Orange County Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Control Study

1. Orange CountyFats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Control Study Phase I FOG Control Building Blocks JOHN SHAFFER ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AND CONTRACTING, INC.

2. Grease Int. Food Service Establishment Sewer Main Sanitary Waste Drain Grease Waste Drain Combined Waste Lateral

3. Why Conduct a LargeFOG Control Study? • Orange County Grand Jury Recommendations • Most SSOs in Orange County are caused by fats, oil, and grease (FOG) • Must take a regional approach to reducing grease-related SSOs • State Waste Discharge Requirements Issued for North Orange County • All permittees must have FOG Control Programs and Grease Disposal Alternatives developed by Dec. 2004 • Potential for Statewide Issuance of Similar WDR Requirements

4. Purpose of the FOG Control Study • Conduct National Research to Evaluate the Current FOG Control Practices, Technologies and Programs to Prevent SSOs Associated with Grease Build-up and Blockages • Regional Strategy to Provide a Consistent Approach for Each City and Agency and Reduce Costs • Provide Comprehensive Approaches Customized to the Local Conditions

5. FOG ControlPrograms Researched • Some Programs Emphasize Kitchen BMPs and Education/Outreach • Some Programs Emphasize Grease Control Device Installation and Maintenance • Some Programs Emphasize Sewer Line Cleaning • Very Few Programs Emphasize All Three

6. Outcomes of the FOG ControlStudy – Phase I • 12 Building Blocks Were Developed to Allow Each Agency to Build an Effective FOG Control Program Based on their Local Conditions • Regional Meetings on Kitchen BMPs, Grease Interceptor Design and Maintenance, Program Costs and Fees, Legal Authority, and Inspections and Enforcement • Model Ordinance • FOG Characterization Strategy • Support for the Phase II Study

7. Additives Automatic Grease Traps Passive Grease Traps Sewer Line Cleaning FOG Disposal Practices and Alternatives Kitchen BMPs GreaseInterceptors Program Costs, Fees, andIncentives Monitoring And Enforcement Educationand Outreach FOG Characterization Ordinance FOG ControlBuilding Blocks

8. Building Blocks • Technologies • Kitchen Best Management Practices (BMPs) • Sewer Line Cleaning • Waste Grease Disposal • Programmatic Building Blocks

9. Automatic Grease Traps GreaseInterceptors Building Blocks Technologies

10. Building Blocks Technologies • Conventional Grease Interceptors • Best conventional technology • Proper maintenance is critical and achievable • Over-sizing is causing a hydrogen sulfide generation problem • Monitoring device to be tested in Phase II • Conventional Grease Traps • Valuable for FSEs that cannot or should not install an interceptor • Proper maintenance is critical but is not easily achievable for many FSEs • Automatic Grease Traps (Grease Removal Devices) • To be tested in Phase II • Additives (Biological) • FSE and sewer line applications to be tested in Phase II

11. Kitchen BMPs Building BlocksKitchen BMPs • Structural BMPs • Removal of garbage disposal • Install drain screens • Storage of yellow grease in a barrel or bin • Other BMPs • Waste grease collection • Plate and cookware scraping • Signage • Records / Logs • Employee training • Grease interceptor / trap maintenance and disposal • Yellow grease disposal

12. Sewer Line Cleaning Building BlocksSewer Line Cleaning • Public Collection System • Use post-cleaning CCTV to verify cleaning effectiveness • Characterize sewer line “hot spots” and develop an appropriate cleaning procedure • Private Lateral System • Grease and root masses are pushed into the public lines • May be the cause of many public SSOs • Consider notification system to coordinate private and public sewer line cleaning

13. Waste Grease Disposal Building Blocks Waste Grease Disposal • Agencies Must Provide Disposal Location Solutions to Avoid Being Part of the Problem • POTW (digesters) • Central dewatering site • Biodiesel • Coordinate with / regulate the private companies • Track Waste Grease Hauling and Disposal • Certify haulers and disposal sites • Proposed four-part manifest system

14. 4-Part Manifest System 1 Hauler Signs Generator? 2 Hauler & Disposal Site Signs 3 Hauler & Disposal Site Signs • Alternative 1 – 4th Part to the Lead Agency, All Responsibility on the Hauler DisposalSite Generator Hauler LeadAgency 4 Hauler & Disposal Site Have Signed • Alternative 2 – 4th Part to the Generator, Hauler Responsible for Proper Hauling, FSE Responsible for the Waste 1 Hauler Signs Generator? 2 Hauler & Disposal Site Signs 3 Hauler & Disposal Site Signs Generator Hauler DisposalSite LeadAgency Monthly Log of Activities 4 Hauler & Disposal Site Have Signed Pros: FSEs Have a Vested Interest in Disposal of Waste, FOG Inspector Can Verify Proper Disposal Cons: More Admin Burden for Haulers and FSEs

15. Building Blocks Programmatic • Education and Outreach • Monitoring and Enforcement • Program Costs, Fees, and Incentives • Ordinance • FOG Characterization

16. Education and Outreach Building Blocks Programmatic Education and Outreach • Food Service Establishments (in multiple languages) • BMP flyers • Kitchen posters • Training videos • Fact sheets explaining the program • Workshops • Hands-on training from inspector • General Public • BMP flyers • Apartment building posters • School campaigns • Local newspaper & radio spots

17. Monitoring and Enforcement Building Blocks Programmatic Monitoring and Enforcement • FSE Inspection Approach • Health Department Inspector Kitchen BMP screening audits • Grease Control Device (GCD) Inspector Dedicated to inspecting interceptors and traps • FOG Inspector Minimum of annual detailed inspections focusing on Hot Spots and issues from Health and GCD Inspector

18. Monitoring and Enforcement Building Blocks Programmatic Monitoring and Enforcement • Enforcement • Best enforcement strategy consists of gradual violation structure focused on re-education • Elevated enforcement if discharger “causes or contributes to a blockage or SSO” based on Line Cleaning Report or CCTV evidence

19. Program Costs, Fees, and Incentives Building Blocks Programmatic Program Costs, Fees, and Incentives • Cost Recovery • Fees Should be Based on the Recovery of Costs that a City or Agency will Incur to Control the FOG • Grease-related sewer line cleaning costs • FSE monitoring and enforcement costs

20. Program Costs, Fees, and Incentives Building Blocks Programmatic Program Costs, Fees, and Incentives • FSE Initial Fee • One-time fee for preliminary funding • FSE Ongoing Fee • Based on water usage or type of FSE • Discount for FSEs with properly maintained conventional grease interceptors

21. Ordinance Building Blocks Programmatic Ordinance • Ordinance and Permit • Ordinance - Legal Authority • