Overview Training - Clean Water Act And Related Rules And Programs

Overview of Clean Water Act 

Click link above to download presentation slides.

Overview of the Clean Water Act and underlying programs. Clean Water Act; CWA; wastewater; NPDES; pretreatment permit; water quality standards; permit limits; effluent guidelines; effluent standards; waters of the US, water quality criteria, SPCC rule

Reducing Zinc In Stormwater. What Are Possible Sources Of Zinc In Storm Water?

Many facilities required to monitor metal concentrations under their industrial stormwater permit have found high levels of zinc in their stormwater discharges.

Work conducted by the State of Washington found the major sources of zinc were galvanized materials, particularly on roof surfaces, as well as motor oil and hydraulic fluid accumulated on parking areas, loading docks, and paved grounds. Tire dust in areas with high volumes of trucks and forklifts may also be an important source. Zinc concentrations in runoff from roofs with galvanized ductwork were about 10-fold greater than found from the roofs without galvanized materials.

Both motor oil and hydraulic fluid contain high concentrations of zinc, about 0.1% by weight.

As an example, as little as ½ cup of motor oil spilled on a small paved parking lot could result in 250 µg/L of zinc in runoff during a small rain event.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training. For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

EPA Proposes Revision To Discharge Requirements For Construction and Development Sources

Pursuant to a settlement agreement to resolve litigation, US EPA is proposing changes to the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the Construction and Development point source category. This proposed rule would withdraw the numeric discharge standards, which are currently stayed, and change several of the non-numeric provisions of the existing rule. Comments on the proposed rule are being accepted through May 31, 2013. The revisions to 40 CFR part 450 now being proposed by EPA consist of the following three elements:

1. Addition of a definition of "infeasible" consistent with the preamble to the 2009 final rule and 2012 CGP;
2. Revisions to the effluent limitations reflecting the best practicable control technology currently available (BPT), effluent limitations reflecting the best available technology economically achievable (BAT), effluent limitations reflecting the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT), and the new source performance standards reflecting the best available demonstrated control technology (NSPS) found at 40 CFR 450.21, 450,22, 450.23 and 450.24, respectively; and
3. Withdrawing the numeric turbidity effluent limitation and monitoring requirements found at 40 CFR 450.22(a) and 450.22(b) and reserving these subparts.

Click here for further information on the history of rulemaking for this effluent standard.


Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training. For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Revision To Construction Stormwater Effluent Standards

EPA has announced that it will be considering revisions to selected portions of the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Point Source Category. This action will address revisions to the effluent guidelines and standards for the construction and development point source category 40 CFR 450. The C and D rule was issued on December 1, 2009 and became effective on February 1, 2010. EPA plans to revise several of the non-numeric portions of the rule in response to litigation.


Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting and Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Reissued Kansas KDHE Construction Discharge Permit

The Kansas Department of Health & Environment (KDHE) reissued the Kansas General Permit for Stormwater Runoff Associated with Construction Activities on March 2, 2012 with various modifications. The new permit expires March 1, 2017 and replaces the current general permit for stormwater discharges from construction activities which remained in effect through March 1, 2012. Projects authorized prior to March 2, 2012 may operate under the previous general permit for 18 months, ending September 1, 2013. If these projects are not terminated by September 1, 2013, they must meet the requirements of the new general permit. Coverage continues from the date of authorization until the site is stabilized and the construction stormwater discharge Notice of Termination (NOT) is accepted by KDHE or the permit is revoked/terminated for cause by KDHE.

Owners or operators of any project or combination of projects who engage in construction activities which will disturb one (1) or more acres must have authorization to discharge stormwater under the Stormwater Runoff from Construction Activities General Permit S-MCST-0312-1. Construction activities consist of any activity (e.g. clearing, grubbing, excavating, and grading) which disturb a cumulative total of one or more acres or when the site is a part of a larger common plan of development or sale which will disturb a cumulative total of one or more acres.

Owners or operators of construction activities which disturb less than one acre and which are not part of larger common plan of development or sale, must have authorization to discharge stormwater runoff from construction activities under this NPDES general permit when KDHE notifies the owner or operator that the water quality impact from discharge of stormwater runoff from construction activity warrants consideration because the proposed construction activities constitute a significant pollution potential.

