1816
Jefferson
Place,
NW
Washington,
DC
20036­
2505
202.833.
AMSA
202.833.4657
FAX
info@
amsa­
cleanwater.
org
Association
of
Metropolitan
Sewerage
Agencies
TESTIMONY
OF
THE
ASSOCIATION
OF
METROPOLITAN
SEWERAGE
AGENCIES
(
AMSA)

September
27,
2002
On
Proposed
Changes
to
the
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
Program
Presented
by
Guy
Aydlett
Director,
Water
Quality
Hampton
Roads
Sanitation
District
Virginia
Beach,
Virginia
Submitted
to
the
OFFICE
OF
POLICY,
ECONOMICS,
AND
INNOVATION
U.
S.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WASHINGTON,
DC
Testimony
of
Guy
Aydlett
Director,
Water
Quality
Hampton
Roads
Sanitation
District
on
behalf
of
the
Association
of
Metropolitan
Sewerage
Agencies
Good
morning,
my
name
is
Guy
Aydlett
and
I
am
the
Water
Quality
Director
for
the
Hampton
Roads
Sanitation
District
in
Virginia
Beach,
Virginia
and
Chair
of
the
Pretreatment
and
Hazardous
Waste
Committee
of
the
Association
of
Metropolitan
Sewerage
Agencies
(
or
AMSA).
AMSA
represents
the
interests
of
over
270
of
the
nation's
publicly
owned
wastewater
utilities
(
POTWs).
AMSA
members
serve
the
majority
of
the
sewered
population
in
the
United
States
and
collectively
treat
and
reclaim
over
18
billion
gallons
of
wastewater
every
day.

AMSA
is
a
strong
proponent
of
environmental
management
systems
(
EMSs)
as
is
evidenced
by
our
co­
sponsorship
of
the
National
Biosolids
Partnership,
which
supports
the
development
of
EMSs
for
POTW
biosolids
programs,
and
our
support
of
a
collaborative
effort
with
EPA
and
the
Water
Environment
Federation
(
WEF)
to
develop
an
integrated
EMS
framework
for
public
utilities.
In
principal,
the
Performance
Track
Program
is
designed
to
foster
the
development
of
EMSs
and
to
provide
incentives
for
those
who
go
beyond
compliance
with
the
regulations.
AMSA
supports
these
goals,
but
questions
why
regulatory
provisions
proposed
by
the
Agency
in
1999
to
streamline
the
National
Pretreatment
Program
for
all
POTWs,
are
now
only
being
made
available
as
incentives
under
the
Performance
Track
Program.

In
1999,
EPA
proposed
to
streamline
the
National
Pretreatment
Program
after
discussions
with
multiple
stakeholders
identified
a
number
of
areas
where
improvements
could
be
made.
Many
of
the
changes
proposed
in
1999
are
similar
to,
and
some
identical
to,
those
proposed
for
use
in
the
Performance
Track
program.
In
fact,
the
preamble
to
the
August
13,
2002
Federal
Register
makes
reference
to
a
workshop
on
streamlining
that
AMSA
cosponsored
and
cites
the
recommendations
from
that
workshop
as
a
source
for
the
proposed
changes
to
the
Performance
Track
program.

The
pretreatment
streamlining
provisions
being
proposed
as
incentives
for
the
Performance
Track
Program
were
developed
by
a
multi­
stakeholder
process
that
included
EPA's
Office
of
Wastewater
Management.
It
was
agreed
that
every
POTW
in
the
nation
should
benefit
from
the
changes,
not
a
select
few
who
may
choose
to
meet
the
list
of
requirements
for
Performance
Track.
EPA
must
not
ignore
its
stakeholders
and
its
own
staff
by
restricting
the
availability
of
these
streamlining
measures
to
Performance
Track
participants.

The
streamlining
provisions
that
AMSA
has
been
advocating,
and
that
are
proposed
as
incentives
for
the
Performance
Track
program,
would
result
in
greater
public
access
to
information
and
overall
improvement
in
operational
efficiency.
Why
then
should
these
changes
only
be
available
to
Performance
Track
participants?
The
provisions
that
EPA
has
2
proposed
to
allow
all
POTWs
to
take
advantage
of
under
the
pretreatment
streamlining
rule
include,
for
example:


A
modified
definition
of
significant
non­
compliance
(
SNC)
that
would
provide
some
leniency
in
declaring
an
industrial
user
in
SNC
when
paperwork
is
only
a
few
days
late.
This
requirement
alone
would
save
hours
of
needless
paperwork
management
for
the
POTW,
and
result
in
no
detrimental
impact
on
the
environment.


Flexibility
for
POTWs
to
classify
a
categorical
industrial
user
as
non­
significant,
reducing
the
amount
of
required
monitoring
and
paperwork.
A
provision
identical
to
the
one
proposed
for
Performance
Track.


