A Point Source of a Different Color: Identifying a Gap in United States Regulatory Policy for “Green” CSO Treatment Using Constructed Wetlands
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Current U.S. Regulatory Framework
3.1.1. “Grey” vs. “Green” Wastewater Treatment Policy
Parameter | Secondary Treatment Standards (“grey”) | Equivalent to Secondary Treatment Standards (“green”) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
30-day average | 7-day average | 30-day average | 7-day average | |
BOD5 | 30 mg/L (or 25 mg/L CBOD5) | 45 mg/L (or 40 mg/L CBOD5) | not to exceed 45 mg/L (or not to exceed 25 mg/L CBOD5) | not to exceed 65 mg/L (or not to exceed 60 mg/L CBOD5) |
TSS | 30 mg/L | 45 mg/L | not to exceed 45 mg/L | not to exceed 65 mg/L |
BOD5 and TSS removal (concentration) | not less than 85% | - | not less than 85% | - |
pH | within the limits of 6.0–9.0 | within the limits of 6.0–9.0 |
3.1.2. CSO Control Policy
- (1)
- Proper operation and regular maintenance programs for the sewer system and the CSOs;
- (2)
- Maximum use of the collection system for storage;
- (3)
- Review and modification of pretreatment requirements to assure CSO impacts are minimized;
- (4)
- Maximization of flow to the publicly owned treatment works for treatment;
- (5)
- Prohibition of CSOs during dry weather;
- (6)
- Control of solid and floatable materials in CSOs;
- (7)
- Pollution prevention;
- (8)
- Public notification to ensure that the public receives adequate notification of CSO occurrences and CSO impacts; and
- (9)
- Monitoring to effectively characterize CSO impacts and the efficacy of CSO controls.
3.1.3. Green Infrastructure Policy
3.2. CSO Treatment Wetlands in the United States
3.2.1. History and Specifications
CSO Community | Construction Completed | Treatment System Area (Acres) | Maximum Capacity (MG) | Peak Design Flow (MGD) | Grit and Floatables Removal | Treatment Wetland Components | Receiving Water |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Elkhart, IN | 1999 | 0.5 | NA | NA | Bar screen and sedimentation basin | Free-water surface (shallow and deep zones) wetland, vertical down-flow wetland | Elkhart River |
Akron, IN | 2001 | 6 | 0.5 | NA | Swirl concentrator | Two free-water surface wetlands (“serpentine earthen channels”) | Town Lake |
Washington, IN | 2012 | 27 | 25 | 307.7 | Nutrient baffle and forebay pond | Free-water surface wetland, UV disinfection system | Hawkins Creek |
Syracuse, NY | 2013 | 2 | 0.7 | 28.4 | Swirl concentrator | Floating wetland islands, vertical down-flow wetland, free-water surface wetland | Harbor Brook |
3.2.2. Regulatory Standards and Practices
CSO Community | NPDES/SPDES Permit | Compliance Monitoring (effluent, unless otherwise specified) | Effluent Limits | Basis for Effluent Limitations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Elkhart, IN | None | None | None | None |
Akron, IN | General NPDES | Flow i (MGD) | Report (Daily Maximum and Monthly Average) | Water Quality-Based, Indiana Administrative Code limits for lake dischargers (327 IAC 2-1-6) [48] |
CBOD5 (mg/L) | Monthly Average: 10, Weekly Average: 15 | |||
TSS (mg/L) | Monthly Average: 12, Weekly Average: 18 | |||
Ammonia-nitrogen (mg/L)—Summer | Monthly Average: 1.1, Weekly Average: 1.6 | |||
Ammonia-nitrogen (mg/L)—Winter | Monthly Average: 1.6, Weekly Average: 2.4 | |||
Phosphorous (mg/L) | Monthly Average: 1.0 | |||
pH (standard units) | Daily Minimum: 6, Daily Maximum: 9 | |||
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) | Daily Minimum 6 | |||
Escherichia coli (E. coli) (colonies/100 mL) | Monthly Average: 125, Daily Maximum: 235 | |||
Washington, IN | General NPDES | Effluent Flow (MGD), CBOD5 (mg/L), TSS (mg/L), Ammonia-nitrogen (mg/L), pH (s.u.), Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) | Report | Technology-Based, primary treatment and disinfection [52,54] |
Escherichia coli (E. coli) (colonies/100 mL) | Monthly Average: 125, Daily Maximum: 235 | |||
