implementing the new los angeles county ms4 npdes permit ...€¦ · pasadena water and power...

Pasadena Water and Power

Implementing the New Los Angeles County MS4 NPDES Permit for Community Water Systems:

The First YearPresented by

David Kimbrough, Ph.D., Water Quality Manager

Presented to

California Nevada Section of the American Water Works

Association Annual Fall Conference, Sacramento

October 2, 2013


Outline

1) NPDES Permits

2) MS4s

3) CWSs

4) BMPs

5) Compliance for MS4 Permittees

6) Compliance for CWSs

7) Details

8) Update

2


NPDES Permit

Who Needs an NPDES Permit?

3


NPDES Permit

1) Point Source

2) Discharge of Pollutants

3) Waters of the US

4


A Point Source Discharging Pollutants in a

Water of the United States

5

Point Source


A Point Source Discharging Pollutants in a

Water of the United States?

6


RAPANOS ET UX., ET AL. v. UNITED

STATES 2006

“The restriction of „the waters of the United States’ to exclude channels containing merely intermittent or ephemeral flow also accords with the commonsense understanding of the term. In applying the definition to „ephemeral streams‟, „wet meadows‟, storm sewers and culverts, „directional sheet flow during storm events‟, drain tiles, man-made drainage ditches, and dry arroyos in the middle of the desert, the Corps has stretched the term ‘waters of the United States’ beyond parody. The plain language of the statute simply does not authorize this „Land Is Waters‟ approach to federal jurisdiction.”

7


This is not a Water of the US, No NPDES Permit is Need to Discharge Pollutants


Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System

Who Cares About MS4s?

9


Combined Sewer System

10


Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)

11

In California almost

every City

separates Sanitary

Sewers from

Storms SewersThis is a Point Source

Discharging Pollutants

Into a Water of the

United States


MS4 NPDES Permit

• The Sole Legal Purpose for an MS4 is to Protect the Life and Property of the People of California from Floods

• Under the MS4 Permit

> The Only Allowable Use of an MS4 is for the Control of

Flood Waters

> MS4 Permittees are Required to Effectively Ban All

Non-Storm Water Discharges from Entering the MS4

> MS4 Permittees are Required to Control the Discharge

of Pollutants from Leaving the MS4

12


Exceptions

The MS4 Permits allow Exceptions to the Above Rule

MS4 Permittees are REQURED to NOT ALLOW any non-storm water discharges.

Except for Authorized Non-Stormwaters which MS4 Permittees are NOT REQUIRED to NOT ALLOW

Which is not the same as REQUIRING them to ALLOW.

So the MS4 Permit ALLOWS MS4 Permittees to ALLOW these Discharges

This means that the MS4 Operator DECIDES which Allowed Non-Stormwaters to ALLOW and which to BAN, not the RWQCB

13


MS4 Operators Can Regulate Discharges from CWSs


Los Angeles County MS4 Permit

Who Cares About CWSs?

15


16

Categories of Authorized Non-Stormwater Discharges

Allowed into MS4s by the LAC MS4 Permit

Authorized

Emergency Fire

FlowCERCLANPDES Permit

Conditionally

Exempt

Non-Essential

Allowed Discharge

Essential

1 BMPs

Yes

2 BMPs

NoYes

No

2 BMPs

YesNo


NSW Outfall Monitoring

17

Within 90 days after completing

the source identification or after

the Executive Officer of the

Regional Water Board approves

the IMP or CIMP, whichever is

later, each Permittee shall

monitor outfalls that have been

determined to convey significant

discharges comprised of either

unknown or conditionally exempt

non-storm water discharges, or

continuing discharges attributed

to illicit discharges.


III 4 c d e Evaluate Monitoring Data

18

Collect Out Fall Data

Is a WQBEL or AL Exceeded?

