The treatment process consists of three basic steps: biological treatment, filtration and final polishing and disinfection. The wastewater is first collected in a buried pre-treatment trash trap/sump tank. The trash chamber provides grit removal and gross solids retention; the sump provides flow equalization and an emergency storage reservoir. After treatment and equalization, the wastewater is pumped to the biological treatment system.

The biological treatment system incorporates both anoxic and aerobic processes. The first anoxic stage receives the raw wastewater which is high in organics and ammonia. In addition to nitrate nitrogen in the recycled flushwater, toxic organisms convert the nitrates to nitrogen gas (denitrification) while consuming BOD. In the second stage, air is supplied through blowers to provide an aerobic environment for nitrification of ammonia, further BOD reduction, and solids digestion. The digestion process reduces solids so efficiently that residual stored solids are removed by hauling only once per year.

Filtration of the biological solids is accomplished with tubular ultrafiltration membranes. These membranes provide consistent and complete separation of all suspended solids id microorganisms. The rejected solids are returned to the waste treatment tank for further digestion. Filtered permeate proceeds to the water polishing step, except for the small volume that is discharged.

Once all biological solids have been separated, the wastewater to be recycled is polished and disinfected. In this process the wastewater passes through activated carbon absorbers. This removes any color and odor and produces a sparkling clear water. Next, the flow is disinfected by passing through an ultraviolet lamp or alternatively by contact with ozone. The reclaimed wastewater is then stored in a treated water reservoir where it will be recycled to flush toilets and urinals.

The process is odor free, requires no chemical additions and can be housed within the facility it serves. Water conserving fixtures such as 1.5 gallon toilets and selfclosing lavatory faucets are generally used with the system because of the favorable economics.

Wastewater Treatment and Recycling Technology for Residential Applications

Recycled water residential treatment technology till recently has been limited to sand filter systems. However, new technology which uses electricity to treat/clean wastewater is now available. This technology can remove 90 percent of the chemicals, organic materials and other contaminants. Figure 2 illustrates one such new System.

This system is totally self-contained. It is engineered to be safe and has a built-in automatic control system. The unit is available with storage tanks sized for the sac water recycling need. It can be installed either above or below ground.

Water treatment is accomplished by this system in six steps. These are as follows: Step #1: Raw sewage from the residence Is pumped to the system from the household sewer or septic lines.

Step #2: Water and any solids are run through a shredder/grinder.

Step #3: An electronic control panel monitors the condition of incoming waste water and activates the electrical treatment process accordingly.

Step #4: The liquid passes through a series of treatment cells where It Is electrically charged. Each cell has a sacrificial electrode which creates an electro-chemical flocculent suspended in the liquid. This flocculent attracts both organic and inorganic waste materials in the water and surround it. Additional benefit is realized in bacteria reduction by means of high voltage induction through the treatment cell that is exposed to the waste water.

Step #5: The electrically charged water which contains the flocculent is passed through a variety of filters which separate the waste from the water.

Step #6: The reclaimed water is then pumped into a holding tank for later use. Several other electrical technologies also can be employed in various aspects of wastewater treatment. For example, electromagnetic field systems keep minerals and other deposits from coating the surface of pipes. Another type of system is electrodialysis which uses electrically charged membranes to attract various degrees of minerals and metals suspended in the water. A third type of system which employs electrolysis uses a positive/negative electrode submerged in water at very low voltage which in the presence of sodium creates a chlorine chemical for disinfection.

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGIONAL COUNCILS
WASHINGTON, DC.

July 24, 1991

Hon. Max Baucus

United States Senate

Chairman, Subcommittee on Environmental Protection
Committee on Environment and Public Works

Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR Baucus:

As the Congressional hearings on the Clean Water Act Reauthorization are concluding, we are contacting you about the provisions on grant funding to regional councils for water quality planning. We have had further concerns expressed by our member regional councils about the continuing availability of water quality planning grants to regional councils under section 604(b) of the Act. The situation is this:

●The States, since the 1987 amendments to the Act, have been required to passthrough to regional councils and other sub-state entities 40 percent of the grant funds the States receive under the section 205(j) and section 604(b) set-asides of 1 percent from the annual appropriations for Construction Grants and the State Revolving fund.

This pass-through requirement is specified only in section 205(j) (3) of the Act, however, the U.S. EPA's Office of Water and Office of General Council have specifically determined that the pass-through requirement also applies to grant funds from the section 604(b) set-aside, as restated in the U.S. EPA memo (Attachment 1) of June 26, 1991.

This restatement of the Agency's policy was in response to further State inquiries regarding the continued applicability of the pass-through requirement under section 604(b). While our Association and its members are sympathetic to the needs of the States for water quality planning grant funds, we must point out that this is the only source of such grant funds (Attachment 2) for regional councils and other substate entities. Our association testified on April 4, 1990 (Attachment 3) before the House Subcommittee on Water Resources on the importance of this grant funding to regional councils and their water quality management programs. It has been reported to the Association that at least two western States simply do not passthrough any of these Federal grant funds because they consider their own needs to be greater than the needs of the sub-state entities.

