United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water (4203)
Washington, D.C 20460
www.epa.gov/npdes
EPA833-R-01-004
December 2001
&EPA Executive Summary
Report to Congress
on Implementation and Enforcement of the
Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy
f
*
-------
Large photo in background: Part of large sewer separation project in Atlanta, Georgia. Atlanta s CSO Long Term Control Plan
includes partial sewer separation, additional peak flow storage, and collection system improvements.
Department of Public Works.
Top inset: Surcharging CSO on the beach in Atlantic City, New Jersey. Communities are working with New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection to develop CSO control plans in context of watershed management plans.
Jersey Department of Public Works.
Second inset:Typical wastewater treatment plant. For many communities, wastewater treatment facilities are one of the most
expensive infrastructure assets.
Third inset: Installation of a new sewer tunnel in New Brunswick, New Jersey part of a completed sewer separation project.
Photo courtesy of New Jersey Department of Public Works
Fourth inset: Sailboarding in Lake Michigan at Grand Haven, Michigan.
Office.
-------
Executive Summary
Report to Congress on
Implementation and Enforcement of the Combined
Sewer Overflow Control Policy
I he U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA or "the
Agency") is transmitting this
Report to Congress on the progress
made by EPA, states, and
municipalities in implementing and
enforcing the Combined Sewer
Overflow (CSO) Control Policy signed
by the Administrator on April 11,
1994. This report is required by
Section 402(q)(3) of the Clean Water
Act (CWA).
Overview and Background
Why is EPA preparing this report?
In the Consolidated Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 2001, P.L. 106-
554 (or "2000 amendments to the
CWA") Congress made several changes
to the CWA regarding CSOs,
including:
Section 402(q) Combined Sewer
Overflows
(3) Report-Not later than
September 1, 2001, the
Administrator shall transmit to
Congress a report on the progress
made by EPA, states and
municipalities in implementing
and enforcing the CSO Control
Policy.
This Executive Summary provides an
overview of this report and highlights
report findings, key program
challenges, and EPA actions and next
steps to ensure effective
implementation and enforcement of
the CSO Control Policy.
What are CSOs, and why are they a
problem?
As defined in the CSO Control Policy,
a combined sewer system (CSS) is:
A wastewater collection system
owned by a state or municipality
(as defined by Section 502(4) of
the CWA) which conveys sanitary
wastewaters (domestic, commercial
and industrial wastewaters) and
storm water through a single-pipe
system to a publicly owned
treatment works (POTW)...
Further, a CSO is defined as:
In this chapter:
Overview and Background
Report Findings
Key Program Challenges
EPA Actions and Next Steps
ES-1
-------
Report to Congress on Implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
The discharge from a CSS at a
point prior to the POTW...
CSSs were among the earliest sewers
built in the United States and
continued to be built until the middle
of the twentieth century. During
precipitation events (e.g.,rainfall or
snowmelt), the volume of sanitary
wastewater and storm water runoff
entering CSSs often exceeds
conveyance capacity. Combined sewer
systems are designed to overflow
directly to surface waters when their
design capacity is exceeded. Some
CSOs occur infrequently; others, with
every precipitation event. Because
CSOs contain raw sewage and
contribute pathogens, solids, debris,
and toxic pollutants to receiving
waters, CSOs can create serious public
health and water quality concerns.
CSOs have caused or contributed to
beach closures, shellfish bed closures,
contamination of drinking water
supplies, and other environmental and
public health problems.
What statutory and regulatory
framework applies to CSOs?
The CWA establishes national goals
and requirements for maintaining and
restoring the nation's waters. As point
sources, CSOs are subject to the
technology- and water quality-based
requirements of the CWA. They are
not, however, subject to the secondary
treatment standards that apply to
POTWs.
