SB 737 SAMPLING continued on page 2

SPRING 2011 Page 1

SPRING 2011

Working with more than 90 community wastewater treatment agencies to protect Oregon’s water

SB 737 Sampling Shows Oregon Wastewater Utilities Working to Reduce ToxicsThe final round of SB 737 effluent sampling results for the 52 affected Oregon wastewater treatment plants confirmed that Oregon wastewater treatment plants, and associated pollution prevention programs, continue to effectively control discharges of Priority Persistent Pollutants to Oregon’s rivers and streams.

Under SB 737, passed by the 2007 Oregon Legislature, the largest treatment plants in Oregon (over 1 MGD) screened their effluent for 117 of the 118 Oregon Priority Persistent Pollutants in sampling events held in the summer of 2010 (dry weather) and the winter of 2010 (wet weather). Both sampling events had very similar results.

Overall ResultsOregon DEQ set threshold levels for each of the 118 Priority Persistent Pollutants, above which pollution prevention plans would need to be prepared. DEQ calls the thresholds Plan Initiation Levels. Exceeding a threshold in either sampling event requires preparation of a pollution prevention plan.

“The results show that the pollution reduction measures currently in place are working to keep the majority of persistent pollutants out of municipal wastewater effluent. Wastewater from municipal treatment plants is not a significant source of most persistent pollutants,” said Cheryl Grabham, SB 737 project coordinator for Oregon DEQ.

Of the 52 participating treatment plants1, each sampling twice, only five Oregon treatment plants must prepare pollution prevention plans – each for one pollutant. These include:

The Cities of Klamath Falls •and Ontario for arsenic where background arsenic concentrations are elevated from volcanic soils,

The City of Hermiston and Oak •Lodge Sanitary District for beta-sitosterol, a plant-based sterol common in municipal wastewater, and

The City of Portland (Columbia •Blvd. Treatment Plant – a combined sewer system) for pyrene, a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon associated with combustion.

“What wasn’t found is just as important as what was found,” said Bob Baumgartner with Clean Water

Services. “An overall review of the data shows that about 68% of the compounds were not detected at any of the treatment plants, even at the very low detection levels that the DEQ laboratory was using,” he said.

Chemicals that were found in wastewater effluent, but below Plan Initiation Levels included:

Legacy pesticides including •2,4,6-Trichlorophenol, 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol, and pentachlorobenzene,

Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons •(PAHs) - - by-products of combustion - - including benzo (a) anthracene, benzo (b) fluoranthene, chrysene, and others,

Metals including arsenic, lead, and •methyl mercury,

Legacy chemicals including PCBs, •

A consumer chemical fragrance – •galaxolide

Flame retardants •

Every treatment plant exceeded the Plan Initiation Levels for cholesterol and coprostanol, natural by-products of digestion. After further examination, DEQ staff suspended pollution prevention plan requirements for those pollutants due to limited information about toxicity, lack of feasible municipal pollution prevention activities, and lack of cost-effective treatment options.

1. Only 50 treatment plants sampled in the summer; two treatment plants do not operate in the summer

SB 737 SAMPLING continued from page 1

SB 737 SAMPLING continued on page 3

SPRING 2011 Page 2

Study of National Significance Oregon is the first state in the nation to undertake such an extensive examination of persistent toxics in wastewater treatment facility effluent. This study is noteworthy considering the number of chemicals tested, clean sampling protocols, and the extremely low laboratory detection levels used in the analysis

The effluent results were analyzed by the Oregon DEQ Laboratory and paid for by the SB 737 affected municipalities. Each of the 52 affected wastewater treatment plant paid about $15,000 for the sampling effort. The DEQ laboratory worked collaboratively with Oregon municipal lab managers to develop the sampling protocols, design the sampling programs, and develop the testing efforts. “The DEQ lab really did an amazing job on this project. These were not a few extra sample bottles a week spread over a year – it was an avalanche of samples in two huge sampling events,” said City of Portland Water Quality Lab Supervisor, Chuck Lytle. “DEQ did a very good job.”

Pollution Prevention Tools DevelopedAs part of its efforts to assist members with SB 737 pollution prevention planning, ACWA organized a project with participating ACWA members to develop a web-based pollution prevention tool focused on Oregon Priority Persistent Pollutants.

The web tool includes:

Chemical Profiles • – Detailed information is available for all 118 of Oregon’s Priority Persistent Pollutants. The information included in the profile includes basic chemical information, potential sources to wastewater effluent, an inventory of effective pollution prevention programs, and resources.

Pollution Prevention Program Categorie • s – a series of 19 different pollution prevention programs are included. The pollution prevention programs are sorted by broad chemical category (consumer products, pesticides, metals, etc.). Some programs may be effective at reducing a number of chemical categories.

Other Features • - Background information on SB 737 is included, along with reference and resource information for pollution prevention programs.

The web tool is available to ACWA members that participated in funding its development. Access to the web tools is password protected, and ACWA member agencies that participated in the project will be issued passwords.

The web-based pollution prevention tool will be premiered at the ACWA Summer Conference, scheduled for July 27, 28, & 29, 2011 in Bend.

