1. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
Julia Moore, P.E.
Limno-Tech, Inc.

2. Expectations of the CSO Policy
The development of the long-term control plan should be coordinated with the review and appropriate revision of WQ standards and their implementation procedures on CSO-impacted receiving waters to ensure that the long-term controls will be sufficient to meet WQ standards.
In this module we will address:
MS4 Coverage: Three types of regulated MS4s
Permit options
Permit application requirements
Permit requirements
Exercise: Determining status as a regulated small MS4. This is a brief exercise to familiarize you with one of the tools necessary to determine coverage.
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

3. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
EPA’s Expectations
CSO permittees develop and implement affordable LTCPs that will achieve compliance with water quality standards
Phased implementation
Priority controls for overflows to sensitive areas
Coordination among permittees, state agencies, environmental organizations, and EPA
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

4. Importance of Water Quality Standards Reviews
Local resource constraints
Permittees need clear guidance on implementation of CSO and other wet weather water pollution control programs to maximize water quality benefits
Any CSO discharge is likely to violate bacteria standards in waters designated for primary contact recreation
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

5. Water Quality Standards Reviews Are Not Easy
Challenges
Scientific and political complexity
Lack of precedent (or little precedent)
Uncertain roles and responsibilities, limited resources
Solutions
Leadership and direction are emerging
Initiate case studies in data rich communities to illustrate acceptable approaches
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

6. EPA Draft Designated Use Plan
Issued July 28, 2004, plan calls for:
UAA workshop for EPA staff
Four regulatory workshops
Funding for 10 pilot projects
Methods to use bioassessment to refine aquatic life uses
Web-based clearinghouse
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

7. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
CSO Program Framework
The CSO Policy offers two approaches for LTCP development
Presumption
Demonstration
Either approach should include site-specific, cost-effective CSO controls that will provide for the attainment of water quality standards
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

8. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
CSO Program Framework
Under the presumption approach:
Data collected during system characterization must suggest that use of the presumption approach can be reasonably expected to result in the attainment of water quality standards
Post-construction compliance monitoring must be used to document WQ standards attainment
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

9. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
CSO Program Framework
Under the demonstration approach there are a number of strategies:
Developing LTCP to meet current WQ standards
Developing LTCP to meet revised WQ standards
Note: revised WQ standards must be in place before LTCP can be approved
Using a TMDL to demonstrate WQ standards can be attained through CSO and other controls
Developing LTCP which will eliminate all CSOs (e.g. separation)
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

10. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
CSO Program Framework
CSO monitoring programs should:
Assess attainment of WQ standards
Define baseline conditions in the receiving water
Assess the relative impact of CSOs
Gain sufficient understanding of the receiving water to support the evaluation of proposed CSO control alternatives
Support the review and revision of WQ standards
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

11. Types of CSO Data Supporting WQ Standards Reviews
Timing of CSO events
Amount of precipitation causing CSO events
Number, volume, frequency, and duration of CSO events per year
Pollutants in CSO that cause or contribute to water quality excursions
Pollutant loadings from other point sources
Precipitation, soil, land use and watershed modeling data
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

12. Types of CSO Data Supporting WQ Standards Reviews
Flow data for CSO-impacted waters
Identification of designated uses and existing use impairments
Locations of sensitive areas
Cost-performance considerations for CSO control options
Financial impact of CSO control options
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

13. Water Quality Standards Program Framework
Options for WQ standards revisions
Changing the designated use
Creating CSO sub-categories
Segmenting the water; using a mixing zone
Adopting a seasonal use
Applying a “high-flow” cutoff
Adopting a variance
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

14. Water Quality Standards Program Framework
States may not remove:
An “existing” use, i.e., a use actually attained in the water body on or after November 28, 1975
A use that can be attained by the imposition of effluent limits required under sections 301(b) or 306 of the CWA and cost-effective and reasonable best management practices for non-point source control
States must also ensure any WQ standards revisions provide for the attainment and maintenance of downstream WQ standards
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

15. STEP 5 STEP 4 STEP 3 STEP 2 STEP 1 STEP 6 STEP 11 STEP 7 STEP 8 STEP 9
Agree on the data
and analyses to
Establish a
Collect data
Implement the
Issue permit requiring
support LTCP
coordination team
and develop draft
NMCs and
implementation of Nine
development and
to oversee LTCP
LTCP, with the
evaluate their
Minimum Controls (NMCs)
alternative
development and
public involved
efficacy
and LTCP development
evaluation, and
WQS review
WQS reviews
Responsible Entity
STEP 6
Water Quality Agency(s)
Implement
(NPDES and WQS Authorities)
STEP 11
and, through WQ
NPDES Authority with
Review and accept
monitoring, evaluate
Coordination Team
draft LTCP and
effectiveness of priority
Implement
evaluate attainability
controls (e.g. for sensitive
CSO Community
post-construction
of WQ standards
areas) and controls
compliance
common to all
WQ standards Authority
monitoring to
alternatives
evaluate attainment
of WQS
WQS attainable,
WQS revisions
no revision
may be needed
necessary
Propose revisions
Review and
Revise LTCP,
Implement
and revise WQS,
approve LTCP,
as appropriate
LTCP
if needed
and modify permit
STEP 7
STEP 8
STEP 9
STEP 10