In 1989, EPA initiated action to clarify
requirements for CSOs through the
publication of the National CSO
Control Strategy (54 FR 37370,
September 8, 1989). As a result, states
developed—and EPA approved—-state
CSO strategies. In 1992, a
management advisory group to EPA
recommended that the Agency begin a
dialogue with key stakeholders to
better define the CWA expectations
for controlling CSOs. A workgroup of
CSO stakeholders was assembled
during the summer of 1992. The
workgroup achieved a negotiated
dialogue that led to agreement on
many technical issues, but no
consensus on a policy framework.
Individuals from the workgroup
representing stakeholder groups met
in October 1992 and developed a
framework document for CSO control
that served as the basis for portions of
the draft CSO Control Policy issued
for public comment in January 1993.
With extensive and documented
stakeholder support, EPA issued the
final CSO Control Policy on April 19,
1994 (59 FR 18688). When the CSO
Control Policy was released, many
stakeholders, key members of
Congress, and EPA advocated that it
be endorsed in the CWA to ensure its
full implementation.
In the Consolidated Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 2001, P.L. 106-554,
Congress also stated that:
...each permit, order or decree
issued pursuant to this Act after
the date of enactment of this
subsection for a discharge from a
municipal combined storm and
sanitary sewer shall conform to the
CSO Control Policy signed by the
Administrator on April 11, 1994.
In addition, Congress required
preparation of a second report to
Congress by December 2003. The
second report will summarize the
ES-2
-------
Executive Summary
extent of human health and
environmental impacts from CSOs
and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs),
quantify and characterize resources
spent by municipalities to address
these impacts, and evaluate the
technologies used by municipalities to
control overflows. EPA collected data
during the preparation of this first
report in anticipation of preparing the
second report.
What is the CSO Control Policy?
The CSO Control Policy "represents a
comprehensive national strategy to
ensure that municipalities, permitting
authorities, water quality standards
authorities and the public engage in a
comprehensive and coordinated effort
to achieve cost effective CSO controls
that ultimately meet appropriate
health and environmental objectives."
In 1994, EPA estimated that the cost of
CSO control, consistent with the CSO
Control Policy, would be $40 billion.
In the 1996 Clean Water Needs Survey
Report to Congress (EPA, 1997b), EPA
estimated the cost to be $44.7 billion
(1996 dollars).
The CSO Control Policy established
four key principles to guide CSO
planning decisions by municipalities,
NPDES authorities, and water quality
standards authorities:
1. Providing clear levels of control
that would be presumed to meet
appropriate health and
environmental objectives.
2. Providing sufficient flexibility to
municipalities, especially
financially disadvantaged
communities, to consider the site-
specific nature of CSOs and to
determine the most cost-effective
means of reducing pollutants and
meeting CWA objectives and
requirements.
3. Allowing a phased approach to
implementation of CSO controls
considering a community's
financial capability.
4. Reviewing and revising, as
appropriate, water quality
standards and their
implementation procedures when
developing CSO control plans to
reflect the site-specific wet weather
impacts of CSOs.
The CSO Control Policy expected that
NPDES permits or other enforceable
mechanisms would require CSO
communities to implement nine
minimum technology-based controls
(the "nine minimum controls" or
NMC) by January 1, 1997, and to
develop CSO long-term control plans
(LTCPs). The LTCP must assess a
range of control options, including
costs and benefits, and lead to
selection of an alternative that would
achieve appropriate water quality
objectives and compliance with the
CWA. Once the NPDES authority and
CSO community reached agreement
on an LTCP, the CSO community
would design and construct the CSO
controls as soon as practicable.
What methodology did EPA use for
this Report to Congress?
The basic study approach for this
report was to collect data and report
on implementation and enforcement
activities across EPA headquarters and
the nine EPA regions and 32 states
ES-3
-------
Report to Congress on Implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
known to have CSO communities
within their jurisdictions. This
entailed:
Reviewing existing information in
state and EPA permit and
enforcement files, and federal data
bases.
Performing a literature search on
policy, technology, and
environmental data.
• Using modeling projections in
certain cases.
