The California Industrial Permit and the Solid Waste Industry Laura Carpenter and Sean Porter Brown and Caldwell San Diego, CA

Transcription

1 The California Industrial Permit and the Solid Waste Industry Laura Carpenter and Sean Porter Brown and Caldwell San Diego, CA INTRODUCTION On July 1, 2015, the California State Water Resources Control Board s (Board) new Industrial Storm Water General Permit (IGP) became effective. The IGP is a statewide general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit that regulates storm water discharges from industrial activity. The new IGP is intended to minimize costs to permittees and attempts to streamline the compliance process. For industrial companies in California, this is a continuation of the existing requirements but it also adds more stringent drainage area delineations, Best Management Practices (BMP) evaluations, institutes Numeric Action Levels (NALs), Exceedance Response Action (ERA) reporting, the inclusion of ocean discharge and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements, as well as strict liability for discharges that cause or contribute to an exceedance of a Water Quality Objective (WQO). Landfills and solid waste facilities are unique public services that have their own storm water signature. These facilities, by their very nature, are distinct from virtually all other forms of industrial activities and offer an essential public service. The IGP has drastically changed the storm water management approach at landfills, solid waste facilities, material recovery facilities (MRFs), recycling centers, and hauling stations by setting NALs and implementing a Risk Level system. Risk Levels NAL compliance is tied to the three-tiered Risk Level system. Risk Levels are assigned based on EPA benchmarks. All sites begin at Baseline Risk Level 0. As an example, if Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in runoff data from two consecutive Qualifying Storm Events (QSEs) exceed the benchmark values (100 mg/l) on the annual average, exceed the instantaneous maximum (400 mg/l), or exceed two benchmarks in the same QSE, the site will be put into Risk Level 1. Table 1 presents the parameters, methods, units, and NAL values for constituents that may be present at solid waste facilities. All permitted industrial facilities in California are required to sample for ph, TSS, and Oil and Grease (O&G).

2 Table 1. Numeric Action Level Triggers Parameter Test Method Reporting Units Annual Average NAL Instantaneous Maximum NAL ph Field or 40 CFR.136 ph units TSS SM 2540-D mg/l O&G EPA 1664A mg/l Zinc, Total EPA mg/l 0.26 Copper, Total EPA mg/l Lead, Total EPA mg/l Aluminum, Total EPA mg/l 0.75 Iron, Total EPA mg/l 1.0 Nitrate + Nitrite Nitrogen SM 4500-NO3- E mg/l 0.68 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) SM 5210B mg/l 30 At Risk Level 1, a facility must implement additional BMPs that focus on removing those constituents that caused exceedances. The same set of criteria applies to a Risk Level 2 site. When a site reaches Risk Level 2, however, the discharger must address the problem with structural treatment BMPs. These Risk Levels mean more reporting requirements, field evaluations, enhanced BMPs, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) revisions and additional reporting to ensure compliance. The IGP also requires industrial facilities to upload all documentation and data concerning contaminants in their discharges to the Storm Water Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS) public website. This increases compliance exposure; it is a very short step from reporting elevated levels of contaminants in the discharged storm water to an allegation by a citizen suit plaintiff that discharge is causing or contributing to the exceedance of a water quality objective, particularly when the receiving water is already identified as being impaired under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. This makes citizen suit enforcement much easier because the data can be readily viewed by anyone and, once posted by the discharger, is irrefutable. Fines can be up to $34,000 per day, per violation. BMPs for Compliance To reduce exposure, maintaining full compliance with the IGP is paramount for solid waste facilities. The risk of enforcement actions or lawsuits increases as more NALs are exceeded. Sites must implement effective BMPs to remove pollutants to prevent the NAL exceedances. Table 1 presents NALs, some of which are lower than drinking water standards (i.e. Zn). Meeting these standards in storm water runoff from most industrial facilities is challenging, and solid waste facilities are no exception. Two large solid waste companies are leading the way with proactive approaches to storm water management, treatment, employee training, and compliance exposure reduction. Republic Services and Waste Management operate most of the solid waste facilities in southern California. These companies implement effective BMPs at their landfills sites, recycling facilities, and maintenance/cng fueling facilities. As needed, they have upgraded to advanced treatment systems and automated sampling devices

