Wet_Weather_Partnership

What's New

.

Presentations from the 2008 CSO Workshop have been posted here.

WA Municipal Stormwater Decision, 4/3/08

EPA Environmental Appeals Board rules that State compliance schedule requirements are binding on EPA and that EPA cannot change permit language that was not identified in a public notice or which is not a logical outgrowth of public comments. Both rulings are important to all WWP members. Read more…..

Check here to see CSOs in the News. This section of the website tracks CSO news articles of interest nationwide. Also, our CSO Page has links to several communities' CSO homepages.

Sample rainleader disconnect ordinances for several communities have been added here.

11/27/07 - The November 2007 General Counsel's Status Update is now available on the Members Only page. It addresses the following items of interest:

Wet Weather Partnership Website Update

Partnership Launches Green CSO Infrastructure Library

Partnership Website Tracks CSO Articles Nationwide

General Counsel Advice Regarding CSO/Storm Water Enforcement

Congressional Update

EPA Releases Report to Congress on CSOs in Lake Michigan Basin

EPA Region III Withdraws Favorable MS4 Permit Modification for District of Columbia

Environmental Appeals Board to Hear Challenge regarding CSO Compliance Schedules

American Rivers Report Criticizes State Sewer Overflow Reporting

Sewer Overflows Top EPA Enforcement Priority List

Annual Troubled Waters Report Lists Facilities in Noncompliance with NPDES Permits

Richmond Launches E-mail CSO Alert

EPA Guidance on CSO Controls in Small Communities

Major Agreement to Promote Green Infrastructure

EPA Publishes Report on TMDLs with Stormwater Source

Check out our new Green Infrastructure Library!

10/13/07 - October 2007 EPA Green Infrastructure Update Bulletin with Example Projects

9/19/07 - Testimony from September 19 Senate Water Quality Subcommittee Heaing on Water Infrastructure Needs, Opportunities and Challenges. This testimony generally supports restoring federal investment levels for our nation's water and sewer infrastructure. While EPA (see Grumbles testimony) continues to advocate for "full cost pricing" as the major solution to the national funding gap, it appears that Congress continues to believe that restoring a greater federal financial role toward protecting and enhancing water quality is warranted.

In addition to funding the testimony (see Grumbles and Stoner Testimony/powerpoint) supports a significantly expanded green infrastructure program, especially to help control wet weather sources of pollution such as municipal storm water and sewer oveflows.

Many of these issues will be addressed in detail in April 2008 during the WWP's Chicago CSO Workshop.

Majority Statement - F. Lautenberg

Minority Statement - J. Inhofe

Minority Statement - G. Voinovich

B. Grumbles Testimony

C. Westhoff Testimony

D. Palmer Testimony

G. Brasseaux Testimony

J. Freeman Testimony

N. Stoner Testimony

N. Stoner Powerpoint

8/31/07 - Information on Kansas City's Rain Garden Workshop is available here - their program is an excellent example. Also you can go to their website to find more information.

8/28/07 - Wet Weather Partnership Files Brief in Support of DC WASA Arguing that Compliance Schedules are Required in Permits to Implement LTCPs

The Wet Weather Partnership filed a brief with the U.S. EPA Environmental Appeals Board on August 22, 2007, supporting the position of the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority (DC WASA) in a long-running dispute with EPA and environmental groups over WASA’s NPDES permit at its Blue Plains treatment plant. The brief, jointly filed with the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), supports DC WASA’s challenge to its permit, because the permit does not include a compliance schedule for implementing WASA’s approved Long Term Control Plan to address its combined sewer overflows. The brief argues that a compliance schedule is legally required in the permit, based on the District’s regulations setting water quality standards, and that EPA erred in not including one.

This case is important to WWP members because an adverse ruling could jeopardize the investments WWP members have made toward complying with the CSO-related requirements in their NPDES permits. The incorporation of compliance schedules in permits rather than in administrative enforcement orders is of critical importance to communities. Generally, a community’s LTCP specifies the performance standards that must be met in order for CSO discharges to comply with the state’s water quality standards as translated into NPDES permits. A provision such as the one contained in WASA’s permit, which requires a permitee to comply with the District’s water quality standards through implementation of the LTCP controls but does not contain a compliance schedule, poses serious compliance issues for communities, and exposes communities to enforcement actions that could disrupt implementation of their approved LTCPs. Even though a community may be in full compliance with a LTCP approved by a state or EPA, a suit could be brought arguing that the entity is not in compliance with the general water quality standards compliance language in its permit. Even CSO communities with State or federal consent decrees must ensure they obtain compliance schedules in their permits to avoid allegations of current and future permit noncompliance.