The pollution prevention tool was developed under the guidance of an ACWA Task Force. Membership included: Mark Yeager (Albany), Tom Penpraze (Corvallis), Amy Pepper (Troutdale), Amy Kyle (Clackamas County Water Environment Services), Marney Jett (Clean Water Services), Steve Witbeck (OMI/RUSA), Paul Eckley (Gresham), Stephanie Eisner (Salem), Rick Williams (McMinnville), and Bob Baumgartner (Clean Water Services).

Prevention Efforts Continuing for Oregon MunicipalitiesAlthough a limited number of municipalities are required to meet the SB 737 pollution prevention plan requirements, this is not the end of pollution prevention activities for Oregon wastewater municipalities.

“The pollution prevention information developed for participating ACWA members as part of the SB 737 process will be also be helpful to members that don’t need to prepare a pollution prevention plan under SB 737,” said Mark Yeager, chair of the ACWA SB 737 Task Force.

“For instance, under the DEQ’s revised toxic water quality standards, communities will need to prepare a pollution reduction plan when they apply for a variance,” he said. An analysis by ACWA has indicated that most - - if not all - - Oregon wastewater treatment plants will need variances from the revised toxic water quality standards for legacy chemicals such as PCBs and other pollutants.

Other regulatory drivers for developing pollution prevention plans might include:

Maintaining high quality biosolids for •beneficial reuse,

Meeting Oregon water quality •standards for metals and other toxics,

Preparing to meet future water quality •standards,

Developing pollution reduction plans •as part of a water quality variance application,

Assisting in evaluation of Whole •Effluent Toxicity (WET) test failures, and

Building community partnerships to •reduce the use of toxic materials, especially in households.

ENERGY YIELDS SAVINGS continued on page 4

SB 737 SAMPLING continued from page 2

SPRING 2011 Page 3

Example pollution prevention activities that communities might institute include:

Working with OSU Extension, Soil •and Water Conservation Districts, and local drinking water providers to organize an event to collect legacy pesticides from area ranchers and farmers,

Supporting and promoting local •household hazardous waste collection events,

Working with schools to clean out lab •chemicals, remove mercury-containing equipment, and revise procurement practices,

Promoting eco-certified soaps and •cleaners,

Specifying that electronic devices •including computers, monitors, and laptops meet environmental standards set by EPEAT (see www.epeat.net).

Ensuring landscaping practices meet •Eco-Biz standards,

Working with local law enforcement •agencies to establish a collection box for unwanted and unused drugs,

Inspecting equipment and •transformers at the treatment plant and pump stations to ensure no PCB equipment is used where it could fail into effluent, and

Outreach and education to the public •on proper use of pesticides, including herbicides.

“The results from SB 737 are good news for Oregon wastewater utilities. But we need to continue to communicate to our ratepayers and communities that these toxic chemicals must be removed from use if they are going to be removed from Oregon’s rivers and streams,” concluded Yeager. “We must all continue to stress the message that if you don’t want it in the water, don’t put it down the drain…”

Focused Approach On Energy Yields Savings

After attending a thirteen month training program, including seven daylong workshops focused on building an energy management system, participating ACWA members have seen the results – energy savings…

The City of Vancouver treatment plants are on track to reduce their energy •consumption by 10% this year- - and on target for a savings of nearly 1 megawatt hours for 2011. An aggressive energy conservation program at the plants involved blower shut down, turbo blower installation, UV system adjustments, VFD drive installation, lighting upgrades, and other projects. Lighting upgrades alone will save 525,000 kilowatt hours per year (kwh/year) at the Vancouver wastewater plants.

Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority (RUSA) will save $11,000 per year by limiting •blower run time – with no impact on effluent quality.

Installing turbo blowers is expected to save the City of Troutdale $22,000 per year. •Redmond expects to save $12,000 per year with its new turbo blower system

The City of Gresham •has saved $1.35 million with conservation and renewable energy project investments since October of 2005.

Adjustments to the filters •in the recycled water system at the City of Bend saves $5,400 per year; a turn-down of the digester pump added an additional $5,300 savings per year.

The City of Portland has increased the run time on its co-generation units to 95%, •along with crafting an energy policy for the treatment plant, and incorporating energy into its overall capital planning process.

ENERGY YIELDS SAVINGS continued from page 3

ENERGY YIELDS SAVINGS continued on page 5

SPRING 2011 Page 4

The City of Lewiston targeted •specific energy conservation blower-related projects and is saving 10% or $27,000 per year for this small, 4 MGD activated sludge system. Adjustments to the UV disinfection system are planned - - that should add an additional savings of $10,000 per year.

The training followed a plan/do/check/act sequence, as outlined by the EPA‘s workbook Ensuring a Sustainable Future: An Energy Management Guidebook for Wastewater and Water Utilities – see http://www.epa.gov/owm/waterinfrastructure/pdfs/guidebook_si_energymanagement.pdf

Training was provided by a variety of energy experts and trainers including Dorothy Atwood – Zero Waste Alliance, Layne McWilliams – BPA EnergySmartIndustrial, and Walt Mintkeski and Thad Roth – Energy Trust of Oregon. National energy experts from CH2M Hill, Brown & Caldwell, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, and HDR added technical presentations on a variety of energy issues.

