Wet Weather Issues
Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) Policy Framework
Background: EPA is continuing a SSO policy dialogue with
stakeholders through federal advisory committee meetings. AMSA
has been actively involved in the Subcommittee discussions, which
are expected to eventually guide EPA in policy-making activities
regarding a sanitary sewer overflow policy or regulatory framework
by fall 1997.
Status: EPA has postponed the April meeting of the
Subcommittee indefinitely until headquarters and regional EPA
management can resolve internal staff differences regarding the
SSO policy discussions and proposed policy. At the last EPA
SSO Advisory Subcommittee meeting on December 16-17, officials
from EPA Headquarters discussed the negative feedback it received
from four of the six EPA Regions which commented (Regions I,
III, IV, V, VI, and , VII) on EPA's, "Draft Sanitary Sewer
Overflow (SSO) and Sanitary Sewer Operation, Maintenance and Management
Framework" (distributed via RA 96-25). AMSA and
other operator interests on the Subcommittee submitted comments
on the framework in early December, will submit additional comments,
based upon AMSA member input, in early March. Also, EPA is working
to complete a draft cost/benefit analysis for different scenarios
of proposed policy and regulatory revisions, which should be available
in March. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA (202) 833-9106 or Kevin
Weiss, EPA (202) 260-9524.
EPA's Urban Wet Weather Flows Advisory Committee
Activities
Background: The UWWFAC, chartered in May 1995, is responsible for "developing recommendations to address cross-cutting issues associated with the human health and environmental impacts of urban wet weather discharges (including storm water, combined sewer overflows, and sanitary sewer overflows) in an innovative and cost-effective manner." The UWWFAC is composed of EPA, state regulatory, environmental, municipal government, industrial, business development, and local wastewater agency interest groups. AMSA has been actively involved in the Committee, and its workgroups.
Status: The UWWF advisory
committee held its latest meeting January 9-10, 1996. Below is
a summary of current Committee activities. CONTACTS: Mark Hoeke,
AMSA (202) 833-9106 or Will Hall, EPA (202) 260-1458.
Table 2 - UWWFAC Activities
| Committee Activities | EPA Action Taken or Expected |
| Watersheds: Watershed Policy | Policy (Spring/Summer 1997) |
| Watersheds: Monitoring Recommendations | Guidance (Spring/Summer 1997) |
| Water Quality Standards: Wet Weather Standards Recommendations | Proposed Rule on WQS |
| Stormwater: Phase I Reapplication Requirements | Policy Issued (5/17/96) [RA96-15] |
| Stormwater: Interim Policy on BMPs in Lieu of Numeric Standards | Policy Issued (8/1/96) [RA96-18] |
| Stormwater: No Exposure Incentive | Proposed Rule (9/1/97) |
| Stormwater: Expanded General Permit Notice of Intent | Proposed Rule (9/30/97) |
| Stormwater: Database on BMP Effectiveness | Database Availability (1/31/98) |
| Stormwater: Definition of Maximum Extent Practicable | Guidance to be Issued (1/31/98) |
| Stormwater: Phase I Enforcement | Guidance or Policy (9/30/97) |
| Stormwater: Background Sources | Guidance or Policy (9/30/97) |
| Stormwater: Phase I/Phase II Integration | Prop. Rule on Phase II (9/1/97) |
Watershed Policy: The
committee is developing a document titled, "A Watershed Alternative
for the Management of Wet Weather Flows (and FlowChart)."
The draft document expresses EPA's support for a process of pursuing
a watershed approach as an alternative to the traditional NPDES
permitting approach for meeting water quality standards through
control of individual wet weather point sources, and builds upon
EPA's previous watershed-related efforts. A revised draft
watershed policy document will be distributed for comment to AMSA's
Wet Weather Issues Committee and Comprehensive Watershed Committee
when made available by EPA in early March.
Watershed Monitoring Recommendations:
These recommendations will supplement the Watershed Alternative
document by providing guidance on the development of watershed-based
monitoring strategies.
Wet Weather Standards Recommendations:
Some committee members are uncomfortable with applying national
water quality criteria, derived from bioassays based on steady-state
exposures, to wet weather conditions, which are characterized
by discontinuous exposures. A number of other issues have been
raised regarding objectives, the applicability of standards, and
how standards should be implemented in wet weather NPDES permits.
The Committee is soliciting input from the American Society of
Civil Engineers (ASCE) in answering some key questions regarding
this issue and hopes to address policy questions in future discussions.
The water quality standards workgroup of the Advisory Committee
has tentatively planned to meet April 1-3, 1997 to define what
questions need to be addressed by the ASCE panel, and how the
Committee should proceed on the issue.
No Exposure Incentive: The
Committee has developed criteria for determining whether an industrial
facility has "no exposure" to stormwater under the Phase
I stormwater program. These facilities which are defined as having
"no exposure" would reduce NPDES permit requirements
to a one-time, or annual certification of "no exposure".
EPA expects to propose a change to the Phase I regulations in
September 1997.
Expanded General Permit Notice of Intent (NOI)
Form: The Committee has developed an expanded
industrial NOI form which allows the public to obtain more information
on an industrial facility's potential impact on stormwater runoff.
EPA expects to have expanded NOI form ready in September 1997,
when existing general permits expire.
Database of Best Management Practices (BMP) Effectiveness:
The Committee is currently tracking progress of a cooperative
EPA/WERF project on the effectiveness of BMPs. Results of this
effort will be presented a standard manual on BMPs which is intended
as a source of guidance and performance information.