Conducting site visits to five EPA
Regions and 16 states in which
more than 90 percent of the
nation's CSSs are located.
• Developing 15 CSO community
case studies.
Reviewing data from surveys
conducted by the Association of
Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies
(AMSA) and the CSO Partnership.
Organizing a stakeholder
discussion of the preliminary
issues and findings from the
report at a meeting in Chicago,
Illinois on July 12 and 13, 2001.
These efforts have allowed the Agency
to compile a data base of all CSO
permits, prepare profiles of all state
CSO programs, and identify and
document data gaps. The
methodology for this Report to
Congress recognizes that the Report to
Congress required in 2003 will focus
on the extent of environmental and
human health impacts, resources
spent, and an evaluation of
technologies for CSO control.
Report Findings
What are the overall findings of this
Report to Congress?
Progress has been made in
implementing and enforcing
CSO controls prior to, and as a
result of, the 1994 CSO Control Policy.
Cities that have made substantial
progress and investments in CSO
control are realizing public health and
water quality benefits. The CSO
Control Policy provides a sound
approach to assess and implement cost
effective CSO controls that meet
appropriate environmental goals and
objectives and achieve CWA
compliance. It fosters and expects
significant involvement of the public
and the NPDES and water quality
standards authorities.
Although federal, state, and municipal
officials are involved in a broad range
of activities to regulate and control
CSOs, CSOs continue to pose a
serious environmental and public
health threat. Much remains to be
done to fully realize the objectives of
the CSO Control Policy and the CWA.
The CSO Control Policy provides an
appropriate framework for
communities to control CSOs. EPA
believes the codification of the CSO
Control Policy through the 2000
amendments to the CWA will focus
greater attention on implementation
of the CSO Control Policy.
EPA believes a number of factors have
affected the degree of implementation
of the CSO Control Policy, including
the lack of any statutory or regulatory
endorsement of the CSO Control
ES-4
-------
Executive Summary
Policy from 1994 until December
2000, and competing priorities at the
federal, state and local level.
Below, EPA presents a summary ol the
key findings of this report, organized
along four central themes. These
themes are:
A description of the status of
CSOs in the United States.
An overview of progress in
implementing and enforcing the
CSO Control Policy, examining
key programmatic
accomplishments at the federal
and state levels, as well as
municipal actions to implement
the technology- and water quality-
based controls.
Early feedback on the nature and
extent of environmental results
stemming from CSO control.
A review of remaining challenges
in implementing and enforcing
the CSO Control Policy.
What is the status of CSOs in the
United States?
Today, there are 772 CSO
communities with a total of 9,471
CSOs that are identified and regulated
by 859 NPDES permits. Key attributes
of the CSO universe include:
CSSs are found in 32 states
(including the District of
Columbia) and nine EPA Regions.
They are regionally concentrated
in older communities in the
Northeast and Great Lakes regions
as shown in Figure ES.l.
CSSs are diverse, varying in
configuration, size, age, number
and location of outfalls. For
example:
I Prior to CSO control, San
Francisco estimated that CSO
discharges from 43 combined
sewer outfalls occurred
approximately 58 times per
year, with a total annual
overflow volume of 7.5 billion
gallons, discharging into Islais
Creek, San Francisco Bay, and
the Pacific Ocean. As a result
of its CSO control program,
San Francisco has eliminated
seven outfalls and reduced
total annual overflow volume
by more than 80 percent.
I In Bremerton, WA, prior to
initiation of CSO control, the
average annual CSO volume
was more than 120 million
gallons from 16 CSOs
discharging into Puget Sound.
As part of its CSO control
program, Bremerton has
eliminated three outfalls and
reduced total annual overflow
volume by nearly 70 percent.
Of the 772 CSO communities,
approximately 30 percent have
populations greater than 75,000,
and approximately 30 percent are
very small with total service
populations of less than 10,000.
