Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Municipal Concerns and an Update on Whole Effluent Toxicity Yvonne Baker, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Senior LA Conference on Water, Sewerage, and Industrial.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Municipal Concerns and an Update on Whole Effluent Toxicity Yvonne Baker, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Senior LA Conference on Water, Sewerage, and Industrial."— Presentation transcript:

1 Municipal Concerns and an Update on Whole Effluent Toxicity Yvonne Baker, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Senior LA Conference on Water, Sewerage, and Industrial Wastes, Inc. March 15, 2012

2 Kimberly Corts LDEQ/Water Permits Division MS4s in Louisiana: Updates

3 How is Storm Water Regulated Under the LPDES Program? Phased approach to regulation consistent with federal regulations: –Phase I: Regulated discharges from large and medium MS4s, large construction projects, and industrial activity - §402(p)(2) –Phase II: Regulated discharges from small MS4s and small construction projects - §402(p)(6)

4 MS4 Permits Phase I LPDES permits – individual permits – LAS000XXX Phase II LPDES permits – general permits – LAR04XXXX –Small MS4s were required to apply for coverage under the general permit in 2003

5 List of LA MS4 Permittees Large and Medium MS4s (Individual Permit Coverage): –4 large MS4s are permitted –New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Shreveport, and Jefferson Parish Small MS4s: –Covered under the general permit, LAR –44 MS4s have obtained coverage

6 2010 Census Currently permitted MS4s were required to obtain coverage based on the 2000 census The 2010 census may require more municipalities to obtain coverage and develop a Storm Water Management Plan or may require MS4s to reevaluate their boundaries The urbanized area maps are used as the basis for MS4 requirements, although LDEQ may designate MS4s using other population information

7 2010 TIGER/Line Shapefiles Release Schedule Data Product SupportedGeography ReleasedTIGER/Line Shapefiles Release Dates 2010 Census Redistricting Data (P. L ) State-based Files to Block for the U.S. and Puerto Rico Completed National Summary File of Redistricting Data/Summary File 1 National FilesCompleted Summary File 15-digit ZIP Code Tabulation AreasCompleted Island Areas Summary FileIsland AreasCompleted Urban Area UpdateUrban Areas th Congressional District Summary File113th Congressional Districts2013 Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) FilePublic Use Microdata AreasTo Be Determined

8 MS4 GIS Layer

9 Permitting Challenges TMDLs are being developed/have recently been approved in heavily impacted areas – East Baton Rouge, Livingston, Ascension Parishes and along the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain that include allocations for MS4s EPA intends on proposing a new rule in December, 2012, which could change the requirements for small MS4s – who is considered “regulated”, new construction/redevelopment requirements, etc

10 EPA’s 2002 Guidance Memorandum Regarding Wasteload Allocations for Stormwater Sources “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)- regulated stormwater discharges must be addressed by the wasteload allocation (WLA) component of a TMDL.” “NPDES-regulated stormwater discharges may not be addressed by the load allocation (LA) component of a TMDL.” “Stormwater discharges from sources not currently subject to NPDES regulation may be addressed by the load allocation component of a TMDL.”

11 2010 Update to the 2002 EPA Memorandum Numeric WQBELs can clarify permit requirement and improve accountability and enforceability, based on the discretion of the permitting authority WLAs for stormwater sources should be disaggregated in order to establish clear, effective, and enforceable NPDES permit limitations Stormwater limitations may be established through the use of surrogate parameters-ex. flow volume vs. impervious cover Permitting authorities should consider designating stormwater sources not currently regulated by NPDES permits as candidates for regulation

12 LDEQ Interim Solution Currently developing dissolved oxygen TMDLs: –the critical low flow is 7Q10, stormwater is not present at that time –Include statements indicating that the allocation for all stormwater loading is 0.0 lb/day –Allocate a portion of the nonpoint load to the MS4 based on drainage area ratios –Include statement that the load is not to be interpreted as a permit limit

