Get documents about "Pretreatment Streamlining Rule
Document Sample
Pretreatment Streamlining Rule
Overview of Changes to the Federal
Pretreatment Regulations
Objectives of Briefing
Provide history and background of the Rule
Review all changes adopted in the final rule
2
History of Streamlining Rule
1995 – Office of Wastewater Management (OWM) initiates evaluation
streamlining opportunities in Part 403 regulations
May 1996 – OWM circulates issue papers to stakeholders for feedback
September 1996 – Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies
(AMSA)/Water Environment Federation (WEF) present report
summarizing multi-stakeholder experts workshops
July 1999 – Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes Streamlining
Rule
August 2003 – Streamlining Workgroup reconstituted
March 2005 – Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Thompson
Report published
June 2005 – EPA formally submits final rule to OMB
September 26, 2005 – Administrator Johnson signs final rule
October 14, 2005 – Final Streamlining Rule Published in the Federal
Register 3
Key Stakeholders
National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Water
Environment Federation and Other POTWs
Industrial Users
Metal Finishers
Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers
Assoc. (SOCMA)
Food Industry
Auto/Shipbuilding/Leather Tanning
Small Business Administration
Approval Authorities (Regions/States)
Natural Resources Defense Council
4
Glossary of PT Terms
Pretreatment-the reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of
the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging into a POTW.
POTW-Publicly Owned Treatment Works, includes any devices and systems used in the storage, treatment,
recycling, and reclamation of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature.
Approval Authority – the Director in an NPDES State with an Approved Program and the appropriate
Regional Administrator in a non-NPDES State or NPDES State without an approved State pretreatment
program.
Control Authority- The POTW, if there is an approved pretreatment program or the Approval Authority if
there is not an approved pretreatment program. Also referred to as a CA.
BMP-Best Management Practices
SIU- All industrial users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards, and any other industrial user that
discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the POTW (excluding
sanitary, non-contact cooling, and boiler blow-down wastewater); contributes a process wastestream which
makes up to 5% or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the POTW treatment
plant, or is designated as such by the Control Authority on the basis the industrial user has the reasonable
potential for adversely affecting the POTW’s operation or for violating any pretreatment standard.
CIU- Categorical Industrial User- All industrial users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Pass-Through- a discharge that exits the POTW into the waters of the United States in quantities or
concentrations which, alone or inconjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, is a cause
of a violation of any requirement of the POTW’s NPDES permit.
Interference- a discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources,
both inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or
disposal.
5
Glossary of PT Terms (cont’d)
SNC – Significant Non-Compliance-An Industrial User is in SNC, if one or more of the following occur:
a.) Chronic violations of wastewater discharge limits, defined here as those in which 66% or more of the
measurements taken within a six month period exceed (by any magnitude) the daily maximum limit or the
average limit for the same pollutant
b.) Technical Review Criteria (TRC) violations, defined here as those in which 33% or more of all of the
measurements for each pollutant parameter taken during a six-month period equal or exceed the product of
the daily maximum limit or the average limit multiplied by the applicable TRC (TRC=1.4 for BOD, TSS, &
O+G, and 1.2 for all other pollutants except pH.)
c.) Any other violation of a pretreatment effluent limit (daily maximum or longer-term average) that the
Control Authority determines has caused, alone or in combination with other discharges, interference or
pass-through.
d.) Any discharge of a pollutant that has caused imminent endangerment to human health, welfare, or to the
environment.
e.) Failure to meet within 90 days of after the schedule date, a compliance schedule milestone contained in a
local control mechanism or enforcement order for starting construction, completing construction, or
attaining final compliance.
f.) Failure to provide, with in 45 days after the due date, required reports such as baseline monitoring
reports, 90 day compliance reports, and reports on compliance with compliance schedules.
g.) Failure to accurately report noncompliance
h.) Any other violation or group of violations which the Control Authority determines will adversely affect
the operation or implementation of the local pretreatment program.
Control Mechanism-permit issued to SIU/CIU by CA if approved pretreatment program or by AA if not.