EPA estimated in 1978 that there
were as many as 1,300 CSO
communities. Differences with
today's 772 CSO communities are
primarily attributable to the
improved inventory of CSO
Since implementing CSO controls, San
Francisco has reduced the number of CSO
events and pollutant loads by an average of
ES-5
-------
Report to Congress on Implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
Figure ES.1
Distribution of CSO
Permits by Region and
* State
i; CSOs are found throughout the
U.S., but are most heavily
concentrated in the Northeast and
Great Lakes regions.
I
i
i_.
i
Total Permits: 859
Region 10
1 1 Region 8
Region 5
1 07 1 07
93
52
AK OR WA
IL IN Ml MN OH Wl
Region 2
74
31
I
NJ NY
Region 1
44
'
• o
5 i 5 3
• I | « f
CT MA ME NH Rl VT
155
58
CA
Region 9
IA KS MO NE
Region 7
Region 4
DC DE MD PA VA WV
Region 3
ES-6
-------
Executive Summary
permits developed for this report,
completed sewer separation
projects, and better differentiation
between CSSs and separate sewer
systems.
• National projections of annual
CSO discharges are estimated at
1,260 billion gallons per year.
• Available data indicate the
following distribution in receiving
waters for CSOs: 43 percent to
rivers, 38 percent to streams, five
percent to oceans, estuaries and
bays, two percent to ponds/lakes,
and 12 percent to other waters
(ditches, canals, unclassified
waters).
• Uncontrolled CSOs continue to
impair water quality in areas
served by CSSs:
I According to EPAs 1998
National Water Quality
Inventory, CSOs are a source
of impairment for 12 percent
of assessed estuaries (in square
miles) and two percent of
assessed lakes (in shore miles)
(EPA, 2000a).
i According to a state-by-state
report of impaired waters
listed under CWA Section
303(d), less than one percent
of the nearly 15,600 impaired
water bodies in states with
CSOs are impaired by CSOs.
Further, approximately eight
percent of the assessed water
bodies are impaired by urban
runoff (which may include
CSOs). Appendix N provides a
summary of the 303(d) listed
waters.
I The Natural Resources
Defense Council (NRDC)
reported in its 2000 Testing the
Waters report that sewage
spills and overflows accounted
for 2,230 beach closings and
advisories in 2000. Sewage
spills in the NRDC report
include combined sewer
overflows, sanitary sewer
overflows, and breaks in sewer
lines or septic systems
(NRDC, 2001).
Localized impacts of uncontrolled
CSO discharges have been well
documented by some
communities. For example:
t New York City reported that
prior to CSO control, CSOs
caused or contributed to
shellfishing restrictions for
more than 30,000 acres of
shellfish beds. In 1998, New
York City reported that
improvements to sewage
treatment infrastructure and
operations, including CSO
control, led to the lifting of
shell-fishing restrictions.
t The State of New Jersey
reported that prior to CSO
floatables control, CSOs
caused or contributed to
hundreds of days of ocean
beach closings each year. The
control of floatables in CSOs
and storm water discharges
has reduced the average
annual days of ocean beach
closings by more than 95
percent.
Fecal coliform concentrations in New York
Harbor have declined dramatically from the
early 1970s to the present. This
improvement is largely attributable to
abatement of raw sewage discharges
through the construction and expansion of
POTWs, elimination of illegal discharges, and
reduction of CSOs.
ES-7
-------
Report to Congress on implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
What is the status of implementation
and enforcement of the 1994 CSO
Control Policy?
There has been definitive progress
implementing and enforcing CSO
controls prior to, and as a result of, the
CSO Control Policy, resulting in
demonstrable environmental progress
in some communities where CSO
controls have been instituted. EPA,
states, and municipalities all have
played important roles in advancing
the CSO Control Policy.
EPA Progress
•i EPA issued guidance, supported
communication and outreach, and
provided compliance assistance
and some financial support for
CSO control.
EPA issued guidance on
coordinating CSO LTCPs with
water quality standards in 2001.
