403 Streamlining Specifics

1. 403 Streamlining Specifics What’s Up with the Extra Industrial Classifications, General Permits & BMPs?

2. Pretreatment Compliance Specialist, Senior City of Austin Austin Water Utility Tammy Y. West

3. Government If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions.

4. What are my options? • Equivalent Mass Limits for Concentration limits • Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits for Flow-Based Standards • Non-Significant Categorical Industrial Users • Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial Users • Monitoring Waivers • General Control Mechanisms

5. Categorical Industrial users regulated by concentration-based limits may now have those limits converted to equivalent mass-based limits Equivalent Mass Limits for Concentration limits

6. Equivalent Mass Limits • Conditional use of equivalent mass limits in lieu of concentration-based limits to facilitate adoption of water-saving technologies. • IUs whose wastewater discharges are controlled by equivalent mass limits have more flexibility to implement water conservation. • May elect to control discharges through more efficient wastewater control technologies and pollution prevention techniques, or more efficient water conservation practices.

7. Equivalent Mass Limits Applies to: • Industrial categories that have pretreatment standards expressed as concentration limits alone. • 14 Industrial categories Inorganic Chemicals (415) Fertilizer Manufacturing (418) Petroleum Refining (419) Steam Electric Power Generating(423) Leather Tanning (425) Glass Manufacturing (426) Rubber Manufacturing (428) Metal Finishing (433) Pharmaceutical Manufacturing (439) Transportation Equipment Cleaning (442) Paving and Roofing Materials (443) Commercial Hazardous Waste Combustors Subcategory –Waste Combustors Point Source Category (444) Carbon Black Manufacturing (458) Electrical and Electronic Components (469)

8. Equivalent Mass Limits To Qualify a CIU Must: • Implement or demonstrate that the CIU will implement water conservation measures that “substantially reduce” water use. • Use control and treatment technologies adequate to achieve compliance. • Not use dilution as a substitute for treatment. • Provide monitoring data to establish its actual average daily flow rate and its baseline long term average production rate. • Demonstrate that it does not have daily flow rates, production rates, or pollutant levels that fluctuate “significantly.” • “Consistent compliance” with applicable categorical pretreatment standards.

9. Streamlining Rules When the winds of change blow hard enough, the most trivial of things can become deadly projectiles.

10. Equivalent Mass limits Qualification Issues • No precondition that IUs have already employed water conservation measures. • Streamlining rule does not specify the amount of water conservation that should be achieved. • Nor does it define what a substantial reduction in water use is. • EPA suggests several programs define thresholds: • Final rule for Pretreatment Community XL Site-Specific Rulemaking for Steele County, MN. (10% H20 Reduction) • National Metal Finishing Strategic Goals Program (50% H20 Reduction) • Use of Production Based Pretreatment Standards and the Combined Wastestream Formula (20% change in flow rate)

11. Equivalent Mass Limits Qualification Issues • CA is to evaluate use of dilution as a substitute for treatment by several ways: • Compare CIUs product to flow ratio relative to that of other facilities within the industry • Review historical monitoring reports • Comparing current flows to the flows that are assumed as part of the model technology for the standard in the Technical Development Document for the Effluent Guideline for that Industry.

12. “It’s possible with all the stuff pouring out of Washington DC these days—most of which you may logically conclude represent punishment for your sins in a past lifetime-- you could have missed the release of EPA’s long-awaited Effluent Guidelines for Discharges from the Construction and Development Industry on November 23, 2009.” John Trotti The EPA' Effluent Limitations Guidelines: NTUs for You to Use Reference Document Search

13. Equivalent Mass Limits Qualification Issues • EPA does not define “significantly” • COA uses the 20% change in flow • Regulations do not define a set period of consistent compliance. • Not in SNC in last two years • EPA expects the CA to evaluate a period of time that is long enough to ensure that seasonal violations do not occur.

14. Is there more than one season in Texas? Summer is the only real season-May, June, July, August, and September are “hell on earth.”

15. Equivalent Mass Limits Establishing Mass Limits • Work with Approval Authority to review, and revise, as necessary, its Ordinance, program procedures, enforcement response plan and local limits. • Determine CIU’s actual average daily flow rate from the regulated processes: • Equivalent mass limits must be based on CIU’s actual average daily flow rate, • Use combined wastestream formula if necessary, • Flow rate must be representative of current operating conditions, and • Flows must be measured using a continuous effluent flow monitor.

16. Equivalent Mass Limits Establishing Mass Limits • Calculate the equivalent mass limit by multiplying the Pretreatment Standard in the regulations by IU’s actual average daily flow rate for the regulated processes and the appropriate unit conversion factor. • Use the same flow numbers in the calculations for both the daily maximum and monthly average equivalent mass limits. • CA must document calculations and make them available publicly. • Incorporate the mass limits into the CIU’s permit.

