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

2. 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

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

4. 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

5. Some States have also Adopted Public Notification Rules
Michigan requires facilities report overflows within 24 hours
Indiana (327 IAC ) requires:
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

6. Public Participation Examples
Sample CSO project websites:
City
URL
LaPorte, IN
Columbus, OH
Manchester, NH
Portland, OR
St.Joseph, MO
Wilmington, DE
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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. CSO Impacts? Current 303(d) Listed State Waters
303(d) List Available at… PA WV OH KY IN
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

12. 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

13. 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)
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

14. 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)
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

15. 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:
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

16. Waters with Threatened or Endangered Species
Determine whether listed species are located in the area by checking the ESA listing at:
Most states categorize endangered species by county.
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

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

22. Water Quality Standards and Contacts
Pennsylvania
Bob Frye (717)
West Virginia
Dave Montali (304) x1063
Ohio
Bob Heitzman (614)
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

23. Water Quality Standards and Contacts
Kentucky
Tom VanArsdall (502)
Indiana
Jody Arthur (317)
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

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

32. 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

33. 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
Other Elements for Small Community LTCPs

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. Thank You