The EPA' Effluent Limitations Guidelines: NTUs for You to Use
It’s possible with all the stuff pouring out of Washington DC these days—most of which you may logically conclude represent punishment for your sins in a past lifetime-- you could have missed the release of EPA’s long-awaited Effluent Guidelines for Discharges from the Construction and Development Industry on November 23, 2009. You can find links to both a brief EPA fact sheet and to the entire rule.
So as not to short you on your spare time reading urges, the EPA released several supporting documents, namely:
1. “Development Document for Final Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Category,” EPA-821-R-09-010. (“Development Document”) This document presents the EPA’s methodology and technical conclusions concerning the C&D category.
2. “Economic Analysis for Final Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Category,” EPA-821-R-09-011. ("Economic Analysis") This document presents the methodology employed to assess economic impacts of the rule and the results of the analysis.
3. “Environmental Impact and Benefits Assessment for Final Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Category,” EPA-821-R-09-012 (“Environmental Assessment”). This document presents the methodology to assess environmental impacts and benefits of the rule and the results of the analysis.
You can obtain electronic copies of this preamble and final rule as well as the technical and economic support documents for the rule at the EPA’s Web site for the C&D rule,.
Before you get overly excited in anticipation of immersing yourself in the pleasures of regulatory poetics, you may take some solace in the fact that the December 1, Federal Registernotice for the final rule contained incorrect compliance dates for the turbidity limitation for sites disturbing 20 or more acres at one time. This error appears on page 63050 of the preamble to the final rule as well as in the rule text at 450.22(a) on page 63058, in case you’re wondering.
Anyway, the regulation is effective on February 1, 2010, after which all permits issued by EPA or states must incorporate the final rule requirements. All construction sites required to obtain permit coverage must implement a range of erosion and sediment controls and pollution prevention measures. Beginning on August 1, 2011 all sites that disturb 20 or more acres of land at one time are required to comply with the turbidity limitation. On February 2, 2014, the limitation applies to all construction sites disturbing 10 or more acres of land at one time. These sites must sample stormwater discharges and comply with a numeric limitation for turbidity.
In order to keep us on the edge of our seats, it is not until page 204 of the 251-page pdf file containing the complete rule (and nowhere at all in the fact sheet) that the framers cough up the magic number that we’ve all been waiting for (you have been on pins and needles have you not?), so prepare yourself. It’s 280.
That requires some explanation. In the draft rule, published last year, EPA proposed a numeric limit of 13 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) for discharges from some construction sites—namely those that covered 30 acres or more, had an R factor of 50 or greater, and had at least 10% clay content. Although this by no means included every construction site, that number prompted a huge outcry—it was too low, lower even than the background turbidity level in some areas, some people said, and the cost of achieving such a level imposed too great an economic burden. Even EPA acknowledged that an advanced treatment system would be needed to achieve it in most cases. You can see past discussions of the proposed limit from our sister publication, Erosion Control, http://erosioncontrol.com/blogs/ec-editors-blog/debating-the-cost-of-effluent-limitations-guidelines-51991.aspx and http://erosioncontrol.com/blogs/ec-editors-blog/more-on-the-proposed-elg-52200.aspx.
Advertisement
The EPA has modified this number significantly. The 280-NTU numeric limit in the final rule applies to construction activities disturbing 10 acres or more at one time, and the rule defines this in some detail—the 10 acres don’t need to be contiguous, for example, if they’re all part of the same project, and the idea was to encourage development of a site in phases.
There’s more, of course—indeed I could go on for days ruminating about some of the more arcane aspects of the regulation—but I don’t want to intrude on your reading pleasure. However, once you’ve digested the rule, I’d truly like you to tell me what you think, and whether can you live with it.
Author's Bio: John Trotti is the Editor of Grading & Excavation Contractor magazine.
January-February 2010
The EPA' Effluent Limitations Guidelines: NTUs for You to Use
It’s possible with all the stuff pouring out of Washington DC these days—most of which you may logically conclude represent punishment for your sins in a past lifetime-- you could have missed the release of EPA’s long-awaited Effluent Guidelines for Discharges from the Construction and Development Industry on November 23, 2009. You can find links to both a brief EPA fact sheet and to the entire rule.
So as not to short you on your spare time reading urges, the EPA released several supporting documents, namely:
1. “Development Document for Final Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Category,” EPA-821-R-09-010. (“Development Document”) This document presents the EPA’s methodology and technical conclusions concerning the C&D category.
2. “Economic Analysis for Final Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Category,” EPA-821-R-09-011. ("Economic Analysis") This document presents the methodology employed to assess economic impacts of the rule and the results of the analysis.
3. “Environmental Impact and Benefits Assessment for Final Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Category,” EPA-821-R-09-012 (“Environmental Assessment”). This document presents the methodology to assess environmental impacts and benefits of the rule and the results of the analysis.
You can obtain electronic copies of this preamble and final rule as well as the technical and economic support documents for the rule at the EPA’s Web site for the C&D rule,.
Before you get overly excited in anticipation of immersing yourself in the pleasures of regulatory poetics, you may take some solace in the fact that the December 1, Federal Registernotice for the final rule contained incorrect compliance dates for the turbidity limitation for sites disturbing 20 or more acres at one time. This error appears on page 63050 of the preamble to the final rule as well as in the rule text at 450.22(a) on page 63058, in case you’re wondering.
Anyway, the regulation is effective on February 1, 2010, after which all permits issued by EPA or states must incorporate the final rule requirements. All construction sites required to obtain permit coverage must implement a range of erosion and sediment controls and pollution prevention measures. Beginning on August 1, 2011 all sites that disturb 20 or more acres of land at one time are required to comply with the turbidity limitation. On February 2, 2014, the limitation applies to all construction sites disturbing 10 or more acres of land at one time. These sites must sample stormwater discharges and comply with a numeric limitation for turbidity.
In order to keep us on the edge of our seats, it is not until page 204 of the 251-page pdf file containing the complete rule (and nowhere at all in the fact sheet) that the framers cough up the magic number that we’ve all been waiting for (you have been on pins and needles have you not?), so prepare yourself. It’s 280.
That requires some explanation. In the draft rule, published last year, EPA proposed a numeric limit of 13 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) for discharges from some construction sites—namely those that covered 30 acres or more, had an R factor of 50 or greater, and had at least 10% clay content. Although this by no means included every construction site, that number prompted a huge outcry—it was too low, lower even than the background turbidity level in some areas, some people said, and the cost of achieving such a level imposed too great an economic burden. Even EPA acknowledged that an advanced treatment system would be needed to achieve it in most cases. You can see past discussions of the proposed limit from our sister publication, Erosion Control, http://erosioncontrol.com/blogs/ec-editors-blog/debating-the-cost-of-effluent-limitations-guidelines-51991.aspx and http://erosioncontrol.com/blogs/ec-editors-blog/more-on-the-proposed-elg-52200.aspx.
The EPA has modified this number significantly. The 280-NTU numeric limit in the final rule applies to construction activities disturbing 10 acres or more at one time, and the rule defines this in some detail—the 10 acres don’t need to be contiguous, for example, if they’re all part of the same project, and the idea was to encourage development of a site in phases.
There’s more, of course—indeed I could go on for days ruminating about some of the more arcane aspects of the regulation—but I don’t want to intrude on your reading pleasure. However, once you’ve digested the rule, I’d truly like you to tell me what you think, and whether can you live with it.