Transcript Current Program - Virginia Manufacturers Association

Melanie D. Davenport
September 2014
OVERVIEW
 Recent Regulatory Actions
 Construction Stormwater General Permit
 Industrial Stormwater General Permit
 Groundwater Withdrawal Regulations
 Water Reclamation and Reuse Regulation
 Biosolids Regulation
 Pending Regulatory Actions
Triennial
Review of Water Quality Standards
Nutrient Trading Regulation
Upcoming Regulatory Actions
Virginia Water
Protection Program
OVERVIEW CONT’D…..2
 Other Items
 EPA §316(b) Final Rule
 eDMR update
 James River PCB TMDL
 Stormwater Local Assistance Fund
Construction Stormwater VPDES
General Permit
 New GP effective July 1, 2014
 4000+ reissuance registration statements
received
 2400+ processed to date
 May take until end of 2014 to process all
reissuance registrations.
 82 new issuance registration statements
received and processed since July 1, 2014.
2014 Stormwater Legislation
 July 1, 2014 requirement for VSMP
implementation by MS4 localities.
 Non-MS4 localities can choose to “opt in”
this year or in future years. If they opt out,
DEQ administers the program for them.
 New MS4s counties may defer local
program implementation until January 1,
2015, with DEQ administering it for them
in the meantime.
2014 Stormwater Legislation
 Allows agreement in lieu of a stormwater plan for construction




of a single family residence.
No registration under the construction general permit for single
family residences separately built.
Procedure for a stormwater management plan approved for a
subdivision to govern development of individual parcels, even
if developed by subsequent owners.
Provide reciprocity with other states that have certified
proprietary best management practices
Clarifies that appeal of local decisions conducted in accordance
with local procedures.
9VAC25-880 : 2014 CGP Reissuance
 Local & Private Construction Projects
 2014 Registration Statement & Permit Fee
Form
 $290 to $9,600 (due to DEQ)
 DEQ still accepting Reissuance
applications (were due June 1, 2014)
 Update existing SWPPP no later than 60
days after general permit coverage
Local Programs (VSMP) Status
 DEQ has provided provisional or final approval for
localities to become a VSMP Authority.
 Regulations amended to include 2014 legislation
 VSMP to receive local portion of Construction GP
reissuance fee.
 DEQ/VSMP Construction General Permit Database in
use for first time issuances.
Local VSMPs & DEQ ROs
9VAC25-880 : 2014 CGP Issuance
 Local & Private Construction Activities
 Locality is VSMP Authority





Prepare SWPPP
2014 Registration Statement & Permit Fee Form
ESC Plan, SWM Plan & Registration Statement
reviewed by locality
$209 to $6,912 (due to locality)
$81 to $2,688 (due to DEQ)
9VAC25-880 : 2014 CGP Issuance
 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) Requirements
 Approved ESC Plan
 Approved SWM Plan (LTM Agreement)
 New Water Quality Requirements
Virginia Runoff Reduction Method
Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse
 New Water Quantity Requirements
Channel Protection (Energy Balance)
Flood Protection
July 1, 2014 - Construction GP
Issuance
Operator submits information to the VSMP via a
paper registration statement.
 The VSMP does all necessary information correction
and checks for completeness.
 VSMP provides registration statement information to
DEQ database.
 Database system verifies required fields and quality
control checks have been met and immediately sends
a confirmation email to the VSMP.