Wastewater utilities used a process to:

Set an energy goal, •

Get a no-cost energy audit, •

Set an energy baseline, •

Form an energy team, •

Explore opportunities for saving •energy, make a plan, test, and measure,

Consider installation of renewable •power technologies, and

Measure, report, and improve. •

Specifics include:

Set an Energy Goal. 1.The City of Gresham wants to be energy independent. City of Redmond wants to reduce energy use by 5% through efficiency and increase renewable power generated on site by 10% by 2012. The City of Lewiston set (…and met) a goal of reducing power consumption by 10%. McMinnville reduced its load factor by 20%.

Consider involvement by your Council, Commission, or Board in setting the energy policy and energy goals for the wastewater treatment plant.

Get a NO COST Energy Audit. 2.Engage technical and energy program resources offered by your utility and their partners.

Free energy audits will help identify energy efficiency measures and available financing incentives. Wastewater utilities served by public power electric utilities including PUDs, municipal agencies, or co-ops should contact their electric utility, or get additional information at www.energysmartindustrial.com. Wastewater utilities served by Portland General Electric or Pacific Power should contact the program delivery contractor that serves the area – more information at http://energytrust.org/industrial-and-ag/program-delivery-contractor/

Areas to explore include lighting upgrades, thermostat adjustments, and motor and pump replacement.

Set an Energy Baseline. 3.Using the past 12 months of energy bills, calculate the amount of energy used per million gallons of wastewater treated (kwh/MGD). Another useful metric is kwh per 1,000 pounds of BOD removed. For example, the kwh/1,000 pounds of BOD removed varied greatly within the participating utility group - - at the high end, one treatment plant used 1,947 kwh/1,000 pounds of BOD removed. At the other end, three treatment plants with biogas generators were between 335 and 680 kwh/1,000 pounds of BOD removed.

It is also useful to calculate your load factor – there can be substantial savings by shifting power uses to off-peak times of the day.

Form an Energy Team. 4.The energy team works to gather information and implement energy efficiency measures. Ensure all aspects of the plant staff are included in the team membership – operators, management, lab, and maintenance staff.

“We found that small successes built operator support for energy conservation,” said David Six with the City of Lewiston. Other tips to getting the energy team into action include:

Reprogramming SCADA to provide direct feedback to operators on energy ~efficiency issues. “Adding energy feedback into our SCADA system has been a tremendous help in getting operators to incorporate energy issues into their

ENERGY YIELDS SAVINGS continued from page 4

ENERGY YIELDS SAVINGS continued on page 6

SPRING 2011 Page 5

thinking as they are managing for water quality,” said RUSA General Manager Ron Thames.

Plan and hold an event to share ~the energy goals and gather suggestions from the entire staff. The City of Vancouver included their electric utility provider in this discussion with the entire treatment plant staff.

Identify staff as ‘champions’ of ~the efficiency effort. “Identify the energy champions in your operator group and empower them to improve,” highlighted Aaron Kraft with Veolia Water, contract operator for the City of Vancouver.

Incorporate energy into routine ~safety walk-throughs. “We have incorporated the O & M Energy Efficiency Checklist for Wastewater Treatment Plants into our routine monthly safety walk-throughs,” said Bob Sprick of the City of Eugene, “Now staff is identifying both safety issues and energy efficiency opportunities.”

Dorothy Atwood with Zero Waste Alliance provided training on management systems through

the program. “It was great to see the energy teams formed at the local wastewater utilities, and the benefits of a systematic approach to reducing energy costs,” she said. “Items such as scheduling routine meetings of the energy team, check-ins with senior management, and providing energy training and awareness for all employees, work to keep these types of programs moving forward.” She added that an organized approach for inventorying all possible projects and setting priorities also helps.

Explore Opportunities for 5.Saving Energy, Make a Plan, Test, and Measure. Inventory energy efficiency opportunities at the treatment plant to save energy. Some items that might be included:

Use the ~ O & M Energy Efficiency Checklist for Wastewater Treatment Plants to identify low/no cost areas for energy conservation. The checklist can be incorporated into a ‘walk around’ for the energy team to identify efficiency opportunities in routine plant operations. A

copy is posted on the ACWA web site at http://www.oracwa.org/files/news/670/WWTP-Energy-Efficiency-OM-Measure-checklist-ACWA-formatted.pdf ?PHPSESSID=bffafe4a793962128239ac647b6a933e

Adjust the UV disinfection light ~banks for maximum effectiveness and minimum power. The City of Vancouver saved 25% of its power for the UV system through adjustments, with no impact on effluent quality.

Identify the most efficient pumps ~and use them first.

Use jockey pumps to increase ~pump efficiency at lower flows.

Evaluate installation of turbo ~blowers.

Monitor pumps and motors for ~excessive vibration and amp draw to detect plugging and excessive wear.

Turn blowers off for a several ~hours each day. RUSA is saving $11,000 per year just by adjusting blower run time.

With that information, make a plan for implementing the highest priority energy conservation measures, and for measuring and reporting success to the entire organization.