13 LDEQ Interim Solution LDEQ realizes that this will not be adequate for all cases Future TMDLs –may include dynamic modeling to account for storm events –may be developed for high flow conditions

14 EPA guidance and recommendations are steadily moving towards numeric limitations for MS4s This may be very costly for MS4 permittees to implement EPA is revising stormwater regulations, which may further complicate permitting Bottom Line…

15 Complying with the TMDL Requirements Current TMDLs (Bayou Manchac, Gray’s Creek, drafts for Bayou Lacombe, Tchefuncte, etc.) specify that BMPs are the most appropriate method of addressing the TMDL to reduce the nonpoint source loading as well as eliminate illicit discharges.

16 LAR04 Requires… Documentation is the key….

17 Part IV.G BMPs should be evaluated to determine if programs are adequate to address the TMDL.

18 Monitoring See guidance letter to Ascension Parish MS4: Monitoring does not necessarily refer to laboratory- analyzed samples only Regular visual inspections of outfalls are acceptable! Some storm water samples may be taken to establish overall load coming from the MS4 (BOD, COD, TSS, possibly nutrients) Frequencies and types of monitoring are established by the MS4 permittee

19 What is an outfall? An outfall is the point at which any conveyance of a storm sewer system discharges to surface waters of the state – does not include pipes, tunnels, or ditches that connect two storm sewers. DOTD outfalls are a little different and may include bridges that cross water bodies.

20

21 2012 Reissuance LAR04 expires 12/4/2012 LDEQ aims to have a draft for PN late summer/early fall and reissue the permit prior to the expiration date Changes in federal regulations ???? Without any final federal rules that imposes additional requirements on MS4s, the changes will be minor

22 Contact Information Kimberly Corts, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Supervisor Debbie Bissett, LDEQ Environmental Scientist

23 Pretreatment 101

24 What is Pretreatment? The reduction of the amount of pollutants, The elimination of pollutants, or The alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to, or in lieu of, discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants into a POTW (publicly owned treatment works)

25 Louisiana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (LPDES) LAC 33:IX.Subpart 2 LPDES applies to all “point sources discharging pollutants” into “waters of the State” Point sources must obtain an LPDES permit from LDEQ LPDES permits issued to POTWs can require the POTW to develop a state- approved Pretreatment Program

26 General Pretreatment Program Requirements Can be found at: LAC 33:IX.Subpart 2.Chapter 61 (General Pretreatment Regulations) 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 403

27 Pretreatment Streamlining Rule The EPA Pretreatment Streamlining Rule revised several provisions of the General Pretreatment Regulations Effective on November 14, 2005 Incorporated into the State of Louisiana’s regulations via publication in the June 2006 Louisiana Register.

28 Applicability of the Pretreatment Regulations Pretreatment regulations are a component of the LPDES program This regulation applies to pollutants from non-domestic sources covered by pretreatment standards which are indirectly discharged into or transported by truck or rail or otherwise introduced into POTWs

29 Terminology Indirect Discharge: –The introduction of pollutants into a POTW from any non-domestic source POTW or “Publicly Owned Treatment Works”: –Any device or system used in the treatment (including recycling and reclamation) of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature which is owned by the state, or a municipality, or a parish. This definition includes sewers, pipes, or other conveyances, only if they convey wastewater to a POTW providing treatment

30 Objectives of the Pretreatment Program To prevent the introduction of pollutants into POTWs which will: –interfere, –pass through, and/or –be incompatible. To improve opportunities to recycle and reclaim wastewaters and sludges (High quality biosolids for Beneficial Use and/or Land Application). To protect POTW workers.

