AMSA Regulatory Update September 2004

Click here for previous updates.

The Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) is pleased to provide you with the September 2004 Regulatory Update. This Update provides a narrative summary of relevant regulatory issues and actions current to October 4, 2004. Unless another contact person is specifically listed, call Chris Hornback, AMSA’s Regulatory Affairs Director, at 202/833-9106 or e-mail him at chornback@amsa-cleanwater.org with any questions or input you have concerning the Update topics.

Top Stories

Hotel Deadline for the National Pretreatment Coordinators Workshop is Today
The hotel deadline for the 2004 National Pretreatment Coordinators Workshop, to be held in Norfolk, Va., October 27 – 29, is October 4. Registration information and a preliminary agenda for the Workshop are available on AMSA’s website (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/meetings/04pret/). This year’s Workshop will build on past successes and afford wastewater treatment agency, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state representatives the opportunity to share knowledge on numerous technical challenges facing today’s pretreatment professionals, discuss current EPA pretreatment program initiatives, and learn valuable skills to improve pretreatment programs around the nation. Some of the “hot topics” to receive attention in Norfolk are the Pretreatment Streamlining Rule, EPA’s Local Limits Guidance and alternatives to numeric standards, emerging pollutants, pretreatment security challenges, pollution prevention, airport waste issues, and, more broadly, the effluent guidelines program as a whole. If you would like more information on the Workshop, or if you have difficulty reserving a room, please contact AMSA’s Will Pettit at 202/833-3280 or wpettit@amsa-cleanwater.org. AMSA looks forward to seeing you in Norfolk!

Members Must Update Information to Enjoy Free Access to Cleanwater Central
When Cleanwater Central was launched in July 2003, all current public utility members of AMSA and subscribers to the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) were given free access to the database for one year, starting in September 2003. To maintain free access after that period, agencies are required to update the database with basic agency and facility information at least once a year. The September 30, 2004 deadline has now passed. AMSA thanks those agencies that have already updated their agency information, and encourages those who have not done so to tap into this vital resource by updating today. To maintain free access, simply log onto http://www.cleanwatercentral.org using your AMSA username and password and update your information as soon as possible.

Biosolids

National Academies of Science Convenes Expert Panel to Review Draft Dioxin Reassessment
EPA’s nearly decade-long reassessment of dioxins and its approach to regulating dioxins was a key issue as AMSA worked with EPA’s Office of Water to determine whether dioxins in land applied biosolids should be regulated. Nearly a year after EPA decided not to regulate dioxins in land applied biosolids, the National Academies of Science (NAS) have been asked by EPA, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Health and Human Services to review EPA’s 2003 draft reassessment by the end of 2005.

NAS has convened a provisional expert panel that will hold its first meeting November 22 – 23 to look at a wide range of issues relevant to the reassessment. These issues include the data and assumptions used in creating the draft reassessment, gaps in scientific knowledge, the scientific evidence for classifying 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) as a human carcinogen, and the usefulness of toxic equivalency factors in the risk assessment. The list of panel members, along with details about the questions the panel will address, are available on NAS’ website (http://www4.nas.edu/webcr.nsf/ProjectScopeDisplay/BEST-K-03-08-A). EPA’s decision not to regulate dioxins in land applied biosolids would not be immediately affected by the outcome of the review, as EPA considered the 2003 draft reassessment in making its October 2003 decision. AMSA will continue to track the work of the panel and will alert the membership of any developments.

Conference and Workshops

AMSA Members to Help Set WERF’s Research Priorities for 2005 and Beyond
AMSA is working with WERF to provide Association members with an opportunity to communicate their research needs directly to those individuals who set the Foundation's research priorities. AMSA and WERF will hold a one-day session in conjunction with its 2005 Winter Meeting to discuss the research priorities of the wastewater treatment community. The input provided during the session will then be considered by WERF’s Research Council as it revises the Foundation's long-term research agenda for the upcoming year. This collaboration is intended to increase AMSA member participation in the research priority setting process, regardless of whether they are WERF subscribers. The one-day session has been scheduled for Monday, January 31, 2005 in San Antonio, Texas at the Westin La Cantera hotel. Meeting details will be made available in future AMSA publications.