6
Summary of Final Rule Changes
Issue Rule Change
Pollutants not present CAs can grant sampling waivers where CIU demonstrates that a
regulated pollutant is neither present nor expected to be present
General control CAs may issue general control mechanisms to groups of SIUs that
mechanisms are substantially similar
BMPs as local limits BMPs may be used in lieu of numeric local limits
Slug control plans 1) POTWs may determine how often they evaluate SIUs for the
need for slug control plans or other requirements
2) Any requirements must be reflected in control mechanism or
permit.
Equivalent Conc. CAs can use existing concentration-based standards instead of
Limits converting to flow-based mass limits for CIUs in Organic
Chemical, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers, Petroleum Refining, and
Pesticide Chemicals
Grab and Composite Clarifies and updates application of sampling requirements;
Sampling Provides flexibility to CA in certain sampling protocols
SNC – Publication POTW can publish SNC violations in any paper of general
circulation 7
Summary of Final Rule Changes (cont’d)
Issue Rule Change
SNC – Applicability SNC criteria apply only to SIUs and to those IUs that have
adversely affected pretreatment program
SNC – Daily Max. or Broadens scope of violations covered by chronic, TRC, and
Avge. Limits other violations
SNC – Late Reports SNC violation occurs when reports submitted more than 45
days after deadline
SNC – TRC, Rolling No changes made to current rules
Quarters, pH
Removal Credits - Retains and updates current formula to adjust removal credits
Overflows by number of hours of sewer overflows per year
Removal Credits – Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) asks for
Sewage Sludge comment on adding pollutants to list of chemicals eligible for
removal credits, and on potential ways to streamline consistent
removal requirements
Miscellaneous Changes Updates or corrects provisions re: to signatory requirements,
net/gross calculations, requirement to report all monitoring
data, and notification of changes 8
Summary of Final Rule Changes (cont’d)
Issue Rule Change
Equivalent Mass Limits CIUs can request, and Control Authorities have discretion to
approve, the conversion of concentration-based categorical
standards to equivalent mass limits
CIU Oversight 1) Establishes Non-Significant CIU (NSCIU) category
(discharges < 100 gpd)
CIU reporting can be reduced to yearly compliance
certification
CA oversight can be reduced to annual evaluation of the
CIU’s certification
2) Establishes “Middle Tier” CIU category (discharges don’t
exceed (a) the smaller of 5,000 gpd or 0.01 % of POTW
design dry weather hydraulic capacity; (b) 0.01 % of POTW
design organic treatment capacity; and (c) 0.01 % of the
Maximum Allowable Headworks Loadings
CIU reporting can be reduced to once annually
CA oversight can be reduced to one inspection and sampling
event every other year
9
Pollutants Not Present
Current Rules
CIUs must sample for all pollutants covered by the categorical standard,
regardless of whether pollutant is present (unless the categorical standard
allows for surrogate pollutant sampling or alternative certifications)
Proposed Rule
If CIU can demonstrate a pollutant is not present in its process waste
stream or is present only in background levels in intake water, the CA
may authorize a sampling waiver for that pollutant
Must still comply with categorical standards
OCPSF (Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers) facilities
not eligible
10
Pollutants Not Present
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with the following modifications:
OCPSF facilities are eligible for waiver
At least one representative process wastewater sample must be taken prior to
treatment
CIU must notify CA if pollutant found, and must immediately resume
monitoring
CA must:
include waiver and notification requirement in control mechanism,
document reasons for granting waiver and maintain information for 3 years after
control mechanism expires
Waiver valid for one term of control mechanism (like NPDES provision)
Waiver does not replace any certification requirements established in specific
categorical standards
Waiver may be granted where pollutant present solely due to sanitary
wastewater except if covered by categorical standard
11
Pollutants Not Present
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(v)
40 CFR 403.12(e)(2)
12
General Control Mechanisms
Current Rules
SIUs must be controlled through permits or equivalent
mechanisms
EPA has emphasized the importance of evaluating each SIU
individually
Proposed Rule
Allow POTWs to control SIUs through general permits where
the necessary legal authority exists and the SIUs meet the
criteria for being substantially similar
SIU must file a Notice of Intent or similar application device
Coverage by general control mechanism doesn’t relieve SIU of
reporting requirements
Coverage not allowed for SIUs subject to mass limits
