Industrial Storm Water Permitting in California: a Regulatory Perspective An intensive overview of the program, its key principles, and likely future –

Industrial Storm Water Permitting in California: a Regulatory

Perspective

An intensive overview of the program, its key principles, and likely future –slammed into a 20 minute format.

Greg Gearheart, PECA State Water Board

916.341.5892

The view ahead….

Grand Slam Game Plan

• Two main concepts to take home from this:

1. Effluent Limitations are not the same as Receiving Water Limitations (dually enforceable under current scheme)

2. Numerics come in 4 basic varieties, but we have the technology to make new hybrids or varieties.

SW Permits

• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit

• Effluent Limitations – Provisions– Prohibitions– SWPPP (by extension)– Technology-based standards, mostly

• Receiving Water Limitations– Water Quality Standards (WQS)

Technology Based Standards

• Industrial and construction: BAT/BCT

• Permits may require best management practices (BMPs)

• In establishing requirements, permit writers use best professional judgment (BPJ)

• NRDC v USEPA: states establish BMP requirements

Water Quality Standards

• Water Quality Standards are made up of:– Beneficial Uses (designated to specific waterbodies),

plus– water quality criteria; and– an antidegradation policy.

• Beneficial Uses (BUs) are:• often not directly related to key water resource uses

valued by communities (it might take a suite of them to protect wetlands and streams, for example)

• Narrative or Numeric

Humboldt BayBUs:

• REC1• REC2• NAV• WILD• EST• MAR• MIGR• SPWM• SHELL

SW Effluent Limitations

Receiving Water Limitations

Narrative: reduce pollutants using BAT/BCT - technology-based standard

Do not cause or contribute to anExceedance of a water quality standard (WQS).

Numeric: could be technology- (TBEL) or water quality-based (WQBEL)

ExampleStorm Water (SW) Dischargesfrom an industrial facility toHumboldt Bay

Humboldt BayBUs:




Technology-based BMPs:• Covering waste piles• Sweeping/cleaning of open areas• Treatment (basins) of solids• Etc.


Numbers – TSS < 100 mg/LNarrative – “no toxics in toxic amounts”

Humboldt BayBUs:




Technology-based BMPs:• Covering waste piles• Sweeping/cleaning of open areas• Treatment (basins) of solids• Etc.


Numbers – TSS < 100 mg/LNarrative – “no toxics in toxic amounts”

(1) Enforce ELs

(2) Enforce RWLs

Compliance Scenarios

• ELs are violated and RWLs are fine• ELs are violated and RWLs are violated• ELs are fine and RWLs are fine• ELs are fine and RWLs are violated

• TBALs and WQBALs indicators for ELs and RWLs

• TBELs and WQBELs direct compliance measures for ELs (in the case of WQBELs these also should ensure RWL compliance)

The Challenge of Numerics

• Effluent limitations can either be “narrative” or “numeric”

• Numeric effluent limitations can either be “technology-based” or “water quality-based”

• Benchmark values are being used my many as training wheels for NELs– And just to be different, CA calls these

“Numeric Action Levels” - NALs

NELs and NALs

Water Quality Technology

Numeric Effluent Limitations

WQBELs TBELs

Numeric Action Levels WQBALs TBALs

WQBELs

• Derived from water quality standards

• Apply to the effluent at the point of discharge

• Could include mixing zone or dilution credit

• If NELs are met, water quality standards (WQS) would be met (in theory)

• Site specific!

TBELs

• Using the BAT/BCT approach, these are derived from performance data on specific BMPs (probably treatment control, but could be others, too)

• Apply to the effluent at the point of discharge

• Probably somewhat sector specific, but otherwise generally applicable

Action Levels

• aka Benchmark values in the MSGP

• These are typically a hybrid of technology- and water quality-based values

• MSGP values are derived from water quality criteria, however not site specific (nor are they CA specific)

• If exceeded these generally do not constitute a violation of the permit

CA Expert Panel on Numerics

• Recommended differentiating between TMDL based NELs and the rest of the pack

• Recommended a specific approach to setting TBALs and TBELs

• Technology-based numbers should be based on effluent characterization data – mean plus one or two standard deviations

• Panel went on to say our data was not acceptable

More on TBALs, TBELs, WQBALs and WQBELs

• Effluent data is only helpful in setting technology-based numbers if there is more known about the relationship to BAT/BCT implementation

• Some individual NPDES permits for industrial storm water have WQBELs – Boeing SSFL, refineries, etc.

Charts and graphs.

Industrial Facilities Inspected FY10/11

Industrial Facilities Inspected FY10/11

Industrial Facilities Submitting Annual Reports FY10/11

Industrial Facilities Submitting Annual Reports FY10/11

Next steps.

IGP - Next Steps

• Release new IGP draft (early November)

• Public, staff workshops (outreach) in November and December

• Public Hearing in December

• Comment period ends

• Staff digests and puts out FINAL draft for adoption

• Adoption in Spring 2012

The Scoop

• Staff will recommend a continuation of narrative ELs this permit cycle

• USEPA Benchmark values quasi-WQBALs (and TBALs) in draft

• Progressive (iterative) approach, akin to CASQA recommendations from 2006

• Improve data quality and breadth of information gathered, per Panel QiSP role and other features

• Aiming for possible TBELs in next permit

Greg Gearheart | 916-341-5892 | [email protected]

Documents

Industrial Storm Water Permitting in California: a Regulatory Perspective An intensive overview of the program, its key principles, and likely future –