Portsmouth sewage waiver is queried

Local activists and environmentalists are lobbying the state office of the US Environmental Protection Agency to reject a waiver that would allow Portsmouth to remain the only city in New Hampshire that treats its sewage at the lowest level possible under federal law.

Portsmouth, one of the few municipalities in the country exempt from treating its sewage with a more advanced system before it is discharged, is seeking to renew a rarely issued waiver to allow the practice to continue.

City officials said they have been making millions of dollars worth of improvements to the sewer systems in an effort to enhance the health of the Piscataqua River.

But many locals want the city to comply with the original requirements of the 1972 Clean Water Act, which requires a second level of treatment to remove more of the pollutants.

''It's embarrassing," said local activist Fred Short, a research professor in the Department of Natural Resources at the University of New Hampshire, who has been studying the Great Bay Estuary, which includes the Piscataqua, for 22 years. ''We're supposed to be promoting tourism and presenting our best face."

Short and other activists are lobbying the state's EPA to reject the city's application to renew the waiver, which was originally granted in 1985. An exemption to treating water at the secondary level may be granted if a receiving body of water is substantial enough to accept and process waste water that has only been treated at the primary level, explained Damien Houlihan, a permit engineer with the EPA. Houlihan said there are no more than 20 such waivers around the country.

The EPA wrapped up public hearings on the issue in mid-June. Houlihan said it will be months before a decision is made.

According to Peter Rice, the city's engineer for water and sewer, the sewage treatment facility on Peirce Island treats raw sewage to an enhanced primary level. Customarily, he said, primary treatment removes 30 percent of the solid particles found in sewage and 30 percent of the particles that require oxygen to decompose and therefore take oxygen from the river or other receiving body of water. In Portsmouth's situation, however, Rice said more than 50 percent of these particles are removed and 70 percent of the solids are broken down.

No one is disputing that the river is polluted and that nitrogen levels are high. But city officials said it's not all Portsmouth's fault. Rice said seven other facilities along the estuary, including treatment plants in Exeter, Dover, and Newmarket, are contributing to the problem.

''There are problems in the river," said Rice. ''Are they from the treatment plant? We don't think so." He said one major problem is bacteria, which he says is not from the city's facility.

Tom Irwin, a staff attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation in New Hampshire, said ''We believe the evidence is strong that the Piscataqua River itself is under stress. This waiver should not be issued. It's beyond me why the EPA has allowed this waiver to go on as long as it has." Irwin's group has appealed to the EPA to reject the waiver.

Short is concerned that discharges into the bay will have a drastic effect on the ecosystem. ''Half the time, the nutrients are coming out of the Portsmouth plant and flowing up the river," he said, explaining that the Piscataqua is a tidal river that flows toward the ocean half the time and upstream into Great Bay the other half. ''It's essentially sloshing back and forth."

This means, Short said, that ''there is no classic downstream here," which would typically flush the water directly away from the plant and into the ocean. He also noted that the other plants that discharge into the Piscataqua use a secondary treatment.

Rice said the nutrients mentioned by Short would not be eliminated through secondary treatment at the Portsmouth plant, and that the mercury, dioxins, PCBs, and bacteria levels in the river would largely be unaffected by such treatment. In addition, Rice said it would cost the city $30 million to $40 million to upgrade.

Rice said since 1997 the city has been working on a $40 million upgrade to the sewer and water system. Currently, the city dumps an average of 4.8 million gallons of treated sewage into the river each day. In the early 1980s, Rice said, there were 14 pipes that discharged untreated sewage directly into the river. There is currently no untreated sewage being directed into the river, except overflow during heavy storms. ''The city prides itself on being environmentally sound and sustainable," said Rice, adding that the city is working with limited resources while still doing more than is required under the Clean Water Act waiver. ''I don't think anyone would disagree with the laudable goals of these environmental groups."