Consider Installation of Renewable 6.Power Technologies. Example renewable technologies in use at the participating plants include:

Biogas use – The City of Medford ~found that it could reduce its natural gas purchases and substitute biogas instead. “We reduced our monthly natural gas cost from $2,500 to less than $10 a month - - a savings of about $30,000 per year,” said Tom Suttle with the City of Medford. Treatment plants should also explore using biogas for digester heating and building heating.

ENERGY YIELDS SAVINGS continued from page 5

SPRING 2011 Page 6

Biogas generators – Portland, Gresham, ~MWMC/Eugene, and Medford are each offsetting over 50% of their purchased electricity by installing biogas generators to generate electricity from digester gas. Gas treatment and scrubbing systems have dramatically increased the reliability of these generators.

Solar P/V – Gresham has installed a solar P/V ~system at its treatment plant.

Effluent heat pump – Both the City of Silverton ~and City of McMinnville have effluent heat pumps. Silverton uses the energy to heat the historic Frank Lloyd Wright-designed Gordon House at the Oregon Gardens; McMinnville uses the energy to heat and cool its administration building, including its laboratory.

Measure/Report/ Improve. 7.“Information on energy conservation and the success we have had at the treatment plant has been of top interest for our City Council,” said Shannon Taylor with the City of Redmond. “Our Council is very interested in efficiency and in exploring renewable energy technologies for our plant.” Items to consider:

Incorporating life-cycle cost analysis and energy ~issues into capital planning decisions. “The initial cost of a pump or piece of equipment is small compared to the energy costs for running it over its lifetime,” added Bob Sprick with the City of Eugene.

Write Standard Operating Practices to ~promote energy efficient behavior. As part of the workshops, a set of SOPs were drafted and are available to ACWA members. Available example SOPs cover motor replacement, reducing mixing horsepower, load shifting, LED lighting, pump set points, and preparing an energy report.

Incorporate energy issues into all facility ~planning and major upgrade Request for Proposals (RFPs) and Request for Qualifications (RFQs). Some example RFP language is posted at http://energytrust.org/library/reports/100603_Energy_Efficiency_RFP_Guidance.pdf

Participating UtilitiesParticipating wastewater utilities included:

Interested in Energy Issues?ACWA is forming an Energy Task Force – the group will focus on promoting energy efficiency within the wastewater industry, technical assistance and information sharing around energy issues, and exploring renewable power options at treatment plants. The group will be chaired by Frank Dick of Vancouver. If you are interested in joining the group, please contact the ACWA office.

Metropolitan Wastewater Management •Commission/Eugene

Silverton •

Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority •

Vancouver, WA •

Bend •

Troutdale •

Funding for the program was provided by the Energy Trust of Oregon, Bonneville Power Administration through its EnergySmartIndustrial program, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the participating utilities.

“This energy management program was called a ‘pilot project’ because it was new – but the participants should really think of themselves like the bar pilots in Astoria – leading the way in this industry and guiding others to the very best, energy efficient practices,” summed up Layne McWilliams.

“We know that setting energy targets and meeting them without affecting water quality performance is possible from this group - - almost every facility is meeting the energy targets they set for their organization at the start of the project,” added Thad Roth.

ACWA is currently considering how best to continue to serve its members to promote energy efficiency and renewable power projects. Contact the ACWA office with your ideas and suggestions and if you have an interest in participating in future training programs.

Gresham •

Lewiston, ID •

McMinnville •

Medford •

Newberg •

Portland •

Redmond •

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued on page 8

SPRING 2011 Page 7

ACWA Stormwater Summit Held in EugeneOver 130 ACWA members and other experts gathered in Eugene on May 4, 2011 to spend the day discussing trends in stormwater management, strategies for meeting regulations, and tools for improving stormwater management in Oregon. The ACWA Stormwater Summit is held annually each spring, usually in Eugene.

that the public is very negative about government. “The average public believes that $0.30 of every dollar is wasted. The public also thinks the government has the wrong priorities - - they don’t know what the priorities should be, but they think they are wrong”. He highlighted that trust in public leaders is also very low. “People are very frustrated with leaders - - politicians, CEOs, and labor leaders.” Horvick highlighted that the economy is a root cause of many of these concerns, adding that DHM research shows that nearly 2/3 of Oregonians are ‘somewhat or very concerned’ about their personal finances.

How to handle this as a stormwater utility, questioned Horvick. “Over-communicate with your customers,” he advised. “People make the worst assumptions about public agencies, so you have to communicate over and over on the services you are providing.”

Horvick discussed a general preview of a survey conducted in the Portland-area focused on the quality of local rivers and streams. Some of the key messages from the survey include:

Many people don’t know about the •health of local rivers and streams.

75% think they are ‘very or •somewhat’ informed about maintaining the health of local rivers and streams.

When asked specific questions about •actions homeowners might take on their property to control stormwater and improve water quality, the results flip - - a majority cannot name a single personal action they could take to improve water quality, such as disconnecting downspouts.

How to Talk to the Public about StormwaterJohn Horvick from DHM Research discussed their research related to stormwater and water quality in Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. He added tips for ACWA members on how to talk about stormwater with the public.