EPA issued extensive technical
and policy guidance documents to
foster implementation of CSO
controls dealing with the NMC,
monitoring and modeling,
financial capability, LTCPs, and
permit writing and water quality
standards reviews. EPA has
sponsored and conducted more
than 15 workshops and seminars
on various aspects of
implementation of the CSO
Control Policy as well as other
compliance assistance activities.
Administrative and civil judicial
actions have been used
successfully together with
permitting and compliance
assistance activities to foster
development and implementation
of CSO controls. Many of the CSO
communities that have made the
most progress to date, including
several of the largest
municipalities in the United
States, have done so as the result
of enforcement actions.
• EPA issued the Compliance and
Enforcement Strategy for Combined
Sewer Overflows and Sanitary
Sewer Overflows in 2000.
State Progress
• Most states have made efforts to
regulate and control CSOs.
NPDES authorities have done
extensive work placing conditions
for CSO control in permits. In
total, 94 percent of CSO
communities are required to
control CSOs, either through a
permit or an enforceable order.
• All 32 states with CSSs developed
CSO strategies in response to the
National CSO Control Strategy.
Most states have adopted the key
provisions of the CSO Control
Policy:
I 27 require implementation of
the NMC or a suite of best
management practices (BMPs)
that include or are analogous
to the NMC.
25 require development and
implementation of LTCPs.
• Most CSO communities are
required to implement BMP
measures to mitigate CSO-related
impacts:
ES-8
-------
Executive Summary
94 percent of CSO permits
require implementation of
one or more BMPs.
I 86 percent of CSO permits
have requirements to
implement the NMC or a set
of BMPs that includes or is
analogous to the NMC.
6 percent of CSO permits do
not require any BMPs.
Imposition of permit or other
enforceable requirements for more
capital intensive CSO facility
planning (e.g., sewer separation or
underground storage) is less
extensive:
I 82 percent of CSO permits
include enforceable
requirements to develop and
implement CSO facilities pi
Ian.
65 percent of CSO permits
contain requirements to
develop and implement an
LTCP.
18 percent of CSO permits do
not require CSO facilities
planning.
Several states have addressed the
full range of programmatic
components (e.g., guidance,
compliance assistance,
communications and information
management, among others).
Other states, principally those
with fewer CSO communities,
have dealt with CSOs on a site-
specific basis.
Many states have provided
compliance assistance and most
include compliance monitoring of
CSOs in their NPDES inspections
programs. Many state strategies
have been updated since issuance
of the CSO Control Policy in
1994. Yet, state programs vary
widely in the approaches used to
implement the CSO Control
Policy.
Most states have not developed
separate, specific procedures for
coordinating the review of water
quality standards with LTCP
development. Some states have
approaches for considering water
quality standards for CSO
receiving waters. For example:
Indiana passed legislation
providing a mechanism
whereby CSO communities
may apply for a temporary
suspension of state water
quality standards when certain
criteria are met.
i Maine passed legislation
codifying standard procedures
for providing variances for
CSO receiving waters during
the implementation of an
approved LTCP.
Massachusetts added a series
of refined uses to its state
water quality standards use
classification system to
address CSO-impacted waters.
f Illinois' water quality
standards program framework
presumes compliance with
water quality standards upon
the completed
implementation of a CSO
facility plan that meets the
-------
Report to Congress on Implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
criteria for the state-derived
presumption approach.
I Michigan rules allow the use
of alternate design flows (i.e.,
alternate to 7Q10 low flows or
95-percent exceedance flows)
when determining water
quality based requirements for
intermittent wet weather
discharges such as treated
CSOs.
I New Hampshire has
developed a surface water
partial-use designation. A
partial-use designation is
made only if the community
planning process and
watershed planning efforts
demonstrate that the
allowance of minor CSO
discharges is the most
environmentally protective
and cost-effective option
available.
At least 16 states have brought
enforcement actions that have
included CSO violations. The
enforcement actions have
primarily been administrative
actions, such as administrative
compliance orders.
