Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs Adrienne Nemura, P.E. Limno-Tech, Inc.

What are the LTCP Expectations for Small Communities? Implement the Nine Minimum Controls (NMC) Develop an LTCP with the following key elements: Public participation Consideration of sensitive areas Post-construction compliance monitoring program Communities may also want to consider financial capability and schedule issues All communities are required to do the NMC, which the LTCP should reference The Policy specifically calls out the following elements for small communities However, it is difficult to develop a cost-effective control program without some consideration of alternatives Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

(If only it was this easy…) Public Participation (If only it was this easy…) Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs Public Participation Defined as interaction between the municipality and the general public and stakeholders Need to involve ratepayers and interested members of the public in CSO control planning Appropriate vehicles include: Public meetings Newspaper & media announcements Collaboration with other civic groups Bill inserts Fact sheets & project websites Public participation is required of everyone: both big and small communities Public meetings: It is a challenge to get people excited about public meetings. Some communities have found that the formation of community advisory groups have been successful, particularly if the mayor is included. (Picture of Terre Haute Mayor Judy Anderson) This creates a fixed group –who are invited to attend the meetings—provides community education – provides a mechanism for input from interested groups. BILL INSERTS: any number of techniques can work including bill inserts a 1/3 of a page form Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Some States have also Adopted Public Notification Rules Michigan requires facilities report overflows within 24 hours http://www.deq.state.mi.us/csosso/ Indiana (327 IAC 5-2.1-1) requires: http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/T03270/A00050.PDF CSO notification procedures Notification to interested parties and DW suppliers within 10 miles Invitation for notification every March Signage at public access points Monthly reporting on discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) Public notification can actually increase interest in the CSO LTCP development process. The LTCP is considered to be a “living document” that should be updated as more information becomes available. Incorporating public notification into the public participation process is a good thing. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Public Participation Examples Sample CSO project websites: City URL LaPorte, IN http://www.ci.la-porte.in.us/wwtp/cso.htm Columbus, OH http://utilities.ci.columbus.oh.us/sewers_drains/Project%20Clean%20Rivers.htm Manchester, NH http://www.manchesternh.gov/CityGov/DPW/EPD/CSO.html Portland, OR http://www.portlandonline.com/cso/ St.Joseph, MO http://www.ci.st-joseph.mo.us/publicworks/wpc_cso.asp Wilmington, DE http://www.wilmingtoncso.com/CSO_home.htm A lot of generic material is available on websites. So instead of reinventing the wheel . . Communities can take a lot of what is already out there and borrow the standard language Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Public Participation City of Monticello, IN (Pop 5,250) Formed Citizen Advisory Committee Conducted public meeting to discuss LTCP Prepared brochure on “Combined Sewers and Water Quality” Implemented simple notification program Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs Public Participation Success defined by an affirmative answer to the question: Did the public participation process involve ratepayers and potential users of receiving waters? Success is being able to say yes. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Consideration of Sensitive Areas The sensitive area aspect of the CSO Policy is important. In some situations, how this piece fits in is pretty clear, such as the full body immersion you see here at a designated beach area. In other places it is less clear, like kayaking on the Chicago River. What to do regarding the potential impact of CSO on endangered and threatened species, such as the piping plover if they happen to have been spotted in your community, is even less clear. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Consideration of Sensitive Areas Sensitive areas include: Outstanding National Resource Waters (ONRW) National Marine Sanctuaries Waters with threatened or endangered species and their habitat Waters with primary contact recreation Public drinking water intakes or their designated protection areas Shellfish beds Are sensitive areas present and impacted by CSO discharges? Second element of LTCP – regardless of size This list includes the 6 general types of sensitive areas. It is not exhaustive. The permit writer could add additional types. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