“You might think that people don’t know about your work - - and that is true,” opened Horvick. “The general public’s

awareness of the ABCs of government is very low – 37% of Oregonians do not know that Oregon has two senators and 60% cannot name the three branches of government,” he said. “It is not that they cannot name the two Oregon senators - - it is that they don’t know there are two.”

In terms of water, the public is unaware of who provides water services, and they lump them into a single category - - stormwater, drinking water, and wastewater combined.

“You can be a victim of your own success. If your organization is not in the news routinely, you may need to do something to raise the public awareness to counter the public skepticism about any problems your organization is trying to tackle,” he said.

Another factor public agencies must factor into communication strategies is

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued from page 7

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued on page 9

SPRING 2011 Page 8

About one-half of people don’t know •what happens to water when it enters the storm drain.

The most frequent household action •named to manage stormwater on their property is to plant trees.

About 40% of the households have •taken no action to improve stormwater management and are not likely to undertake these actions.

The largest tool to change behavior is financial discounts for stormwater fees and actions to lower costs. “This is a pocketbook issue for homeowners,” he said. “Information will work on the margins, but the largest way to motivate people is price,” he concluded.

He continued by highlighting the best tools for stormwater communication, including:

1. Link your message to values and beliefs – Oregonians have a strong belief in the importance of clean water.

2. Mention programs that save customers money. “People don’t know who you are, but they do know what bills they pay.” He also reminded utilities to continue to remind all customers of programs for low income communities.

3. Show partnerships and collaboration – especially with small businesses and nonprofits

4. Use effective messengers including small business owners, places of workshop, women (especially moms) and youth.

5. Use multiple communication methods including websites, social media (for alerts and emergencies), newsletters, billing inserts. “Be careful about social media – people don’t really want to be ‘friends’ with their stormwater utility,” he said.

6. Know your changing demographics – acknowledge and serve the growing Latino population; be aware of the aging population, and an increased number of lower income households.

DEQ Stormwater Regulations – what is ahead?Annette Liebe with Oregon DEQ discussed the Oregon stormwater regulations. She reviewed the DEQ stormwater priorities including:

The stormwater construction permit (1200C ) was renewed, •

In the process of renewing the industrial stormwater permits, and •

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permits for Phase I and Phase II •communities.

The revised DEQ industrial stormwater permits (1200Z and 1200Columbia Slough) will be issued shortly for public comment, said Liebe. The key revisions in the draft permit include:

New requirements for dischargers to waters that do not meet water quality •standards (referred to as ‘water quality impaired’),

Revised water quality benchmarks for copper, lead and zinc, and •

Expanding monitoring and corrective action required at industrial sites, •including requiring metals and Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) sampling at all facilities, and Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) and mercury monitoring for certain facilities. Additional requirements for corrective actions are also incorporated in the draft permit.

In other permitting requirements, she mentioned:

DEQ renewed the 1200C construction permit in December, 2010. The •monitoring requirements and turbidity limits will be revisited when the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalizes its national stormwater permit for construction activities. The DEQ permit includes an improved implementation process for common plan lots, including a new fee category for individual lots.

New permit category of 1200CN was created to eliminate dual plan review •and oversight between local governments and DEQ requirements, where local governments act as DEQ’s agents in regulating construction activities.

DEQ is working at renewing the agent agreements with local governments that •act as DEQ agents for the construction permitting program.

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued on page 10

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued from page 8

SPRING 2011 Page 9

Liebe indicated that the MS4 Phase I permits have been revised and reissued to Portland, Clackamas County, Eugene, Salem, and Gresham as of the end of 2010 and beginning of 2011. Some of the revisions incorporated into the revised permits include:

Education and outreach program •evaluation

Post-construction stormwater •management

Operation & maintenance •program for privately-owned stormwater facilities

Expanded monitoring program to •incorporate current use pesticides and mercury

Hydromodification assessment •

Retrofit strategy •

For the Phase II communities, DEQ will be working at renewing the Lane County and City of Springfield permits as the first priority. In response to a question, Liebe indicated that detailing the ‘who, what, where, when, why’ and setting measurable goals will be anticipated improvements in the Phase II MS4 permits, along with addressing flow modification and reflecting TMDL load allocations, if TMDLs have been set for stormwater – related pollutants.

She directed the audience to the DEQ Permit Evaluation Report for the Phase I MS4 permits as a reflection of the direction of DEQ regarding incorporating numeric effluent limits for stormwater dischargers, given current available information. “DEQ does not believe that sufficient information is available to set numeric effluent limits in stormwater permits; the MS4 Phase I Permit Evaluation

Report reflects that,” she said. A copy of the MS4 Phase I DEQ Permit Evaluation Report is available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/stormwater/municipalph1.htm#permit

Some of the issues on the horizon include:

Pending federal EPA stormwater •rule changes – proposed federal stormwater rule revisions are likely to be issued as drafts in the fall of 2011. Liebe has been emphasizing to EPA to focus on the changes that EPA wants on the landscape, and the need to use performance standards for existing efforts, such as stormwater controls from logging roads.