Major modifications in the reissued permit include:

• the addition of EPA’s Construction and Development effluent guideline standard (40 CFR 450),
• procedures for construction activities undertaken to avoid imminent endangerment to the public health or environment in response to a public emergency,
• additional best management practices for steep slopes,
• revision to the Sediment Basin Design Criteria to allow easier alternative basin detention size calculation for areas where large off-site areas drain to the basin or for areas of Western Kansas where the 2-year, 30-minute rain event is less than 1.3 inches, and
• various wording changes to clarify permit requirements.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients in Kansas and nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Revised EPA 2012 Construction General Permit (CGP) Released

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a new general permit for stormwater discharges from construction activities. The 2012 construction general permit (CGP) is required under the Clean Water Act and replaces the existing 2008 CGP, which expired on February 15, 2012. The new permit includes a number of enhanced protections for surface waters, including provisions to protect impaired and sensitive waters. The 2012 CGP updates include requirements intended to limit erosion, minimize pollution sources, provide natural buffers or their equivalent around surface waters, and further restrict discharges to areas impaired by previous pollution discharge.

Many of the permit requirements implement new effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for the construction and development industry that became effective on February 1, 2010, which include pollution control techniques to decrease erosion and sediment pollution.

The permit will be effective in areas where EPA is the permitting authority: Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington, D.C., and most U.S. territories and in Indian country lands.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

EPA Proposed Storm Water Discharge Permit For Construction Sites

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is asking for public comment its draft permit regulating the discharge of stormwater from construction sites. The proposed Construction General Permit (CGP) includes a number of new requirements on owners and operators of construction sites, including new provisions to protect impaired and sensitive waters. The current permit is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2011; however, EPA is proposing to extend the current permit until January 31, 2012 to provide sufficient time to finalize the new permit.

Some of the significant proposed permit modifications include new requirements for:

• Eligibility for emergency-related construction


• Required use of the electronic notice of intent (NOI)process


• Sediment and erosion controls


• Natural buffers or alternative controls


• Soil stabilization


• Pollution prevention


• Site inspections


• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP)


• Permit termination (NOT)

Many of the new permit requirements implement new effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for the construction and development industry that became effective on February 1, 2010. These requirements include a number of erosion and sediment controls and pollution prevention measures that apply to all permitted construction sites.

The permit will be effective in areas where EPA is the permitting authority, including four states (Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New Mexico); Washington, D.C.; most territories; and most Indian country lands. However, in practice, EPA general permits are used by authorized States as a template for revised State general NPDES permits, and therefore, conditions of the EPA permit will likely be reflected in State permits in the future.

The public will have 60 days to comment on the draft permit. EPA anticipates that it will issue the final construction general permit by January 31, 2012.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Draft Ohio Industrial Permit, Stormwater Monitoring and Effect of Hardness on Benchmarks

The proposed stormwater monitoring requirements in the proposed General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (Multi-Sector General Permit, or MSGP) include both effluent monitoring requirements for some facilities and benchmark monitoring requirements for most permitted facilities in Ohio. Consistent with the US EPA MSGP, the OEPA draft permit contains numeric effluent limitations based on Effluent Limitations Guidelines for Sectors A, C, D, E, J and O. [more information on difference between effluent limitations and benchmark concentrations]

The Ohio MSGP requires benchmark monitoring, specific for each industrial sector, for pollutant parameters which US EPA has determined to be of concern by industrial sector. The draft Ohio general permit requires that 19 of the 29 industrial sectors perform benchmark analytical monitoring. The benchmark monitoring requirements are not effluent limitations. Benchmark values represent a level to determine whether a facility’s SWP3 is effective.

The benchmark monitoring is based on a collection of 4 quarterly samples. If the average of the 4 monitoring values for any parameter does not exceed the benchmark value, the permittee has fulfilled their monitoring requirements for that parameter for the permit term. If this average exceeds the benchmark for a parameter, then the permittee will need to review their SWP3 and control measures and modify accordingly. Additional monitoring would be required. The US EPA MSGP’s primary source of benchmark concentrations is derived from EPA’s National Water Quality Criteria. For a majority of the benchmarks, USEPA used the acute aquatic life, fresh water ambient water quality criteria. USEPA believes these acute freshwater values best represent the highest concentrations at which typical fresh water species can survive exposures of pollutants for short durations, such as a storm discharge event.