Yes

No

Is a RWL Exceeded? No

Yes

Is It from a Essential CED or AD? No

Yes

Notify RWQCB 30 Days

Effectively Prohibit

Impose Conditions

Sewer Discharge

Require Treatment

Non-Essential CED or ID


In Stream Monitoring

19

Minimum 3

Times per Year in

Wet Weather

Conditions, 2

Times in Dry


In Stream Monitoring

20

Sampling Location 9


III 4 c d e Evaluate Monitoring Data

21

Collect In Stream Data

Is a WQBEL Exceeded?

Yes

No

Is a RWL Exceeded? No

Yes

Is It from a Essential CED or AD? No

Yes

Notify RWQCB 30 Days / No Violation

Notice of Violation

Fine

Third Party Law Suit

Public Notice

Non-Essential CED or ID


Bacteria WQBEL Dry Weather

22


Bacteria RWL

23


Bacteria RWL Compliance

24

1) Do not Exceed the RWL

2) Demonstrate that your Discharges did not Cause the Exceed the RWL

3) There were no NWS Discharges

4) The RWL Exceedance was Caused by an Essential CED Discharge



What Do CWSs Have to Do?

25


Technical Aspects

MS4 Permittees are Required to Require CWSs to follow BMPs including

1) Advance Notification of Discharges

2) Dechlorination

3) Sediment Control

4) Monitoring of Discharge

5) Record Keeping and Sharing

6) For Discharges Greater than 100,000 Gal.

26


Discharges Covered

8 Potable Drinking water supplier distribution system releases means sources of flows from drinking water storage, supply and distribution systems (including flows from system failures), pressure releases, system maintenance, distribution line testing, and flushing and dewatering of pipes, reservoirs, and vaults, and minor non-invasive well maintenance activities not involving chemical addition(s) where not otherwise regulated by NPDES Permit No. CAG674001, NPDES Permit No. CAG994005, or an other separate NPDES permit.

27


Advance Notification

Each Permittee shall work with drinking water suppliers [CWSs] that may discharge to the Permittee’s MS4 to ensure for all discharges greater than 100,000 gallons:

(1)notification

a) at least 72 hours prior to a planned

discharge and

b) as soon as possible after an unplanned

discharge;.

28


Dechlorination & Sediment Control

Discharges from drinking water supplier distribution systems…provided appropriate BMPs are implemented based on the American Water Works Association (California-Nevada Section) Guidelines for the Development of Your Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual for Drinking Water System Releases (2005) or equivalent industry standard BMP manual.

http://ca-nv-awwa.org/iMISpublic/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Resource_Center34

&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=7742

29


Monitoring

Each Permittee shall work with drinking water suppliers [CWSs] that may discharge to the Permittee’s MS4 to ensure for all discharges greater than 100,000 gallons:

(2) monitoring of any pollutants of concern9 in the drinking water supplier distribution system release

30


Monitoring

9 Pollutants of concern from drinking water supplier distribution system releases may include trash and debris, including organic matter, total suspended solids (TSS), residual chlorine, pH, and any pollutant for which there is a water quality-based effluent limitation (WQBEL) in Part VI.E applicable to discharges from the MS4 to the receiving water. Determination of the pollutants of concern for a particular discharge shall be based on an evaluation of the potential for the constituent(s) to be present in the discharge at levels that may cause or contribute to exceedances of applicable WQBELs or receiving water limitations.

31


Monitoring

1) trash and debris, including organic matter

2) total suspended solids (TSS)

3) residual chlorine,

4) pH,

5) any pollutant for which there is a water quality-based effluent limitation (WQBEL) in Part VI.E applicable to discharges from the MS4 to the receiving water. Determination of the pollutants of concern for a particular discharge shall be based on an evaluation of the potential for the constituent(s) to be present in the discharge at levels that may cause or contribute to exceedances of applicable WQBELs or receiving water limitations.

