![Page 1: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
AVOIDANCE TACTICS TOCONSIDER DURING COMPLIANCE
ALTERNATIVES PLANNING
Greg Gunderson, P.E.
MSA Professional Services, Inc.
Wisconsin Rural Water Association
26th Annual Technical Conference
Green Bay, WI
March 27, 2014
PHOSPHORUS LIMITS
![Page 2: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Presentation Overview
• What are we trying to “avoid”?
– Stringent Phosphorus Limits
– Compliance Schedules
– Treatment, Adaptive Management, Trading
• How can I avoid them?
– Find a way to have a different limit!
– Evaluate all options
• Summary/Questions
![Page 3: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Phosphorus Rule
• Rule passed in December 2010
• Settlement of federal Clean Water Act lawsuit
– CWA set the basis for numeric nutrient criteria (NNC)
– 2007 EPA memo reaffirmed need for NNC
– Criteria developed by DNR w/ EPA guidance/approval
• Rule developed statewide numeric nutrient criteria for
water bodies
– Streams 75 mg/L
– Rivers – NR102 100 mg/L
– Lakes/Reservoirs 15-40 mg/L
– Great Lakes 5-7 mg/L
– Ephemeral streams, <5 acre lakes, and wetlands are
excluded
![Page 4: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Phosphorus Rule Overview
![Page 5: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Phosphorus Rule
• Criteria used by DNR to set WQBELs
• Limits must also protect downstream waters
• Permit reissuance with WQBELs began in Fall 2011
• Internal and external pressure to DNR is speeding up the
reissuance process
• Permits reissued
– ~70% municipal with stringent limit
– ~50% industrial with stringent limit
![Page 6: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Compliance Schedules
• Length of compliance schedules vary (3 – 15 years)
• Typical Schedule (First Permit Term)
– Year 0 Permit Term Begins
– Year 1 OER Due, Initiate CAP
– Year 2 CAP Status Update (including OER implementation)
– Year 3 Preliminary CAP Due
– Year 4 Final CAP
– Year 5 Start of Permit 2nd Permit Term
– Future schedule depends on direction for compliance
![Page 7: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Treatment Technology
• Requires tertiary treatment
– Ballasted Clarification, MBR, Reactive Sand Filter, etc.
– Capital & Operational Costs• 1 MGD plant
• Capital $6-8M
• 20-Year Present Value $10-12M
– Significant cost and what benefit?
• Most watersheds are non-point source dominated for
phosphorus
![Page 8: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Adaptive Management & Trading
• Still complying with the stringent limit by relocating
responsibility to the watershed
• Watershed is dynamic environment
• If AM doesn’t work, then required to meet limit anyway
• Each municipality required to create and manage a new
compliance program
– Finding willing partners
– Barriers for land owners (privacy, trust, data)
– Coordinate multiple entities (land owners, County, etc.)
– Staff limitations
– Political will and fortitude
• Difficulty in quantifying barriers and risk
![Page 9: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Avoidance Tactics
• Regionalization
• Alternative Discharge Location
• Total Maximum Daily Load Studies (TMDLs)
• Site Specific Criteria (SSC)
• Variances
– Economic
– Lagoon
– New Multi-Discharger Option
![Page 10: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Regionalization
• Pump wastewater to another WWTF owned by a
different entity
• Fostered by DNR
• Potential pitfalls in user fee negotiation process
• Takes you out of the treatment plant business – Is that
good or bad?
• cost/risk threshold has changed – possibly cost-effective
• Examples
– 0.83 MGD 0.20 MGD
– 4.8 mi. forcemain 4.2 mi. forcemain
– $12,000,000 ($14/gal) $4,000,000 ($20/gal)
![Page 11: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Alt. Discharge Locations
• Groundwater Discharge
– Direct discharge to groundwater
– Groundwater Standards NR140
• Total Nitrogen 10 mg/L
• Chloride 250 mg/L
– Competitive treatment costs, 10 mg/L TN vs. 0.1 mg/L TP
– Discharge Units – Seepage Cells, Drain Fields
– Land availability
– Treatment type and soil characterization/analysis
necessary to determine sizing and loading requirements
– Examples
• Drain Field Seepage Cells
• 0.068 MGD 0.312 MGD
• 2 acres 16 acres
![Page 12: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
![Page 13: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Alt. Discharge Locations
• Wetland
– Discharge to a delineated wetland
• DNR Surface Water Viewer
• Different than constructed wetlands (discharge, not treatment)
– Wetlands specifically excluded water body from new
phosphorus rule
– HOWEVER – must consider downstream sources
– Effluent Limits calculation by DNR needed
![Page 15: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Alt. Discharge Locations
• Spray Irrigation
– Irrigating crops
• e.g. grasses, corn, soybeans, hybrid poplars
– Only allowed during growing season – could require up to
nine months of storage
– Hydraulic & nutrient loading limitations
• Hydraulic – soils, groundwater, BOD
• Nutrient – nitrogen update based on cover crop. No current
regulations for phosphorus loading
– Monitoring wells
– Example• 0.24 MGD
• Hybrid Poplars/Willows, 150-160 days/year
• Irrigation area = 31 acres
• Advantages - Existing lagoons, City-own property
• $1,300,000
![Page 16: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
![Page 17: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Alt. Discharge Locations
• Indirect Discharge to Surface Water
– Subsurface discharge (e.g. seepage cell, drain field)
– Defined as a subsurface discharge that affects a nearby
surface water
– Surface Water Limits - likely no nitrogen limits
• May or may not have phosphorus limits
• limits effective at point of discharge to surface water
• Phosphorus removal due to soil interaction - filtration, adsorption,
biological update, etc.