AMSA Participates in Advisory Committee on Water Information Meeting
In mid-September, AMSA participated in the 2004 Annual Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) in Herndon, Va. ACWI is a Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) group that advises the federal government on water information programs and their effectiveness in meeting the nation's water information needs. AMSA has been a member organization of ACWI for more than five years. At the September meeting, two topics of particular interest to AMSA’s membership were discussed: 1) a June 2004 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled Watershed Management: Better Coordination of Data Collection Efforts Needed to Support Key Decisions; and 2) the recommendation found in the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s Preliminary Report to develop a national water quality monitoring network.

The GAO report includes a recommendation that Congress should consider formally designating a lead organization for the purpose of enhancing and clearly defining the authority for coordinating the collection of water data nationwide. At the meeting, ACWI discussed whether the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC), an officially designated subgroup of ACWI, or ACWI itself, should serve as the lead organization. ACWI already conducts many of the coordinating activities GAO recommended, and plans to follow up with GAO and Congress to clarify the responsibilities of this coordinating group.

The development of a national water quality monitoring network was a recommendation fully supported in AMSA’s June 2004 comments on the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s Preliminary Report (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/advocacy/comments/2004-06-04ocmts.pdf). ACWI will likely be asked by the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the coming months to help the Administration design such a network. AMSA will continue to participate in ACWI meetings and will update the membership when additional details are available on the activities surrounding these reports.

Pretreatment

AMSA Meets with EPA on Potential Effluent Guidelines; EPA to Revisit 50 POTW Study
On September 21, AMSA met with officials from the Engineering and Analysis Division of EPA’s Office of Science and Technology (OST), the office responsible for the development of effluent guidelines. Also present at the meeting were officials from the Office of Wastewater Management. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the Agency’s announcement that it will conduct an effluent guideline rulemaking for two new industries in its Effluent Guidelines Program Plan for 2004/2005, published in the Federal Register on September 2 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2004_register&docid=fr02se04-61.pdf). The plan identified Airport Deicing Operations and Drinking Water Supply and Treatment as two industries discharging “non-trivial” amounts of pollutants for which EPA has not previously developed effluent guidelines. Being identified by EPA simply means that the Agency will initiate a rulemaking, but does not mean a guideline will necessarily be developed. AMSA’s Pretreatment & Hazardous Waste Committee Chair, Guy Aydlett, Water Quality Director for the Hampton Roads Sanitation District in Virginia Beach, Va., highlighted that AMSA member agencies have successfully dealt with many of the discharges from both of these industries using local limits. Aydlett also cautioned that many of these industries may look to POTWs as an alternative discharge point. It is AMSA’s goal to be involved in the rulemaking process from the earliest stages to ensure the guidelines are based on the best science and the most current practices. AMSA will continue to stay engaged in the effluent guidelines development process and will alert the membership of any developments.

Also at the September 21 meeting, EPA announced that it is developing a plan to conduct a new “50 POTW Study.” The more than 20 year old original study, Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works, provides the underlying basis for regulating pollutants under current or any future categorical pretreatment standards. AMSA has long argued to EPA that the removal efficiencies, physical parameters, and process data in the study are no longer valid and therefore need to be updated before the study is used to evaluate the need for new or revised pretreatment standards. AMSA again offered its assistance to EPA, including the possibility of conducting part or all of the study itself. The Agency is in the preliminary stages of developing a new study, but assured AMSA that it will look to the Association for input on the study plan. If you have any questions on these matters, please contact AMSA’s Will Pettit at 202/833-3280 or wpettit@amsa-cleanwater.org.

AMSA Seeks to Enter Key Effluent Guidelines Case Despite Opposition from Plaintiffs
On August 19, AMSA filed papers with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to participate in Our Children’s Earth Foundation v. EPA. In this case, the plaintiffs allege that EPA has failed to review its Clean Water Act (CWA) effluent guidelines every five years and to evaluate whether technological advances or changed economic circumstances have made it feasible to make existing guidelines more stringent. AMSA has a long history of impacting policy development in the effluent guidelines program, and the Association’s participation in the case is vital.