17. Equivalent Mass Limits Continuing applicability • Maintain and effectively operate control and treatment technologies adequate to achieve compliance. • Record the facility’s flow rates using a flow meter. • Continue to record the facility’s production rates and notify the CA of rates that vary by more than 20%. • Continue to employ the same or comparable water conservation measures.

18. Equivalent Mass Limits • If CIU does not meet the requirements, the permit would have to be revised to require compliance with the pre-existing concentration-based pretreatment standard. “Your going back to concentration limits until you can stop those nasty fluctuating flows.”

19. Equivalent Mass Limits Mass Limits as Local Limits • A POTW can allocate and apply its Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading (MAIL) to its controllable sources as mass-based limits. • If a POTW allocates its MAILS on a case-by-case basis, it may be easier to apply mass-based limits to IUs that have the capability to accurately measure their flows at designated sample points. • If approved local limits are currently expressed as concentrations-based limits, the POTW cannot convert the local limits to mass limits without modifying the approved program, which could be substantial, check 403.18(b)(2).

20. City of Austin: Decision • However, instead of referencing 403.6(c)(5) we put the regulation per verbatim into our Wastewater Ordinance as §15-10-42 Exceptions to Categorical Pretreatment Standards. √ yes

21. Adoption Reasons • AWU wanted the ability to establish mass based limits for our customers to encourage water conservation. • COA is aggressively pursuing water conservation. • All four of our semiconductors have initiated major water conservation efforts in the past and plan to implement more major water saving efforts. Alleviate concerns of meeting TBLL’s for copper and fluoride.

22. Necessary Changes • The POTW will need to modify its Ordinance or Regulations to include the appropriate references to 40 CFR 403.6(c)(5) for equivalent mass based limits. • Considered a substantial program modification.

23. Control Authorities have the discretion to control pollutant discharges through equivalent concentration-based limits in lieu of flow-based mass limits for certain industrial categories. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits for Flow-Based Standards

24. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits EPA established this flexibility because flow-based mass limits can be difficult to develop and enforce in situations where the facility has highly variable production with flows that often vary week-to-week or day-to-day.

25. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits Applies to: • The following categories may now have those limits converted to equivalent concentration-based limits. • Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (414) • Petroleum Refining (419) • Pesticide Chemicals (455) • Other concentration-based limits may now be converted to equivalent mass based limits.

26. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits To Qualify, a CIU’s: • Equivalent concentration-based limits are not currently being or will not subsequently be met through the use of dilution or by-pass as a substitute for treatment. • Comparing product to flow ratio relative to that of other facilities within its industry • Requesting an explanation of why it uses the level of process water that it uses.

27. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits To Qualify, a CIU Must: • Adjust the pollutant concentrations at the sampling point using the combined wastestream formula where the CIU mixes their process effluent with dilution sources.

28. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits Establishing the Limits • The CA will also verify and document that the CIU meets the above eligibility requirements before incorporating the equivalent concentration based limits into the CIU’s permit. • CA will document how the equivalent concentration-base limits were derived and make the documents publicly available.

29. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits Example of Documentation required for concentration based limits using combined wastestream COA puts all calculations in Appendices of the IU’s permit.

30. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits Continuing applicability • CA may determine that an IU should be subject to both the flow-based mass limit as well as the concentration-based limit. • CA should specify appropriate flow monitoring requirements. • CA should evaluate flow data reported in the self monitoring reports.

31. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits Continuing applicability • This evaluation will determine if there have been changes in flows that may indicate dilution. • Increases in process • Non-process or overall flows • Those flows not accompanied by production increases

32. Equivalent Concentration-Based Limits • If CIU subsequently fails to comply with these requirements, the CA must revise the CIU’s permit to require the CIU to comply with flow-based mass limits derived from the Categorical Pretreatment Standards. “My little friend will visit you”

33. Necessary Changes • The POTW will need to modify its Ordinance or Regulations to include the appropriate references to 40 CFR 403.6(c)(5) for equivalent mass based limits. • Considered a substantial program modification.

34. City of Austin: Decision • However, instead of referencing 403.6(c)(6) we copied verbatim the sections into our Wastewater Ordinance as §15-10-42 Exceptions to Categorical Pretreatment Standards. √ yes

35. Adoption Reasons • AWU wanted the discretion to control pollutant discharges through concentration or mass based limits. • AWU also wanted the ability to create equivalent concentration-based limits in cases where it would be difficult to implement and enforce mass based limits.

