA Board of Directors

NEWEA Executive Director, Elizabeth A. Haffner via e-mail

Gian-Carl Casa, CCM