Can We Afford Performance? Why? What is performance? Copyrighted Material ~ All Rights Reserved Course Materials for NEHA-CERT Course OWS0601 Page 1

Transcription

1 Can We Afford Performance? Richard J. Otis, PhD, PE National Environmental Health Association 70th Annual Conference June 25-28, 2006 Why? Do we limit our options? Do we pre-approve equipment? Do we avoid proactive monitoring? Have we become too comfortable and invested too much in our programs to change? What is performance? A stipulated treatment output to achieve a public health or water quality goal that is based on risk to health / water quality (it s finding suitable systems for sites) Is specific and measurable Requires system owners to be accountable Empowers owners with choices Page 1

2 Why is performance important? To protect water quality as well as public health To allow development of sites unbuildable under prescriptive codes To provide affordable options for unsewered communities To provide effective tools for Smart Growth Why is performance important? But, it s more than that! It s necessary to: Gain affordability & sustainability of solutions Gain credibility of or our regulatory programs Gain parity of technologies & management Gain integration of technologies to solve watershed problems Why prescription is not performance Prescription stipulates the means to achieve a public health or water quality goal rather than the ends or output (it s finding suitable sites for systems It is specific and measurable but for design compliance rather than performance It has little post construction accountability and what there is, is seldom enforced It does not empower the owner with choices But prescription can be part of performance Page 2

3 Can t we use prescription programs to achieve performance? System O&M and performance is not ensured Permitted systems under prescriptive code may not be suited for the given site conditions and wastewater Suitable systems may be more complex and require more care in design, construction, and operation Regulatory and management programs are not adequate to ensure sustainable performance We rely too heavily on deemed to comply We believe that prescription can provide performance through performance designs We insist that pre-approved treatment units, which are independently tested, can achieve our performance goals* We expect that after installation and final inspection, systems will perform indefinitely without need for owner accountability (deemed to comply) We rely on public complaints to identify systems that are not performing to the requirements * Variability and Reliability of Test Center and Field Data, NEIWPCC, NDWRCDP (2005) Prescription works for the regulator! State governments are not demanding change * It s only a matter of time before onsites are replaced by central sewerage, at which time it becomes someone else s problem * State Authorities and Practices Regarding Management of Wastewater Systems, Environmental Research Institute of States, NWRCDP (2002 unpublished) Page 3

4 We are encumbered by an outdated paradigm REGULATOR Licensing Standards Practices Pre-approved designs Final inspections Enforcement Construction Permit Strong regulator role distorts the customer relationship with the practitioners by assuming much of the customer s role.* *After Ed Clerico, Alliance Environmental, LLC PRACTIONERS Services Contract OWNER The owner nearly becomes incidental. Why this paradigm? It was adopted to protect public health in unsewered urban areas Lack of owner knowledge Lack of practitioner knowledge & competency With rural electrification, the technology and prescriptions were moved to the rural areas Unfortunately, it hasn t worked well, yet we continue to follow it! But, protecting public health isn t enough anymore! Most traditional technologies we use weren t designed to remove water contaminates Today we have greater concerns for water quality impacts: Pathogens Nitrates Aquatic plant nutrients Page 4

5 Our regulatory priority should be sustainable water quality! Of all the water on earth, less than 3% is fresh! Less than 1% is available for drinking, agriculture, and industry 20% of the world s fresh surface water is in the Great Lakes alone! We are concerned more about the costs and politics of oil than our water resources, but there are alternative energy sources. There are no alternatives for fresh water! The need for a more effective approach is increasing New discharges into impaired waters have been denied even though total mass of pollutants is reduced (Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy vs. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 2005) Performance or performance designs? Our regulatory response has been the introduction of performance designs This is a prescriptive approach to performance that does not account for: Variability in the particular wastewater characteristics Sensitivity of the receiving environment This still relies on compliant installation rather than compliant performance We need a new paradigm! Page 5

6 How Does a Performance Code Work? Performance requirements based on risk to public health and environment System designed to meet requirements accommodating the site as appropriate Rule compliance based on system performance to established performance requirements It requires owners to be accountable for sustained performance of their systems Roles, responsibilities, & mutual reliance The Team Regulator Owner Service Providers Licensing Board Legal System Each team member performs in the role for which they have the authority and responsibility No member assumes another s authority without also assuming the responsibility Parties must be able to rely on each other Transfer of authority & responsibility Use empowerment and incentives to develop awareness and cooperation Allows manufacturers to develop and market advanced products Provides the opportunity to practitioners to offer value added services Empowers the property owner by providing choices Fosters responsive government and a cooperative citizenry Page 6