31 Corrosion of Collection System and/or Treatment Plant Explosions Interference with Wastewater Treatment Facility Limitations on Sludge Disposal Options and/or Greater Expense Injury to Workers from Hazardous Fumes Pass-Through of Toxics into Surface Waters

32

33

34

35 Tequila Floods Louisville Sewer February 11, 2003: More than 1,000 gallons of tequila spilled into the sewer system after a worker tried to unload it from a truck into an already full storage tank at the Brown- Forman Distillery. The tequila overflowed at a rate of 100 gallons per minute, resulting in 1,500 to 1,800 gallons entering the city sewer system. Fire and sewer officials were called because of the flammability of the 80-proof liquor, he said. Water was used to dilute the spilled alcohol.

36 Who Must Develop a Program? POTWs with: –combined design flow > 5 MGD, and –receiving flow from CIUs, and/or –receiving pollutants which pass through or interfere. Approval Authority (LDEQ) may require program be developed, regardless. LDEQ may assume responsibility for regulating IUs that discharge to a POTW.

37 The Basic Connection EPA - Approval Authority - Control Authority State POTW IU - Industrial User in approved program

38 Federal & State Requirements Identify and locate IUs subject to pretreatment program requirements  [40 CFR '403.8(f)(2)(i)] and/or [LAC 33.IX.Subpart 2.Chapter F.2.a]

39 Industrial User: A source of indirect discharge. [LAC 33:IX.6105 and/or 40 CFR §403.3(h)] Indirect Discharge is -- The introduction of pollutants into a POTW from any non- domestic source regulated under section 307(b), (c), or (d) of the CWA. [LAC 33:IX.6105 and/or 40 CFR §403.3(g)]

40

41 Classifying Industrial Users Significant Industrial User (SIU) –First Type: Categorical Industrial User (CIUs): Industrial Users subject to categorical pretreatment standards under 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N (LAC 33:IX.4903)

42 Categorical Standards National, uniform, technology-based standards for “direct” dischargers and “indirect” dischargers Effluent limitations guidelines for direct dischargers; Pretreatment Standards for indirect dischargers Specific industrial categories Specific pollutants Pretreatment Standards Protect POTW 40 CFR Parts

43 53 Categorical Industry Sectors Industry Category40 CFR Relevant SIC code(s) -‘87 SIC Manual Dairy products processing , 2022, 2023, 2024, 2026 Grain mills manufacturing , 2043, 2044, 2045, 2046, 2047 Fruits / vegetable processing , 2034, 2035, 2037 Canned / preserved seafood , 2092 Sugar processing , 2062, 2063 Textile mills , 2221, 2231, 2241, 2251, 2252, 2253, 2254, 2257, 2258, 2259, 2261, 2262, 2269 Cement manufacturing Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations , 0213, 0214 Electroplating , 3672 Organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers , 2823, 2824, 2865, 2869

44 Categoricals & Possible SIC code Correlations (cont.) Inorganic chemicals , 2813, 2816, 2819 Soaps & detergents manufacturing Fertilizer manufacturing , 2874, 2875 Petroleum refining Iron & steel manufacturing , 3315, 3316, 3317, 3479 Nonferrous metals manufacturing , 3331, 3334, 3339, 3341 Phosphate manufacturing , 2874 Steam electric power generation Ferroalloy manufacturing

45 Categoricals & Possible SIC code Correlations (cont.) Glass manufacturing , 3221, 3296 Asbestos manufacturing , 3292 Rubber manufacturing Timber products processing , 2493 Pulp, paper & paperboard , 2621, 2631 Meat products , 2013, 2077 Metal finishing433Leather tanning / finishing Coal mining , 1222, 1231, 1241

46 Categoricals & Possible SIC code Correlations (cont.) Oil & gas extraction Mineral mining & processing , 1423, 1429, 1442, 1446, 1455, 1459, 1474, 1475, 1479, 1499 Pharmaceutical manufacturing , 2834 Ore mining & dressing , 1021, 1031, 1041, 1044, 1061, 1094, 1099 Transportation equipment cleaning , 4499, 4741, 7699 Paving & roofing materials , 2952, 3996 Waste combustors (commercial incinerators combusting hazardous waste) , 2819, 2869, 3241, 1422, 1429, 1459, 9999 Landfills Paint formulating