Definition of Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP):
The Committee is developing a process by which the term "MEP"
can be clarified or defined so that Phase I requirements for MS4s
are clear and consistent. EPA expects that it can issue guidance
on the definition in January 1998, and has indicated its desire
to develop performance standards to quantify MEP in January 1999
(see discussion of performance standards in Phase II Stormwater
Committee). During the January meeting, the Committee discussed
several outcomes of the Committee's MEP workgroup. Significant
areas of agreement were reached on several issues, including:
(1) MEP is viewed as the technology standard (rather than a technology-based
standard), (2) MEP should be viewed as a "process" and
not so much as an endpoint (i.e., numeric effluent limitations),
(3) MEP is one way to get to water quality attainment, which is
the ultimate goal, (4) MEP is a minimum performance requirement
for municipalities under CWA §402(p), (5) EPA should put
out guidance along these lines, to help permit writers and permittees,
and (6) the MEP process should be applicable to Phase II communities.
The Committee's MEP working group expects to draft guidance which
incorporates these agreement areas by the Committee's next meeting
scheduled for April 1997.
Phase I Enforcement: Environmental
groups on the Committee are working with other interests to better
define ongoing Phase I enforcement and the level of noncompliance.
Based on the results of this effort, the Committee may decide
to make recommendations to EPA on improving the level of compliance.
Background Sources: The
Committee is discussing issues concerning background sources of
pollution (i.e., air deposition and run-on) that may contribute
to point source stormwater discharges and/or contribute to point
source discharge violations. The Committee may eventually recommend
a permitting policy to EPA.
Phase I/Phase II Integration:
During the November meeting, participants reviewed EPA's draft
Phase II rule outline and discussed Phase I/Phase II integration
issues. AMSA and other municipal representatives of the committee
support a general permitting approach to the proposed Phase II
program, and emphasized the importance of a "seamless"
Phase I/Phase II stormwater program that would ensure consistency
between the two programs.
EPA's Stormwater Phase II Advisory Subcommittee
Discussions
Background: EPA is continuing a stormwater Phase II national policy dialogue with stakeholders through federal advisory committee meetings. AMSA has been actively involved in the Subcommittee which is expected to eventually guide EPA in proposed stormwater phase II rulemaking activities by September 1997.
Status: The EPA advisory
subcommittee recently met on February 20-21. During the first
day of the meeting, municipal and operator representatives of
the FACA (including AMSA) met separately to discuss serious concerns
regarding the revised version of the draft stormwater rule and
preamble released February 14 (distributed to the membership via
Regulatory Alert RA 97-5). During the separate discussion, the
municipal and operator caucus developed a list of priority issues
which EPA must address in order for EPA to retain municipal and
operator support for the proposed stormwater rule. These issues
included:
Numeric Effluent Limits
- The caucus objects to any suggestion that numeric effluent limits
are applicable to stormwater permits.
Citizen suits and "backsliding"
- Local government exposure to lawsuits
by citizens is a major concern. The proposed rule fails to encourage
use of dispute resolution and other administrative remedies prior
to initiation of litigation and leaves local governments exposed
to suits for effluent limit compliance. Legal action against
local government is inappropriate if the local government is amending
its mix of BMPs.
Local Discretion
- The caucus objects to the permitting authority/writer having
the discretion to select BMPs and measurable goals. That discretion
belongs to the permittee.
Additional Requirements Beyond Minimum Measures
- The caucus objects to mandatory changes in the mix of BMPs prior
to completion of the evaluation of the entire federally mandated
stormwater program.
Performance Assessment/Monitoring
- The caucus objects to shifting the burden of stormwater monitoring
and assessment of best management practices (BMPs) to local governments.
Members of the municipal caucus have repeatedly indicated that
local governments cannot bear responsibility for monitoring or
assessing the effectiveness of specific best management practices.
These responsibilities more appropriately lie with the states
and EPA.
Application of the Term "Maximum Extent
Practicable" (MEP)- The rule does
not include the definition of MEP as developed by the Urban Wet
Weather Advisory Committee MEP workgroup.
Flow Issues - Stormwater
volume and rate of flow should not be regulated under federal
stormwater regulations.
During the second day of the meeting, the full
committee discussed the municipal/operator concerns. EPA thought
it addressed some of the group's major concerns in the revised
rule, and others of the subcommittee expressed optimism that agreement
on these issues could be reached. EPA had requested that all
subcommittee members submit major concerns on the current draft
rule and preamble by February 26. The municipal/operator caucus
submitted the above concerns, along with detailed recommendations
by the February 26 deadline. The municipal/operator caucus intends
to meet with EPA to discuss major concerns on March 6.
EPA is under court order to propose a Phase II rulemaking by
September 1997. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA (202) 833-9106, or
George Utting, EPA (202) 260-9530.
EPA Releases Draft CSO Guidance on Monitoring
and Modeling
Background: EPA recently
transmitted a draft document titled, "CSO Guidance on Monitoring
and Modeling," to several interest groups, including AMSA,
for comment. The document presents information on the development
of monitoring and modeling plans and various levels of monitoring
and modeling for both the combined sewer system and the receiving
water body.
Status: The National Office distributed the document to AMSA CSO communities for comment on January 2. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA (202) 833-9106 or Ross Brennan, EPA (202) 260-6928.