Presentation on theme: "CMOM and Beyond Overview of the Proposed SSO Rule Presented By: Deborah Chase, CBCP Phone: (425) 450-6257 Ron Brown, PE, PMP Phone:"— Presentation transcript:
CMOM and Beyond Overview of the Proposed SSO Rule Presented By: Deborah Chase, CBCP Phone: (425) 450-6257 Deborah.Chase@hdrinc.com Ron Brown, PE, PMP Phone: (425-450-7104) Ron.Brown@hdrinc.com
Update on the previously proposed SSO rule and how EPA enforcement of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for collections systems, operations, and maintenance impacts municipal wastewater utilities. Presentation Objective
Overview SSO Rule & EPA Enforcement Operational Program Management Program Components Monitoring, Measuring and Modifications
SSO Rule & EPA Enforcement CMOM and Beyond Overview of the Proposed SSO Rule
Why EPA Cares About SSOs A national problem SSOs are widespread. SSOs pose health/environmental risks. Chronic SSOs reflect inadequate O&M. EPA/States sending mixed signals Inconsistent/unclear NPDES requirements. Response to the national problem EPA convened negotiating committee Dec 1994. Included municipal, environmental, and state stakeholders. EPA committed to considering recommendations; hence, evolving regulations on SSOs.
SSO Rule Update Intended to require Best Management Practices (BMPs) using proposed CMOM regulation. C apacity M anagement O perational Practices M aintenance Practices Withdrawn from the Federal Register as enforcing the Clean Water Act (CWA) was sufficient. CWA prohibits any avoidable discharge of untreated wastewater. EPA’s goal is to eliminate or minimize overflows as required by the CWA.
EPA Overflow Reduction Strategy April 2000: EPA Developed Strategy Enforce Using CWA Authority Address problems using CMOM concepts EPA Regions Develop Enforcement Plan ID SSO and NPDES Violators & Establish Enforcement Priorities Use Full Range of Regulatory Response Options Ensure Action Taken EPA Activity in Region 1 0 Oregon - Portland, Medford Washington - Seattle Public Utilities, King County, Everett EPA has increased their emphasis on audits
EPA Actions... JULY 1998 May 3, 2005 - Metropolitan Wastewater Department City Reaches Agreement on Sewer Spills Lawsuit SAN DIEGO - The City of San Diego has reached an agreement that ensures the continuation of the City's successful Sewer Spill Reduction Program. The consent decree, signed by the City, the Surfrider Foundation, the San Diego Baykeeper, and the EPA, resolves a lawsuit against the City for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act from sewer spills. Monies to meet the estimated $187 million settlement are already part of the Metropolitan Wastewater Department's budget. May 3, 2005 - Metropolitan Wastewater Department City Reaches Agreement on Sewer Spills Lawsuit SAN DIEGO - The City of San Diego has reached an agreement that ensures the continuation of the City's successful Sewer Spill Reduction Program. The consent decree, signed by the City, the Surfrider Foundation, the San Diego Baykeeper, and the EPA, resolves a lawsuit against the City for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act from sewer spills. Monies to meet the estimated $187 million settlement are already part of the Metropolitan Wastewater Department's budget. May 8, 2007 - EPA, DOJ, and State of Hawaii reach agreement with the City and County of Honolulu to address vulnerabilities that led to Waikiki sewage spill HONOLULU – The Department of Justice, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Hawaii Attorney General’s Office, and the Hawaii Department of Health have reached an interim agreement with the City and County of Honolulu that will correct the most significant problems in Honolulu’s wastewater collection system. This settlement resolves a civil enforcement action that the United States and the state have filed against the city. The current agreement is an interim settlement because it addresses only some of the problems in the city’s wastewater collection system. In addition to the force mains addressed in the agreement announced today, the city’s wastewater collection and treatment system includes many other features which are the subject of other regulatory processes and legal proceedings. As a next step, it will be the intention of the federal and state governments to attempt to reach a comprehensive resolution to the city’s remaining wastewater collection and treatment challenges.
EPA Enforcement Strategy (2008-2010)* * EPA Presentation at PNCWA 9.12.2008 100% of large & associated satellite systems addressed 1 50% of medium & associated satellite systems addressed 2 Large System = 100 MGD (design flow) or greater Medium System = >10 MGD but <100 MGD Goals for SSOs Goals for CSOs Address 100% of all combined sewer systems with 50,000+ population 1 Prioritize less than 50,000 population applicable for federal involvement 2
Local EPA Actions... March 2008 EPA audits King County and Seattle Public Utilities June 2009 EPA enters Administrative Orders with King County and Seattle Public Utilities August 2009 EPA audits City of Everett Public Works Department 2010 Who’s Next? Is Your Agency Ready?
