1. Industrial Storm Water Permitting in California: a Regulatory Perspective An intensive overview of the program, its key principles, and likely future – slammed into a 20 minute format. Greg Gearheart, PE CA State Water Board 916.341.5892

2. The view ahead….

3. Grand Slam Game Plan Two main concepts to take home from this: 1.Effluent Limitations are not the same as Receiving Water Limitations (dually enforceable under current scheme) 2.Numerics come in 4 basic varieties, but we have the technology to make new hybrids or varieties.

4. SW Permits National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Effluent Limitations –Provisions –Prohibitions –SWPPP (by extension) –Technology-based standards, mostly Receiving Water Limitations –Water Quality Standards (WQS)

5. Technology Based Standards Industrial and construction: BAT/BCT Permits may require best management practices (BMPs) In establishing requirements, permit writers use best professional judgment (BPJ) NRDC v USEPA: states establish BMP requirements

6. Water Quality Standards Water Quality Standards are made up of: –Beneficial Uses (designated to specific waterbodies), plus –water quality criteria; and –an antidegradation policy. Beneficial Uses (BUs) are: often not directly related to key water resource uses valued by communities (it might take a suite of them to protect wetlands and streams, for example) Narrative or Numeric

8. Humboldt Bay BUs: REC1 REC2 NAV WILD EST MAR MIGR SPWM SHELL SW Effluent Limitations Receiving Water Limitations Narrative: reduce pollutants using BAT/BCT - technology-based standard Do not cause or contribute to an Exceedance of a water quality standard (WQS). Numeric: could be technology- (TBEL) or water quality-based (WQBEL) Example Storm Water (SW) Discharges from an industrial facility to Humboldt Bay

9. BUs: REC1 REC2 NAV WILD EST MAR MIGR SPWM SHELL Example Storm Water (SW) Discharges from an industrial facility to Humboldt Bay SW Effluent Limitations Technology-based BMPs: Covering waste piles Sweeping/cleaning of open areas Treatment (basins) of solids Etc. Receiving Water Limitations Numbers – TSS < 100 mg/L Narrative – “no toxics in toxic amounts”

10. Humboldt Bay BUs: REC1 REC2 NAV WILD EST MAR MIGR SPWM SHELL Example Storm Water (SW) Discharges from an industrial facility to Humboldt Bay SW Effluent Limitations Technology-based BMPs: Covering waste piles Sweeping/cleaning of open areas Treatment (basins) of solids Etc. Receiving Water Limitations Numbers – TSS < 100 mg/L Narrative – “no toxics in toxic amounts” (1) Enforce ELs (2) Enforce RWLs

11. Compliance Scenarios ELs are violated and RWLs are fine ELs are violated and RWLs are violated ELs are fine and RWLs are fine ELs are fine and RWLs are violated TBALs and WQBALs  indicators for ELs and RWLs TBELs and WQBELs  direct compliance measures for ELs (in the case of WQBELs these also should ensure RWL compliance)

13. The Challenge of Numerics Effluent limitations can either be “narrative” or “numeric” Numeric effluent limitations can either be “technology-based” or “water quality- based” Benchmark values are being used my many as training wheels for NELs –And just to be different, CA calls these “Numeric Action Levels” - NALs

14. NELs and NALs Water QualityTechnology Numeric Effluent Limitations WQBELsTBELs Numeric Action Levels WQBALsTBALs

15. WQBELs Derived from water quality standards Apply to the effluent at the point of discharge Could include mixing zone or dilution credit If NELs are met, water quality standards (WQS) would be met (in theory) Site specific!

16. TBELs Using the BAT/BCT approach, these are derived from performance data on specific BMPs (probably treatment control, but could be others, too) Apply to the effluent at the point of discharge Probably somewhat sector specific, but otherwise generally applicable

17. Action Levels aka Benchmark values in the MSGP These are typically a hybrid of technology- and water quality-based values MSGP values are derived from water quality criteria, however not site specific (nor are they CA specific) If exceeded these generally do not constitute a violation of the permit

18. CA Expert Panel on Numerics Recommended differentiating between TMDL based NELs and the rest of the pack Recommended a specific approach to setting TBALs and TBELs Technology-based numbers should be based on effluent characterization data – mean plus one or two standard deviations Panel went on to say our data was not acceptable

19. More on TBALs, TBELs, WQBALs and WQBELs Effluent data is only helpful in setting technology-based numbers if there is more known about the relationship to BAT/BCT implementation Some individual NPDES permits for industrial storm water have WQBELs – Boeing SSFL, refineries, etc.

20. Charts and graphs.

21. Industrial Facilities Inspected FY10/11

23. Industrial Facilities Submitting Annual Reports FY10/11

25. Next steps.

26. IGP - Next Steps Release new IGP draft (early November) Public, staff workshops (outreach) in November and December Public Hearing in December Comment period ends Staff digests and puts out FINAL draft for adoption Adoption in Spring 2012

27. The Scoop Staff will recommend a continuation of narrative ELs this permit cycle USEPA Benchmark values  quasi-WQBALs (and TBALs) in draft Progressive (iterative) approach, akin to CASQA recommendations from 2006 Improve data quality and breadth of information gathered, per Panel  QiSP role and other features Aiming for possible TBELs in next permit

28. Greg Gearheart | 916-341-5892 | ggearheart@waterboards.ca.gov