3 to collect representative discharge sample. Additionally, both companies have implemented a robust and ongoing employee training program to educate and inform employees on BMP maintenance responsibilities, sample collection methods, and proper sample handling techniques. Operational and Source Control BMPs Operational and source control BMPs include actions, procedures, or methods to reduce the potential for pollutants and storm water to contact each other. One example is facility-wide sweeping. By removing the fine material from the exposed surfaces, storm water that contacts these surfaces will not mobilize pollutants. Operational and source control BMPs typically include: good housekeeping, preventative maintenance, spill prevention and control, material handling and waste management, erosion and sediment control, and employee training. Consistently implementing these controls can be challenging. Getting employee buy in is often difficult, especially while trying to maintain consistency during employee turnover. To be sure BMPs are implemented properly, employee work practices must be checked frequently. An effective way to raise employee awareness is to post informational and reminder signs in the work areas and break rooms, such as: proper equipment wash procedures at designated washing areas; "Close the cover" signs on dumpsters, and/or storm drain stenciling (SSMP, 2015). Including storm water BMP training during weekly health and safety meetings also helps to prioritize these issues. Some companies implement employee incentive programs, where pollution prevention team staff that show initiative and consistently perform assigned duties, as verified by a supervisor, are rewarded. Flow Control BMPs Runoff across impervious surfaces generally occurs as sheet flow, which is directed towards concrete swales and curbs, and into drain inlets. Installing additional curbs, berms, trench drains and other flow control BMPs can be very effective in directing runoff to pervious areas such as vegetated swales, grassy areas, planter boxes, or other designed storm water treatment areas. One approach is to redirect runoff towards vegetated areas to reduce volume and pollutants through infiltration into the subsurface. Another approach would be to install a low wall or concrete curb along the base of an exposed slope to prevent the run-on of sediment from the slope onto the site. Trench drains are effective in moving storm water to low spots or sumps, which use settling to lower the suspended sediment concentrations. Sheet flow from a facility entry or exit can be captured and directed to landscaped areas easily by installing a trench drain across the paved area. Flow control BMPs can also be used to create sampling points.

4 Figure 1. Construction of trench drain to direct flows into a BMP Exposure Minimization BMPs The storage of outdoor materials, waste containers, fueling activity, and active processing areas can present a stormwater pollution problem. Exposure minimization BMPs include covering the activity or storage area with a water-resistant cover, or moving the activity or stored equipment indoors. The idea is to protect the activity and materials from contact with stormwater. The preferred method for storage is on a paved surface with a roof or covering so that no direct rainfall contacts potential pollutant sources. Appropriate berms or mounding should also be around the area to prevent run-on of storm water. Scrap metal bins or other potential pollutant sources stored outdoors need to be kept under a roof, cover, or tarp. Figure 2. Cover over compressor and tanks

5 Treatment Control BMPs A Treatment Control BMP is either a single or combination of treatment control BMPs designed to infiltrate, filter, and/or treat runoff from the project footprint (City of Encinitas, 2010). Treatment control BMPs are classified according to whether they are public domain or proprietary controls. Public domain controls, as the name implies, are controls that are available to the general public, while proprietary controls are typically patented devices and are purchased from a vendor (CASQA, 2012). Filter socks and custom inlet filters are proprietary controls that can be installed to reduce or remove specific pollutants such as O&G, metals, or TSS. Figure 3. Proprietary filter sock installed for inlet protection. Public domain treatment control BMPs include biofiltration and infiltration designs. Biofiltration BMPs include vegetated swales, flow through planters, and biofiltration basins. Infiltration basins and trenches can be an especially attractive option for BMP implementation. The Caltrans BMP Retrofit Pilot Study reports that unlined detention basins have a 72% removal rate for TSS but only an 18% removal rate for TPH oil, while biofiltration strips have a 69% removal rate for TSS and a 59% removal rate for TPH oil (Caltrans, 2004). Not all BMPs are created equal, and treatment control BMPs should be selected and sized for the expected flow ranges and for target pollutants. Post Treatment Sample Collection To avoid NAL exceedances, BMPs must be used to reduce or remove the pollutants before site discharge. The IGP requires that samples are collected at the compliance point, where discharge leaves the facility boundary, and that all these samples are reported in SMARTS. It can be challenging to collect samples after treatment, especially in situations where drain inlet filters are used and can prohibit access to the discharge point. In order to collect samples down stream of BMPs, a peristaltic pump and intake tubing can be used. Figure 4 illustrates a sampler intake point downstream of treatment. Automated samplers can be used for this purpose, are economical, and allow for the collection of composite samples. For O&G samples, however, the IGP requires grab sample collection, unless the automated sampler is designed for the collection of O&G samples in accordance with EPA Method 1664A.

