The EPA’s latest water quality initiatives, most notably the proposed numeric nutrient criteria, are generating increased attention on nutrient management practices that are both “inside” and “outside the fence.” Nutrient removal systems — from conventional biological nutrient removal treatment to enhanced nutrient reduction — and watershed-based strategies for improving water quality are not new topics. What’s new is the increased interest water managers have in finding more cost-effective and environmentally friendly solutions to meeting more stringent nutrient limits.

Clearly, many water managers are concerned about the implications of EPA’s new policy.

In Florida, officials say the latest regulations are too strict, will cost too much, hurt the state's economy and are scientifically unsound. "We see it as a huge step in the wrong direction," Paul Steinbrecher, director of environmental permitting for the JEA in Jacksonville, told BC Water News.

The new environmental rules will force the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District to overhaul its wastewater systems. The district estimates it will cost upwards of $2 billion, and does not think the new policy is a "reasonable balance."

Many who commented on the Chesapeake Bay cleanup plan say it is a "noble cause," but say the EPA's 2025 completion goal is too rushed, especially for expensive upgrades such as stormwater control.

Nutrient Recovery and Management 2011: Inside and Outside the Fence will bring together environmental professionals from the treatment and management sectors to discuss nutrient recovery and removal, as well as the parameters that influence technology limitations. At the same time, Impaired Waters Symposium 2011: Spanning the Water Quality Continuum — From Standards to TMDLs will look at watershed management issues in meeting emerging requirements.

The Jan. 9–12 nutrient recovery and management conference in Miami, sponsored by the Water Environment Federation and the International Water Association, will examine research, design, operations, and watershed and river basin management issues, as well as provide a forum to discuss policy approaches to nutrient control.

Take a look the technical program to see what educational events will be offered. You also can join the Nutrients group on LinkedIn to participate in nutrient discussions with colleagues and others, and you can keep up with the conference on Twitter by following and using the hashtag #NR2011.

Summary of EPA regulations

Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution (or nutrient pollution) is one of the top three causes of impairment of the nation's waters, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia and declines in wildlife and wildlife habitat. Collectively, 49 states have listed more than 10,000 nutrient and nutrient-related water quality impairments.

The EPA has encouraged the states to adopt numeric nutrient WQS for both casual (total nitrogen and total phosphorus) and response (chlorophyll-a and clarity) parameters for all of their water body types (lakes and reservoirs, rivers and streams, estuaries and wetlands). During the past 10 years, states have adopted numeric nutrient WQS for a range of waters according to their own priorities and needs.

Now, the EPA has laid out a roadmap with a National Nutrient Policy. So, what are the effluent guidelines? How often are they updated? How are pretreatment standards for indirect dischargers implemented? The EPA has some answers for these and other frequently asked questions.

Brown and Caldwell is at the forefront of new wastewater treatment technology development and implementation, helping wastewater utilities determine the right solution for their treatment needs, understanding the time, cost, risk mitigation and ratepayer benefits of multiple solutions, and helping them consider where each technology is in the introduction process in order to make a better decision.