CA may choose to make coverage optional or required
13
General Control Mechanisms
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with the following modifications:
Coverage available for CIUs granted a monitoring waiver for
pollutants not present
POTW must maintain the following for 3 years after expiration of
general control mechanism:
Copy of the general control mechanism
Documentation to support POTW’s determination that the group
of SIUs meets the criteria for coverage
Copies of all written requests for coverage
Still exempts SIUs subject to mass limits, but allows coverage for
facilities subject to the same mass-based local limits
14
General Control Mechanisms
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii)
15
BMPs as Local Limits
Current Rules
Pretreatment rules are silent on whether POTWs can use
BMPs (rather than numeric limits) to satisfy their requirement
to develop local limits
Pretreatment rules do not explicitly require reporting
compliance data for Industrial Users subject to BMPs as local
limits or categorical standards
Proposed Rule
Clarify that:
BMPs developed by POTWs may serve as local limits, and
Full CIU reporting required where BMPs required for categorical
standards
16
BMPs as Local Limits
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with the following
modifications:
Specify the necessity for POTWs to document the
supporting rationale for specific BMPs
Include definition of BMPs
Clarify in the preamble what EPA considers to be
minimum elements that make BMPs enforceable
Specific notice to IUs of requirements
Equipment specifications
O&M requirements
Timeframes for key activities
Compliance certification, reporting and recordkeeping
Re-opener for revoking or modifying
17
BMPs as Local Limits
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.5
40 CFR 403.8(f)
40 CFR 403.12(b), (e), (h)
18
Slug Control Plans
Current Rules
Slug discharges are prohibited
POTWs must evaluate, at least once every two years,
whether each SIU needs a plan to control slug discharges
EPA has historically emphasized that a plan is not required
Proposed Rule
Provide POTWs the flexibility to review the need for a slug
control plan or other action as necessary
Clarifies that plan is not required outcome of evaluation
Requirements must be included in control mechanism
19
Slug Control Plans
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with the following modifications:
POTWs must evaluate need for a plan at least one time for each
SIU, by the following deadline:
Within 1 year of the effective date of the rule if the IU was identified as
“significant” prior to rule’s effective date
Within 1 year of being designated as “significant”, if the IU is designated as
“significant” after the rule’s effective date
SIUs must immediately notify POTW of any changes at their
facilities, not already addressed in their slug control plan or other
slug requirements, affecting slug discharge potential
Clarify annual slug-related inspections should continue as per
existing guidance
20
Slug Control Plans
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii)(B)(6)
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(vi)
21
Equivalent Concentration Limits
Current Rules
No allowance for equivalent concentration limits
where categorical standard requires a mass limit to
be calculated based on the facility’s flow
Proposed Rule
For CIUs subject to OCPSF, Petroleum Refining (Cr
an Zn), and Pesticide Chemicals allow POTW to use
concentration limit in categorical standard where
flow from facility is so variable that use of mass
limits is impractical
22
Equivalent Concentration Limits
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with the following
modifications:
Eliminate condition requiring variable flows
Require CA to document that dilution is not
being substituted for treatment as prohibited by
40 CFR 403.6(d)
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.6(c)(6)
23
Use of Grab/Composite Samples
Current Rules
Pretreatment regulations specify:
Type of sampling method for baseline monitoring
reports and 90-day compliance reports, but not
for periodic compliance reports
Minimum of 4 grab samples for pH, cyanide, total
phenols, oil & grease, sulfides, and volatile
organic compounds
Composite samples must be flow-proportional
unless the Industrial User demonstrates that this
is “infeasible”
24
Use of Grab/Composite Samples
Proposed Rule
Clarify when different types of sampling methods may be
used:
Extend sampling requirements to periodic reports
Give POTWs flexibility to determine appropriate number of grab
samples to measure pH, CN, total phenols, oil and grease, sulfides
and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Clarify composite samples for CN and VOCs may be done prior to
analysis
Remove requirement that flow-composite sampling must be
“infeasible” in order to allow time-composite sampling (sampling
must be “representative”)
25
Use of Grab/Composite Samples