Syracuse, NY | Draft General SPDES | Event Flow i (MG), BOD5i (mg/L), TSS i (mg/L), Settleable Solids i (mL/L), Oil & Grease (mg/L), Floatable Material (visual obs.), Screenings (Monthly Total—influent only), Ammonia i (mg/L), TKN (mg/L), Total Phosphorous i (mg/L), Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) | Report | Draft for pilot purposes; Technology-Based, primary treatment and disinfection [51,56] |
Fecal Coliform i (colonies/100 mL) | Overflow Event: 200 | |||
Total Residual Chlorine (mg/L) | Overflow Event: 0.2 |
3.3. European CSO Treatment Wetland Policy
3.4. Sustainability Criteria for CSO Treatment Wetlands
3.4.1. Construction and Avoided Infrastructure Costs
3.4.2. Long-Term Operations and Maintenance
3.4.3. Ecosystem Services
3.5. Critical Analysis and Recommendations
- There is a precedent for different technology/performance-based standards between “grey” and “green” wastewater treatment systems;
- Federal CSO control policy favors technology-based treatment alternatives; and
- Federal guidelines support the integration of sustainable GI alternatives into LTCP’s and NPDES permits.
- (1)
- Benefits of “grey” and “green” CSO treatment systems are assessed using sustainability analyses that include construction and avoided infrastructure costs, long-term operations and maintenance, ecosystem services;
- (2)
- Effluent limits and compliance monitoring requirements take into account fundamental technical differences between “grey” and “green” CSO treatment systems; and
- (3)
- Design recommendations facilitate meeting LTCP goals by versatile application of different treatment wetland technologies (e.g., vertical down-flow, free-water surface).
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References and Notes
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Report to Congress: Implementation and Enforcement of the Combined Sewer Overflow Policy. Office of Water: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- NRC (National Research Council). Urban Stormwater Management in the United States; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA; Volume 2009.
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Control Policy; Office of Water: Washington, DC, USA; 1994.
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Combined Sewer Overflow: Guidance for Nine Minimum Controls; Office of Water: Washington, DC, USA, 1995.
- Jaffe, M. Reflections on green infrastructure economics. Environ. Pract. 2011, 12, 357–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnhill, K.; Smardon, R.C. Gaining ground: Green infrastructure attitudes and perceptions from Stakeholders. Environ. Pract. 2012, 14, 6–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Greening EPA Glossary. Available online: http://www.epa.gov/oaintrnt/glossary.htm (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Perreault, T.; Wraight, S.; Perreault, M. Environmental injustice in the Onondaga Lake waterscape, New York State, USA. Water Altern. 2012, 5, 485–506. [Google Scholar]
- Sun, N.; Hall, M. Coupling human preferences with biophysical processes: Modeling the effect of citizen attitudes on potential urban stormwater runoff. Urban Ecosyst. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moshiri, G.A. Construction Wetlands for Water Quality Improvement; Lewis Publishers: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1993.
- Vymazal, J. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Water 2010, 2, 530–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kadlec, R.H.; Wallace, C. Treatment Wetlands, 2nd ed.Lewis Publishers: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009.
- Vymazal, J. Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment: Five Decades of Experience. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ITRC (Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council). Technical and Regulatory Guidance Document for Constructed Treatment Wetlands. Available online: http://www.itrcweb.org/Documents/WTLND-1.pdf (accessed on 6 April 2014).