12
July 1, 2014 - Construction GP
Issuance
 VSMP Authority may issue the land disturbing permit
upon receipt of this email.
 NO land disturbing activity can commence until the
DEQ Construction GP coverage is received by the
permittee.
 DEQ processes complete registration information and
provides permit coverage.
 Permit TMDL applicability included in DEQ
coverage letter.
 DEQ provides e-mail with permit information to the
VSMP and the operator.
13
Industrial Stormwater VPDES
General Permit
 Key changes in regulation:
 New or Expanding facilities in Bay area – no
net increase of TP,TN and Sediments.
 Increased Benchmark/Effluent/Impaired Waters
Monitoring to semiannual.
 Eliminated follow-up monitoring for effluent
limits and TMDL exceedances.
 Additional Monitoring in Chesapeake Bay Area
for nutrients and sediment – semiannual for 2
years.
 Additional Sector Specific changes.
GROUNDWATER WITHDRAWAL
REGULATIONS
 Effective January 1, 2014
 Expands Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management
Area to Middle Peninsula and Northern Neck
 Brings entirety of Coastal Plain Aquifer System within
the designated Groundwater Management Area
 All existing users in expanded area that withdraw
more than 300,000 gallons in any month had to
submit complete permit application by June 30, 2014
 Secures claim to continued withdrawals
 DEQ held Pre-application workshops around the newly





expanded management area
121 Known potential applicants
100% of known withdrawals submitted within required
time frame.
Recently posted jobs for three additional groundwater
permit writers
Rolled out new model – VAH4DRO-GW for technical
evaluation of proposed and actual withdrawal
Working with VDH re: Waterworks Regulations for better
consistency
 Definitions
 Forms
Water Reclamation and Reuse
Regulation (9VAC25-740)
 Amendments effective January 29, 2014
 Regulatory action initiated in 2011 to further
promote and encourage the reclamation and
reuse of wastewater in a manner protective
of the environment and public health
Water Reclamation and Reuse
Regulation (9VAC25-740)
 Amendments include:
 Variance provision can allow design, construction, O&M
deviations
 Temporary emergency authorization allows production,
distribution and reuse of reclaimed water during periods of
significant drought to supplement strained potable water
supplies
 Reduction of the discharge due to reclamation and reuse must
not alter the physical, chemical, or biological properties of the
receiving waters in a manner that would cause a significant
adverse impact to other beneficial uses; cumulative impact
analysis used to evaluate
Biosolids
VPA, VPDES, Fee Regulations
 Regulatory process begun in 2008
 Amendments effective September 1, 2013
 Includes (among others)
 Additional signage requirements (e.g. all fields adjacent to road)
 Additional notification requirements to localities (e.g. sign
placement, within 24 hours prior to land application)
 Staging of biosolids on field up to 7 days prior to land application
 On-site storage up to 45 days at approved land application sites
 Routine storage must be covered (does not include storage at
WWTP)
 New storage requirements effective 9/1/2014
 VDH permits expired on 9/1/2014 if VPA applications not
complete
Triennial Review
Background:

Federal Clean Water Act requires review and update of Water
Quality Standards every 3 years.

Virginia’s Last Triennial Review was completed February
2010.

Goal: provide a technical regulation that is
 protective of water quality in surface waters,
 reflects recent scientific information,
 reflects agency procedures, and
 is reasonable and practical.
Triennial Review of VA
Water Quality Standards:
 NOIRA comment - Aug. 12 to Oct. 11
 Regulatory Advisory Panel formed
 RAP met 3 times – Nov. 2013 to Jan. 2014
 Staff input, public comment, and RAP identified
needed amendments
Reasons for Proposed Changes:




Update criteria based on new EPA guidance
Update waterbody class/use designations
Miscellaneous clarifications and updates
Revisions based on issues raised by agency
programs
Substantive Issues:
1. Table of Parameters (Toxics): Criteria updates
based on recent EPA recommendations
a. Human Health Criteria Parameters:
 Updates to 8 compounds
 New toxicity information – recalculations
based on new reference dose or oral slope
factor
 Possible economic impact on permittees if
present in effluent
Human Health Criteria Updates
Chemical
Carbon Tetrachloride
Cyanide, free
Hexachloroethane
Methylene Chloride
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Tetrachloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
Old Criteria
(µg/L)
Public Water
Supply
2.3
140
14
46
17
2.7
6.9
25
Updated Criteria
(µg/L)
Public Water
Supply
4.3
4.2
5.0
170
68
0.80
130
7.0
Old Criteria
(µg/L)
All Non-PWS
Waters
16
16,000
33
5,900
690
30
33
300
Updated Criteria
(µg/L)
All Non-PWS
Waters
30
480
12
22,000
2,800
9.1
620
82
Substantive Issues:
1. Table of Parameters (Toxics): Aquatic Life
Protection
b. Acrolein (freshwater criteria only)
 Criteria final in August 2009
 Acute & Chronic criteria = 3.0 ug/l
c. Carbaryl
 Criteria final in May 2012