– Site Characterization Study is necessary to determine
feasibility
• Proximity to surface water (wetland, stream, etc.)
• Horizontal & vertical flow gradients
• Soil analysis – type, conductivity, etc.
• Monitoring wells – pollutant fate and transport
• Depth to groundwater/bedrock
![Page 19: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Alt. Discharge Locations
• Alternative Surface Water Discharge Location
– Proximity to larger stream/river section nearby
• Potentially more assimilative capacity available
• “Dilution is the solution to pollution!”
– Two Types
• New location on same water body
• Completely new water body – considered a “New Discharger”
– “New Discharger” only allowed to impaired water bodies in
certain cases (e.g. TMDL reserve allocation)
– Effluent limits request to DNR to determine applicability
• Identify multiple locations to be evaluated
• Beneficial to request monthly low flow statistics from USGS
• Requires significant time for DNR to determine limits at all locations
![Page 20: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
TMDLs
• What is it?
– Provision of the CWA – Section 303(d)
– Determines maximum pollutant load to meet water quality
standards
– Pollutant loadings given to each discharger
• Municipal/industrial wastewater
• Urban stormwater (MS4’s
• Runoff (Rural/agricultural and smaller municipalities)
• Reserve capacity
– Typically completed by state agency (DNR) or private
consultant. Must be approved by EPA.
– TMDLs in Wisconsin
• Major – Lake St. Croix, Rock River, Lower Fox
• In development – Milwaukee River, Wisconsin River
![Page 21: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
TMDLs
• How is this related to avoidance tactics?
– Key Points
• May “override” statewide NR102/217 criteria
• Allocation process typically leads to TMDLs relaxing the limits
• Each TMDL is different which leads to varying limits
– TMDL may help you avoid a stringent limit
• Reissued permit with TMDL in development
– Example – Wisconsin River
• Not expected to be complete until 2017
• Many dischargers in basin have new permits with stringent limits
– Compliance Schedule with annual planning milestones
– “Tiered” approach to planning
– TMDL limit is target for multi-discharger variance option
![Page 22: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Site Specific Criteria
• Criteria of a specific waterbody may be changed based on
site specific study.
• Goal is to prove that the water body is healthy at a higher
criterion than specified in the rules.
• What would you study? Examples:
– Fish health/speciation
– Algae concentration
– Macroinvertebrate health/speciation
– D.O. levels and diurnal swings
– Turbidity
– Natural background phosphorus
![Page 23: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Site Specific Criteria
• DNR Rules/Guidance
– NR102.06(7)
• “A criterion contained within this section may be modified by
rule for a specific surface water segment or waterbody. A site-
specific criterion may be adopted in place of the generally
applicable criteria in this section where site-specific data and
analysis using scientifically defensible methods and sound
scientific rationale demonstrate a different criterion is
protective of the designated use of the specific surface water
segment or waterbody.”
– DNR has recognized need to develop more detailed rules
– Vagueness leads to inconsistency, scrutiny, and challenges
in how it’s applied and what is acceptable
![Page 24: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Site Specific Criteria
• DNR Rules/Guidance
– Current rules note that SSC are likely to be appropriate for
lakes/reservoirs
– Currently requires DNR is create a new rule for each
specific case
– DNR working to write new rule (NR119) and guidance
• Provides methodology, procedures, definition, and structure to
process
• Won’t require new rule for each case
• Likely will be a few years before in place
• Warning – SSC could make limit more stringent!