36. A Categorical Industrial User may now be considered a Non-Significant Categorical Industrial User. Non-Significant Categorical Industrial Users

37. Non-Significant Categorical Industrial Users Applies to: • New classification that requires that the IU does not discharge more than one hundred gallons per day of total categorical wastewater. • No untreated concentrated wastewater, regulated by a categorical pretreatment standard, may be discharged at any time by the IU. • Is meeting all pretreatment standards and requirements. • Annually submit a certification statement 40 CFR 403.12(q).

38. Non-Significant Categorical Industrial Users • If IU is located upstream of a combined or sanitary sewer overflow, the following additional requirements must be met for the application of this classification: • The IU cannot discharge wastewater that is regulated by categorical pretreatment standards, or • Must not have been in SNC at any time in the past two years. • Procedure for categorization of an IU as a Non-Significant Categorical Industrial User and the issues related to combined and sanitary sewer overflows must be addresses through either: • The long term control plan, http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/owm0272.pdf • Approved combined sewer system operation plan implementing the nine minimum controls, or • The program modification request.

39. Implementation of NSCIU • Not required to control IU through a permit. • CA may reduce sampling and reporting requirements for an NSCIU. • CA must annually report and certify that it still meets the NSCIU definition. • CA must evaluate at least once per year whether IU still meets NSCIU. • IU still required to comply with categorical pretreatment standards.

40. Necessary Changes • Appropriate language would need to be included in the Ordinance or Regulations defining this new classification and the necessary conditions that must be met for it to be applied to an IU. • Submitted modification must provide the procedures it will use for evaluating whether an IU meets the criteria of NSCIU and the procedures for the annual evaluation. • Considered a substantial program modification.

41. City of Austin: Decision • Instead of referencing 403.3(v)(2) we stated verbatim the regulation into our Wastewater Ordinance as §15-10-111(D) Significant Industrial Users. √ yes

42. Adoption Reasons • Having no de minimis clause for categorical processes has resulted in the COA permitting companies as categorical that would not adversely affect the POTW. • Economic hardship on the industries. • Often times the companies that have low volume discharges from categorical processes take more time and effort than the larger industries with environmental staff.

43. COA’s Implementation of NSCIU • Ordinance requires that the IU annually submits the certification statement required in Section 15-10-167(Annual Certification by Non-Significant Categorical Industrial Users). • Actual implementation may be semi-annual requirement. • COA decided that to best implement the requirement of this certification statement is by a control mechanism. • Annual inspection to verify accuracy of certification statement and satisfies the annual evaluation requirement. • Annual sampling to be conducted by POTW.

44. A Categorical Industrial User may now be considered a Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial User. Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial Users

45. Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial Users • A Mid-Tier CIU does not discharge total regulated wastewater that exceeds: • Zero point zero one (0.01) percent of the design dry weather hydraulic capacity of the POTW; • Five thousand (5,000) gallons per day of total categorical wastewater; • Zero point zero one (0.01) percent of the design dry weather organic treatment capacity of the POTW; and • Zero point zero one (0.01) percent of the maximum allowable headworks loading for any pollutant regulated by the applicable categorical pretreatment standards for which a local limit has been developed.

46. Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial Users • Flow must be measured by a continuous effluent flow monitoring device, unless a batch discharger. • Must not have been in SNC for any time in the past two years. • The daily flow rates, production levels, or pollutant levels of the IU cannot vary so significantly that decreasing the reporting requirement would result in data that is not representative of conditions occurring during the reporting period. • Same conditions as NSCIU for IUs located upstream of a combined or sanitary sewer overflow.

47. Necessary Changes • Appropriate language would need to be included in the Ordinance or Regulations defining this new classification and the necessary conditions that must be met in order for the CA to apply to an IU. • Submitted modification must provide the procedures that the CA will use for evaluating whether an IU meets the criteria of a Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial user and the procedures for the annual evaluation. • Considered a substantial program modification.

48. Implementation of Mid-Tier Categorical Industrial Users • CA may reduce submission frequency of periodic reporting to once per year. • SMRs should include data that is representative of conditions for entire reporting period. • Inspect and monitor by the POTW at least once every two years. • If IU no longer meets criteria for being classified as a mid-tier categorical industrial user, the POTW must immediately begin inspecting the IU and monitoring the effluent at the frequency set by the POTW’s pretreatment program.

49. City of Austin: Decision • The COA has a minimum reporting/self monitoring requirement of semi-annual. • COA prefers to maintain the annual inspection requirement. • COA prefers to maintain at least annual monitoring requirement. • The COA aims for twice per year. X NO

50. A POTW’s legal authority as an approved program now allows the POTW to authorize, at is discretion, an industrial user subject to a categorical pretreatment standard to forego sampling of a pollutant regulated by a categorical pretreatment standard. Monitoring Waivers