NPDES Permits, Compliance and SSOs - Central States Water ...

Regulations/Policies Affecting SSOs1. Subtitle C: part 306.304 & 306.3052. 40 CFR 133: Definition of SecondaryTreatment3. 40 CFR 122.41(e): Proper Operation &Maintenance4. USEPA’s s Activitiesa. SSO Task Forceb. Wet Weather Flow Policy of 2002c. Present FR Request for Information2

Proper Operation & MaintenanceRequirements• Treatment Systems• Collection Systems5

USEPA’s s Wet Weather Flow Policyof 2002 prioritized USEPA’s s (andstates) workload for permit andcompliance activities. Dischargesfrom CAFOs, stormwaterrequirements for construction siteactivities and industrial sites, CSOdischarges and LTCP and SSOs.6

Current Compliance Activities2008 – 22 VNs2009 – 71 VNs2010 – 28 VNssent due to SSOs7

VN Actions• Immediate Compliance• Possible Cease and Desist Order ifDefinitely correctable• Possible Compliance CommitmentAgreementa. Previous sewer rehabilitation workb. Financial documentation8

Conditions in NPDES Permits1. I/I Study Requirements• I/I Special Condition General• I/I Special Condition Detailing Efforts and EvaluationProcess2. Overflow Prohibition• Prohibits Specific Chronic Overflow Points and RequiresReporting• Standard Condition 12(e) Requires Reporting of AnyOverflow9

Previous Permits Conditions3. CMOM – Capacity, Management, Operationand Maintenance• Requires Development and Implementation of aCapacity Management, Operations and ManagementPlan4.Authorized Discharges from Excess FlowTreatment Facilities With Effluent Limitations ofBlended or Non-Blended Flows10

The CMOM plan shall include the followingelements (as a minimum):a. Measure and Activities:a.1. A complete map of the collection system;2. Schedules, checklists, and mechanisms to ensurethat preventative maintenance is performed onequipment;3. An assessment of the capacity of the collection andtreatment system at critical junctions andimmediately upstream of locations where overflowsand backups occur or are likely to occur; and4. Identification and prioritization of structuraldeficiencies in the system.11

. Design and Performance Provisions:b.c.1. Monitor the effectiveness of CMOM;2. Upgrade the elements of the CMOM plan asnecessary; and,3. Maintain a summary of CMOM activities.4. Upgrade collection system as necessary.c. Overflow Response Plan:d.e.1. Know where overflows and backups occur; and,2. Respond to each overflow or backup to determineadditional actions such as clean up.d. System Evaluation Plan.e. Reporting and Monitoring Requirements.12

Other Requirements Considered• Event Report• Monthly and Annual Summaries• Notification of Local Health Departmentsand/or General Public13

History• 1970s – 1980s USEPA and IEPA AwardedGrant Money for Excess Flow Facilities– Required I/I Analysis, removal of cost-effective I/I, treatment of remaining flows.• Define Discharge Requirements for ExcessFlow Requirements– 35 IAC306..305 and 40 CFR 133• 1995 USEPA Charters Urban Wet WeatherFlow Federal Advisory Committee (FAC)14

History (cont.)• October 20, 1999 FAC CompletedFramework to Address SSOs• Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Was NeverFormally Released• November 7, 2003 EPA Seeks Commentson Draft Policy15

Thursday, December 22, 2005Proposed Rules• Result of National Resource DefenseCouncil (NRDC)• National Association of Clean WaterAgencies (NACWA) Joint Proposal• Clarification That Bypass Provisions WouldApply to Wet Weather Diversions atPOTWs16

EPA Anticipates Elimination ofPeak Wet Weather Diversions1. Storage Enhancement2. Treatment Capacity Increases3. Source Reduction17

Applicability of the BypassRegulation to Blending(40 CFR 122.41(m))• Interprets Wet Weather flow diversions aroundsecondary treatment and recombined with treatedeffluent• Interprets “no feasible alternatives” in 40 CFR122.41(m)(4)(i)(B)• Does not apply to:– Discharges prior to the headworks (off site diversions)– Dry Weather Diversions– Diversions around primary or tertiary treatment– Diverted flow that is not recombined with flow fromsecondary treatment18

Applicability of the BypassRegulation to Blending(40 CFR 122.41(m))• Promotes measures to provide treatmentat peak wet weather flow• Promotes reporting and public notificationof wet weather diversion• Ensures full utilization of secondarytreatment capacity at Design MaximumFlow19

Applicability of the BypassRegulation to Blending(40 CFR 122.41(m))• Reduces infiltration and inflow (I/I)• Maximizes collection system storage• Provides for off-line storage• Provides for sufficient secondarytreatment20

No Feasible Alternatives• Analysis Provided for Every RenewalApplication or New Bypass Facility– Documents Design Maximum Treatment Capacityand Assesses Treatment Capacity Increases– Estimates frequency, duration and volume ofdiversions and evaluates reduction alternatives– Estimates future diversions and evaluatesalternatives– Assesses existing storage availability or expansion21

No Feasible Alternatives• Assesses reduction alternatives• Evaluates technology augmentation• Evaluates I/I reduction• Evaluates reductions through CMOMenhancements• Evaluates funding capabilities for alternatives• Monitoring protocol for recombined flow• Projects effluent improvements related toutility improvements22

IEPA Requirements• Evaluate the utility analysis and requireimplementation of treatment to the greatestpossible wet weather flow accounting the fullrange of economic, environmental, publichealth and engineering considerations• Approve or deny wet weather diversionsbased upon feasible and affordablealternatives• Permit provisions recognizing approveddiversions and conditions such diversions23

IEPA Requirements• Require notice of peak wet weather diversion eventswithin 24 hours of each event and the volume of theevent 48 hours after cessation• Require monitoring on a daily basis• Explain in the Fact Sheet calculations of peak flows,reasons allowing peak flows and any permit provisions ofpeak flow• Include permit provisions for pretreatment programrevision to account for wet weather flow/divert industrialflows around bypasses• Rigorously review each renewal request for continuedwet weather diversion approval. 24

Draft Guidance on Preparing aUtility Analysis• July 2009• Explains in detail nine elements of ananalysis• Provides nine page checklist25

June 1, 2010 Seeking Input onCurrent Regulatory Framework1. Should EPA propose to clarify its standard permitconditions for SSO reporting, recordkeeping andpublic notification?2. Should EPA propose to develop a standard permitcondition with requirements for capacity,management, operations and maintenanceprograms based on asset managementprinciples?3. Should EPA propose to require permit coveragefor municipal satellite collection systems?26

June 1, 2010 Seeking Input onCurrent Regulatory Framework4. What is the appropriate role of NPDESpermits in addressing unauthorized SSOsthat are caused by exceptionalcircumstances?5. How should EPA address peak flows atPOTW treatment plants?6. What are the costs and benefits of CMOMprograms and asset management ofsanitary sewers?7. Are there other considerations?7.27

WEB SITESGuide for Evaluating Capacity, ManagementOperation, and Maintenance (CMOM) Programs atSanitary Sewer Collection Systemshttp://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/cmom_guide_for_collection_systems.pdfSanitary Sewer Overflowshttp://cfpub/epa/gov/npdes/home.cfm?program_id=428

WEB SITESJune 1, 2010 Request for Inputhttp://edocket/access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-13098.htm2009 Utilities Analysishttp://www/epa/gov/npdes/sanitaryseweroverflows2005 Proposed Rulehttp://www/epa/gov/npdes/wetweather/Rick Pinneo @ 217/782-0610rick.pinneo@illinois.gov29