• Subject to EPA approval
![Page 25: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Variances
• Variances are not “get out of jail free” cards
• Subject to EPA approval
• Variance not in perpetuity
• Variance to a less stringent/interim limit
• Types of Variances
– St. 283.15 – Economic Variance
– NR217.19 – Lagoon Variance
– St. 283.16 – Multi-Discharger Variance (proposed)
![Page 26: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Economic Variance
• WI St. 283.15(4)(a)(1)(f)
– “Substantial and widespread adverse social and economic impacts”
– Impact adverse at 2% of MHI (1995 EPA Guidance Document)
– Applied for during permit application process
– Must reapply each permit term
• Analysis must consider all options (including AM/WQT)
• Variance to a limit that is affordable (likely TBL, 1 mg/L)
![Page 27: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Economic Variance
• How much is 2%?
• WI average MHI = $52,374 (2010 census)
– 2% = $1,047/year or $87/month
• 2013 MSA Sewer User Charge Survey
– State average at 1% of MHI ($44/month)
– <5% over 2% MHI
– <20% over 1.5% MHI
![Page 28: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Economic Variance
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
4.00%
Population
Percent of 2012 MHI Spent on Sewer Costs by Population
% MHI
Average
![Page 29: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Lagoon Variance
• NR217.19
– Assumes treatment is too costly
– Simplified application procedure (DNR form)
– Equation used to calculate cost
– Not applicable to new dischargers
• Key Points to Consider
– Variance limit (p99, but likely TBL)
– Need to evaluate affordability of AM/WQT
– Complete source reduction and optimization
– EPA Approval
– Must be reapplied for each permit term
– Advisable to complete treatment evaluation anyway
![Page 30: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
• SB547 “Clean Waters, Healthy Economy Act”
– NR283.16 – Multi-Discharger Variance
– NR283.13 – AM compliance schedule increased to 20 years
• Multi-Discharger Variance
– DOA/DNR determines statewide economic feasibility
– Permitees can apply for variance from WQBEL if “major facility
upgrade” economically infeasible.
– Variance applicable for 20 years from effective date of bill
![Page 31: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
• Multi-Discharger Variance
– Interim limits that become progressively more stringent
– Permitee responsible for further phosphorus reductions to offset
difference in interim and a target limit
– Permitee responsible for meeting WQBEL at the end of 20 years
– Modeled after other EPA-Approved Rules
• Montana (Phosphorus) and Wisconsin (Chlorides)
![Page 32: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
• Statewide Economic Feasibility Determination
– Completed by DOA with technical support from DNR
– Prelim. determination due 240 days (8 mo.) after effect date of bill
– DOA/DNR will revisit determination again in 2024 and subsequently
every three years during Water Quality Standards review
• Determine if new affordable technology is available to meet criteria and/or
• A more stringent limit is needed than the current interim limit
• May determine certain categories of point sources can meet limit
![Page 33: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
• Interim Limits
– First Term – no change in current limit
– Second Term – 0.8 mg/L
– Third Term – 0.6 mg/L
– Fourth Term – 0.5 mg/L
• Interim limits subject to change based on DOA/DNR review
• Limits could be higher if major facility upgrade needed
– Can’t be higher than “best available demonstrated control
technology” per st. 283.11
– Likely have to meet TBL of 1.0 mg/L and install chemical feed
![Page 34: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
• Further Phosphorus Reductions
– Responsible for total pounds down to a target limit
– Target Limit is 0.2 mg/L or TMDL-based limit
• Two Options
– Trading Scenario
• Develop plan and construct non-point BMP’s
• Completed by Permittee or contracted entity
• Trades are 1:1
• Improvements must be to accepted standards
• Annual reporting required to DNR
– “Fee-in-Lieu” Scenario
• Permittee pays $50/lb to County to implement projects
• Fee cap of $640,000/year
![Page 35: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
• “Fee-in-Lieu” Scenario
– Fee starts and $50/lb and tied to Consumer Price Index
– Fees distributed to counties within Permittee’s HUC-8
– County payments used to implement BMP’s (model & construct)
– >65% towards cost share to implement non-point BMP’s
– County must submit annual report to DNR, DTCAP, and Permitee
– Report subject to review and approval by DNR
![Page 36: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
– 0.83 MGD Facility, 20 Year Present Worth
• Tertiary Filtration with Pump Station
– Capital Cost $3,840,000
– Annual O&M $140,000
– 20-Year Present Value $5,400,000
• Delay Upgrade, Pay Fee
– Annual Fee $55,000
– Capital Cost (delayed 20 years) $1,630,000
– 20-Year PV $2,300,000
![Page 37: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
![Page 38: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Multi-Discharger Variance
– Current State of Bill
• On Governor’s Desk (scheduled 4/23 signing)
• EPA Approval Pending
• EPA/DNR negotiation with companion legislation
• Probably a year away from implementation
![Page 39: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Summary
![Page 40: Phosphorus Limits: Avoidance Tactics to Consider During Compliance Planning](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042715/55a1d0911a28ab9a468b46fb/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
QUESTIONS??
Contact Info:
Greg Gunderson, P.E
608-355-8883