CSO Impacts? Current 303(d) Listed State Waters 303(d) List Available at… PA http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/watermgt/Wqp/WQStandards/303d-Report.htm#List WV http://www.wvdep.org/item.cfm?ssid=11&ss1id=720 OH http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/tmdl/2004IntReport/2004OhioIntegratedReport.html KY http://www.water.ky.gov/sw/tmdl/303d.htm IN http://www.in.gov/idem/water/planbr/wqs/303d.html Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Outstanding National Resource Waters Water quality (generally) cannot be lowered Examples: Waters of national and state parks Wildlife refuges Waters of exceptional recreational or ecological significance States designate ONRW and may treat other waters similarly Antidegradation rules govern how ONRW are treated. In most states, ONRW water bodies are considered Tier III waters and water quality cannot be lowered, which means that a discharge has to demonstrate that they will not lower water quality (versus not cause criteria to be exceeded). Some states (like KY) have more stringent criteria that must be met for ONRW. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Regions 3 & 5: “Outstanding” Waters State Designation # of Water Bodies # of River Miles PA High Quality (HQ) Waters Exceptional Value (EV) Waters 26.8% 3.7% 22,267 3,046 WV ONRW = Tier III Waters All streams in 4 or 5 wilderness areas OH ONRW Outstanding State Waters (reserve 70%) Superior High Quality Waters (reserve 35%) 2 158 ONRW are waters of national ecological or recreational significance. Many states have other designations which they consider to be included in the spirit of ONRW. KY: see 401 KAR 5:030, Section 1, Table 1: Red River (19.4); Underground River System (no miles listed); Wild River Boundary (10.2) Cliff Schneider, KDOW, (502) 564-3410 cliff.schneider@ky.gov http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/401/005/030.htm Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Regions 3 & 5: “Outstanding” Waters State Designation # of Water Bodies # of River Miles KY ONRW 3 29.6+ IN Outstanding State Resource Waters Exceptional Use Streams Salmonid Waters 11 8 ONRW are waters of national ecological or recreational significance. Many states have other designations which they consider to be included in the spirit of ONRW. KY: see 401 KAR 5:030, Section 1, Table 1: Red River (19.4); Underground River System (no miles listed); Wild River Boundary (10.2) Cliff Schneider, KDOW, (502) 564-3410 cliff.schneider@ky.gov http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/401/005/030.htm Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

National Marine Sanctuaries None adjacent to states along the Ohio River Closest are: Stellwagen Bank, off the coast of Massachusetts Monitor, off the coast of North Carolina More information available on-line at: http://www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/ Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Waters with Threatened or Endangered Species Determine whether listed species are located in the area by checking the ESA listing at: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSWebpageUsaLists?state=PA http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSWebpageUsaLists?state=WV http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSWebpageUsaLists?state=OH http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSWebpageUsaLists?state=KY http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSWebpageUsaLists?state=IN Most states categorize endangered species by county. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Waters with Threatened or Endangered Species If there are listed species in the area, contact the local FWS, NMFS, or State or Tribal Heritage Center to determine if the listed species could be found or if any critical habitat areas have been designated in the CSO receiving waters Critical habitat areas may be designated independently from listed species, so even if there are no listed species in the area still should contact one of the agencies mentioned above to determine if there are any local critical habitat areas If you find endangered species in the county, you need to work with other organizations like the Fish & Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Services, or other local (county-level) agencies Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Waters with Primary Contact Recreation (PCR) State Designation PA Majority of waters protected for all uses WV Waters designated for all uses unless there is a specific exemption OH Waters designated as bathing beach or PCR or SCR KY Water designated as PCR and SCR (except White Oak Creek - SCR only) IN PCR everywhere, except for 34 limited- use areas Exemptions for WV are listed in Section 7.2.c of the WQS and there are also site-specific exemptions. The exemptions must be approved by the Environmental Quality Board. Reasons for exemptions, and the exemptions themselves vary. They can be socioeconomic, based on low flow, stream characteristics, wet weather… Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Public Drinking Water Intakes Potentially Impacted by CSOs EPA Region State Number of CSOs w/in 1 mile of a DWI 1 ME 7 2 NY 3 PA 19 WV 9 4 KY 5 IN OH TOTAL 59 RE: 1 mile – a length that impacts could be attributable to CSOs Where confirmed, Active lines of communication between drinking water authority and CSO community are in place Due to national security reasons, drinking water intake can not be published. . . Please see OGWDW for further information. Note: EPA was unable to confirm data for an additional 14 outfalls in two states (PA and WV); these outfalls are not included in this table. Source: 2004 Report to Congress on the Impacts and Control of CSOs and SSOs Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Shellfish Beds Potentially Impacted by CSOs Shellfish Harvest Classification Number of Classified Shellfish Growing Areas w/in 5 miles of a CSO Prohibited 411 Restricted 80 Approved 154 Unclassified 14 Total 659 Source: Report to Congress on the Impacts and Control of CSOs and SSOs Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Shellfish Beds Potentially Impacted by CSOs Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Water Quality Standards and Contacts Pennsylvania Bob Frye (717) 787-9637 http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/025/chapter93/chap93toc.html West Virginia Dave Montali (304) 926-0499 x1063 http://www.wveqb.org/Finalrule2003.pdf Ohio Bob Heitzman (614) 644-3075 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/wqs/wqs.html Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Water Quality Standards and Contacts Kentucky Tom VanArsdall (502) 564-3410 http://www.water.ky.gov/sw/wqstandards/ Indiana Jody Arthur (317) 234-1424 http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/title327.html Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Consideration of Sensitive Areas If sensitive areas are present and impacted, the LTCP should address plans for: Prohibiting new or significantly increased overflows Eliminating or relocating overflows where possible Treating overflows where necessary Reassessing impacts each permit cycle where elimination or treatment are not achievable Give as much weight as possible to eliminating or relocating overflows that discharge to sensitive areas. If you can’t eliminate or move . . . Treat Where elimination or treatment is not achievable –give a lot of attention Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Post-Construction Compliance Monitoring Annual number of overflows Annual volume of overflow Days of overflow Days of exceedances Pounds of BOD removed Pounds of TSS removed Money spent Post-construction compliance monitoring is an important mechanism for reporting progress (for the investment made) as well as determining compliance with the LTCP and WQ standards. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