On September 7, Our Children’s Earth Foundation (OCEF) filed a motion opposing AMSA’s intervention in the case, stating that AMSA was “confused” and that the case only applied to direct dischargers. AMSA, in turn, filed a reply to OCEF’s objection on September 17, demonstrating AMSA’s substantial involvement in the development of effluent guidelines and EPA’s practice of reviewing and revising direct discharge guidelines concurrently with review of pretreatment (indirect) standards. The court heard from AMSA’s lawyers on the motion on September 29. We hope to have a decision soon on our request to participate. Aside from AMSA’s motion, all other activity in the case is on hold for 90 days while some jurisdictional questions raised by the plaintiffs are considered. For more information on this case, please visit AMSA’s Litigation Tracker (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/private/littrack/#childrenef), or contact AMSA’s General Counsel, Alexandra Dunn, at 202/533-1803 or adunn@amsa-cleanwater.org.

Utility Management

AMSA Sends Index Survey to Members, Urges Online Completion Using Cleanwater Central
On September 16, AMSA sent its annual AMSA Index questionnaire via Member Update to its public agency members (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/private/membcomm/memupdate/mu04-15.cfm). Since 1992, the Association has published the AMSA Index every year to track average annual single-family residential service charge increases as measured against the rate of inflation. The one-page Index survey requests the average annual single-family residential sewer service charge and service population of each AMSA utility respondent. From these values, a population-weighted nationwide average annual single-family residential service charge and corresponding annual AMSA Index are determined. The Index is representative of the Association’s broad membership and this valuable resource continues to be used by wastewater agencies and national policymakers. Individual agency responses are kept confidential. AMSA asks that members complete the survey online using the Cleanwater Central website. Again, instructions for completing the survey can be found in Member Update 04-15 (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/private/membcomm/memupdate/mu04-15.cfm). AMSA asks that surveys be completed by October 29. For more information, please contact AMSA’s Will Pettit at 202/833-3280 or wpettit@amsa-cleanwater.org.

Water Quality

AMSA Seeks to Join Lawsuit, Files Comments on Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Issues
AMSA filed a motion in early September to intervene with the Virginia Association of Municipal Wastewater Agencies (VAMWA) in Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) v. Town of Onancock (Onancock). In this case, CBF argues that the court should require Virginia to place strict limits on the amount of nitrogen that Onancock can discharge before the state revises its water quality standards and completes a total maximum daily load (TMDL). If the motion to intervene is successful, AMSA and VAMWA will argue that scientifically defensible water quality standards are an essential prerequisite for issuing permit limits to wastewater treatment utilities. The two groups will also assert that a TMDL is needed to allocate the environmentally acceptable amount of nitrogen and phosphorus among the various sources, including wastewater treatment facilities, in the Bay watershed. AMSA is particularly interested in the outcome of this case because it could set national precedent for nutrient permitting issues. Additional information on this case is available on AMSA’s website (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/private/littrack/#cbf). For more information on the case please contact AMSA’s General Counsel, Alexandra Dunn, at 202/533-1803 or adunn@amsa-cleanwater.org.

In a related matter, AMSA, VAMWA, the Maryland Association of Municipal Wastewater Agencies and the West Virginia Municipal Water Quality Association filed comments (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/advocacy/comments/2004-09-15NPDESCmts.pdf) September 15 on EPA Region II and III's draft approach for permitting nutrient discharges to the Chesapeake Bay. The comments generally support EPA's water quality-based approach as opposed to a “one-size-fits-all” technology-based approach. AMSA notes that a technology-based approach would require public expenditures on treatment technologies without a direct relationship to attainment of water quality standards. The groups also agreed that watershed permits should be considered as an effective and efficient method for implementing nutrient limits in the Bay, where the impairments are caused by multiple point and nonpoint sources. AMSA remains very active in Chesapeake Bay water quality issues, and will keep members apprised of nationally-relevant developments.