- Wong, T.H.F.; Fletcher, T.D.; Duncan, H.P.; Jenkins, G.A. Modeling urban stormwater treatment—A unified approach. Ecol. Eng. 2006, 27, 58–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Constructed Wetlands Treatment of Municipal Wastewaters Manual; Office of Research and Development: Cincinnati, OH, USA, 2000.
- Scholz, M. Wetlands Systems to Control Urban Runnoff; Elsevier: London, UK, 2006.
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Menu of BMPs: Stormwater Wetland. Available online: http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps/index.cfm?action=factsheet_results&view=specific&bmp=74 (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Meyer, D.; Molle, P.; Esser, D.; Troesch, S.; Masi, F.; Dittmer, U. Constructed wetlands for combined sewer overflow treatment—Comparison of German, French and Italian approaches. Water 2013, 5, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Save the Rain. Onondaga County, New York Save the Rain Program 2010–2018 Green Infrastructure Plan. Available online: http://savetherain.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2010-2018-Green-Infrastructure-Plan.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Renew Evansville. Volume 1 Final Integrated Overflow Control Plan. Available online: http://www.evansvillegov.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=13319 (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Harrison, K. Ideas and environmental standard setting: A comparative study of regulation of the pulp and paper industry. Governance 2000, 15, 65–96. [Google Scholar]
- Keleman, R.D. Regulatory Federalism: EU environmental regulation in comparative perspective. J. Public Policy 2000, 20, 133–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knill, C.; Lehmkuhl, D. The national impact of European Union regulatory policy: Three European mechanisms. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2002, 41, 255–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navrud, S.; Pruckner, G.J. Environmental valuation—To use of not to use? Environ. Resour. Econ. 1997, 10, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pargal, S.; Hettige, H.; Singh, M.; Wheeler, D. Formal and informal; regulation of industrial pollution: Comparative evidence from Indonesia and the Unites States. World Bank Econ. Rev. 1997, 11, 433–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cole, D.K.; Grossman, P.Z. When is command and control efficient? Institutions, technology, and the comparative efficiency of alternative regulatory regimes for environmental protection. Available online: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/590 (accessed on 8 February 2014).
- Hahn, R.W.; Stavins, R.N. Incentive-based environmental regulation: A new era for an Old idea? Ecol. Law Q. 1991, 18, 1–42. [Google Scholar]
- Hornstein, D.T. Reclaiming environmental Law: A normative critique of comparative risk analysis. Columbia Law Rev. 1992, 92, 562–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hazilla, M.; Kopp, R.J. Social cost of environmental quality regulations: A general equilibrium analysis. J. Polit. Econ. 1990, 98, 853–873. [Google Scholar]
- Karr, J.R. Defining and assessing ecological integrity: Beyond water quality. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1993, 12, 1521–1531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringold, P.L.; Boyd, J.; Landers, D.; Weber, M. What data should we collect? A Framework for identifying indicators of ecosystem contributions to human well-being. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaffe, M.; Zellner, M.; Minor, E.; Gonzalez-Meler, M.; Cather, L.; Minor, D.; Ahmed, H.; Elberts, M.; Sprague, H.; Wise, S.; et al. Using Green Infrastructure to Manage Urban Stormwater Quality: A Review of Selected Practices and State Programs; Illinois Environmental Protection Agency: Springfield, IL, USA, 2010.