[read recent comparison of benchmark concentrations to typical industrial sector monitoring data]

Ohio EPA evaluated each benchmark monitoring parameter and followed US EPA’s methodology, but used Ohio Water Quality Criteria when available. As such, some US EPA benchmark values have been changed to be consistent with Ohio Water Quality Criteria. The benchmark values of some metals are dependent on water hardness. For these parameters, permittees will need to determine the hardness of the receiving water to determine the benchmark concentration that applies to their facility. Depending on the condition of the receiving water, benchmark values for heavy metals can vary widely between facilities.

[read of summary of the revised OEPA genernal stormwater discharge permit]

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients in Ohio & nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWP3), Stormwater Monitoring (including determination of the effects of receiving water hardness on benchmark concentrations), and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Numeric Action Levels, Numeric Effluent Limits, and Corrective Action Triggers In California Draft Permit

UPDATE: On July 16, 2012, an updated draft was released. Click here for a summary of the revised draft ICP

On January 28, 2011, the California State Water Resources Control Board proposed a draft industrial stormwater discharge general permit. The draft General Permit amends a number of the existing requirements for permitted facilities and adds some new requirements.

One of the more significant changes to the California General NPDES Permit is the incorporation of quantitative Action Levels and Effluent Limits which could apply to any discharger:


Numeric Action Levels (NALs) are derived from the US EPA Multi-Sector General Permit’s benchmarks, and are used as numeric thresholds for corrective action. Exceedances of an NAL are not a violation of the permit; however, exceedance of specific NAL Corrective Action Triggers requires the facility to enter into Level 1 Corrective Action.

[More information on US EPA benchmarks, and comparison to historic industrial sector monitoring results]


Numeric Effluent Limits (NELs) are could also apply to any facility. Dischargers in Corrective Action Level 3 (see below) are subject to a numeric effluent limitation (NEL) that will be the same value as the applicable pollutant NAL. A daily average exceedance of the NEL is a violation of the General Permit and may subject the discharger to mandatory minimum penalties.

NAL Corrective Action Triggers are defined in the draft general permit as follows:
1. The Daily Average (DA) for any one constituent exceeds the NAL value for two or more storm events of a reporting year, or;
2. The DA for any two constituents exceed the NAL values for any single storm event within a reporting year, or;
3. The concentration for any one constituent exceeds 2.5 times the NAL value for any one individual or allowable combined sample (or is more than one pH unit outside the NAL pH range)

In the event that any of the NAL Corrective Action Triggers are met, the facility will need to complete Level 1 Corrective Actions. The need to do further corrective actions will depend on subsequent monitoring results.


Level 1 - Operational Source Control Corrective ActionsUpon the first occurrence meeting any of the NAL corrective action triggers, the discharger will be required to valuate areas of the facility to identify where additional operational source control BMPs and/or SWPPP implementation measures are necessary to prevent or reduce pollutants in storm water discharges in compliance with BAT/BCT. Based upon the facility evaluation, the facility will certify that the pollutant source(s) have been identified and 1) additional operational source control BMPs and/or SWPPP implementation measures have been included in the SWPPP , 2) no additional operational source control BMPs or SWPPP implementation measures are required , or 3) pollutant source(s) causing the exceedance are not related to the facility’s industrial activities. A Level 1 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report will need to be prepared and submitted.
Level 2 Structural and/or Treatment Corrective ActionsIf in any subsequent reporting year the sampling results meet an NAL corrective action trigger, the discharger is require to take addition action. If the NAL corrective action trigger is for a constituent that had not been included in a previous Level 1 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report, the discharger go through Level 1 Corrective Actions.
If the NAL corrective action trigger is for one or more of the constituents previously addressed in a Level 1 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report, the discharger would need to evaluate and select additional structural source control BMPs and/or treatment BMPs with the goal of achieving the applicable NAL value(s) in future discharges. A Level 2 NAL Exceedance Evaluation Report will need to be prepared and submitted and more frequent monitoring is required.
Level 3 Imposition of Numeric Effluent LimitsIf in any subsequent reporting year the sampling results meet an NAL corrective action trigger for the same constituents subject to the Level 2 corrective actions, the discharger shall the applicable NAL(s) will become an NEL(s), and starting October 1 of the following compliance year, the discharger will be required to sample every qualifying storm event.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.comorCaltha LLP Website