Relaxation
of
monitoring
requirements
for
pollutants
that
are
not
present.
A
time
saver
for
industry
and
the
POTW.

These
changes
do
not
roll
back
environmental
protection
in
any
way.
Rather,
they
allow
POTWs
to
move
precious
resources
away
from
burdensome
paperwork
management
activities
to
those
areas
of
the
pretreatment
program
that
can
achieve
real
environmental
improvements.
All
POTWs
should
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
these
streamlining
provisions.

If
EPA
decides
to
use
the
streamlining
provisions
in
the
Performance
Track
Program,
AMSA
believes
that
there
will
not
be
a
significant
increase
in
POTW
participation
in
the
program.
Based
on
conversations
with
a
number
of
POTWs,
including
one
that
has
already
gone
through
the
EMS
process
for
their
biosolids
program,
the
proposed
changes
to
the
Performance
Track
Program
will
do
little
to
encourage
POTWs
to
sign
up.
While
the
provision
regarding
nonsignificant
categorical
users
could
be
extremely
beneficial
for
a
pretreatment
program,
the
other
provisions,
including
the
option
to
use
the
Internet
in
lieu
of
a
newspaper
for
announcing
significant
non­
compliance,
are
not
nearly
as
substantial.
For
a
wastewater
agency
that
may
only
save
$
2,000
a
year
on
newspaper
ads,
the
incentives
will
not
balance
the
tremendous
effort
required
to
join
the
program.

AMSA
also
notes
that
the
POTWs
EPA
is
trying
to
attract
to
the
Performance
Track
Program
with
these
incentives
are
the
same
stakeholders
who
envisioned
the
pretreatment
streamlining
provisions
being
available
to
all
POTWs
nationwide.
Many
wastewater
professionals
committed
their
time
and
expertise
to
develop
these
concepts
and
have
worked
hard
ever
since
to
see
that
they
are
available
to
the
entire
wastewater
treatment
community.
This
will
undoubtedly
be
a
major
point
of
contention
for
many
POTWs
across
the
nation.

While
AMSA
understands
that
many
POTWs
have
already
completed
or
are
moving
forward
with
efforts
to
develop
EMSs,
AMSA
believes
that
in
order
to
attract
additional
POTW
participants,
the
Performance
Track
Program
will
have
to
offer
some
substantial
time
and
cost
saving
benefits
and/
or
regulatory
relief
to
offset
the
burden
associated
with
EMS
development
and
Performance
Track
Program
participation.
AMSA
recommends
that
EPA
look
beyond
the
pretreatment
program
for
potential
incentives
and
examine
the
wastewater
3
treatment
operation
as
a
whole.
Pretreatment
programs,
though
a
vital
component
of
wastewater
treatment,
are
not
the
largest
drain
on
agency
resources.
EPA
should
provide
flexibility
for
POTWs
in
the
areas
of
National
Pollutant
Discharge
Elimination
System
(
NPDES)
permitting,
biosolids
management,
and
air
emission
controls.

In
the
long
run,
AMSA
believes
that
it
will
take
more
than
incentives
or
regulatory
relief
to
dramatically
increase
the
number
of
public
utilities
who
are
participating
in
the
Performance
Track
Program.
The
fact
that
only
one
POTW
is
currently
in
the
Performance
Track
Program
highlights
a
trend
that
is
observed
even
in
those
countries
where
EMS
development
is
outpacing
the
United
States.
EMS
adoption
by
public
utilities
is
limited.
Compared
to
private
industry,
public
utilities
make
up
a
small
fraction
of
those
entities
that
have
adopted
EMSs.
There
remains
a
substantial
learning
curve
that
must
be
overcome
before
we
will
see
greater
growth
in
EMS
adoption
by
public
utilities.
There
are
a
number
of
initiatives
that
wastewater
utilities
have
been
encouraged
to
embrace
and
many
have
found
it
difficult
to
discern
how
the
initiatives
interrelate
and
to
identify
opportunities
to
use
them
in
an
integrated,
systematic
way
to
improve
utility
performance.
Reluctance
among
public
utilities
will
remain
until
the
true
value
of
an
integrated,
EMS
approach
is
more
evident.

In
conclusion,
EPA
must
not
restrict
the
pretreatment
streamlining
provisions
to
the
Performance
Track
Program.
These
streamlining
provisions
were
designed
for
all
POTWs
and
EPA
should
commit
the
resources
necessary
to
finalize
the
1999
proposal
and
allow
the
POTW
community
to
streamline
their
pretreatment
programs.
AMSA
understands
that
EPA
is
already
targeting
additional
pretreatment
streamlining
provisions
as
possible
incentives
for
the
Performance
Track
Program.
These
streamlining
measures
must
not
be
locked
up
in
the
Performance
Track
Program
where
only
one
POTW
will
have
access
to
them.

Thank
you.