Proposed Rule (cont’d)
Clarify when different types of sampling methods
may be used:
Clarify that although “24-hour composite sample” must be taken
within a 24-hour period, this period only covers period during
which IU is discharging
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with minor editorial
changes
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.12(b), (d), (e), (g), (h) 26
SNC - Publication
Current Rule
Pretreatment regulations require SNC violations to be
published in largest daily newspaper
Proposed Rule
Allow publication in any paper of general circulation
within the jurisdiction that provides meaningful public
notice
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(viii) 27
SNC – Application to SIUs Only
Current Rules
SNC can apply to any IU
Proposed Rule
Apply SNC to Significant Industrial Users only
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule, with the following modifications:
Apply SNC to other IUs if they cause pass through,
interference, imminent endangerment, or adversely affect
pretreatment program
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(viii) 28
SNC – Daily Maximum or Avg. Limits
Current Rule
SNC determinations for chronic violations, technical review
criteria violations, and pass through or interference
violations limited to daily maximum or average limits
Proposed Rule
Include broader array of numeric or narrative violations
Final Rule
Adopted proposed rule
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(viii)(A), (B), (C)
29
SNC – Late Reports
Current Rule
SNC applies if a required report is submitted more than
30 days late
Proposed Rule
No changes were proposed due to the wide variety of
suggestions
EPA solicited comments on recommended approaches
Final Rule
Extended 30-day deadline to 45 days
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(viii)(F)
30
SNC – Technical Review Criteria
Current Rules
TRC are numeric thresholds used to define a subcategory of SNC based
on the magnitude of an effluent violation
TRC violation occurs when 33 percent or more of all measurements
taken for the same pollutant during a 6-month period equal or exceed
the product of the applicable limit multiplied by the TRC
Proposed Rule
No changes proposed, but solicited comment on workable alternatives to
current TRC
Final Rule
Retained current TRC, with slight wording changes
31
pH
Current Rules
IUs prohibited from discharging at pH < 5.0 w/o exception
Proposed Rule
Allow temporary excursions for discharges with pH < 5.0 to
POTWs provided POTW first conducts a technical evaluation
to support lower pH
Final Rule
EPA did not take action due to insufficient data on relationship
between pH and corrosion
Clarified current enforcement flexibility
32
Removal Credits - Overflows
Current Rule
POTWs may grant removal credit to a CIU which equals or is less
than the consistent removal of the pollutant provided by the
treatment plant
Where annual overflows occur, the amount of consistent removal
claimed by the POTW is reduced by a mathematic formula that
takes into account the number of hours of overflows in a year
As a condition of using this overflow formula, the POTW must be in
compliance with certain guidance documents related to combined
sewer overflows, which are now obsolete
Proposed Rule
Delete the current overflow formula
CIUs that are upstream from overflows are ineligible for removal
credits unless they can establish that their discharges are consistently
treated
33
Removal Credits - Overflows
Final Rule
Retains current overflow formula
Updates references to obsolete guidance, and replaced with
requirement for POTWs to be in compliance with all NPDES
permit requirements and other requirements in any orders or
decrees issued pursuant to the CSO Control Policy
Makes one technical correction to a footnote in Appendix
G, Table 1
THC or carbon monoxide concentrations can be used to represent
organic compounds in exit gas from incinerators
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.7(h)
34
Removal Credits – Sewage Sludge
Current Rule
Removal credits can be granted to a CIU where:
The POTW demonstrates its ability to “consistently remove”
the pollutant at issue,
The Pollutant is among those listed in Appendix G, Table I or
Table II,
If the pollutant isn’t listed in Table I or Table II, it isn’t
eligible for removal credits
Potential additions to Appendix G
EPA has identified 15 pollutants for refined risk assessments
will be conducted, which could result in part 503 amendments
EPA has concluded that an additional 20 pollutants did not fail
the Agency’s exposure and hazard screening process, and could
be considered for inclusion in the Appendix G, Table II list if
upper concentrations are developed
35
Removal Credits – Sewage Sludge
Proposed Rule
No specific revisions to the Appendix G list or the
consistent removal provisions proposed
Public comments on the overflow provision indicated
support changes to the removal credit provisions to make