In addition, other environmental legislation is requiring an expanded role for regional councils. For example, the Clean Air Act Reauthorization requires that a regional council serving as a “Metropolitan Planning Organization" take the lead in integrating air quality and transportation planning. There should also be a required integration of water quality and air quality planning since many pollutant substances are transported through atmospheric deposition from land to water. The pending RCRA Reauthorization legislation gives priority to regional management approaches and should also provide for integration of land disposal and ground water management. The proposed Surface transportation legislation includes provisions for wetlands preservation.

Under these circumstances, we are requesting your support for the Associationls proposal (Attachment 4) that the Congress:

⚫ amend section 604(b) of the Clean Water Act to specify the required passthrough of grant funds to sub-state entities, in keeping with the expressed Congressional intention in the 1987 Clean Water Act amendments; and

raise the level of the section 604(b) set-aside from 1 percent to 2.5 percent to increase the amount of grant funding available to the States, as well as the amount of the required 40 percent pass-through to sub-state entities.

The proposed 1.5 percent increase for section 604(b) set-aside would, in effect, be only a reallocation of funds under the State Revolving Fund appropriation, rather than an actual increase. This is because the Clean Water Act Title II set-aside of 1.5 percent of the Construction Grants appropriation under section 205(1) ended in fiscal year 1990.

Members of our Association would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you or your staff representatives on this matter. I would be happy to arrange such a meeting at your convenience. This would be an opportunity to discuss these proposals and the benefits that would accrue to the environment through improvements in water quality management at the sub-state level where water program implementa

tion actually takes place. Please contact me at 457-0710 to let me know your views on this matter. Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

RICHARD C. HARTMAN
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

[Attachments to this letter have been retained in committee files.]

STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TOWNS AND TOWNSHIPS

The National Association of Towns and Townships (NATaT) appreciates the opportunity to comment on legislation to reauthorize the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. We hope that a balanced approach is adopted, taking into consideration the provision of clean and healthy waters, while recognizing the fiscal and technical constraints faced by America's small communities.

NATAT represents more than 13,000 mostly small rural governments across the United States. These communities are typical of the nation's 39,000 general purpose local governments: 86 percent of local governments serve populations of less than 10,000 people, and 67 percent govern less than 2,500 residents. Thus, small communities are truly the majority of governments in the U.S.

During clean water reauthorization, NATaT urges Congress to take into consideration the feasibility and costs of environmental requirements on small local governments. Small communities cannot afford planning and technical experts on their town payrolls. Much more effort is needed at the State and Federal level to provide this assistance to needy communities.

S. 1081-THE WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT OF 1991

NATAT recommends that the Water Quality Monitoring Council established by S. 1081 include representatives from small local governments. The Council would assure the effective and coordinated implementation of water quality monitoring programs." Because local officials are on the front line enacting these programs, it is important that they be represented on the Council. One of these local government representatives should specifically represent a small community with under 5,000 residents. Also, the Water Quality Information Advisory Committee should include representatives from small local governments. Often Federal councils and committees include State government representatives and it is assumed that they represent the "local government" perspective. True small local government officials who implement these programs need proper recognition and equal say with State, Federal and educational officials in planning and oversight of Federal programs.

CLEAN WATER FUND

NATAT supports the Clean Water Fund established by S. 1081 to help finance the problems identified in the 1987 Water Quality Act and S. 1081, and appreciates the recognition that Federal mandates must be accompanied by funding commitments. The Clean Water Fund needs to provide flexibility to States and in turn to local governments to allocate funds according to priorities for improving water quality. Water quality problems vary around the country, and small local governments need flexibility to address problems specific to their communities.

STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUND

In addition to the Clean Water Fund, Congress needs to follow through with the promises made in the 1987 Water Quality Amendments and fully fund wastewater treatment seed money in the State Revolving Ban Fund. The 1987 Water Quality Act authorized $18 billion for wastewater treatment needs through construction grants and the State Revolving Ban fund. Appropriations remain $1.9 billion below that figure while construction costs have risen. If the Federal Government sets standards for clean water, it must play a role in helping local governments meet federally mandated wastewater treatment requirements. Full funding of State Revolving Funds is essential to meet the wastewater treatment needs of our country. In order for small communities to participate in any grant or loan program, they must have a simple and streamlined application process. Many times small communities lack the sophistication needed to participate in confusing and technical Federal assistance programs. Many of the administrative burdens encourage increased facility costs and discourage participation by small communities. NATaT strongly supports the simplification of these programs so more communities can take advantage of them.