Effluent Discharge Management in South Pacific Small Island Developing States

1. Effluent Discharge Management in South Pacific Small Island Developing States Government of Samoa MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT Matāgaluega o Puna'oaFaalenatura ma Siosiomaga Rupert Craggs, Amanda Valois and Rob Davies-Colley National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, New Zealand P. O. Box 11-115, Hamilton, New Zealand (+64-7-8591807; E-mail: r.craggs@niwa.co.nz) 10th Pacific Water and Wastewater Conference and Expo August 7 – 11, 2017, Apia, Samoa.

2. The need of effluent discharge regulation • The Samoan Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) wishes to develop a National Effluent Discharge Standard for Samoa • To strengthen the management of all current and future point-source discharges to water • Sewage, industry treatment plant discharge to water • Does not include septic tank effluent discharge to land • Septic tanks are often poorly designed or constructed, overflowing or leaking • Improved septic tank designs are good – but still have high nutrient and microbial pollution • Improved treatment stages following septic tanks need to have higher priority

3. Pacific SIDS effluent discharge • Wastewater pollution is a major threat to both: • Public health through disease risk • Freshwater and coastal ecosystems by causing eutrophication and algal blooms which can affect coral reefs (Burke 2002, SPREP 2016) • Most wastewater discharges are to the marine environment • Ocean discharges take advantage of dilution by ocean currents • Coastal lagoon discharges often lead to accumulation of nutrients and the risk of eutrophication • Discharges must take into account the ability of the receiving environment to assimilate the wastewater

4. Pacific SIDS with effluent discharge

5. Effluent Discharge Standards • Numeric standards (discharge limits) are the most common means for direct regulation of permissible amounts • Concentrations(mg/l) • Loads (kg/day) (often nutrients and persistent contaminants) • Performance-based (e.g. % removal) • Minimum change of ambient conditions (e.g. temperature)

6. Developing Effluent Standards Two methods for creating effluent standards: • Technology-based standards are based on the performance of treatment technologies • Simple, easy and low cost to implement • Environmental quality objective (EQO) standards are based on political choices about risks to or impacts on one or more of: • Human or species health, • Receiving water quality • Receiving water ecosystem e.g. fully functional coastal lagoon ecosystem, • Receiving water amenity (e.g. drinking water supply, fishery, recreation, aesthetics etc) • Much more complex and costly, requiring development of receiving water monitoring and standards and modelling of effects of discharges

7. Obstacles to effective wastewater management • Lack of, or poor legislation • Inappropriate institutional structures • Fragmentation of jurisdiction between agencies • Ministries, departments, boards, authorities, utilities and other stakeholders. • Lack of implementation due to • Lack of staff capacity • Lack of enforcement • Lack of adequate long-term funding

8. Effluent discharge management in South Pacific SIDS • Existing regional guidelines • Institute of Natural Resources, The University of the South Pacific (1988) Development of effluent and waste disposal standards for industrial wastewaters in South Pacific island countries • Industrial effluent standards (brewery, sugar, metal finishing, tanneries, abattoirs etc) • Guidelines for receiving waters depending on desired use (recreation, marine biodiversity, general use including commercial and industrial use). • SPREP effluent guidelines for Pacific SIDS (1996) • Maximum permissible discharge concentrations to waters that are already degraded • Guidelines for receiving waters • Despite the recommendations of these guidelines very few South Pacific SIDS have adopted them or others

9. Effluent discharge management in South Pacific SIDS • The few countries that currently have their own guidelines or standards include: • U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands • Fiji • Cook Islands

10. U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands • Follow U.S legislation (e.g., The Clean Water Act 1974) • Wastewater disposal generally regulated by Environmental Protection Agencies (EPA) • Have technology-based performance standards based on secondary treatment for BOD5, TSS, and pH • Considerable variation in EPA activity between the island groups • Highest in the three politically affiliated island groups (Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, Guam, and American Samoa) • Less in the independent nations (the Republic of Palau, Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands) • American Samoa Water Quality Standards (2005) contain narrative water quality standards on colour floatables taste and odour applicable to the receiving water • Often, it is not clear which agencies are responsible for enforcement

11. Fiji • Public sewerage system increased from 49% of the accessible population in 2011 to almost 92% of that population in 2015 • Eight major sewerage treatment plants and three minor institutional schemes • Standards proposed in the Environmental Management Act (2005) • The National Liquid Waste Management Strategy was developed in 2006 in response to the Environmental Management Act (DoE 2006) • Includes domestic, commercial, and industrial wastewater as well as animal waste • The strategy has national liquid waste standards for two receiving environment types: • General standard for wastewater discharged into most environments • Higher standard for discharges into sensitive ecological zones • Water Authority of Fiji’s water and wastewater master plan 2013–2033 has development objectives on improved environmental regulation including reporting, monitoring, and enforcement

12. Cook Islands • From 2013 the Cook Islands implemented a revised and improved Water Quality Monitoring Programme including: • The Public Health (Sewage and Wastewater Treatment and Disposal) Regulations 2014 • Sanitation Policy (WATSAN 2016) • Legal and compliance framework for standards based on the level of wastewater treatment • Based on guidelines from New Zealand and the World Health Organization • Enables existing treatment operations to initially comply with guidelines with upgrade over time • All new systems require stricter treatment