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). NPDES Permit Writers’ Manual; Office of Water: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Memorandum, Achieving Water Quality through Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Plans. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/memointegratedmunicipalplans.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Memorandum, Protecting Water Quality with Green Infrastructure in EPA Water Permitting and Enforcement Programs. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/gi_memo_protectingwaterquality.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Memorandum, Use of Green Infrastructure in NPDES Permits and Enforcement. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/gi_memo_enforce.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Memorandum, Using Green Infrastructure to Protect Water Quality in Stormwater, CSO, Nonpoint Source and Other Water Programs. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/greeninfrastructure_h2oprograms_07.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Factsheet 1: General Accountability Considerations for Green Infrastructure. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi_regulatory.cfm (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Factsheet 2: Combined Sewer Overflows. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/EPA-Green-Infrastructure-Factsheet-2-061212-PJ.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Factsheet 3: Sanitary Sewer Overflows. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/EPA-Green-Infrastructure-Factsheet-3-080612.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Factsheet 4: Stormwater. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/EPA-Green-Infrastructure-Factsheet-4-061212-PJ.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Factsheet 5: Total Maximum Daily Loads. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/EPA-Green-Infrastructure-Factsheet-5-061212-PJ.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Factsheet 6: Water Quality Standards. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/EPA-Green-Infrastructure-Factsheet-6-110112-508.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Umble, A.K.; Machlan, M.; Horvath, E.C.; Newvine, L.A. Constructed wetlands for treating combined sewer overflows: An alternative solution for implementing the CSO strategy. In Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation Watershed 2000 Management Conference, Vancouver, Columbia, July 2000; Water Environment Federation: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2000; Volume 2000, No. 6. pp. 2571–2588. [Google Scholar]
- Machlan, M. Personal communication. City of Elkhart Wastewater Utility: Elkhart, IN, USA, 7 January 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Cluxton, P. Personal communication. Indiana Department of Environmental Management: Indianapolis, IN, USA, 9 January 2014. [Google Scholar]
- IDEM (Indiana Department of Environmental Management). Final NPDES Permit No. IN0025232, Town of Akron Wastewater Treatment Plant, Fulton County. Available online: http://vfc.idem.in.gov/Pages/Member/View.aspx?DocId=59116233 (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Water & Wastes Digest. 2011 Top Water and Wastewater Projects. Available online: http://www.wwdmag.com/sites/default/files/23_RG_TopProjects.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Mosley, E.; Legnetto, P.J.; Pries, J.; Fordiani, R. Constructed Wetlands for CSO Treatment: A Full-scale Pilot in Onondaga County, NY. In Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA, 27 September–1 October 2012.
- NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). Long Term Control Plan (LTCP) Requirements. Available online: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/48985.html (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- IDEM (Indiana Department of Environmental Management). Agency Nonrule Policy Document: CSO Treatment Facilities (Water-016). Available online: http://www.in.gov/idem/files/wpcb_2008_mar_npd-016.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- IDEM (Indiana Department of Environmental Management). Final NPDES Permit No. IN0025674, City of Elkhart Wastewater Treatment Plant, Elkhart County . Available online: http://vfc.idem.in.gov/Pages/Member/View.aspx?DocId=65956939 (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- IDEM (Indiana Department of Environmental Management). Final NPDES Permit No. IN0025658, City of Washington Wastewater Treatment Plant, Daviess County. Available online: http://vfc.idem.in.gov/Pages/Member/View.aspx?DocId=69041904 (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- IDEM (Indiana Department of Environmental Management). Inspection Summary/Violation Letter, Akron Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plant, NPDES Permit No. IN0025232; IDEM: Akron, IN, USA, 31 December 2013.
- NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Discharge Permit Number NY 002 7081 (Draft). Received from NYSDEC on 17 January 2014.
- Save the Rain. Quality Assurance Project Plan: Harbor Brook CSO 018 Constructed Wetlands Pilot Treatment System. Available online: http://savetherain.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Monitoring-Plan.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2014).
- Stephenson, V. Personal communication. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC): Syracuse, NY, USA, 6 January 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Van Dien, F. Personal communication. ECOFYT: Oirschot, The Netherlands, 1 April 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Arias, C. Personal communication. Aarhus University Department of Bioscience: Aarhus, Denmark, 26 March 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Rousseau, D. Personal communication. Gent University, Department of Industrial Biological Sciences: Gent, Belgium, 1 April 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Hawes, P. Personal communication. ARM Ltd.: Staffordshire, UK, 26 March 2014. [Google Scholar]
- EC (European Commission). Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Off. J. Eur. Community. 2000, pp. 1–73. Available online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060 (Accessed on 18 April 2014).