New census information will be •available in 2012 and EPA may require additional MS4 communities. Finding resources to expand the Oregon stormwater program will be difficult, she said. DEQ will be cutting its existing stormwater program due to budget cuts.

Tackling Hydromodification – Three Perspectives A new condition in the revised MS4 Phase I permits requires communities to gather information regarding existing efforts and conceptually develop proposed actions to address hydromodification, where applicable.

Development increases impervious surfaces with building footprints, paved roads and sidewalks. This increases the instantaneous flow of stormwater runoff and captures more pollutants. Three communities shared how they were considering tackling the hydromodification portion of the revised permit - - Clean Water Services, City of Eugene, and Clackamas County Water Environment Services.

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued from page 9

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued on page 11

SPRING 2011 Page 10

Carrie Pak with Clean Water Services described the strategies that Clean Water Services would be using to address the hydromodification condition of the renewed MS4 Phase I permit. “What is not in the permit, but is likely to follow, are a post-construction requirement and a retrofit requirement for MS4 communities,” she predicted. She outlined the existing program pieces that Clean Water Services can use to craft its hydromodification program including:

Low Impact Development standards – •in place for many years in the Tualatin Basin,

Resource protection ordinances, and •

Stream buffer requirements. •

She indicated that the elements of the DEQ permit requirement will be met through an integrated water resources approach, focused on melding the requirements together. As an example, she continued that Clean Water Services is using the Cedar Mill/North Johnson Basin as the example basin for tackling hydromodification as part of the overall surface water master plan. Clean Water Services will be completing about ten sub-basin surface water master plans in the next permit cycle. Source control will be an important element of the Clean Water Services strategy, she said, continuing that implementing Low Impact Development (LID) standards is important.

She reviewed a number of aggressive programs planned by Clean Water Services and highlighted that photo documentation at established monitoring sites is a useful tool to track progress over time.

She emphasized that each community should be using sub-basin master planning efforts to tackle the hydromodification requirements of the Phase I MS4 permit. “There is no one-size fits all,” she stressed.

Based on Clean Water Services experiences to date, she summarized the lessons learned in tackling difficult issues such as hydromodification:

Everything takes longer than you •think,

Make sure you know your financial •constraints,

Answering the same question over •and over doesn’t give you a different answer, and

The technical analysis is the easy part, •implementation is significantly more challenging.

Therese Walch with the City of Eugene outlined how Eugene plans to tackle the issue of hydromodification. She illustrated that urban development leads to higher runoff volumes, higher peak flows and more frequent runoff events, leading to increased stream bank erosion and stream ‘flashiness”.

Some of the projects Eugene has underway to address hydromodification include:

Headwaters protection, •

Waterway protection, •

Restoration and retrofit capitol •projects,

Stream corridor acquisition projects, •

Open waterway maintenance plans, •

Stormwater basin master plans, and •

Eugene/Springfield Metro waterways •study.

Walch stressed that many communities have similar programs underway that can be used to address the MS4 stormwater permit hydromodification permit requirement. She reminded the group that the land use planning Goal #5 for Natural Resources and Goal #6 for Water Quality might also be used in existing

programs that can be incorporated into the hydromodification assessment planning. Stormwater retrofit projects should also be an element of the assessment, she said. “Eugene will be reviewing and evaluating the work we have already done to meet the permit requirements, and continually examine the linkages between the different elements of the permit in terms of overall water resources management and adaptive management,” she said.

Leah Johanson with Clackamas County Water Environment Services highlighted the hydromodification work completed by Clackamas County for the urbanized areas of their service districts. Johanson opened by stressing the shift in emphasis at the County towards overall watershed health as the basis for its decisions and plans. Clackamas County has completed Watershed Action Plans for the Kellogg Creek/Mt. Scott and Rock Creek sub-basins. The action plans focused on hydrologic stresses, responses to stressors and hydromodification. Clackamas County used the information to develop an inventory of early action items and a prioritized Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and programmatic changes.

The County is also using the information to update its Low Impact Development (LID) and on-site stormwater detention Best Management Practice by developing a LID-sizing strategy as a flow duration curve. Clackamas County is now working with Brown & Caldwell to develop a web-based LID tool for developers and land developers, termed the “Sizing Tool”. The tool also includes a detention pond sizing approach that automatically sizes a detection pond, including pond size, depth, and discharge orifice size.

STORMWATER SUMMIT continued from page 10

SPRING 2011 Page 11

Clackamas County is now working under a DEQ grant to test the sizing tool with its co-permitttees, and to continue to improve the tool. Three stormwater retention facilities will be funded to use the tool and test its effectiveness. The tested tools and revised site development standards are anticipated in June, 2011.

Tabor to the RiverBill Owen with the City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services discussed the integrated watershed approach that the City is implementing in its Tabor-to-the-River program. Removing excess stormwater from the City’s combined sewer system is one of the drivers for the program.

He opened by outlining that he has increased the standard watershed asset management tools to add additional components including more outreach and engagement in the local community and overall enhancements to watershed health,

The project is located in southeast Portland and involves the land stretching from Mt, Tabor to the Willamette River, including about 1500 acres. He provided examples of Portland’s green street program and suggested that those interested check the available Portland green streets report at http://www.portlandonline.com/BES/index.cfm?c=44407 .