A hearing is scheduled in this case before the Environmental Appeals Board on November 15, 2007. If you'd like to see the brief, please go to our Litigation page.

8/7/07 - USA Today Article on NRDC Stormwater Report

6/9/07 - 2007 Guidance from Indiana Regarding Ten-Year, One-Hour Storm Control Option. This 2007 guidance from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management alerts Indiana communities to another CSO control option - borrowed from Michigan. This options focuses on developing treatment plant and storage capacity to capture and treat the ten year one hour storm event. Storms of greater magnitude/intensity are simply required to be given any treatment that may be feasible with the available WWTP and wet weather infrastructure.

6/3/07 - The recent ALCOSAN Consent Decree is posted in our Consent Decree library.
April 2007 DC WASA Phase II Permit Language
April 2007 General Counsel's Report

DC WASA Phase II CSO Permit Published with Important Changes – Key Precedent for Other Communities

.

On April 5, 2007, EPA Region III republished the Phase II CSO permit for DC WASA. EPA took out the narrative water quality standards requirement and, instead, made the performance measures in DC’s approved CSO LTCP the water quality-based effluent limits in the permit. Moreover, EPA removed the numeric TMDL compliance requirements for the Anacostia TMDLs and stated that the CSO Performance Measures in the LTCP were also the appropriate water quality limits to meet the TMDLs.

.

Questions about Phase II permitting of WASA can be directed to Dave Evans (804/775-4317 - McGuire Woods/WASA Counsel) or Paul Calamita.

.

A few of the key specific EPA findings included in the permit/fact sheet are:

“The LTCP performance standards are the appropriate WQBELs for these [CSO] discharges. The use of the LTCP performance standards as the WQBELs for CSO discharges is consistent with the CSO Policy….

“In addition to setting forth the performance standards in the permit … it is appropriate for EPA to indicate that these are the water quality-based effluent limits that apply to the discharges.

“Given that there are now specific WQBELs, EPA believes that a general requirement to comply with water quality standards is unnecessary, redundant and would not as clearly specify the permittee’s obligations. Therefore, that portion of the permit has been deleted.”

The final permit modification deletes the numeric effluent limits derived directly from the numeric wasteload allocations included in specific TMDLs that were previously included directly as effluent limits, as well as the monitoring and reporting requirements associated with those limits.

Instead … EPA is ensuring consistency with the applicable WLAs through the permit limitations and conditions requiring implementation of the LTCP according to the performance standards….

Development and articulation of those performance standards took the WLAs into account and should achieve those WLAs [based on WASA’s modeling].

This is a very positive development and the modified permit should be a significant precedent for all CSO communities nationwide in terms of proper Phase II permitting.

A copy of the final permit modification and fact sheet for this action can be viewed here. .

.

Grant Funding Legislation

On January 18, 2007, Representatives Pascrell, Camp, and Capuano reintroduced legislation that would extend the authorization for CSO/SSO grant funding which the CSO Partnership pushed through Congress in 2003 but which was never funded. As you can see here, the bill will authorize $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, $550,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, $650,000,000 for fiscal year 2012, and $750,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.

It is too early to tell how the Democratically-controlled Congress will approach domestic funding issues in the 110th Congress. While the authorizing committees are likely to pass broad spending measures, it remains to be seen if any of this will actually be appropriated.

My view is that we will not see any appreciable increase in water and sewer appropriations during the 110th. Instead, my view is that the Democratic majority will try to maintain tight fiscal discipline in order to support an expansion of their majorities in the 2008 election cycle as well as to support an effort to regain control of the White House as well. Only then will we see broad domestic spending increases (hopefully, corresponding to major spending reductions as the US involvement in the Middle East winds down).

Also provided here is the "dear colleague" letter that the Bill's original sponsors have circulated. This remains good legislation and the WWP urges its members to request their congressional delegation co-sponsor this bill.

If nothing else, this legislation reminds the Congress of the massive unfunded mandate imposed on local governments by CSO/SSO control requirements.

Finally, please note that this legislation would apply Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements to any grants provided under this grant funding authorization. However, the provisions could be waived by each State's governor in regard to a specific grant.