AMSA Cautions EPA on Use of New Data for Ammonia Criteria
On September 8, AMSA filed comments (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/advocacy/comments/2004-09-08OW-2004-0012Cmts.pdf) in response to the EPA’s July 8 Federal Register notice (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2004/July/Day-08/w15532.htm) announcing the Agency’s intent to review the existing water quality criteria for ammonia. Recent studies evaluating the toxicity of ammonia to freshwater mussels suggest that a certain family of mussels (Family Unionidae) is more sensitive to ammonia than the aquatic life species EPA used to establish its existing water quality criteria. The Association’s primary concern was that EPA use only valid, peer-reviewed data for revising its water quality criteria. AMSA believes the use of these new studies by EPA in its revision process is premature because there is no standardized test protocol for the unique life stages of unionid mussels and there is a lack of knowledge regarding these life stages in laboratory test environments.

Should EPA decide to use the new unionid mussel data to revise the criteria, AMSA recommends that the Agency allow site-specific or region-specific modification of the criteria to adjust for the presence or absence of particular freshwater mussel species and other site-specific factors; or develop two criteria, unionids present and unionids absent, similar to the approach used for salmonids in the Agency’s 1999 criteria. AMSA will closely monitor EPA’s approach in reviewing the water quality criteria for ammonia.

AMSA Involved in Stakeholder Process for Detection and Quantitation Procedures Development
On September 15, EPA announced in the Federal Register (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2004_register&docid=fr15se04-17.pdf) its intent to explore the feasibility and design of a process through which stakeholders could provide ideas and recommendations on procedures for the development of detection and quantitation limits and uses of these limits in Clean Water Act programs^[1]. The Agency has specifically contacted AMSA to be a part of the assessment to determine what kind of stakeholder process is needed.

AMSA maintains, as it contended in an August 15, 2003 coalition letter (http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org/private/legreg/outreach/2003-08-15mdl.pdf) sent to EPA, that the current method detection limit/minimum level of quantitation (MDL/ML) approach routinely gives erroneous estimates of the sensitivity of laboratory measurements. AMSA continues to work with a broad stakeholder group to further develop the concepts outlined in the August 2003 coalition letter. The subject of the August 2003 coalition letter, EPA’s March 2003 proposed MDL and ML procedures, will likely be withdrawn in order to consider input from stakeholders. Through this stakeholder group and the newly announced, formal process, AMSA will continue to weigh in on this issue.

AMSA Contribution to TMDL Adaptive Implementation Project Leads to a Series of Workshops
In February 2003, AMSA’s Board of Directors approved a $25,000 Targeted Action Fund (TAF) contribution to a project to conduct workshops and develop a monograph on the interpretation, analytics, and execution of adaptive implementation for total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). Dr. Ken Reckhow, Chair, Environmental Sciences and Policy at Duke University, who served as the chair of the National Research Council’s Committee to Assess the Scientific Basis of the TMDL Approach to Water Pollution Reduction, and oversaw the issuance of the corresponding NRC report, Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management, is organizing the project. Materials for the workshops are under development, with the first workshop taking place October 25 – 26, 2004 in Durham, N.C., the second in January of 2005 in Irvine, Calif., and the third and final workshop in April 2005 in Durham, N.C. AMSA will attend all three workshops and will notify its membership of progress made in this important TAF initiative.

EPA Staffing

President Bush Nominates Thomas Skinner to Continue as Enforcement Chief
On September 8, the White House announced that President Bush had nominated Thomas Skinner to be Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, of which Skinner has been Acting Assistant Administrator since April. Prior to coming to EPA headquarters, Skinner served as administrator for EPA's Region V office. From 1999 to 2001, Skinner served as director of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. Before joining the Illinois EPA, Skinner was a partner in the environmental law department of the Chicago firm Winston & Strawn for eight years. The Senate is not expected to consider Skinner's nomination until after the November presidential election.

[1] EPA approves analytical methods (i.e., test procedures) used for monitoring and reporting chemical pollutants under the Clean Water Act. EPA's analytical methods specify detection limits to determine if a pollutant is present. Quantitation limits describe the concentration of a pollutant that can be measured with a known level of confidence. These values are often used as reporting and compliance limits by the states, tribes and EPA Regions that administer and enforce permit limits on direct discharges into surface waters. These values are also often used by states and localities in administering and enforcing pretreatment programs for indirect discharges.