Acute & Chronic criteria = 2.1 ug/l in freshwater

Acute criterion=1.6 ug/l in saltwater
Substantive Issues:
1. Table of Parameters (Toxics): Aquatic Life Protection
d. Cadmium – revise criteria in freshwater based on
more recent data
Freshwater Cadmium Criteria
Acute
Chronic
3.9 1.8
WER = 1
CaCO3=100
1.1 0.52
WER = 1
CaCO3 = 100
Substantive Issues:
1. Table of
Parameters (Toxics): Aquatic Life
Protection
e. Copper– Biotic Ligand Model for Aquatic Life





2 options: adopt incrementally or State-wide.
Current monitoring program does not collect
all model parameters.
Draft proposal includes “site specific option”,
similar to Water Effects Ratio.
Permittee would generate needed data.
Without data for all parameters, cont. to apply
hardness-based criteria.
Substantive Issues:
1. Table of Parameters (Toxics): Aquatic Life Protection
f. Lead– Apply conversion factor to express criteria as
dissolved
Lead Criteria
Freshwater
Acute
120 94
WER = 1
C aCO3 = 100
Chronic
14 11
WER =1
CaCO3= 100
Saltwater
Acute
240 230
WER=1
Chronic
9.3 8.8
WER=1
Substantive Issues:
2. Manganese (Mn): current criterion = 50 ug/l
 Originated as Safe Drinking Water Act secondary
maximum contaminant level for finished water.
 Protects drinking water supplies from staining
properties.
The Issue:
Soils & underlying geology of many VA regions
naturally high in Mn and compounds
Substantive Issues:
2. Manganese (cont.)
 Half the Mn values in DEQ’s historical water
monitoring database higher than 50 ug/l.
 Mn is an essential nutrient; recommended daily intake
2,000 to 10,000 micrograms/day.
 Staff concluded Mn drinking water standard
misapplied as surface water criterion.
Substantive Issues:
3. Ammonia Surface Water Quality Criteria
 EPA completed criteria reassessment in 2012.
 Incorporates toxicity data for FW mussels.
 New criteria ~50% lower than current criteria.
 EPA allows site-specific criteria derivation where
mussels absent.
Ammonia Criteria
Substantive Issues:
4. Bacteria Criteria for Recreational Waters
 EPA finalized criteria recommendation Oct. 2012.
 Indicator species & allowable geometric mean
concentrations unchanged.
 New recommendations for Statistical Threshold Value is
higher than current “Single Sample Maximum”.
 Criterion applied during any 30 day interval.
 EPA has not issued implementation guidance.
Substantive Issues:
4. Bacteria Criteria (cont.)
 All VA surface waters designated for Primary contact




recreation.
EPA indicates “any and all data within 30-day period
should be used to assess”.
Typical monitoring conducted once/month.
Assessment concern: treating a single sample as
Geometric Mean.
Staff do not recommend proposing new criteria at this
time.
Substantive Issues:
5. Special Standards
a. Special Standard ‘m’ - Effluent limits in the Chickahominy
watershed above Walker’s Dam