them available for a broader range of pollutants
Several public comments highlighted in the Office of
Management & Budget’s 2004 Report to Congress on
costs and benefits of Federal regulations supported
revisions to the “consistent removal” provisions to more
accurately reflect total removal by POTWs
36
Removal Credits – Sewage Sludge
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)
EPA requests comment on options to amend the
consistent removal provisions to simplify the
process for obtaining removal credits
EPA requests comment on whether the addition
of the 20 pollutants to Appendix G, Table II
would be helpful to POTWs and IUs
37
Miscellaneous Provisions
Signatory Requirements for IU and POTW Reports (40 CFR
403.12(l) and (m))
Changes numeric criteria for designating an appropriate
“responsible corporate officer” signer to more flexible
narrative criteria (same as adopted by NPDES rules)
Specifies general POTW or pretreatment personnel who
can sign as a “duly authorized” employee
Net / Gross Calculations (40 CFR 403.15)
Corrects unintended error in net/gross procedures which
appeared to make the test for using such procedures
more difficult to meet (mirrors the NPDES provision)
38
Miscellaneous Provisions
Requirement to Report All Monitoring Data (40 CFR
403.12(g)(6))
Corrects omission from earlier addition of reporting
requirements (1990) for non-categorical SIUs to require
such Users to report all monitoring data [this is a
required change to approved pretreatment program]
Notification by IUs of Changed Discharge (40 CFR 403.12(j))
Clarifies that when IU provides notification, notice must
be given to the CA or to the AA where the POTW does
not have an approved pretreatment program
39
Equivalent Mass Limits
Current Rules
40 CFR 403.6(d) allows CA to impose equivalent mass limits
in addition to concentration-based standards where the IU is
using dilution to meet standards or where the imposition of
mass limits is appropriate
Current rules do not allow the equivalent mass limit to
replace the concentration-based standard
Some POTWs and CIUs argue that use of concentration-
based standards discourages the adoption of water
conservation measures
40
Equivalent Mass Limits
Proposed Rule
Allow POTW to set equivalent mass limits as an
alternative to concentration limits where CIU has:
Installed treatment equivalent to model technology,
Is employing water conservation
POTW would need to determine an appropriate
flow from a CIU to set the alternative mass limit
Flow based upon a reasonable estimate of the flow
required to achieve the facility’s production goals using
BAT and in the absence of water conservation technology
41
Equivalent Mass Limits
Final Rule - Adopt proposed rule, with following modifications:
Emphasized that CIU may request equiv. mass limits, and CA has discretion to
authorize
To be eligible for use of equiv. mass limits, CIU must:
Implement water conservation measures that substantially reduce water use,
Use control and treatment technologies adequate to achieve compliance with
categorical standards, and demonstrate that dilution not used,
Provide monitoring data to establish its actual average daily flow rate through
the use of a continuous effluent flow monitoring device and its baseline long-
term average production rate,
Demonstrate that it doesn’t have daily flow rates, production rates, or
pollutant levels that fluctuate so significantly that establishing equiv. mass
limits would not be appropriate, and
Have consistently complied with applicable categorical standards
42
Equivalent Mass Limits
Final Rule (cont’d)
If CA approves eligible CIU’s request, CA then calculates the equiv. mass
limits:
Concentration-based categorical standard × CIU’s actual average
daily flow rate × unit conversion factor
Once equiv. mass limit is effective in the CIU’s control mechanism, CIU
must do the following to retain coverage:
Maintain and effectively operate control and treatment technologies
adequate to achieve compliance with the equiv. mass limits,
Record the facility’s flow rates through use of a continuous effluent
flow monitoring device,
Continue to record facility’s production rates and notify CA if rates
vary by more than 20 percent from production rates used as basis for
equiv. mass limits
Employ same or comparable water conservation measures used in
setting the equiv. mass limits
43
Equivalent Mass Limits
Final Rule (cont’d)
After calculating equiv. mass limit, CA must reassess the limit and
recalculate as necessary to reflect changed conditions, where the CIU
notifies it of a revised production rate
CA may retain the initial equiv. mass limits in subsequent control
mechanism terms if:
CIU’s actual average daily flow rate reduced solely as a result of water
conservation methods and technologies,
Actual average daily flows used for calculating limit weren’t based on
use of dilution as substitute for treatment, and
CIU doesn’t bypass treatment control and treatment technologies