7 Can we afford it? What are the costs? 1. Performance requirements 2. Permit tracking 3. Monitoring Performance requirements We must be careful to set reasonable requirements We must consider concentration, mass, fate, and transport of regulated pollutants Consider the nitrate standard Example: 10,000 gpd (30 homes) 50 mg/l Total Nitrogen (4.2 lbs TN per day) Required effluent concentration of 10mg/L end-of-pipe Estimated cost to produce 20 mg/l TN: $127,000 or $51,000 per pound TN removed (1.7 lbs TN remaining) Estimated cost to treat from 20 to 10 mg/l TN: $102,000 or $123,000 per pound TN removed (0.8 lbs TN remaining) Total costs to reach 10 mg/l TN = $229,000 including capital and operation (monitoring not included) $67, 400 per lb TN removed or $22.90 per treated gallon (Operation, maintenance, & monitoring excluded) Page 7

8 Is this reasonable? Are we assessing risks appropriately between large and small dischargers or just defaulting to concentration limits? Are we placing too low a value on good sanitation and water quality protection when we set unreasonable limits while denying financial assistance because treatment is unaffordable? As a result, are we creating a group of second class citizens? Risk assessment We must be committed to water quality Can t compromise treatment to achieve affordability If economics allowed to trump water quality, then ultimate costs to society will be magnitudes higher But we shouldn t strive for 100% safety We shouldn t what if beyond reason We can t fear underestimating risks Engineers are taught that if we have 100% success, society is probably paying too much The nitrate standard Is a drinking water standard as an effluent requirement appropriate? What are the risks to the public if the drinking water standard is exceeded? Page 8

9 Cost versus benefit Re-evaluation of the Nitrogen Removal Example: 10,000 gpd (30 homes) 50 mg/l Total nitrogen (4.2 lbs TN per day) Required effluent concentration of 10mg/L end-of-pipe Estimated TN persons/home x 0.03 lbs/d/capita 2.5 lbs/d or 30 mg/l (versus 4.2 lbs/d assuming gpd/cap) Other Factors: Soil can be expected to remove ~ 10% TN Refractory organics account for 2-3 mg/l of TN Dispersion of nitrate in groundwater may be limited but it does occur Other sources of nitrogen in groundwater? Mass of pollutants AND concentration? Eliminating excessive factors of safety Design flow Population rather than bedrooms Flow equalization to eliminate design peaks Treatment requirements Drinking water standards?! Consider both concentration and mass of pollutants in setting requirements Consider deminimus limits for small flows Consider A point discharge versus land application: Assume 640 acres with 1 acre lots with average 2.8 persons per home generating 50 gpd/person If the wastewater is treated to 10 mg/l nitrogen Point discharge = 7.5 lbs nitrogen/day at outfall Onsite systems (565 ft 2 ea) = lbs/ft 2 (3/10,000 ths oz) Considering dilution by infiltration of precipitation: Point discharge = 10 mg/l nitrogen discharged Land application assuming 30 precipitation per year with 25% infiltration = 2 mg/l discharged Page 9

10 Performance management code framework Provides a guide for local programs to implement programs that ensure sustained performance of systems Defines roles, responsibilities, and performance expectations owners, service providers, and regulators *Code framework may be requested from otisr@ayresassociates.com Cradle to grave permitting Notice of Intent to Discharge Performance Requirements and Monitoring (Draft Operating Permit) Construction Permit Construction Certification Operating Permit Monitoring Reports Notice of Violation Interim Agreement (compliance plan) Abandonment Certificate Permit tracking To ensure performance is sustained, all systems must be periodically monitored Renewable and revocable permits that stipulate requirements necessary to sustain and report performance must be issued for each system Page 10

11 Public health versus water quality Water quality is primarily a watershed issue Public health is primarily a density issue Page 11

12 What is a watershed? Drainage divide Political boundaries Single outlet Watersheds are Nature s boundaries Areas bounded by hydrologic divides Areas with a single surface water outlet Surface water and groundwater divides generally coincide Economies of scale Economies of scale for onsite/cluster treatment facilities are severely limited compared to conventional sewerage with equivalent treatment But, onsite/cluster facilities take advantage of environment s assimilative capacity to reduce degree of treatment needed Monitoring costs for each treatment facility is costly Monitoring for surface breakouts should be system by system Monitoring for water quality parameters should be by watershed monitoring rather than by individual system Water quality monitoring Page 12

13 Decentralized wastewater approach at watershed level Create watershed authorities to coordinate water resource protection? Preparation of comprehensive watershed water resources plan to coordinate activities to avoid incompatible decisions Prioritization of watershed problems and solutions Development of action plans Evaluation of effectiveness (feedback loop) Decentralized wastewater approach at watershed level Provide watershed authorities with authority to levy taxes and issue bonds? Provision of financing assistance for individuals and small communities with hardships Capability to own and operate systems as needed Achieving affordability Establish clear roles, responsibilities, and accountability Implement performance-based rules Establish reasonable performance requirements without compromising water quality relying on feedback loop to evaluate requirements Establish an effective permit tracking system Consider environmental monitoring rather than system-by-system monitoring to assess whether water quality goals are being met Page 13

14 Sustainable Clean and Safe Water! Page 14