	Home Who We Are Accomplishments For Members Membership Workshops Storm Water Storm Water Utility Green Infrastructure Library Combined Sewer Overflows CSO Guidance Documents Litigation Consent Decrees Outreach Materials Technical Advisory Council Use Attainability Analyses Other Documents of General Interest Contact Us	What's New . Presentations from the 2008 CSO Workshop have been posted here. WA Municipal Stormwater Decision, 4/3/08 EPA Environmental Appeals Board rules that State compliance schedule requirements are binding on EPA and that EPA cannot change permit language that was not identified in a public notice or which is not a logical outgrowth of public comments. Both rulings are important to all WWP members. Read more….. Check here to see CSOs in the News. This section of the website tracks CSO news articles of interest nationwide. Also, our CSO Page has links to several communities' CSO homepages. Sample rainleader disconnect ordinances for several communities have been added here. 11/27/07 - The November 2007 General Counsel's Status Update is now available on the Members Only page. It addresses the following items of interest: Wet Weather Partnership Website Update Partnership Launches Green CSO Infrastructure Library Partnership Website Tracks CSO Articles Nationwide General Counsel Advice Regarding CSO/Storm Water Enforcement Congressional Update EPA Releases Report to Congress on CSOs in Lake Michigan Basin EPA Region III Withdraws Favorable MS4 Permit Modification for District of Columbia Environmental Appeals Board to Hear Challenge regarding CSO Compliance Schedules American Rivers Report Criticizes State Sewer Overflow Reporting Sewer Overflows Top EPA Enforcement Priority List Annual Troubled Waters Report Lists Facilities in Noncompliance with NPDES Permits Richmond Launches E-mail CSO Alert EPA Guidance on CSO Controls in Small Communities Major Agreement to Promote Green Infrastructure EPA Publishes Report on TMDLs with Stormwater Source Check out our new Green Infrastructure Library! 10/13/07 - October 2007 EPA Green Infrastructure Update Bulletin with Example Projects 9/19/07 - Testimony from September 19 Senate Water Quality Subcommittee Heaing on Water Infrastructure Needs, Opportunities and Challenges. This testimony generally supports restoring federal investment levels for our nation's water and sewer infrastructure. While EPA (see Grumbles testimony) continues to advocate for "full cost pricing" as the major solution to the national funding gap, it appears that Congress continues to believe that restoring a greater federal financial role toward protecting and enhancing water quality is warranted. In addition to funding the testimony (see Grumbles and Stoner Testimony/powerpoint) supports a significantly expanded green infrastructure program, especially to help control wet weather sources of pollution such as municipal storm water and sewer oveflows. Many of these issues will be addressed in detail in April 2008 during the WWP's Chicago CSO Workshop. Majority Statement - F. Lautenberg Minority Statement - J. Inhofe Minority Statement - G. Voinovich B. Grumbles Testimony C. Westhoff Testimony D. Palmer Testimony G. Brasseaux Testimony J. Freeman Testimony N. Stoner Testimony N. Stoner Powerpoint 8/31/07 - Information on Kansas City's Rain Garden Workshop is available here - their program is an excellent example. Also you can go to their website to find more information. 8/28/07 - Wet Weather Partnership Files Brief in Support of DC WASA Arguing that Compliance Schedules are Required in Permits to Implement LTCPs The Wet Weather Partnership filed a brief with the U.S. EPA Environmental Appeals Board on August 22, 2007, supporting the position of the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority (DC WASA) in a long-running dispute with EPA and environmental groups over WASA’s NPDES permit at its Blue Plains treatment plant. The brief, jointly filed with the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), supports DC WASA’s challenge to its permit, because the permit does not include a compliance schedule for implementing WASA’s approved Long Term Control Plan to address its combined sewer overflows. The brief argues that a compliance schedule is legally required in the permit, based on the District’s regulations setting water quality standards, and that EPA erred in not including one. This case is important to WWP members because an adverse ruling could jeopardize the investments WWP members have made toward complying with the CSO-related requirements in their NPDES permits. The incorporation of compliance schedules in permits rather than in administrative enforcement orders is of critical importance to communities. Generally, a community’s LTCP specifies the performance standards that must be met in order for CSO discharges to comply with the state’s water quality standards as translated into NPDES permits. A provision such as the one contained in WASA’s permit, which requires a permitee to comply with the District’s water quality standards through implementation of the LTCP controls but does not contain a compliance schedule, poses serious compliance issues for communities, and exposes communities to enforcement actions that could disrupt implementation of their approved LTCPs. Even though a community may be in full compliance with a LTCP approved by a state or EPA, a suit could be brought arguing that the entity is not in compliance with the general water quality standards compliance language in its permit. Even