- DWA Deutsche Vereinigung für. DWA Empfehlungen für Planung, Konstruktion und Betrieb von Retentionsbodenfilteranlagen zur weitergehenden Regenwasserbehandlung im Misch- und Trennverfahren (Design, construction and operation guideline for retention soil filters for enhanced combined sewer overflow treatment); DWA-Regelwerk, Merkblatt M 178: Hennef, Germany. 2005. Available online: http://www.dwa.de/dwa/shop/produkte.nsf/663C11FEBE91CE72C125753C00345630/$file/vorschau_DWA_M_178.PDF (accessed on 18 April 2014). (In Germany)
- Uhl, M.; Dittmer, U. Constructed wetlands for CSO treatment—An overview of practice and research in Germany. Water Sci. Technol. 2005, 51, 23–30. [Google Scholar]
- Meyer, D.; Dittmer, U. Design supportive modelling of constructed wetlands for combined sewer overflow treatment in Germany. Ecol. Eng. 2014, in press. [Google Scholar]
- Wise, S.; Braden, J.; Ghalayini, D.; Grant, J.; Kloss, C.; MacMullan, E.; Morse, S.; Montalto, F.; Nees, D.; Nowak, D.; et al. Integrating Valuation Methods to recognize Green Infrastructure Multiple Benefits; Center for Neighborhoods and Technology: Chicago, IL, USA, 2010.
- Spatari, S.; Yu, Z.; Montalto, F. Life cycle implications of urban green infrastructure. Environ. Pollut. 2011, 159, 2174–2179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campbell, C.S.; Ogden, M. Constructed Wetlands in the Sustainable Landscape; John Wiley & Sons Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1999.
- Droguett, R.B. Sustainability Assessment of Green Infrastructure Practices for Infrastructure Practices for Stormwater Management: A Comparative Energy Analysis. Master Thesis, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Geiger, W.F. Combined sewer overflow treatment—Knowledge or speculation. Water Sci. Technol. 1998, 38, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Wetlands & Water Synthesis; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
- Smardon, R.C. Human perception of utilization of wetlands for waste assimilation, or how to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. In Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment: Municipal, Industrial and Agricultural; Hammer, D.A., Ed.; Lewis Publishers: Chelsea, MI, USA, 1989; pp. 287–295. [Google Scholar]
- Mander, Ü.; Tournebize, J.; Kasak, K.; Mitsch, W.J. Climate regulation by free water surface constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment and created riverine wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Mitsch, W.J.; Bernal, B.; Nahlik, A.M.; Mander, Ü.; Zhang, L.; Anderson, L.; Jørgensen, S.E.; Brix, H. Wetlands, carbon, and climate change. Landsc. Ecol. 2013, 28, 583–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, M. Personal communication. Bernardin, Lochmueller & Associates: Indianapolis, IN, USA, 6 December 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Gibson, J.P., Jr.; Bell, S. The Banklick Constructed Wetland. Water Environ. Technol. 2013, 25, 34–39. [Google Scholar]
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Levy, Z.F.; Smardon, R.C.; Bays, J.S.; Meyer, D. A Point Source of a Different Color: Identifying a Gap in United States Regulatory Policy for “Green” CSO Treatment Using Constructed Wetlands. Sustainability 2014, 6, 2392-2412. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052392
Levy ZF, Smardon RC, Bays JS, Meyer D. A Point Source of a Different Color: Identifying a Gap in United States Regulatory Policy for “Green” CSO Treatment Using Constructed Wetlands. Sustainability. 2014; 6(5):2392-2412. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052392
Chicago/Turabian StyleLevy, Zeno F., Richard C. Smardon, James S. Bays, and Daniel Meyer. 2014. "A Point Source of a Different Color: Identifying a Gap in United States Regulatory Policy for “Green” CSO Treatment Using Constructed Wetlands" Sustainability 6, no. 5: 2392-2412. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052392