Municipal Progress
Most CSO communities have
documented CSO control through
some combination of the NMC
and other best management
practices.
I 77 percent of CSO
communities have submitted
documentation of
implementation of one or
more of the NMC to their
NPDES authority.
I 32 percent have submitted
documentation of
implementation of all NMC.
A smaller number of CSO
communities have developed
LTCPs.
I 34 percent of CSO
communities have submitted
draft LTCPs to their NPDES
authority.
•» 19 percent have had their
LTCPs approved.
'9 17 percent have initiated
implementation of LTCPs or
other CSO facility plans.
I 87 CSO communities have
substantially completed
implementation of their
LTCPs or other CSO control
programs.
CSO communities with LTCPs
developed or approved are
pursuing attainment of water
quality standards in roughly equal
measure under three approaches —
demonstration, presumption, and
a combination of the
demonstration and presumption
approaches.
LTCPs indicate that CSO
communities are relying on a wide
range of technologies to address
CSOs including storage
(e.g.,tunnels), expanded treatment
capacity, sewer separation, and
improved conveyance. EPA will be
examining the environmental
ES-10
-------
Executive Summary
benefits of various CSO control
technologies, including sewer
separation, in the second Report
to Congress in 2003.
What is the nature and extent of
environmental accomplishments
from CSO control?
EPA has seen some examples of
demonstrable public health and
environmental improvements in
communities that have made
substantial progress in controlling
CSOs. The second Report to Congress,
due in 2003, will focus on the
environmental and human health
impacts of CSOs and SSOs, the
resources spent by CSO communities
in controlling them, and an evaluation
of CSO technologies. However, some
early insights into the environmental
gains from CSO controls are provided
so that Congress has some sense of the
return on federal, state and municipal
investments. The following
preliminary observations have been
made:
• According to EPA's initial
modeling estimates, CSO controls
have resulted in an estimated 12
percent reduction of untreated
CSO volume and pollutant
loadings since 1994. EPA
developed a preliminary model,
GPRACSO, which estimates that
since 1994, annual CSO volumes
have decreased by 170 billion
gallons per year. It also estimates
that loadings of biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD) have
decreased by 125 million pounds
per year.
® The number of CSO communities
documenting environmental
results from CSO control is
growing. EPA has identified a
number of notable CSO efforts in
which significant infrastructure
has been completed and
environmental improvements
noted. For example:
I Prior to CSO control South
Portland, Maine's 35 CSOs
discharged approximately 100
million gallons of combined
sewer overflows each year to
the Fore River and Casco Bay.
As of 2001, South Portland
has spent nearly $9 million on
capital improvements in the
CSS and invests another
$350,000 annually on CSO-
related operations and
maintenance activities. These
expenditures have resulted in
the elimination of 25 of their
35 CSOs, and an 80-percent
reduction in the amount of
untreated combined sewer
overflows discharged from the
CSS each year. The City of
South Portland has been
recognized by the Friends of
Casco Bay for its efforts to
control CSOs and the
resulting positive impact on
the Bay.
I Prior to CSO control,
Saginaw, Michigan's 36 CSOs
discharged nearly 3 billion
gallons of combined sewage
each year to the Saginaw
River. As of 2001, Saginaw has
spent nearly $100 million on
capital improvements in the
CSS. These expenditures have
resulted in the elimination of
20 of 36 CSOs, and a
The City of South Portland has been
recognized by the Friends of Casco Bay
(shown here) for its positive impact on the
Bay.
ES-11
-------
Report to Congress on Implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
75-percent reduction in the
amount of combined sewage
discharged from the CSS each
year. The Saginaw River is
now characterized by fishing
periodicals as one of the top
walleye fisheries in the
country.
Key Program Challenges
In developing this Report to
Congress, EPA identified several
noteworthy challenges to CSO
control in the United States. Each of
these challenges, based on an overall
synthesis of the report findings, is
briefly described below.