Correction Rule for Construction & Development Effluent Limitations Guidelines

US EPA has announced that it is taking action will address an error that was identified in the Effluent Limitations Guidelines for the Construction & Development (C&D) Point Source Category. The C&D rule was issued on December 1, 2009 and became effective on February 1, 2010. This rule contains a numeric effluent limit for turbidity, based on the application of passive treatment technology.

After the final rule was promulgation, EPA received two petitions for reconsideration of the C&D rule. The petitions pointed out a potential error in the calculation of the numeric limit. Based on EPA's examination of the underlying dataset, EPA has determined that the calculations used to develop the limit were not adequate to support the numeric effluent limit. Consequently, EPA intends to propose a correction rule for public comment and then take final action on a revised limitation.

Caltha LLP provides expert consulting services to public and private sector clients nationwide to address Stormwater Permitting & Regulatory Support, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), Stormwater Monitoring and Stormwater Training.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.comorCaltha LLP Website

Water Quality Standards - Aquatic Toxicology - NPDES Permit Limits

A New Topic Page has been created:

Water Quality Standards - Aquatic Toxicology - NPDES Permit Limits

Discussion of a variety of topics related to State and Federal Water Quality Standards, Ambient Water Quality Criteria, Sediment Criteria, NPDES & Site-specific Discharge Standards, Water Quality Management, Aquatic Toxicology, Aquatic Community Impacts, and Water Quality Assessment

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Numeric Nutrient Water Quality Criteria Requirement for FL

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently announced that the agency is taking actions to develop the required Nutrient Water Quality Criteria within the State of Florida. These actions include EPA issuing a formal determination under the Clean Water Act that “numeric” nutrient water quality criteria are necessary in Florida, and Florida needs to accelerate its efforts to adopt numeric nutrient criteria into state regulations.

EPA believes that water quality degradation from nutrient pollution is a significant issue in Florida. Florida’s 2008 Integrated Water Quality Assessment estimated that at least 1,000 miles of rivers and streams, 350,000 acres of lakes, and 900 square miles of estuaries are impaired by nutrients. The new numeric nutrient water quality standards will help the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its water quality management tools, identify waters impaired because of nutrient pollution, establish total maximum daily loads and Basin Management Action Plans, and derive National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit limits.

EPA expects to propose numeric nutrient standards for lakes and flowing waters within 12 months, and for estuaries and coastal waters within 24 months.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to clients nationwide to address State water quality standards. Caltha provides specialized expertise in biomonitoring, aquatic toxicology and impacts to aquatic communities.

[Click here to request further information on water quality and aquatic community impact assessment]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Biomonitoring Requirements - Amendment to OK Rules

The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) is proposing to modify its rules concerning biomonitoring (whole effluent toxicity, or WET) requirements for wastewater dischargers. Under the proposed rules, a sublethal test failure (failure to demonstrate growth or reproduction) will be handled the same as a lethal test failure (death to the test organisms). This change is required based on changes in US EPA requirements and has already been promulgated into Oklahoma’s Water Quality Standards.

The proposed rule modifications also refine when a facility may request a biomonitoring organism change from Daphnia pulex or Ceriodaphnia dubia to Daphnia magna. Finally, the proposed rule modifications would also require monthly monitoring for phosphorus and/or nitrogen if a facility is discharging to a nutrient limited watershed as designated by Oklahoma’s Water Quality Standards.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to clients nationwide to address State water quality standards. Caltha provides specialized expertise in biomonitoring, aquatic toxicology and impacts to aquatic communities.

[Click here to request further information on aquatic toxicology and aquatic community impact assessment]

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Stormwater Effluent Limits For Industrial - MS4; Are These Next?