What Does the CSO Control Policy Say About Compliance Monitoring? The selected CSO controls should include a post-construction water quality monitoring program adequate to verify compliance with water quality standards and protection of designated uses as well as to ascertain the effectiveness of CSO controls. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Post-Construction Monitoring Goshen, IN (Pop 29,400) Obtain state approval of monitoring plan Include monitoring protocols Monitor select rainfall events after CSO program completed Use same locations as used for LTCP development Coordinate with MS4 NPDES monitoring requirements Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Financial Capability and Schedule $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 “Knee-of-the-curve” Cost in Millions Post-construction compliance monitoring is an important mechanism for reporting progress (for the investment made) as well as determining compliance with the LTCP and WQ standards. Number of Overflows Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

What Does the CSO Control Policy Say About Implementation? Schedules for implementation of the CSO controls may be phased based on the relative importance of adverse impacts upon water quality and designated uses, priority projects identified in the LTCP, and on a permittee’s financial capability. Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs And …. Construction phasing should consider: Eliminating overflows that discharge to sensitive areas as the highest priority Use impairment (expedite if significant) The permittee’s financial capability Grant and loan availability Previous and current … sewer user fees and rate structures Other viable funding mechanisms and sources of financing Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Example: Phased Implementation Under Presumption Approach Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Financial Capability Matrix Permittee Financial Capability Indicator Scores Residential Indicator Low <1% Residential Indicator Mid-Range 1% to 2% Residential Indicator High > 2% Weak <1.5 Medium Burden High Burden Mid-Range 1.5 to 2.5 Low Burden Strong >2.5 Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Financial Capability References Guidance for Financial Capability Assessment and Schedule Development (EPA, 1997) – Helpful for financial capability assessment Small Community Municipal Financial Capability Analysis: Self Evaluation Guidebook (EPA Region 5, 2002) – More detailed, helpful for determination of widespread economic and social impact for UAA www.epa.gov/seahome/trilogyweb/src/financial/capability.htm Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Example: Seaford, DE Completes Sewer Separation in 18 Years Population = 6,699 Miles of sewer = 22.7 Combined area = 1.97 sq. miles (40% of city) Implementation schedule and cost: Eight phases, 18 years (due to construction and financial considerations) $2.2 million Efforts now directed at controlling resulting stormwater discharges Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Example: Kokomo, IN to Spend to Affordability Limit in 20 Years Population = 47,000 300 miles of sewer (60% combined) Eliminated 18 CSOs since 1997 through WWTP upgrades 20-year schedule; eliminate all but 5 CSOs “Knee” LTCP # OFs/yr 1 2 Cost $57M $48M Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Example: Bremerton, WA uses Mix of CSO Controls over 25 Years Population = 36,000 CSO area = 5.2 sq. miles Sewer separation began in 1983; removal of RDII; storage; treatment at CSOs Consent decree requires 1 OF/yr by 2008; City to pay for Financial Feasibility Study if schedule changes required Spent $17M; $27M more needed (as of June 2001) City has no bonding capacity until 2007 Heavy reliance on loans, grants, and user fees Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

Thank You