47 Categoricals & Possible SIC code Correlations (cont.) Ink formulating Gum and wood chemicals Pesticide chemicals manufacturing, formulation and packaging Explosives Carbon black manufacturing Photographic , 7335, 7384, 7819 Hospital , 8063, 8069 Battery manufacturing , 3692 Plastic molding and forming , 3082, 3083, 3084, 3085, 3086, 3087

48 Categoricals & Possible SIC code Correlations (cont.) Metal molding and casting (foundries) , 3322, 3324, 3325, 3365, 3366, 3369 Coil coating , 3492, 3411 Porcelain enameling , 3631, 3632, 3633, 3639, 3469, 3479 Aluminum forming , 3354, 3355, 3357, 3363 Copper forming , 3357, 3463 Electrical and electronic components , 3674, 3679 Nonferrous metals forming and metal powders ,3357, 3363, 3497

49 Industrial Categories: Subparts Manufacturing processes employed Raw materials used Types of items produced Characteristics of typical wastes generated

50 Elements of a Categorical Subpart Applicability Specialized definitions Effluent limitations and standards, i.e., –BPT, BAT, BCT, PSES, NSPS, and PSNS –YOU only have to be concerned with – PSES & PSNS

51 Categoricals: New vs. Existing Source (PSNS/PSES) New Source (definition found at LAC 33.IX.6105) –Any building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or may be a discharge of pollutants, the construction of which commenced after the publication of proposed pretreatment standards. * Construction on a site at which an existing source is located results in a modification rather than a new source if the construction does not create a new building, structure, facility or installation…but otherwise alters, replaces, or adds to existing process or production equipment.

52 Industrial Categories Without PSES/PSNS CFR 422 Phosphate Mfg CFR 432 Meat & Poultry Products CFR 434 Coal Mining CFR 436 Mineral Mining & Processing CFR 438 Metal Products & Machinery CFR 440 Ore Mining & Dressing CFR 445 Landfills CFR 454 Gum & Wood Chemical Mfg CFR 457 Explosives Mfg CFR 459 Photographic Processing CFR 460 Hospital

53 Most Common Industrial Categories Containing Pretreatment Standards Metal Finishing, 40 CFR Part 433: –Applicable to plants which perform any of the following six metal finishing operations on any basis material: electroplating, electroless plating, anodizing, coating (chromating, phosphating, and coloring) –If any of these 6 operations are present, then this part also applies to discharges from 40 types of ancillary operations such as cleaning, machining, heat treating, paint stripping, hot dip coating, etc.

54 Most Common Industrial Categories Continued Transportation Equipment Cleaning, 40 CFR Part 442: –Applies to discharges resulting from cleaning the interior of tanks used to transport chemical, petroleum, or food grade cargos. –This part does not apply to facilities that clean only the exteriors of transportation equipment. –Facilities that clean tank interiors solely for the purposes of repair and maintenance are not regulated by this Part.

55 40 CFR Part 442 Continued Subparts: –Subpart A: Tank Trucks and Intermodal Tank Containers Transporting Chemical and Petroleum Cargos –Subpart B: Rail Tank Cars Transporting Chemical and Petroleum Cargos –Subpart C: Tank Barges and Ocean/Sea Tankers Transporting Chemical and Petroleum Cargos –Subpart D: Tanks Transporting Food Grade Cargos

56 Most Common Industrial Categories Continued Centralized Waste Treatment, 40 CFR Part 437: –A centralized waste treatment (CWT) facility means any facility that treats (for disposal, recycling, or recover of material) any hazardous or non-hazardous industrial wastes, industrial wastewater, and/or used material received from offsite. –CWT wastewater sources may include, but are not limited to: liquid waste receipts, used oil emulsion-breaking wastewater, equipment washes, contaminated stormwater, etc.

