Transcript Antidegradation and Alternatives Analysis

Antidegradation and
Alternatives Analysis
Mary E. Gardner
Regulatory Programs Administrator
Littleton/Englewood WWTP
Colorado
Littleton/Englewood
 Experiences
 Outcomes
 Problems
 Successes
Antidegradation is the regulation that controls
degradation of certain water bodies
Alternatives Analysis is the tool used
by a Permittee to address the issues
associated with the regulation
The Regulatory Definitions are……

Outstanding Waters—”Outstanding Waters” is the
highest level of water quality protection-state/national waters needing to be maintained and
protected at their existing quality

Use Protected—Waters that the Commission has
determined do not warrant the special protection
provided by the outstanding waters designation or the
antidegradation review process.
Segment 14 of the South Platte
River Classification
Reviewable
 Waters with no designation
 Only insignificant degradation is allowed
 Unless a review shows justification for
significant degradation.

Criteria to Evaluate

New activities or facilities: expansion of
existing activities or facilities resulting in
increased load

At time of permit renewal any increase in
authorized discharge levels from permitted
effluent limits
Where Did this Put L/E?

2001 permit issued with new effluent limits for
Copper, Silver, Lindane

Plant expansion PELs for ammonia
How to Sort it Out
A determination shall be made whether the degradation is
necessary to accommodate important economic or social
development in the area in which the waters are located
Two separate issues but one tool—
Alternatives Analysis document
Regulation 31 Statement of
Basis and Purpose
Substantial concern was expressed in comments…..
additional burden placed on project….
establishing an alternatives analysis…
The Commission does not intend that this requirement
would
constitute a major additional burden in most
instances…….
Necessity of Degradation

Area where the waters are located

Is the proposed regulated activity important
for economic or social development?
Important Economic Development
Is it Economically Reasonable to:

Expect L/E to pay to treat to lower standards than the state standards?

Expect L/E customers to pay user fees that exceed other treatment plant customers within
the metro area?

Expect L/E to add treatment technology which results in significantly higher treatment costs
than similar existing dischargers on the same segment.
Is L/E being environmentally conscientious by adding substantial energy costs over the long
term?
Treatment Technologies
Compare the various treatment
technologies that are available and the
cost associated with capital investment
and operations
Other Alternatives
Looked to the Industrial Pretreatment
Program for controls and reduction of
metals and Lindane. Our program had
everything in place. Nothing else could be
done in this area.
How Did Things Go?

Division has had little experience in this area

Division requested additional information (more than
once)

EPA review and Public Notice takes time

No standard format available to develop AA or for
Division to make determinations

Protocols from the Division are shaky
Time Frame
Basically it’s taken 2-3 years to get issues
resolved.
Long Story Short
Metals and Lindane--We met our goal. We were
issued the water quality standards based on the
cost of “available treatment technologies and the
economic unreasonableness of them”
Ammonia—another story. Did not convince the
Division of the unreasonableness for ammonia
treatment due to upcoming AMMTOX limits
which are similar to proposed Antidegradation
limits.
Options for Ammonia Issue
Tiered Limits to delay due to current WLA
 Try for Use Protection Classification
 Go to Commission for a special hearing
 Accept the Antidegradation limit

Conclusions

Things are never as straight forward as
the Regulations and Guidance make it
sound

One size does not fit all

More Antidegradation Regulations will
probably be the trend in the future