“... we need to raise the bar for clean water enforcement performance... we must boost EPA’s enforcement presence... we must assure that we are doing the work that is most important to clean up our nation’s waters...” -Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator – July 2, 2009
EPA Enforcement Goals Clean Water Act action plan: revamp enforcement and work with permitting to focus on the biggest pollution problems, including: Getting raw sewage out of the water Reducing polluted storm water runoff Clean up great waters that matter to communities, e.g, Chesapeake Bay Aggressively go after pollution problems that make a difference in communities. Vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water, air and chemical hazards; advance environmental justice by protecting vulnerable communities.
EPA Proposed Enforcement Strategy (2011-2013) Goals Decrease impact on water quality 1 Encourage utilities to develop a better way of managing infrastructure by understanding condition and making risk-based decisions 2 Candidate National Enforcement Priority: Wet Weather Municipal Infrastructure (Jan ‘10) Combined Sewers 1 Sanitary Sewers 2 Infrastructure Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) 3
Other SSO Reduction Actions Stakeholder Lawsuits Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) Action Agenda Partnership to clean up Puget Sound
Typical EPA Audit and Order Process – Collection System Audit Phase Letter & Information Request Initial Audit* Possible Supplemental Info Requests Draft Audit Report** Comments by Agency (Usually Only 30 Days)*** Final Audit Report *Focus on Facts and Data During Audits, Not “War Stories” ***Respond regardless of whether it will affect the audit **Review Results Very Closely
Draft Proposal to Correct Deficiencies* Negotiations on Programs** Administrative Order or Possible Consent Decree Prepare Plans Required by Order / CD Implement Programs Monitor Compliance and Results *Often Issued 4 to 6 Months After Final Audit Report **Can take days or years Typical EPA Audit and Order Process – Collection System Order Phase
Lessons Learned: Capacity Programs Scrutinize Peaking Factors and Assumptions – Don’t Be Too Conservative Consider Different Capacity Upgrade Guidelines for Existing vs. New Sewers Field Verify Capacity Issues Identified by Models Before Finalizing CIP Wet Weather: Invest in a Detailed Study of Convey & Treat vs. I/I Reduction Options
Lessons Learned: Inspection and Condition Assessment Programs Don’t Inspect Every Sewer in the System (Unless Needed) Utilize Risk Analysis to Identify Sewers that Should be Inspected Standardize Defect Codes Utilized by Crews and Contractors; Have a QC Process Inefficient to Analyze Text-Based Data and Data on Paper Forms
Lessons Learned: Inspection and Condition Assessment (Continued) Code-Based Data Linked to Specific Assets in an Electronic Format is Easily Analyzed Data Management is Essential – Have a Strategy and a System Develop a Decision Process for Repair, Rehabilitation and Replacement Projects Simplified Decision Processes are Easier, But Results Will Not be Optimal
Lessons Learned: Pump Station and Force Main Programs To Support Negotiations, Identify Holding Time Prior to Spill and Location of Overflow for Each Pump Station Consider Generator Connections and Portable Generators When Appropriate For Newer Force Mains, Negotiate a Future Testing or Inspection Date
Lessons Learned: SSO Response and Notification of Stakeholders Focus on Average Response Time During Negotiations, if Possible Utilize Pump Station Holding Time Data to Negotiate Pump Station Response Times Coordinate Notification With State and/or Health Department Make Sure Your Internal Records are Consistent
Lessons Learned: Cleaning and FOG Programs Need Cleaning Data to Negotiate Reasonable Cleaning Frequencies Begin to Collect Cleaning Data re: the Type and Quantity of Findings in Pipes Document Hot Spots and Assign a Frequency and Type of Cleaning Develop a FOG Strategy & Ordinances (Inspect, Clean, Educate, or a Combination) Develop a FOG Strategy & Ordinances (Inspect, Clean, Educate, or a Combination)
Successful Audit Outcome Preparation Meet permitted number of allowable wet weather discharges Strive for 0 dry weather CSO events Show a continuous downward trend in SSOs (goal is 2 or fewer SSOs per 100 miles of pipe) Implement continuous improvement programs Review each program for effectiveness and make adjustments as needed
SSO Rule & EPA Enforcement Summary Data to Support Your Position is Crucial for Reasonable EPA Negotiation Outcomes Adopt BMPs and Develop Programs that Follow CMOM Guidelines Audits Should Not be Taken Lightly – Understand the Process and Implications A High Level of SSOs Gains Attention from EPA, State, or NGOs A High Level of SSOs Gains Attention from EPA, State, or NGOs
Operational Program Management CMOM and Beyond Overview of the Proposed SSO Rule