13. Effluent discharge management in South Pacific

14. Implementation • A discharge permit system is the most common implementation wastewater standards • Licence fee • Permit to discharge • Regulatory monitoring included or additional cost • Either or both • Command-and control • Economic incentive

15. Command-and-control vrs economic incentive(O’Shea 2002, Ragas et al 2005) • Command-and-control • Specified levels of treatment or a cap on discharge concentration or load • Useful approach, particularly for environmental remediation • No incentive for polluters to reduce pollution below the prescribed levels • Economic incentive • Charge polluters for every emission unit, if priced high enough, creates economic incentives improve treatment and reduce pollution • Effective way to finance regulatory monitoring • Disadvantages • Provides dischargers the right to pollute as long as they pay • Some polluters may choose to pollute if the charge is not sufficiently high • Requires more sophisticated institutional support

16. Case Study: Philippines Economic incentive policy • Laguna de Bay, Philippines • Dischargers obtain specific conditions to discharge wastewater • Fee system is composed of a fixed and a variable fee • Fixed fee covers the administrative and implementation costs • Based on 3 discharge flow rates • Variable fee based on total load of a pollutant discharged (in this case BOD) • Low charge rate/kg pollutant discharged if effluent concentration is typically below the existing effluent standard • High charge rate/kg pollutant discharge if effluent concentration is typically above • At the time of application permit holders are charged both the annual flow and pollutant load they are likely to discharge • The first year fees are based on the flow and pollutant data from previous years • When the permit is renewed, a surcharge or credit may be applied depending on the actual discharge • So there is an incentive to reduce pollution levels

17. Compliance Regulatory Monitoring • Requires unrestricted access to discharge by regulator for random undeclared visits • Monitoring schedule depends on: • Defining the effluent standard compliance period e.g. 1 year • Setting sample frequency and number of samples e.g. 12 (monthly) samples • At least monthly compliance monitoring by an Independent regulating agency with quarterly reporting • Receiving environment monitoring (WQ and biota) is important to confirm assumptions about the dilution capabilities of the environment. • initial baseline assessment • At least annual monitoring • Water quality standards for the receiving environment (freshwater and coastal) eventually need to be developed and implemented, with appropriate monitoring

18. Defining Non-compliance • Implementation of regulations requires a clear definition of non-compliance of effluent standards. • e.g. exceedance of any one WQ parameter for one month or more during the 12-month monitoring period • Increasing use of percentile standards, in which concentrations may exceed the critical value for some proportion of the time (e.g 8%, i.e. a 92 percentile standard) • e.g, based on no fewer than 12 samples taken monthly over 12 months • Median (50%ile) concentration of E. coli shall not exceed 200 cfu/100 ml • No more than 1/12 (92%ile) of samples shall exceed 1000 cfu/100 ml • All new and upgraded wastewater systems must comply • Compliance cannot be expected straightaway for existing plants • Must be upgraded within a certain time period to prevent bias against upgrading facilities

19. Financing • The permit can fund wastewater management: • Regulatory monitoring wastewater discharge • Enforcement of legislation • Even, the expansion of sanitation and sewerage systems • Permit fees are often modest relative to upgrade costs • Do not promote improved discharges (unless they are based on economic incentives)

20. Stakeholder and Public Consultation • Consultation is required between all Government Agencies involved • Integration with existing laws • Agency collaboration to implement • Countrywide support should be promoted through an awareness programme: • Meetings and workshops with Village councils, church groups, chamber of commerce etc • Disseminated through media: tv, radio, newspapers, brochures, posters, facebook, smartphone app and report cards: • Receiving water Health Report Card (e.g. Takitumu Lagoon Health Report Card in 2008 (Jupiter et al. 2013).

21. Summary • Most wastewater discharges are to the marine environment • Ocean is preferred to coastal lagoon as higher dilution, mixing and inactivation processes • Significant progress in sanitation and waste management in a number of Pacific SIDS over the past 20 years, although • Few have adopted the SPREP 1996 guidelines or established there own wastewater effluent discharge standards • Many SIDS lack effective legislation, institutional structures, and enforcement concerning wastewater management • Management is often fragmented with many ministries, government departments, boards, authorities and utilities responsible. • Designation of a single, centralized implementation body • Standards are the most common means for direct regulation of wastewater discharges. • Concentrations, loads or treatment performance

22. Summary • There two main approaches to developing wastewater discharge standards: • Technology performance standards - simplest and most easily implemented • Receiving Environmental Quality Objective standards – assessment of impacts on receiving waters • SIDS with standards are still in an early stage of implementation and enforcement • Applying standards as discharge limits (command and control) is the most common • Economic incentive-based policies that charge polluters for every emission unit have shown promise in achieving better pollution abatement • Standards need to be accompanied by a definition of non-compliance and monitoring interval and frequency • Financial and human capital resources will be required for regulatory monitoring • Effective implementation requires widespread stakeholder and public consultation