Intent was to prevent eutrophication.
Applied to all discharges except stormwater.
Includes discharges from non-metallic mining operations.
Effluent limits under Industrial Discharge General Permit appear
more appropriate for inorganic waste.
 Staff recommends modifying standard by adding underlined text:
“m. The following effluent limitations apply to wastewater
treatment facilities treating an organic nutrient source in the
entire Chickahominy watershed above Walker's Dam (this
excludes discharges consisting solely of stormwater).”
Substantive Issues:
5. Special Standards (cont.)
b. Special Standards ‘ee’ & ‘ff’ – Max. temp. for
winter-only stocked trout waters
 Currently – max. temp. applies all year.
 Raise temperature criteria during summer for winter-only
stockable streams.
Substantive Issues:
6. Other Trout Water Updates
 Clarify segment delineations.
 Consulted with DGIF on these revisions.
Substantive Issues:
7. Reclassify Waters to Class VII (Swamp Waters)
Currently ~ 35 listed in WQS.
 20 waters proposed: change from Class III (nontidal waters) to Class VII (swampwaters).
• Low velocity flow, abundant swamp vegetation and
frequent low D.O. and acidic pH.
• Class VII recognizes natural water quality of
swamps is different than other waters with lower
pH range.

Substantive Issues:
8. Public Water Supply – Lower James Basin
 American Tobacco Co.’s old raw water intake in the
James R. above City Point (Hopewell).
 Intake not in operation for decades; was likely for
process water.
 VDH could not document a domestic water intake at
that location in years prior to 1978.
 If use not present on or after CWA then not an “existing
use” and may be candidate for deletion.
Issue for Further Consideration:
Selenium - Freshwater Aquatic Life Criteria







Coal mining interests comment: revise Se criteria.
Submitted criteria recalculation study report.
Results identical to similar study for Kentucky.
EPA disapproved KY’s acute criterion but approved
chronic.
Lawsuit filed against EPA.
EPA updating Se criteria, proposal soon to be distributed
for public comment and peer review.
2014 Gen’l Assembly: Selenium study resolution.
Nonpoint Nutrient Offset Banks
 14 Nonpoint Source Nutrient Banks Approved to
Date