57 40 CFR Part 437 Continued Subparts: –Subpart A – Metals Treatment and Recovery –Subpart B – Oils Treatment and Recovery –Subpart C – Organics Treatment and Recovery –Subpart D – Multiple Wastestreams

58 Types of Significant Industrial Users Continued Any other industrial user that: –discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the POTW (excluding sanitary, noncontact cooling, and boiler blowdown wastewater); –contributes a process wastestream which makes up five percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the POTW treatment plant; or

59 Significant Industrial Users Definition Continued is designated as such by the POTW on the basis that the industrial user has a reasonable potential for adversely affecting the POTW’s operation or for violating any standards or requirement imposed on an industrial user by the POTW. Complete definition can be found at: –LAC 33:IX.6107

60 Local Limits The POTW is required to develop Local Limits for pollutants of concern in the influent or suspected to be present Protect the POTW –Equipment/Processes Protect the receiving waters –LPDES, WQ Standards, WET Improve/Protect sludge disposal options - –Beneficial Reuse Protect POTW personnel – –Toxic Gases, Vapors, Fumes

61 Local Limits Continued EPA has identified 15 pollutants often found in POTW sludge and effluent that it considers potential Pollutants of Concern: ArsenicLeadSelenium CadmiumMercuryZinc ChromiumMolybdenum5-day BOD CopperNickel Total Suspended Solids Cyanide SilverAmmonia

62 Types of Pretreatment Languages Pretreatment Option 1 Language – –General “boilerplate” language that should be in all LPDES permits for POTWs –Used for municipalities that do not have either an approved or required Pretreatment Program Pretreatment Option 2A Language – –For municipal POTWs with Industrial Users on the collection system, with an approved Pretreatment Program Pretreatment Option 3 Language – –Requires the POTW to begin developing a Pretreatment Program

63 Other LDEQ Activities Water Permits Division conducts Pretreatment Audits: –Conducted every 4 – 5 years –Consists of: File Review (permits issued by the Pretreatment Program to IUs, IU sampling laboratory analysis reports, inspections, etc.) Site Visits to IUs – in order to verify that the Pretreatment Program is meeting state requirements

64 Louisiana Pretreatment Programs 15 Programs: AlexandriaLake Charles Bossier City Monroe Crowley New Orleans DeRidderPineville East Baton Rouge Parish Shreveport Jefferson ParishSt. John the Baptist Parish Kenner West Monroe Lafayette

65 Contact Information Kimberly Corts, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Supervisor Melissa Reboul, LDEQ Environmental Scientist

66 WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY

67  Laboratory experiments which measure the adverse effect (growth, reproduction, survival) effluent concentrations may have on standardized test organisms  Federal regulations: 40 CFR (d)(1)(iv) & (v)  State regulations: LAC 33:IX.2707.D.1.e.-f. Biomonitoring is used:  to characterize & measure the aggregate toxicity of an effluent or ambient waters  to measure compliance with whole effluent toxicity limits  as an investigative tool & to measure progress in a toxicity reduction program  as an ambient instream measure of toxicity to identify pollution sources

68 WHO WET TESTS?  All major facilities  Significant minor facilities  Any facility with reasonable potential to cause toxicity If the permit requires WET testing  Report only  Test failure IS NOT A VIOLATION of the permit If the permit contains WET limits  Critical dilution is a permit limit  Test failure IS A VIOLATION of the permit; monitoring frequency increases to monthly until such time the permittee passes for 3 consecutive months

69 PROCESS  Calculate dilution series  Calculated by using the receiving stream 7Q10 flow (cfs) and the facility flow or design capacity (mgd)  critical dilution = 1%-5%quarterly acute biomonitoring  critical dilution >5%quarterly chronic biomonitoring  critical dilution <1%annual acute biomonitoring  Review past 5 years biomonitoring history (if any)  Perform Reasonable Potential Analysis  Statistical analysis which measures variability in the permittee’s biomonitoring results over the previous 5 years.  If there is enough variability in the results, a WET limit may be incorporated into the reissued LPDES permit.