6 Figure 4. Automated sampling equipment installed downstream of BMP treatment. Inclusion of TMDLs A TMDL relates to the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still attain water quality standards. (40 C.F.R (i)). Dischargers with a NPDES permit must comply with effluent limitations that are consistent with the assumptions and requirements of any available waste load allocation for the discharge prepared by the state and approved by U.S. EPA pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations section The Board is currently working to reopen the IGP, to be amended for incorporation of TMDL-specific permit requirements. These requirements were publicly released in March 2016 and, after conducting a 30-day public comment period, the Regional Water Boards submitted the proposed requirements to the Board. Draft language discussing compliance options includes: on-site capture and use of industrial storm water and non-storm water for the volume of the 85th percentile 24- hour storm event; or participation in an approved watershed management plan in offsite compliance. Conclusions Maintaining compliance with environmental regulations requires a proactive approach. The IGP has drastically changed the storm water management approach at solid waste facilities, MRFs, recycling centers, and hauling stations. By knowing the historical runoff results for these facilities, and comparing them to the NALs, BMPs can be designed and implemented before samples are collected under the new IGP and NALs possibly exceeded. NAL compliance is tied to the sample results and to the three-tiered Risk Level system. BMPs are being designed and implemented to reduce the chances of NAL exceedances. Effective implementation of operational and source control, flow control, exposure control, and treatment control BMPs is critical to the reduction of site pollutants and minimization of NAL exceedances. Recently, other states have adopted similar NPDES permits. It is expected that more states will follow this trend. The solid waste industry in California has responded to these new regulations by prioritizing compliance exposure reduction and maintaining permit compliance, while demonstrating good environmental stewardship.

7 References: California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), 2012, Stormwater BMP Handbook Portal: Industrial Commercial, August 2014, Caltrans, 2004, BMP Retrofit Pilot Program, Final Report, Report ID CTSW - RT January 2004, California Department of Transportation CALTRANS, Division of Environmental analysis, Sacramento, CA City of Encinitas, 2010, Storm Water Best Management Practices Manual, Part II, 2010, Stormwater Manual for New Development and Redevelopment, A Manual for Construction & Permanent Post Construction Storm Water Best Management Practices Requirements, modified March 17, Sacramento Stormwater Management Program (SSMP), 2015, Best Management Practices For Industrial Storm Water Pollution Control, adapted from Best Management Practices of Industrial Storm Water Pollution Control, created by Woodward-Clyde Consultants: L. D. Duke, J. A Shannon, June BIOGRAPHIES Laura Carpenter is a trained Hydrologist with Brown and Caldwell. She is a Project Manager with 10 years of experience in storm water compliance. Ms. Carpenter s experience includes supporting Industrial General Permit compliance for multiple clients in Southern California, preparing Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting, hazardous materials, technical assessment of laboratory data, and water quality monitoring. Sean Porter specializes in water resource services with a background in stormwater, wastewater, urban and natural landscape, creek watershed studies, and groundwater. He is an expert in receiving water, storm water, and waste water monitoring, USGS Stream rating protocols, NPDES permit program requirements, ASBS discharge requirements, evaluation of facility SWPPPs, TMDL allocations and monitoring, and public funded research-driven watershed studies. His 14 years experience includes designing and implementing large-scale water quality and sediment monitoring programs for regional stormwater monitoring programs for state, municipal, transportation, federal, and low impact development. He is currently an IGP Trainer of Record and QISP, and qualified Compliance Group Leader.