Water Quality Planning Regulation Unused Allocations in Shenandoah-Potomac River Basin: RAP Meeting November 4, 2009 DEQ – Northern Regional Office Alan Pollock VA DEQ, Office of Water Programs Alan.firstname.lastname@example.org 804-698-4002
Recent Actions by SWCB • Increased WLAs for Merck for both total nitrogen and total phosphorus • Considering increase to WLA for total nitrogen for FCW&SA-Vint Hill; currently in rulemaking process Objective: Under Watershed General Permit effective January 1, 2007, need to maintain total WLA cap for significant dischargers within Shen/Potomac basin
Potential Candidates for Unused Nutrient Allocations Requested Information on: Timeframe for using WLAs Impact if all or part of WLA used as offset higher WLAs Know of any other facilities that appear to have unused WLAs
J.P Salyards[formerly Pilgrims Pride – Alma] • Existing WLA: TN = 18,273 lbs/yr TP = 914 lbs/yr • Basis for WLA – poultry processing plant • Candidate for Unused WLA – original facility is inactive; no specific application for new operation needing nutrient WLA
J.P SalyardsSummary of Response • Timeframe • No specific timeframe • Currently marketing WLAs to others • Impact on Facility • Devastating without compensation • Impact on market value of Alma plant w/o assigned WLAs is very significant • SWCB taking WLAs without compensation is contrary to State law • Owner Comments?
Shenandoah CountyNorth Fork Regional • Existing WLA: TN = 9,137 lbs/yr TP = 685 lbs/yr • Basis for WLA – Regional facility • Candidate for Unused WLA – basis for original WLA no longer appears applicable; former industrial facility with no collection system; being used to treat leachate and septage
Shen. Co. North Fork Regional Summary of Response • Timeframe • No specific timeframe; nor how much of the WLAs the system will need • Facility to provide multiple waste stream source treatment • Designing septage acceptance facility and force main for County • New owner of Aileen site has not finalized plans • Impact on Facility • Nothing specific mentioned • Owner Comments?
Town of Leesburg • Existing WLA: TN = 121,822 lbs/yr TP = 9,137 lbs/yr • Basis for WLA – Design capacity = 10 MGD [Note: former VA-SNR agreed to 10 MGD as basis for WLA] • Candidate for Unused WLA – existing facility has a design capacity of 7.5 MGD; while WLA is not footnoted, do not expect expansion until after December 31, 2010
Town of Leesburg Summary of Response • Timeframe • Using WLA now as part of long term Plan to provide for compliance after December 2010 • Expect to begin design for upgrade/expansion in 2015 • Impact on Facility • Short term: increase costs due to accelerating upgrade to ENR, and need to purchase credits • Long term: additional debt service and increases O&M • Owner Comments?
Upper Occoquan Service Authority • Existing WLA: TN = 1,315,682 lbs/yr TP = 16,446 lbs/yr • Basis for WLA – Need for nitrate discharge to protect Occoquan Reservoir drinking water source; WLA based on TN = 8 mg/l instead of 3 mg/l; about equal to existing TN discharge load • Candidate for Unused WLA – recent data indicates nitrogen load below WLA; DEQ unaware of negative impacts to reservoir
UOSASummary of Response • Timeframe • Studies show that reduced TN discharge in 2007/08 created nitrate deficiencies in reservoir, leading to release of significant amounts of ammonia and phosphorus from sediments • Will reach TN cap between 2012-14; design process begun for new treatment facilities to meet/maintain WLAs • Impact on Facility • Negative water quality impacts • Negative impacts on current design and long term planning • Jeopardize meeting WLA in future years • Owner Comments?
Town of Round Hill • Existing WLA: TN = 9,137 lbs/yr TP = 685 lbs/yr • Basis for WLA – Design capacity = 0.75 MGD • Candidate for Unused WLA – existing facility has a design capacity of 0.5 MGD; while WLA is not footnoted, do not expect expansion until after December 31, 2010
Town of Round HillSummary of Response • Timeframe • Plan to have upgraded/expanded plant on line by December 31, 2010 • Under consent decree with developer to provide wastewater treatment capacity • Impact on Facility • Could not meet limits or fund the facilities • Owner Comments?