mr. chairman , i rise in support of the amendment . 
the amendment offered by my colleague from michigan would prohibit the environmental protection agency from spending any of the funds provided by this bill to finalize any new policy related to sewage blending . 
mr. chairman , when epa proposed to issue a new policy document on sewage blending , i was concerned that it could cause an increase in the frequency of blending by those communities that current use the practice , and an increase in the number of communities that use the practice . 
that is why i thought the policy was flawed . 
i do not believe that there currently is enough information available to epa and state permit writers to know that any increase in the use of blending is protective of human health and the environment . 
that is why i believe that issuing a policy that could increase the use of blending is wrong . 
sewage blending is the practice of taking partially treated wastewater , mixing it with fully treated wastewater , and then relying on the dilution to meet discharge limits . 
i do not believe that sewage blending is what was intended when the secondary treatment requirements for publicly owned treatment works were put in place by congress in 1972 . 
congress intended that all domestic sewage receive a minimum of secondary treatment , and greater levels of treatment where water quality demanded it . 
since sewage blending is a process that is used only during periods of high flows , then the question presents itself as to whether blending complies with the secondary treatment requirements . 
even the proponents of blending acknowledge that blending is used only in limited high flow circumstances -- at all other times the sewage otherwise receives full secondary treatment the current , acknowledged limitations on the use of blending lead to the question -- if blending constitutes secondary treatment , then why is it not acceptable all the time , or if it does not constitute secondary treatment , why is it allowed at all ? 
recently , the epa assistant administrator for water acknowledged , `` the heart and soul of the clean water act , is that dilution is not the solution to pollution , that you need to treat the sewage . 
blending is n't the solution . 
it 's a short-term fix . 
[ epa ] want [ s ] to make sure that it only occurs in the very limited , narrow circumstances and that it meets all requirements in their clean water act permit , and that water quality standards downstream are also maintained. '' mr. chairman , increasing the use of blending is not an acceptable long-term solution to meeting secondary treatment requirements . 
i support the amendment to bring the expanded use of blending policy to a halt . 