32


Record Keeping

Each Permittee shall work with drinking water suppliers [CWSs] that may discharge to the Permittee’s MS4 to ensure for all discharges greater than 100,000 gallons: (3) record keeping by the

drinking water supplier. Permittees shall require that the following information is maintained by the drinking water supplier(s) for all discharges to the MS4 (planned and unplanned) greater than 100,000 gallons: name of discharger, date and time of notification (for planned discharges), method of notification, location of discharge, discharge pathway, receiving water, date of discharge, time of the beginning and end of the discharge, duration of the discharge, flow rate or velocity, total number of gallons discharged, type of dechlorination equipment used, type of dechlorination chemicals used, concentration of residual chlorine, type(s) of sediment controls used, pH of discharge, type(s) of volumetric and velocity controls used, and field and laboratory monitoring data. Records shall be retained for five years and made available upon request by the Permittee or Regional Water Board. 33


Record Keeping

1)name of discharger,

2)date and time of notification (for planned discharges),

3)method of notification,

4)location of discharge,

5)discharge pathway,

6)receiving water,

7)date of discharge,

8)time of the beginning and end of the discharge,

9)duration of the discharge34


Record Keeping

10) flow rate or velocity,

11) total number of gallons discharged,

12) type of dechlorination equipment used, type of dechlorination chemicals used, concentration of residual chlorine,

13) type(s) of sediment controls used,

14) pH of discharge,

15) type(s) of volumetric and velocity controls used,

16) field and laboratory monitoring data.

17) Records shall be retained for five years and made available upon request by the Permittee or Regional Water Board.

35



How Do MS4 Permittees Comply?

36


How To Comply?

1) The Permit is in Effect and MS4 Permittees are now Required to Require CWSs to Comply with the BMPs

2) The MS4 Permit does not describe How the MS4 Permittees are to Require CWSs to Comply with the BMPs

3) There are 84 MS4 Permittees and 300 CWSs covered under the LAC MS4 NPDES Permit

4) Different MS4 Permittees have Different WQBELs, RWLs, and Action Levels to Comply with.

37


II J 1 TMDLs

Permittees with co-mingled MS4 discharges are jointly responsible for meeting the water quality-based effluent limitations and receiving water limitations assigned to MS4 discharges in this Order.

38


Joint Liability & Relief

39

1) This Could be an In-Stream

Monitoring Points

2) All Upstream MS4

Permittees Would be

Responsible for

Compliance Here

3) There is no way for any one

MS4 Permit to demonstrate

that a RWL exceedance

was cause by CWS

discharge

4) Together they might


How to Implement

Given the interconnected nature of the Permittees MS4s, however, the Regional Water Board expects Permittees to work cooperatively to control the contribution of pollutants from one portion of the MS4 to another portion of the system through inter-agency agreements or other formal arrangements.

40


Memorandum of Understanding

The MS4 Permit makes compliance the joint responsibility of MS4 Permittees where discharges are co-mingled to be achieved through inter-agency agreements.

The MS4 Permit regulates MS4 Permittees, not CWSs. There needs to be a link between the MS4 Permit and the CWSs.

This goal is best achieved through an Memorandum of Understanding.

41


The Proposal

• The Benefits of the MS4 Permit Can Only be Accrued if the MS4 Permittees Work With Each Other and the CWSs

• Trying to Set Up BMP Manuals and “Procedures to Ensure” on a Permittee by Permittee Basis is Inefficient

• Develop a BMP Manual for the Entire Watershed

• Develop an MOU to “Ensure” the Use of the Manual

• Test Them Out First

42


Pilot Study

How Do CWSs & MS4 Permittees Cooperate?

43


Background

1) In November of 2012 a Group of CWSs met to Discuss the MS4 Permit.

2) It was Understood that the MS4 Permittees would be Focusing on the “Big Issues” of the Permit (e.g. LID) and that the Provisions that impacted CWS would not get much Attention for Quite Some Time.