Financial Challenges
When the CSO Control Policy was
issued, EPA estimated the nationwide
financial need to control CSOs,
consistent with the CSO Control
Policy, at $40 billion (in 1992 dollars).
More recently, data from EPA's 1996
Needs Survey sets national CSO needs
at $44.7 billion (in 1996 dollars). CSO
control costs will continue to be
considerable, and EPA has received
numerous requests from CSO
communities for financial assistance,
given mounting water and wastewater
infrastructure costs and the resource-
intensive nature of CSO controls. CSO
LTCPs typically involve major
infrastructure investments that must
compete with other infrastructure
needs. Respondents to the AMSA and
CSO Partnership surveys reported that
funding is the primary challenge in
implementing LTCPs.
CSO communities are using a
combination of local funding sources,
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(SRF) loans, state grants and loans,
and, in special cases, line item
congressional appropriations to fund
CSO controls. EPA does not have data
on the total extent of CSO spending.
Figure ES.2
SRF Loans for CSO
Projects,! 988—2000
SRF loans for CSO projects
reached more than $245 million in
1994 and began to rise again in
1998, reaching more than $400
million in 2000.This suggests that
funding for the implementation of
CSO controls lagged several years
behind the issuances of the 1989
Strategy and the 1994 Policy.
L,
$410.6m
$272.8m
$245.4m
$180.1m
$121.5m
$ 169.5m
$ 190.4m
$14.6m
$0
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
$168.1m
$ 157.8m
$ 139.6m
ES-12
-------
Executive Summary
Use of SRF Loans for CSO
Infrastructure Continues to Climb
State use of the SRF to fund CSO
control projects has increased
steadily since 1990. As shown in
Figure ES.2, CSO loans in 2000
were the highest ever, accounting
for $411 million, or about 12
percent, of total SRF assistance.
SRF loans for CSO control totaled
$2.08 billion from 1989 to 2000
(about 5 percent of the total CSO
need). States with the highest SRF
spending levels for CSO control
(typically driven by a few large
projects) were Illinois, Michigan,
New York, and California.
Congress has appropriated specific
CSO infrastructure grants totaling
over $600 million for 32 CSO
communities since FY 1992.
Congress has shown some support for
additional funding for CSO control.
The 2000 amendments to the CWA
authorize EPA to provide grants to
CSO communities, either directly or
through states, for planning, design,
and construction of CSO and sanitary
sewer overflow (SSO) treatment. The
amendments also require EPA to
provide technical assistance and grants
to POTWs for watershed-based
management of CSOs, SSOs, and
storm water discharges. The EPA
Administration requested $450 million
for this program in its FY 2002
budget. To date, however, Congress
has not appropriated funds for these
grant programs.
Water Quality Standards Review
The CSO Control Policy anticipated
that development of LTCPs would be
coordinated with the review and
revision, as appropriate, of water
quality standards. Many reasons,
including institutional barriers, exist
for the lack of coordination in the
LTCP development and water quality
standards review processes. States cite
public pressure to maintain their
water quality standards, EPA
requirements for development of a
use attainability analysis (UAA)
prior to revising a state water quality
standard, and the lack of water quality
monitoring data that could be used to
justify water quality standards
revisions. During EPA-srjonsored
listening sessions held in the spring of
1999, designed to support
development of guidance for
coordinating CSO LTCPs and water
quality standards reviews, many
participants expressed concern about
the complexity of the process for
revising water quality standards.
Among the changes in the 2000
amendments to the CWA, Congress
added Section 402 (q) to require
issuance of guidance to facilitate the
conduct of water quality and
designated use reviews for CSO
receiving waters by July 31, 2001. EPA
prepared a draft guidance for public
review and comment (66 FR 364,
January 3, 2001) and issued the final
guidance on August 2, 2001.
