Wet Weather Issues
Policies, Reports, Guidance Documents and Meetings
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
| 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. During the recent January 9-10 meeting, municipal
caucus members, and other Committee members expressed significant
concerns regarding revisions drafted by EPA in a January 3rd version
of the policy. The Committee was concerned that the revised text
of the policy did not adequately characterize the flexibility
of watershed approaches, and was too focused on traditional "command/control"
approaches. The Committee abandoned the revised January 3rd version
of the document and will continue work on the policy using previous
versions of the document. AMSA members will receive a copy of
the document via Regulatory Alert for review prior to Committee
consensus.
Watershed Monitoring Recommendations: These recommendations
will supplement the Watershed Alternative document by providing
guidance on the development of watershed-based monitoring strategies.
The monitoring document is undergoing formatting changes and
will be available for Committee review in April.
Wet Weather Standards Recommendations: The Committee
is not progressing as rapidly as had been hoped in this area.
Some committee members, including AMSA, 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.
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 has solicited written comments from AMSA and other members
of the committee by January. AMSA's Stormwater Workgroup will
develop comments in conjunction with other municipal representatives
of the Committee.
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 early 1997. The Subcommittee has been working on the issues
through papers which are being drafted by different interest groups
on the Subcommittee.
Status: At the most recent 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." The draft framework
is EPA's second attempt at putting together a regulatory framework
for controlling discharges from sanitary sewer collection systems,
and pulls together separate issue papers which have been discussed
and negotiated among members of EPA's SSO Advisory Subcommittee
during the past two years. AMSA distributed the draft framework
to the membership via Regulatory Alert RA 96-25 on November 25.
AMSA members in EPA Regions which commented on the framework
should also have received their Region's comments. EPA Headquarters
intends to work internally with its Regions over the next several
months to develop Regional consensus support for the draft policy.
Prior to the December meeting, AMSA and other municipal groups
developed "operator caucus" comments on the framework.
Generally, the operator group supported the framework's approach,
however, significant concerns were raised regarding several issues,
which AMSA and other operator groups discussed with the full Committee
during the Dec. 16-17 meeting (see December 1996 Regulatory
Update). The next meeting is scheduled for April 21-22,
1997. AMSA is developing a list of secondary comments on the
framework for submittal on January 24. Individual AMSA member
comments will be submitted along with synthesized "operator
caucus" comments. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA (202) 833-9106
or Kevin Weiss, EPA (202) 260-9524.
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 policy-making activities
regarding the framework and implementation of EPA's Phase II stormwater
program.
Status: EPA's Stormwater Phase II Federal Advisory Subcommittee
met on December 11-13 to discuss EPA's recently distributed second
draft Stormwater Phase II rule outline (Nov. 15) and draft preamble
(Nov. 22) language. EPA's proposal outlines a program to regulate
all municipalities which operate a separate sanitary sewer system
within urbanized areas, eliminating "donut holes", which
concern many AMSA members. Also, the requirements for construction
site permitting are proposed to be expanded to include all sites
from ½ acre to 5 acres (the Phase I program requires permitting
for sites over 5 acres). The proposal includes minimum requirements
for municipal stormwater programs under Phase II which include
planning/implementation requirement to address: (1) public involvement/education
and outreach on stormwater impacts, (2) public participation,
(3) illicit connection and discharge detection and elimination,
(4) construction site sediment and erosion control, (5) post construction
storm water management in new development and re-development,
(6) pollution prevention/good housekeeping of municipal operations,
(7) evaluation and assessment of municipal programs. AMSA
submitted its comments on the proposal as part of a comprehensive
set of a municipal/operator caucus comment document submitted
to EPA on January 13, 1997. Major comments expressed by AMSA
include: (1) support for scope of municipal/industrial coverage
in the proposed Phase II program, (2) concerns regarding the regulation
of construction sites down to ½ acre, (3) oppose references
to enforceable performance standards for both stormwater discharges
and stormwater management measures, (4) oppose references linking
the responsibility for monitoring of ambient water quality to
local governments, (5) oppose a proposal to delegate permitting
responsibilities of Phase II industrial/commercial sources to
local governments, and (6) support for the concept of regulating
municipal construction and municipal industrial activity under
one MS4 permit. EPA is under a court order to propose stormwater
phase II regulations by September 1, 1997 and finalize them by
March 1999. CONTACTS: Mark Hoeke, AMSA (202) 833-9106, or George
Utting, EPA (202) 260-9530
AMSA Completes Outreach on Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Performance
Measures Report
Background: AMSA received additional funding from EPA to conduct follow up activities and outreach on the CSO Performance Measures Project. Follow up activities will include developing case studies on the use of performance measures and conducting regional workshops to promote the use of performance measures. The follow up project is expected to be completed by January 1997.
Status: Five regional workshops attended by over 250 participants
were conducted in October and November. A summary of participant
discussions was sent to AMSA's CSO communities on January 2, 1997.
CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA (202) 833-9106.
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.
EPA wants communities to develop monitoring and modeling programs
that are appropriate for their situation. EPA also recognizes
that medium and large communities with significant combined sewer
systems with numerous CSOs may need more sophisticated monitoring
and modeling programs to develop a cost-effective CSO control
program, and that smaller communities with limited resources may
have simpler monitoring and modeling needs. The Agency's goal
for the document is to provide guidance to all communities, regardless
of size, on development of monitoring/modeling programs commensurate
with their CSO problems. EPA has solicited input on the draft
guidance by February 15.
Status: The National Office distributed the document
to AMSA CSO communities for comment on January 2. AMSA's National
Office has requested that any member wishing to provide comment
on the document, submit their comments to the National Office
by February 7,1997 where collective member comments will be compiled
into comprehensive response to EPA. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke,
AMSA (202) 833-9106 or Ross Brennan, EPA (202) 260-6928.