3) If CWSs wanted to Get these Provisions Addressed, We would have to take the Lead Ourselves.

44


Pilot Study

1) We would Select One Watershed and Attempt to Bring Together All of the CWSs and MS4 Permittees to Apply the Permit as Written for a Test Period

2) We would then see What Worked and What Did Not Work

3) Then the BMP Manual and MOU would be Altered to Meet Everyone’s Needs.

45


Pilot Study

1) After that Meeting We Contacted...

a) The Department of Public Health

b) The Los Angeles County Flood Control District

c) The Regional Water Quality Control Board

2) We Selected the Upper Rio Hondo Watershed (above Whittier Narrows Dam)

a) 19 MS4 Permittees

b) 22 CWSs

c) Many Are Both

46


Pilot Study

1) We would Select One Watershed and Attempt to Bring Together All of the CWSs and MS4 Permittees to Apply the Permit as Written for a Test Period

2) We would then see What Worked and What Did Not Work

3) Then the BMP Manual and MOU would be Altered to Meet Everyone’s Needs.

47


Who is to be Notified?

1. Each MS4 Permittee will Develop a List of CWSs who Notify them

2. Each MS4 Permittee will Accept Notifications via Email

3. LACFCD will Accept Notifications via Telephone on a 24/7/52 Basis for Direct Discharges

48


49

Notification

MS4 Permittee Notification Address CWSs

Pasadena [email protected] Pasadena Water & Power

California-American Water Co.

City of Alhambra

Kinneloa Irrigation District


Notification System

1. The name of the CWS

2. Contact person email and phone number

3. Type of discharge

a) Planned, unplanned/emergency

b) Source (reservoir, tank, well, distribution line, etc.)

c) Type of activity (reservoir or tank dewatering, line flushing, well to waste, well start-up, well

development/redevelopment, etc.)

d) treated or raw

4. If the discharge is coming from an NPDES permitted facility, include the permit number and section/page

5. Direct or Indirect

6. Reason for discharge

a) if unplanned/emergency provide detailed justification (line break, water quality, etc.)

b) If due to water quality, state constituent of concern and concentration triggering need for emergency

discharge

c) maintenance, repair, etc.

7. The start and end dates, times, and duration of the discharges

8. Location of discharge (if available, please include storm drain or channel impacted, cross streets, City, and Thomas Guide page & grid; GPS coordinates). Discharger may contact the LACFCD in advance to help determine impacted storm drain or channel)

9. Flow rate (cfs or gpm)

10. Total volume expected to be discharged (gallons)

50


Monitoring

1)Chlorine Residual

2)pH

3)Prepare a Table of CWS Results from the CCRs for the TMDL Analytes

51


52

Monitoring Data

Upper Rio Hondo Consumer Confidence Reports

All units are mcg/L except

Wet Weather Metals

WQBELs which are

kg/day

MS4 CWS Aluminum Cadmium Chloride Chromium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Nitrate Sulfate TDS Zinc

Wet Weather WQBEL 1.8 9.5 3.85 36 83

Dry Weather WQBEL 36

Non-Stormwater Action Level 1,000 0.1 - 8.0* 150 0.051 3.4 - 179* 36 300 750 4.7 - 251*

Municipal Action Level 2.5 20.2 0.32 27.43 8.2 641

Pasadena Pasadena WP ND 15 2 12 29 268 ND

220 47 10 52 89 422 130

Kinneloa 7 3.8 16 210

Irrigation District 32 22 60 400

Cal American 11 1.8 18 0

Water 27 6.2 30 330

Alhambra ND 11 ND 20 250

WD 200 94 39 250 630


Notification Threshold

1. 30,000 Gallons

2. 72hrs for Planned Discharges

3. ASAP for Unplanned Discharges

53


Study Period

1) Monday February 17 through Sunday March 18 (URHW)

2) Monday March 19 through Sunday April 14 (USGRW)

3) Follow-Up Meeting on Tuesday March 26 (URHW) and Thursday April 18 (USGRW)

4) Assess Results

54


Pilot Study

What are the Details?