Equiv. mass limits are not authorized for pollutants such as pH,
temperature, radiation, or other pollutants which cannot be appropriately
expressed as mass
44
Equivalent Mass Limits
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.6(c)(5)
45
Non-Significant CIU
Current Rules
SIUs include all IUs subject to categorical pretreatment standards
POTW may exclude a non-categorical IU if demonstrates that it has
no reasonable potential to adversely affect the plant or violate a
standard
No flexibility currently to exclude categorical IUs from SIU status
Proposed Rule
Define non-significant CIU (NSCIU) using 100 gpd flow cutoff
Prohibited untreated, concentrated wastewater
Requested comments on whether to allow averaging over 5-day
period
An NSCIU would be exempt from certain inspection and sampling
requirements, and POTW can set appropriate frequencies
46
Non-Significant CIU
Final Rule - Adopted proposed rule, with modifications:
Clarified that 100 gpd cutoff is measured accurately to the amount of
“total categorical wastewater” as opposed to “total process wastewater”
Where categorical and non-categorical wastewaters are commingled,
measure categorical wastewaters to the extent they can be reliably
distinguished from non-categorical wastewater)
If categorical and non-categorical wastewaters can’t be reliably
distinguished, measure the combined flow
100 gpd is a daily maximum threshold, which cannot be met through
averaging
47
Non-Significant CIU
To be eligible, the CIU must:
Have consistently complied w/ all applicable standards and
requirements
Annually submit certification statement indicating that it
continues to meet the NSCIU definitional criteria and that it
complied w/ applicable standards and requirements
Requires annual certification statement to be signed in
accordance w/ 403.12 requirements
CA required to annually list out which CIUs are considered
NSCIUs
CA required to annually evaluate whether each NSCIU has
submitted its certification statement and continues to meet the
definitional criteria
48
Non-Significant CIU
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.3(v)(2)
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(v), (6)
40 CFR 403.12(e)(1), (g), (i), (q)
49
Middle Tier CIU
Proposed Rule
In section discussing NSCIUs, EPA requested comment on “alternative
criteria for determining non-significant status … [such as] the percentage
of POTW’s total flow discharged by a particular CIU.”
18 POTW commenters suggested adoption of 3-tier system for CIUs
1st tier – categorical SIUs
2nd tier – non-significant CIUs: discharge less than a percentage of
POTW’s design dry weather treatment capacity, design dry weather
organic treatment capacity, and MAHL for any pollutant detected at
headworks for which CIU is regulated
3rd tier – de minimis CIUs: discharge less than 100 gpd
EPA approved Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater
Chicago’s pilot project for the 3-tier system (no longer active)
50
Middle Tier CIU
Final Rule
Adopts concept similar to 3-tier system
1st tier – categorical CIUs
2nd tier – “Middle Tier” CIUs
3rd tier – NSCIUs
If designated “Middle Tier”:
CIU can reduce reporting to one time per year
POTW can reduce inspections/samplings to one time every other year
“Middle Tier” CIUs discharge no greater than:
0.01% of POTW’s design dry weather hydraulic capacity, or 5,000 gpd,
whichever is smaller (measured by continuous effluent flow monitor unless
CIU is batch discharger)
0.01% of POTW’s design dry weather treatment capacity
0.01% of MAHL for any pollutant for which CIU regulated
51
Middle Tier CIU
Final Rule
Additional eligibility criteria:
CIU has not been in SNC for any time in past 2 years
CIU does not have daily flow rates, production levels, or pollutant levels
that vary significantly that reduced reporting would be non-representative
of operating conditions
Middle Tier CIU must notify CA immediately of any changes that cause
it to no longer meet eligibility conditions
If CIU no longer meets Middle Tier criteria, it must immediately being
complying w/ minimum reporting requirements for categorical SIUs
CA must retain documentation to support CA’s determination that
specific CIU qualifies as a Middle Tier CIU for 3 years after expiration
of control mechanism
52
Middle Tier CIU
Where to find rule changes?
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(v)(C)
40 CFR 403.12(e)(3), (i)
53
NSCIU v. Middle Tier CIU
Control Minimum CIU Minimum
Mechanism Reporting POTW
Required? Requirements Inspection /
Sampling
Requirements
NSCIUs No Certification only Not required
(no reporting),
one time per year
Middle Tier CIUs Yes One time per year One time every
(if representative other year
of operating
conditions)
Categorical SIUs Yes Two times per One time per
year (at a year
minimum)
54
EPA Webpage to read Final Rule
http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home
55
Questions ??? Call Dan or me at
502-564-3410
56
