As

expected, Monday night's Peachtree City Water and

Sewerage Authority meeting featured an update on the

ongoing watershed assessment along with a detailed

explanation of the permitting process for increasing the

system's capacity.

WASA

general manager Larry Turner reiterated his previous

statements that his department has no position one way or

the other on annexation or any similar issues, but he

must be prepared for whatever happens.

"There

is a misconception about how the water and sewer system

can dictate growth issues," he said. "We're no

different from Georgia Power - we're here to serve. And

when there is a demand, we must provide service."

Turner also

showed the board a videotape of a recent television news

report that pointed out the frequency of spills during

the recent winter storms and accompanying power outages.

According

to the WSB-TV story, a total of 31 spills and more than

600,000 gallons in the metro Atlanta area were attributed

to the weather of the past three weeks, and a spokesman

for the state's Environmental Protection Division was

quoted as saying that total was not all that harmful.

Turner said

he showed this to let the board see what his office sees

on a daily basis. A small spill into Lake Peachtree

within the last two weeks was the result of a power

failure at a pump station.

"This

is not a local problem or a state problem," said

Turner. "This is a national problem."

As for

spills that occurred during 1999, Turner reported that he

has received no comment so far from the EPD about its

consent order and the city's response.

While no

actual permit application has been made, the authority

has been investigating what would be necessary to get

approval for increased capacity and just how much would

eventually be needed. Turner said a few weeks ago that no

matter the outcome of the recent annexation debate,

during which the City Council voted to continue its

annexation moratorium, the sewer system would need to be

increased somewhat.

An

application is now being processed that would renew the

city's current permit, as is required every five years.

The current allotment is 4.9 million gallons per day, and

the system's average flow is about 3.6 mgd.

A study of

the city's possible future needs yielded the following

estimates of how the flow could rise:

� Current requested industrial use

- 0.4 mgd.

� Future industrial growth - 0.4

mgd.

� Future commercial growth - 0.1

mgd.

� Residential buildout - 0.5 mgd.

� Replacement of existing septic tanks

- 0.3 mgd.

� West Village use - 0.5 mgd.

That adds

up to 5.8 mgd, including the West Village, whose

annexation was most recently discussed. If all of those

categories are considered at once, Turner said, the

requested figure sent to EPD would be rounded up to six

mgd for planning purposes.

Turner

stressed that the system cannot be extended outside the

current service area without City Council approval. As

for annexation, "I think they've [council] been very

strong in their stance," Turner said, citing the

most recent vote.

Turner also

pointed out that the septic tank total takes into account

every single tank in the city, and many of those may not

need to be replaced for a long time.

But when

deciding what the flow amount should eventually be for a

permit application, "a lot of money is

involved," Turner said. If a request is sent in and

then the city decides in the future to go back and ask

for more, the extra flow capacity may not be there.

Turner will

send a letter to the City Council asking for some

direction. His current recommendation is not to consider

the proposed West Village in future plans, but he

repeated that it might be difficult to change that later.

The process

has taken some two years to get to where it is now, which

is the midst of the watershed assessment. After that is

completed, there will be public hearings to consider the

findings.

If any

application is made for expansion, the completion of the

process is probably three years away, Turner said.

As for the

watershed assessment itself, Turner addressed recent

public statements which he said insinuated that the

project was not being done correctly. He named several of

the key people involved in the study, pointing out their

credentials and qualifications to perform the work as

mandated by the state.

Turner said

that the public's accessibility to the details of the

watershed assessment had also been called into question.

In response to that, he laid out the timetable the

project has followed over the past year:

l At the May 4, 1999 regular WASA

meeting, the watershed assessment was discussed and

Turner pointed out the need for a watershed advisory

group.

l The advisory group met Sept. 1 in a

public meeting that was posted outside City Hall, which

is the city's normal procedure, Turner said.

l The Nov. 1 regular WASA meeting

included an update on watershed assessment.

l WASA officials met Jan. 5 with EPD

representatives, who Turner said were pleased and

satisfied with the city's progress.

l Another advisory group meeting was

held Jan. 11, and that meeting was also posted.

Turner

showed the board a number of documents from the federal

Environmental Protection Agency and other groups that say

the methods being used in the watershed assessment are

"clearly accepted."

Asked by

the board about the possible time frame for the next step

in the process, after the watershed assessment is

completed, Turner said he hopes to go to the EPD by this

fall, but that part could take more than a year.