13 agricultural land conversions
1 storm water treatment pond
NOIRA
 Published in the Virginia Register on 9/10/12.
 Public Comment Period ended on 10/10/12.
 Comments received were in support of the
regulation development and to request to be on the
Regulatory Advisory Panel (RAP).
 Requires a public hearing during proposed
regulation comment period.
Regulations
 Part I - Definitions
 Define terms used in the regulation
 “Registry” updated to correct cite to §62.1-44.1.19:20
 Part II – General Information
 Provides the requirements for authority,
applicability, prohibitions, appeal, and resources.
 Sections 50 and 60 (C & I) were revised to clarify
Code of Virginia citations
Regulations (cont.)
 Part III – Administrative & Technical Criteria
 Requirements for submitting an application to certify
nonpoint source nutrient credits.
 Sections 90 (A.1 & C.1) and 120 (G) were revised to
clarify Code citations.
 Part IV – Compliance & Enforcement
 Provides inspection authority, recordkeeping and
reporting, and enforcement provisions.
 Part V – Fees
 Establishes a schedule of fees for submittal of an
application for nutrient credit certification.
Regulations (cont.)
 Part VI – Financial Assurance
 Requires the posting of financial assurance for
nonpoint source nutrient credits generated by a
structural BMP.
 Includes requirements for cost estimating and the
provisions for the various types of financial assurance
mechanisms that may be used.
Public Notification (9VAC25-900-80.C)
 Many on the RAP (mostly environmental community)
preferred a public comment process.
 Statute requires public notification of a proposed
nutrient credit-generating entity and does not
stipulate a public comment process.
Local Water Quality Compliance
(9VAC25-900-90.C.2)
 The RAP did not reach consensus on the requirements ensuring
compliance with local water quality requirements. Some
considered the proposed requirements to be too overreaching
while others said the language did not provide enough
assurances for the protection of local water quality.
 The proposed language provides for a workable methodology for
exchanging credits when local water quality requirements are an
issue. Statute requires that the regulations shall provide that
"the option to acquire nutrient credits for compliance purposes
shall not eliminate any requirement to comply with local water
quality requirements".
Financial Assurance (Part VI)
 Many on the RAP did not agree to the overall concept of
requiring financial assurance because it was felt that the
financial assurance costs would not make it cost effective for
structural BMPs to generate credits.
 The statute requires the regulations to "establish requirements to
reasonably assure the generation of the credit depending on the
nature of the credit-generating activity and use, such as legal
instruments for perpetual credits, operation and maintenance
requirements, and associated financial assurance
requirements”.
VIRGINIA WATER PROTECTION PERMIT
PROGRAM
 Regulations
 Notice of Intended Regulatory Action issued in May for
overarching regulation 9VAC25-210 and four general
permit regulations 9VAC25-660, -670, -680, -690
(expiring in August 2016)
 Recently concluded the second of four Citizens Advisory
(CAG) meetings
 Anticipate bring proposed regulation to December State
Water Control Board meeting
VIRGINIA WATER PROTECTION PERMIT
PROGRAM CONT’D…2
 Mitigation
 Staff continues to work to develop a Prospectus for the
Wetland and Stream Replacement Fund established by
the VA General Assembly
 Public comment period on Prospectus expected within
the next month or two
•Effective Date: October 14, 2014
•Addresses fish mortality due to impingement at the entrance of
CWIS of existing power-generators and manufacturers
•Targeted to apply to facilities with intakes designed to withdraw
more than 2 MGD, with at least 25% of water withdrawn used for
cooling purposes
•Facilities that withdraw > 125 MGD must also undertake peer-
reviewed studies to address fish mortality due to subsequent
entrainment within the cooling system
§316(b) Permit Application Requirements
 All applications must include data on the water source,
baseline biological characterizations, operational status,
and intended method to comply with the impingement
standards;
 Compliance alternatives include pre-approved technologies,
streamlined designed methods, or demonstration studies
showing < 24% mortality
 Facilities > 125 MGD must include entrainment
characterization, feasibility, cost/benefit, and other
environmental impact studies;
 For permits that expire prior to July 2018, owners may
request alternate schedules to provide the required
information.
§316(b) Implementation
 VPDES permits issued after July 14, 2018 must include
permit conditions ensuring compliance with the
impingement and entrainment mortality standards;
 For permits issued after October 14, 2014 and prior to
July 14, 2018, DEQ may include conditions for
information to be included in the application for the
subsequent permit cycle;
 At a minimum, permits are to include monitoring,
reporting, and record keeping requirements.
 Schedules must provide for compliance as soon as
practicable.
New Version of eDMR System
 “Look and Feel” much different.
 Online entry:
 Data entry for one parameter per page
 Required fields highlighted.
 Immediate validation - exceedances and
errors flagged.
 XML Upload:
 Allows preparer to select and validate XML
files.
 Allows attachments to be sent.
 User information exported as Excel file.
eDMR Participation
 Individual VPDES permits
 591 of 931 permits (63%)
 Nutrient Watershed GP

58
of
108
permits (50%)
 Industrial Storm Water GP

27
of
762
permits (4%)
Tidal James River PCB TMDL
 Targeted completion fall 2015
 Current Activities
 VIMS

Model development on-going
 Hydrodynamic portion completed
 Eutrophication (carbon) model under development
 PCB Fate & Transport model
 To be developed once carbon model finished
 DEQ
 PCB external loadings under development
 Point Sources & MS4s
 Contaminated sites
STORMWATER FUNDING
 Approximately $28 million available for 50% matching




grants
Application deadline is October 24th
Cost effectiveness cap ($/lb TP) will be applied
Grant awards announced in December
Call DEQ if you have any questions