Portland has maintained careful records on the costs of maintaining its green streets, he said. In Portland, maintenance costs for green streets include:

First three years, $3.00 per square •foot annually

After three years, $1.80 per square •foot annually

Some of what the City learned in implementing this project included:

Increased public communication is •essential for project success,

Some trees can’t handle ‘wet feet’ – •having too much water around their roots,

Be persistent with franchise utilities to •avoid conflicts,

Project budgets may need to be •expanded to accommodate other improvements such as Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance,

Specifications should include limits •for open excavated work along with requiring safety measures,

Use of ‘thank you’ trees for businesses •that cooperate in the project is appreciated, and

Partial funding of a volunteer •coordinator has paid benefits in getting projects underway.

The City is in year 4 of a 15 year program. To date, over 350+ street trees have been planted, and two revegetation projects are underway. Four projects have been completed at a cost of $6 million and six projects are in design for $10.7 million.

Green UIC RetrofitsJoel Bowker with the City of Portland discussed how the City of Portland is using green techniques to retrofit Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells. He reminded the audience that DEQ will shortly issue a Water Pollution Control Facility permit template for municipally-owned UICs. In that DEQ permit, the DEQ program may require municipalities to retrofit UICs. The City of Portland is the only municipality in the nation with a permit for stormwater UICs. The City of Portland manages about 9,000 UICs.

He reviewed the process the City has used to incorporate green retrofits for UICs that are identified for retrofits. Some of the issues that cities will need to face in UIC retrofits include:

Will new UICs still be installed? •

What is an adequate budget for UIC •retrofits?

How will alternatives be explored and •environmental benefits be evaluated? Portland developed a specific process to rate benefits and make retrofit decision, incorporating public and community input.

Additional presentations included:

Does Your Walk Match •Your Talk – creating a strategic communications plan using effective media tools by Karen DeBaker with Clean Water Services.

Stormwater Education and •Outreach Programs that WORK! - by Craig Harper and Greg Stabach with Rogue Valley Council of Governments, along with Teresa Huntsinger of the Oregon Environmental Council.

Illicit Discharge Programs – •Setting Action Levels and Using GIS to Identify Potential Sources by Torrey Lindbo with the City of Gresham and Jon Wilson with the City of Eugene.

Implementing an Effective •Industrial Stormwater Control Program with Stacy Hibbard and Steve Anderson with Clean Water Services.

Copies of the presentations from the Summit are posted on the ACWA web site at www.oracwa.org

SAFE PRODUCTS continued on page 13

SPRING 2011 Page 12

Safe Products for Clean Rivers and Healthy FamiliesPurchasing products – especially cleaners and soaps – that are safe for Oregon’s rivers and streams, and healthy for families makes sense. But how can you tell?

There are lots of labels – organic, fragrance-free, certified, natural, all natural, non-toxic, chemical-free…but what does that mean?

A recent ACWA project has a solution for Oregon agencies, businesses, and families searching for safe and healthy products – look for participating eco-certification labels. Participating programs include: EPA Design for the Environment, Eco-Logo, the Good Guide, Coastwide Laboratories – Sustainable Earth Products, EPEAT, Pharos database, GreenWERCS, and Green Screen.

“This is clear, reliable, easy-to-understand information that allows Oregonians to select the safest products for their families – products that also protect Oregon’s rivers and streams,” said Renee Hackenmiller-Paradis, environmental health program director for the Oregon Environmental Council, a project participant.

“This information is very useful,” added Jim Arnold, environmental restoration manager with the Oregon Military Department. “As a military organization and state agency, we have specific performance goals to meet for sustainability. This tool allows us to take straight-forward steps to modify our procurement practices, knowing it will improve Oregon’s environment,” he said.

The project worked with prominent national eco-certification programs to request inclusion of the Oregon Priority Persistent Pollutant inventory – chemicals that pose a threat to Oregon’s rivers and streams, fish and wildlife – see http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/SB737 – into their existing certification programs. Each of the participating programs have committed that their certification program ensures these chemicals are not included in certified products or in tools they provide.

How does it work? Simple - look for the seal or use the database:

FOR HOMESLook for these eco-labels for soaps, cleaners and detergents:

EPA • Design for the Environment Eco-Logo •

Use the information from the Good Guide (http://www.goodguide.com) to rank household products. Look for an environmental score of over 8.5. A free iPhone app is available – the bar code reader provides instant information.

When buying electronic devices including computers, monitors, and laptops, look for products that are

registered as ‘silver’ or ‘gold’ standard by EPEAT (the Electronic Products Environmental Assessment Tool). An inventory of certified products is available at www.EPEAT.net

When buying building products, you can also use the use the Pharos database (http://www.pharosproject.net ) to screen for toxic chemicals (fee-based web site).