Wastewater Overflows What are SSOs (sanitary sewer overflows)? Spilled raw sewage into streets, basements, receiving water bodies, etc.; flooding from sewer system prior to treatment What are CSOs (combined sewer overflows)? Excess wastewater discharged through NPDES permitted outfalls during periods of rainfall or snowmelt when capacity of the sewer system or treatment plant are exceeded What are DWOs (dry weather overflows)? Overflows from combined sewer outfalls during dry weather; prohibited under the NPDES program
$$$ to eliminate all unavoidable What are Avoidable/ Unavoidable Conditions Criteria Utility EPA Dry Wet Dry weather condition > Design Storm ≤ D esign Storm Unavoidable Avoidable All are avoidable unless demonstrated otherwise
Avoidable Overflows Are Caused By: Inadequate or negligent operation Inadequate system capacity Improper system design
Unavoidable Overflows Result From: Extreme acts of nature Unavoidable third party actions Unforeseen/unavoidable structural, mechanical, etc. failure Unforeseen/unavoidable blockages
Estimated SSO Occurrences Based on a sample of six communities Causes of SSOs can vary significantly from community to community Insufficient System Capacity - 7% Source - EPA website Power Failure - 11% Pipe Breaks - 12% I/I - 27% Pipe Blockages - 43%
Minimum Operational Measures Identification and tracking of overflows Immediate response to overflows Proper operation and maintenance programs Public notification as needed
Advanced Operational Measures Process to prioritize chronic wet weather and avoidable dry weather overflows Process to identify and monitor system performance indicators Optimization of treatment plant operations during wet weather Separate sewer system specific evaluation Long-term remediation evaluation and plan
Best Management Practices (BMPs) Know your collection system capacity Know your hydraulic bottlenecks Know your asset conditions Have established procedures for emergency response and public notification Ensure CIP and preventative maintenance programs address all known deficiencies
Program Components Completed Program General Standards Management Program System Evaluation & Capacity Assurance Plan Overflow Response Plan Program Audits Commun- ications
Design Approaches Requirements and standards for installing new sewers, pumps, etc. Procedures and specifications for inspecting and testing installation of new sewers, pumps, etc.
Program Tools Hydraulic Modeling Predictive Modeling - Rehabilitation Assessment Models Decision Analysis Field Inspections Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Master Plan
Management Program Overview Identify program goals Identify organization Establish programs for Utility Responsibilities Identify measures and activities Establish design and performance standards Implement monitoring, measurement, and program modifications
Overflow Emergency Response Plan Ensures… Awareness of all overflows Response to overflows Reporting of overflows Notification to public, health agencies, etc. Trained personnel follow plan Provision of emergency operations
Measures and Activities Maintenance of facilities and system map Management and timely use of relevant information to establish and prioritize program activities Cleaning Cycles Rehab and Replacement CCTV Smoke Testing
System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan ( SEACAP ) Evaluation – Identify portions of system that experience or contribute to overflows. Capacity Enhancement Measures – Short- and long-term measures to address any identified hydraulic deficiency. Plan Updates – Describe significant change in proposed actions or implementation schedule and performance of implemented measures.
Program Audits Conduct internal audit as part of NPDES permit application preparation Organizational deficiencies - Identify areas within organization and practices in need of improvement Identify NPDES violations Determine number of overflows Evaluate customer complaints
Communications Participants 3. Public Health Officials 3. Public Health Officials 2. Local Government 2. Local Government 1. Operators 1. Operators 5. Public 5. Public 4. NPDES Authorities 4. NPDES Authorities Eliminating Avoidable Overflows Compliance with CWA
Continuous Program Process Plan Program (Including Updates) Implement Program Analyze/Evaluate Program Identify any needed Program Updates
Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications Monitor program element implementation Measure effectiveness of each program element Update program elements based on monitoring/performance evaluations Update summary of program
Suggestions for Improving Programs Assess conditions Evaluate cost-effective alternatives for repair, and budget accordingly Develop master plan for phased implementation Examine user fees and develop programs for matching them to assessed needs Evaluate alternative funding, including grants, loans, and creative financing techniques Results in proactive system approach to eliminate avoidable overflows