16. Common Components of LTCPs and WQ Standards Reviews
Water quality monitoring and modeling
Hydraulic monitoring and modeling
Detailed descriptions of existing and designated uses
Analyses of the potential for use attainment
Analyses of control costs
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

17. Example—Water Quality Modeling Results
Scenario
% of Time Fecal Coliform Standard Not Attained
Equivalent Days per Year Fecal Coliform Standard Not Attained
CSOs alone will cause non-attainment of WQS
2.8% 10
CSOs will contribute to non-attainment of WQS
0.3% 1
Upstream sources will cause non-attainment of WQS
8.6% 31
Total
11.8% 42
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

18. Example—Analyses of the Potential for Use Attainment
EXCERPTED FROM LTCP—The City currently requires persons wishing to recreate on the Lazy River when flows exceed 2,000 cfs to obtain a permit from the City and sign a waiver recognizing the inherent danger in such activities. The City has continually demonstrated their belief that recreation should not occur in the Lazy River when flows exceed 2,000 cfs for safety reasons, and therefore purports that the occurrence of particularly high flow precludes the attainment of recreation use.
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

19. Use Attainability Analyses (UAAs)
Required for any change in use
Structured scientific assessment of the physical, chemical, and biological factors affecting use
Six bases
Capital- and time-intensive
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

20. Six Bases for Revising Use Attainment
Naturally occurring pollutant concentrations prevent the attainment of the use
Natural, ephemeral, intermittent, or low flow conditions or water levels prevent the attainment of the uses
Human-caused conditions or sources of pollution prevent the attainment of the use and cannot be remedied
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

21. Six Bases for Revising Use Attainment
Dams, diversions or other types of hydrological modifications preclude the use, and it is not possible to restore the water body
Physical conditions related to the natural features of the water body unrelated to water quality preclude attainment of aquatic life uses
Control necessary to attain the use would cause substantial and widespread economic and social impacts
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

22. Factors with Application for CSO-Impacted Waters
Human-caused conditions or sources of pollution that cannot be remedied
Need to establish “attainable restoration goals” for urban systems
Hydrologic modifications preclude the use
Pose logistical and safety constraints
Shipping channels
Flood control projects
Substantial and widespread economic and social impact
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

23. Example – Adopting a CSO Subcategory
MASSACHUSETTS
Massachusetts amended its WQ standards in 1996 to include refined use designations for CSO-impacted waters
Refined use selection/implementation based on UAA and LTCP controls
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

24. Example – Adopting a CSO Subcategory
MASSACHUSETTS
Class B: Water meets fishable-swimmable standards
Class B (CSO or partial): Some CSO discharges remain; UAA required
Class C: CSO discharges allowed to remain; UAA required; considered last resort
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

25. Where are the Bacteria Criteria Applied?
Many states apply bacteria criteria “end-of-pipe” rather than point of contact
When CSO outfalls are sufficiently removed from recreational areas this may be an important distinction
State could also segment receiving water to protect recreation in the areas where it actually occurs
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

26. Bacterial Standards for Coastal and Great Lakes States
The BEACH Act of 2000 required adoption of new bacterial standards by April 2004
Based on 1986 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria
Will replace fecal coliform with either E.coli or enterococci
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

27. Summary of EPA Recommended Bacteria Criteria
Geometric Mean
(cfu/100mL)
Single Sample Maximum (cfu/100mL)
Designated Beach Area
Moderate Full Body Contact Recreation
Lightly Used Full Body Contact Recreation
Infrequently Used Full Body Contact Recreation
Entero- cocci 33 61 89
108
151
E.coli
126
235
298
406
576
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

28. LTCPs and Water Quality Standards
Variances
Temporary change to existing water quality standards
Designated use must NOT be an existing use
Designated use can NOT be immediately attainable with implementation of technology-based controls and BMPs
Preserves the existing use
Applicable only to discharger
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

29. Example – Providing a Variance for CSO Waters
MAINE
Legislation codifies standard procedure for providing variances to CSO-impacted waters during LTCP implementation
Removes designated uses for short time after wet weather events and snow melt
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards

30. Example – Providing a Variance for CSO Waters
MAINE
Permittees submit flow and load data to DEP to assist in determination of impacted area and duration
LTCP must be submitted AND approved
Variance may be revoked for failure to comply with LTCP implementation schedule
Public hearings and notice must accompany variance
LTCPs and Water Quality Standards