Information Management and
Performance Measurement
This Report to Congress relied
extensively on an assessment of CSO
information that resides in EPA and
ES-13
-------
Report to Congress on Implementation and Enforcement of the CSO Control Policy
state files. EPA believes that this
additional information on progress in
implementing CSO controls and
derived water quality benefits exists at
the community level. EPA was
hindered by the lack of a national data
system for comprehensively evaluating
the implementation and effectiveness
of the CSO program, and by the lack
of clear, national performance
measures in place to assess the
effectiveness of CSO control efforts on
a national basis.
EPA Actions and Next Steps
What actions will EPA take to
improve implementation and
enforcement of the CSO Control
Policy?
Despite significant efforts and
progress by EPA, states, and
CSO communities to
implement CSO controls, more work
remains to ensure that human health
and the environment are adequately
protected from CSOs. The 1994 CSO
Control Policy provides a sound and
appropriate framework for developing
and implementing cost-effective CSO
controls. With the codification of the
CSO Control Policy in the 2000
amendments to the CWA, EPA will
continue to work in partnership with
the states to address remaining CSO
issues. EPA will work aggressively with
NPDES authorities, water quality
standards authorities, and CSO
communities to implement and
enforce the CSO Control Policy. Based
on the findings of this Report to
Congress, EPA will pursue a number
of activities to ensure the continued
effective implementation and
enforcement of the CSO Control
Policy.
Ensure That All CSOs are
Appropriately Controlled
Implement the shall conform
statutory mandate.
I Begin efforts to implement
new CWA Section 402(q)(l),
which requires that future
permits or other enforceable
mechanisms for CSOs
conform to the CSO Control
Policy.
Ensure all CSOs are covered by an
NPDES permit or other
enforceable mechanism.
I Follow up with NPDES
authorities to ensure that
NPDES permits or other
enforceable mechanisms are
issued as soon as possible for
those CSO communities that
have not yet been required to
control CSOs. EPA will also
work with the states to ensure
that permits and enforcement
actions (e.g.,orders, decrees)
conform with the CSO
Control Policy, as required by
the 2000 amendments to the
CWA.
Improve Implementation of the CSO
Control Policy
Advocate CSO control on a
watershed basis.
4 Continue efforts to focus
protection of water quality on
a watershed scale, and support
development of LTCPs on a
ES-14
-------
Executive Sumrnan
watershed basis. EPA will
continue efforts to encourage
integration of wet weather
programs, including support
to facilitate wet weather pilot
projects as designated in the
2000 CWA amendments.
Work with states to speed the
water quality standards review and
revision process.
I Continue to work with states,
communities, and
constituency groups on
coordinating the review and
revision of water quality
standards with development
of LTCPs. EPA will establish a
tracking system for water
quality standards reviews on
CSO receiving waters. EPA
will also assess the need for
additional guidance and tools
to facilitate the water quality
standards review process for
all sources, including CSOs.
Strengthen CSO information
management.
I Ensure that the Office of
Water and the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance coordinate
information management and
performance measurement
activities to demonstrate the
environmental outcomes and
benefits of CSO control.
Improve compliance assistance
and enforcement.
I CSOs will continue to be a
national compliance and
enforcement priority in fiscal
years 2002 and 2003. EPA will
work closely with NPDES
authorities to target
enforcement actions, where
appropriate, to ensure
compliance with the CSO
requirements in NPDES
permits or other enforceable
mechanisms. In addition, EPA
will develop and promote
compliance assistance tools.
Initiate Efforts for 2003 Report to
Congress
• Initiate efforts to define the scope
and methodology for the second
Report to Congress on efforts
related to CSO controls. By
December 2003, EPA is required
to summarize the extent of human
health and environmental impacts
caused by CSOs and SSOs, report
on the resources spent by
municipalities to address these
impacts, and evaluate the
technologies used, including
whether sewer separation is
environmentally preferred for all
situations. EPA will build on CSO
data collected for this report and
develop a methodology for
addressing the challenges of
collecting and analyzing SSO data.
ES-15
------- |