US EPA has recently proposed effluent limits for stormwater discharges from larger construction sites. [Read more about Construction Stormwater Discharge Limits]. This has prompted many industrial and municipal stormwater permitees to speculate on whether or not similar effluent limits will be proposed under Multi-sector General Permits (MSGP) or MS4 permits.

The simple answer is that almost anything is possible.

However, the establishment of construction site effluent limits has some important differences that may not allow easy transfer of the same effluent limits to industrial or MS4 permits.

1. Effluent limits are based on a specific stormwater treatment method that is added to the stormwater treatment pond requirements for smaller sites. Without the requirement to install a pond, the additional treatment may not be economically-feasible. Unless specific structural BMPs, like ponds, are required for industrial or MS4 dischargers, it would be difficult to translate the construction site effluent limits. Because of the nature of industrial and MS4 discharges, requiring treatment ponds would be difficult.


2. In general, the variety of activities and stormwater handling practices associated with industrial and MS4 discharges will be significantly broader compared to construction sites. Therefore, again, translating the proposed effluent limits to industrial and MS4 dischargers would be difficult.

Given these factors, it may be difficult to demonstrate that similar Best Available Technology used to calculate effluent limits for construction site discharges could be equally applied to other types of discharges.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support in permitting and compliance with State and Federal stormwater permits. To request a quote of services on-line, go to Caltha Stormwater Quote Page.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPA Proposed Stormwater Eflluent Limits - Comparison To Benchmark Concentration

In December 2008, US EPA published proposed effluent limits for stormwater discharges from construction sites. [Read more about proposed limits] The proposed rules included a numeric effluent limit of 90 NTU. NTUs are a standard measurement of turbidity in water. Turbidity is a measurement of suspended material in the water.

Benchmark values and previous stormwater effluent limits have always been expressed as Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Turbidity is related to TSS, however the relationship between turbidity and TSS is not always direct, and will be affected by a number of different factors.

Stormwater benchmark concentrations for TSS usually range from 100 to 250 mg/L. Using a few typical conversions between NTU and TSS, it is predicted that an effluent limit of 90 NTU will be roughly equivalent to 45 to 65 mg/L expressed as TSS. Therefore, it is projected that the proposed stormwater effluent limit is about one-half the lowest current benchmark concentration for TSS.

Caltha LLP provides expert technical support to dischargers subject to State and EPA stormwater discharge permit, including permitting, SWPPP training, stormwater monitoring, site inspections, and overall compliance program development.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Stormwater Effluent Limits On Construction Site Discharges

On November 28, 2008, US EPA published its proposed revision to the federal requirements on stormwater discharges from construction sites. The key departure in the current proposal from existing requirements is the establishment of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and numeric effluent limit guidelines (ELG) that will apply to construction sites.

[Read more about the difference between "effluent limit" and "stormwater benchmarks]

[Read more about typical concentrations in stormwater compared to limits]

In June 2008, US EPA published its final general stormwater discharge permit for construction sites. US EPA’s intent is to issue a revised general permit once these new effluent limits are promulgated.

The current proposed rule addresses controls based on size of the construction site:

1. Less than 10 acres. Controls are similar to current approaches.
2. Greater than 10 acres. Sites greater than 10 acres will need to install temporary sediment basins meeting specific design criteria.
3. Greater than 30 acres. For large sites, discharges will need to monitor stormwater discharges and must meet a turbidity effluent limit of 13 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). The effluent limit of 13 NTU is based on the determination that the Best Available Technology (BAT) has been demonstrated to meet this limit. In this case, the BAT is active treatment on-site using injection of polymer into the stormwater to improve precipitation of smaller particles.
   

Does this mean that all large construction sites will need to install active stormwater treatment systems? Not necessarily. Large sites subject to the effluent limit of 13 NTU will need to meet that limit. Sediment basins alone may not be capable of meeting this limit, and if so active treatment, including enhanced precipitation using chemical addition, may be required.

Once the US EPA finalizes the effluent limits for large construction sites, State general permits will likely include these permit limits as they are reissued. US EPA is accepting comments on the proposed Rule through February 26, 2009.


Caltha LLP assists dischargers as they evaluate and address regulatory obligations under State and Federal stormwater permits.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website