70 TEST SPECIES Daphnia pulex (water flea) Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow) Freshwater Acute Freshwater Chronic Ceriodaphnia dubia (water flea) Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow) Marine Acute & Chronic Mysidopsis bahia (Mysid shrimp) Menidia beryllina (inland silverside minnow)

71 PROCESS  Prepare recommendation  If passing history, recommend standard biomonitoring requirements & include frequency reduction option  If failures have occurred, a reasonable potential analysis is run, and all available information is used to determine permit controls. A frequency reduction option will not be included.  Types of Biomonitoring  CHRONIC  7-day test  Measures lethal (survival) and sub-lethal (reproduction & growth) effects  ACUTE  48 hour test  Measures lethal (survival) effects

72 FREQUENCY REDUCTION  Permittee must certify in writing that no lethal or sub-lethal test failures have occurred during the first 4 consecutive quarters of testing & that all tests met all acceptability criteria outlined in permit  DEQ reviews the biomonitoring history for the first four quarters and will issue a letter approving or denying the request for frequency reduction  If granted, the monitoring frequency is reduced to semi-annually for the more sensitive species (Ceriodaphnia dubia, Daphnia pulex, or Mysidopsis bahia) and annually for the less sensitive species (Pimephales promelas or Menidia beryllina)  Applies only until the expiration date of permit or if a lethal or sub-lethal failure is experienced, at which time the frequency reverts to quarterly until the permit is reissued

73 TEST FAILURE  A demonstration of statistically significant sub- lethal or lethal effects to a test species at or below the effluent critical dilution  Lethal failure  3 monthly retests required  If all retests pass, return to regular testing frequency  If 1 retest fails, initiate a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE)  Sub-lethal failure  3 monthly retests required  If all retests pass, return to regular testing frequency  If 2 retests fail, initiate a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE)

74 TRE  Toxicity Reduction Evaluation: A step-wise process which combines toxicity testing and analyses of the physical and chemical characteristics of a toxic effluent to identify the constituents causing effluent toxicity and/or treatment methods which will reduce the effluent toxicity.  Facility will submit a TRE Action Plan & Schedule to DEQ within 90 days from confirmation of lethality in any retest and initiate TRE Action Plan within 30 days of submittal  Action Plan includes:  Specific approach  Sampling plan  Quality Assurance Plan  Project Organization

75 TRE Reports  Quarterly:  Quarterly reports shall be submitted with routine DMRs in January, April, July, and October (quarterly testing is a minimum requirement during a TRE)  Should include:  data which identifies the pollutant(s) and/or source(s) of effluent toxicity  studies/evaluations and results on the treatability of the facility’s effluent toxicity  data which identifies effluent toxicity control mechanisms that will reduce effluent toxicity to the level necessary to meet no significant lethality at the critical dilution

76 TRE Reports  Final :  The TRE Final Report is due no later than 28 months from the date of confirming lethality (or sub-lethality) in retest  Should contain information pertaining to specific control mechanisms selected that will, when implemented, result in reduction of effluent toxicity to no significant lethality at the critical dilution  Should provide specific corrective action schedule for implementing the selected control mechanism.  If one or more toxicants have been identified, a chemical specific limit and/or a WET limit may be incorporated into permit  If one or more toxicants were unable to be identified, a WET limit may be incorporated into permit

77 QUESTIONS

78 Contact Information Kimberly Corts, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Supervisor Laura Thompson, LDEQ Environmental Scientist


Download ppt "Municipal Concerns and an Update on Whole Effluent Toxicity Yvonne Baker, LDEQ Environmental Scientist Senior LA Conference on Water, Sewerage, and Industrial."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google