55


Overlapping Responsibilities

56

RWQCB

MS4

PermitteeCWSs M

O

U

MS4 PermitOther

Permits


MOU - Concept

1. The purpose of the MOU is to implement the provisions of the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) NPDES Permit that apply to Essential Conditionally Exempt Non-Storm Water Discharges (Essential CEDs) from Community Water Systems (CWSs).

2. The MOU does not cover any direct discharges from CWSs to Waters of the United States (WoUS). The MOU only covers indirect discharges which first enter an MS4 and which are then subsequently discharged to a WoUS.

3. CWS agree to implement the specified Best Management Practices (BMPs) for all Essential CEDs.

4. MS4 Permittees agree that if the CWSs use the specified BMPs, CWSs will be allow unfettered right to discharge Essential CEDs to and will not pursue legal action against the CWSs for the Essential CEDs.

57


MOU – Part 3

MS4 Permittee has the right pursue legal action against a CWS if the CWS fails to implement the BMPs as described in the MOU, irrespective of whether there is a Notice of Violation, a Third Party Law Suit, or not.

This make CWSs Nervous

58


MOU – Part 4

CWSs are indemnified from any adverse action against the MS4 Permittee by either the RWQCB or a third party (provided that BMPs are followed). So even if the MS4 Permittee is sued by an environmental group or receives and NOV from the RWQCB, the MS4 Permittee cannot stop the CWSs from discharging or pursue legal action against the CWS.

CWSs are not Permittees, we cannot be sued under the Clean Water Act by third parties or the RWQCB.

This makes MS4 Permittees nervous

59


MOU

The MOU Allows CWSs and MS4 Permittees to be Nervous Together in an Organized, Legal Structure.

60


MOU - Costs

1. Lawyers will have to review it

2. Staff will have to negotiate it.

3. Boards, Councils, Mayors, Directors, &c. will have to approve it.

4. It will take staff time and money.

61


MOU - Benefits

1. Ensures that BMPs will actually be implemented before NOVs are issued

2. When NOVs are issued MS4 Permittees will be in a better position to respond

3. The discharge rules will not change after the NOV

62


MOU

1. Question

There has been the suggestion that perhaps the MOU is not really

necessary, that all that the Permittees have to do is agree on a BMP

Manual and simply ask the CWSs to use to use the BMP Manual.

There would no formal legally binding document, just a sort of

“Gentlemen‟s Agreement” as it were. Strictly from the point of view of

the Board staff and implementing the MS4 Permit, how would this

idea be viewed?

2. Answer

Although we don’t think a MOU is necessary, we think an MOU could

be beneficial for both permittees and CWSs to ensure that all of the

requirements of: III.A,4, VI.A.2.a, VI.A.2.b.i VI.A.a.iii are implemented.

63


MOU

What Now?

64


Process

1. The CWSs in the URHW met and prepared changes to MOU and BMP Manual.

2. It is under Review by the LACFCD and County Counsel

3. If They Accept it, and we should know in a few Weeks, We will then have the other MS4 Permittees Review

4. Perhaps by the New Year we will have our first MOU.

65


Problems

1. There is a Proposal for a Tri-Regional CWS General NPDES Permit / Order

2. It would Cover all CWSs in Regions 2, 4, and 5

3. It is Very Restrictive and Burdensome4. A Draft is Scheduled for Release in Mid-

November (Six Weeks)5. It is Scheduled for Adoption in Spring of

2014

66


Work Plan / Timeline 1

67


Work Plan / Timeline 2

68


Conclusions

1.The MOU Process is Moving Forward

2.The Tri-Regional Permit is moving forward

3.“Something Has to Give”.

69

implementing the new los angeles county ms4 npdes permit ...€¦ · pasadena water and power...

Documents