FOR BUSINESSES, SCHOOlS, GOvERNMENT AGENCIES, NOT-FOR-PROFITSFor cleaning products, specify these eco-certification programs for purchasing soaps, cleaners, and detergents:

EPA • Design for the Environment Eco-Logo •

Good Guide environment rating •over 8.5, or

Sustainable Earth brand products by •Coastwide Laboratories

When buying electronic devices, including computers, monitors, and laptops, specify that the products must be registered as ‘silver’ or ‘gold’ standard by the EPEAT (Electronic Products Environmental Assessment Tool); an inventory is available at www.EPEAT.net. For schools and government agencies, example procurement language is provided on the EPEAT web site.

When buying building products, you can also use the Pharos database (http://www.pharosproject.net ) to screen for toxic chemicals (fee-based web site).

SAFE PRODUCTS continued from page 12

SPRING 2011 Page 13

For manuFacturersManufacturers can use the GreenWERCS tool (http://www.thewercs.com) and software platform to screen product formulations to ensure toxics are not found. Also useful is the Green Screen (http://www.cleanproduction.org/Greenscreen.php) to avoid ‘red list’ chemicals and target a benchmark of 2 or higher

Project BackgroundUsing funding from the ACWA General Fund, ACWA member agencies, and an Oregon DEQ grant provided by the US Environmental Protection Agency, a project steering committee worked with two national consultants – Dr. Lauren Heine of Clean Production Action and Pamela Brody-Heine of Eco-Stewardship Strategies – to convince high priority, national eco-certification programs to incorporate the Oregon Priority Persistent Pollutant chemical inventory into their screening systems. Of the nine programs targeted, eight agreed to participate.

Contributors to the project included the City of McMinnville, City of Pendleton, City of Portland – Bureau of Environmental Services, City of Salem, Clackamas County Water Environment Services, Clean Water Services, and Oak Lodge Sanitary District.

A technical advisory team directed the project, including representatives of the Oregon Military Department, City of Portland – Bureau of Environmental Services, Oregon Health Authority, City of Lake Oswego, Oregon Environmental Council, Clean Water Services, Metro, National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Oregon DEQ, and Zero Waste Alliance.

Education and outreach materials including a web page, flyer, and presentations that describe the program are currently being developed.

Efforts to Safely Collect and Properly Dispose of Unwanted Drugs Continues2nd Drug Enforcement Administration National Take Back Event Americans participating in the United States Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA’s) second National Prescription Drug Take-Back event on April 30, 2011 turned in more than 376,593 pounds (188 tons) of unwanted or expired medications for safe and proper disposal at the 5,361 take-back sites that were available in all 50 states. This is 55 percent more than the 242,000 pounds (121 tons) the public brought in during last September’s event.

In Oregon, 62 collection sites collected 9,515 pounds of medicine – 70 percent more than the first DEA-sponsored take back event held in September, 2010.

“The amount of prescription drugs turned in by the American public during the first two Take-Back events is simply staggering—309 tons—and represents a clear need for a convenient way to rid homes of unwanted or expired prescription drugs,” said DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart in a news release. “DEA is hard at work establishing a drug disposal process and will continue to offer take-back opportunities until the proper regulations are in place.

More Oregon Communities Offering Collection Boxes Thirteen Oregon law enforcement agencies are now offering collection boxes for unwanted and unused drugs. Under federal law, only law enforcement agencies are allowed to take back all types of unwanted and unused drugs. Drug collection boxes provide a safe and environmentally sound method of unwanted drug disposal – reducing prescription drug abuse – especially among teens, reducing accidental poisoning, and protecting the environment.

Participating communities include Albany, Astoria, Cannon Beach, Fairview, Florence, McMinnville, Medford, Newport, Portland, Seaside, Warrenton, Winston, and Deschutes County. An inventory of the details for each community is posted on the ACWA web site.

Drug take back collection boxes for unwanted and unused drugs must be under the control of law enforcement officers, under current Drug Enforcement Administration regulations and the federal Controlled Substance Act.

For long term drop-off boxes, an example of a secure collection box can be found at www.mailboxes.com (phone at 1-800-MAILBOX (624-5269). Courier-style boxes are appropriate for this use, and cost about $600 each with $150 additional for shipping. There can be a discount for ordering multiple boxes.

537 SE Ash, Suite 12Portland, Oregon 97214

Printed on 100% recycled paper

ACWA Summer Conference Set

July 27, 28, & 29, 2011

ACWA’s largest event of the year - - the annual summer conference - - is set at Mt. Bachelor Village Resort for July 27, 28 & 29, 2011. A detailed agenda and registration information is posted on the ACWA web site.

Welcome New Members!Odell Sanitary District near Hood River

BITS & PIECESDEQ Adds Alternative Project Delivery •Process to Revolving Fund Construction Manual. Oregon DEQ has updated its Clean Water State Revolving Fund Construction Project Manual to include details on using Construction Management/General Contractor (CM/GC) as a project delivery system. A link to the revised manual is below – the information is included as Tab 14. See - http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/loans/constr.htm.

The Oregon Water/Wastewater Agency •Response Network’s (ORWARN) 5th annual conference will be held September 28, 29 and 30 at the Sheraton Portland Airport Hotel. This year’s conference includes a full slate of presentations and exhibits by federal, state and local experts that will help you better respond after a catastrophic earthquake. For more information about ORWARN and the 2011 conference, visit ORWARN’s website at http://www.orwarn.org/.