CSO communities with State or federal consent decrees must ensure they obtain compliance schedules in their permits to avoid allegations of current and future permit noncompliance. A hearing is scheduled in this case before the Environmental Appeals Board on November 15, 2007. If you'd like to see the brief, please go to our Litigation page. 8/7/07 - USA Today Article on NRDC Stormwater Report 6/9/07 - 2007 Guidance from Indiana Regarding Ten-Year, One-Hour Storm Control Option. This 2007 guidance from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management alerts Indiana communities to another CSO control option - borrowed from Michigan. This options focuses on developing treatment plant and storage capacity to capture and treat the ten year one hour storm event. Storms of greater magnitude/intensity are simply required to be given any treatment that may be feasible with the available WWTP and wet weather infrastructure. 6/3/07 - The recent ALCOSAN Consent Decree is posted in our Consent Decree library. April 2007 DC WASA Phase II Permit Language April 2007 General Counsel's Report DC WASA Phase II CSO Permit Published with Important Changes – Key Precedent for Other Communities . On April 5, 2007, EPA Region III republished the Phase II CSO permit for DC WASA. EPA took out the narrative water quality standards requirement and, instead, made the performance measures in DC’s approved CSO LTCP the water quality-based effluent limits in the permit. Moreover, EPA removed the numeric TMDL compliance requirements for the Anacostia TMDLs and stated that the CSO Performance Measures in the LTCP were also the appropriate water quality limits to meet the TMDLs. . Questions about Phase II permitting of WASA can be directed to Dave Evans (804/775-4317 - McGuire Woods/WASA Counsel) or Paul Calamita. . A few of the key specific EPA findings included in the permit/fact sheet are: “The LTCP performance standards are the appropriate WQBELs for these [CSO] discharges. The use of the LTCP performance standards as the WQBELs for CSO discharges is consistent with the CSO Policy…. “In addition to setting forth the performance standards in the permit … it is appropriate for EPA to indicate that these are the water quality-based effluent limits that apply to the discharges. “Given that there are now specific WQBELs, EPA believes that a general requirement to comply with water quality standards is unnecessary, redundant and would not as clearly specify the permittee’s obligations. Therefore, that portion of the permit has been deleted.” The final permit modification deletes the numeric effluent limits derived directly from the numeric wasteload allocations included in specific TMDLs that were previously included directly as effluent limits, as well as the monitoring and reporting requirements associated with those limits. Instead … EPA is ensuring consistency with the applicable WLAs through the permit limitations and conditions requiring implementation of the LTCP according to the performance standards…. Development and articulation of those performance standards took the WLAs into account and should achieve those WLAs [based on WASA’s modeling]. This is a very positive development and the modified permit should be a significant precedent for all CSO communities nationwide in terms of proper Phase II permitting. A copy of the final permit modification and fact sheet for this action can be viewed here. . . Grant Funding Legislation On January 18, 2007, Representatives Pascrell, Camp, and Capuano reintroduced legislation that would extend the authorization for CSO/SSO grant funding which the CSO Partnership pushed through Congress in 2003 but which was never funded. As you can see here, the bill will authorize $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, $550,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, $650,000,000 for fiscal year 2012, and $750,000,000 for fiscal year 2013. It is too early to tell how the Democratically-controlled Congress will approach domestic funding issues in the 110th Congress. While the authorizing committees are likely to pass broad spending measures, it remains to be seen if any of this will actually be appropriated. My view is that we will not see any appreciable increase in water and sewer appropriations during the 110th. Instead, my view is that the Democratic majority will try to maintain tight fiscal discipline in order to support an expansion of their majorities in the 2008 election cycle as well as to support an effort to regain control of the White House as well. Only then will we see broad domestic spending increases (hopefully, corresponding to major spending reductions as the US involvement in the Middle East winds down). Also provided here is the "dear colleague" letter that the Bill's original sponsors have circulated. This remains good legislation and the WWP urges its members to request their congressional delegation co-sponsor this bill. If nothing else, this legislation reminds the Congress of the massive unfunded mandate imposed on local governments by CSO/SSO control requirements. Finally, please note that this legislation would apply Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements to any grants provided under this grant funding authorization. However, the provisions could be waived by each State's governor in regard to a specific grant.

		The Wet Weather Partnership P.O. Box 51, Richmond, VA 23218 \| voice: 804.909.3598 \| fax: 804.716.9022 Copyright © 2007 The Wet Weather Partnership. All Rights Reserved.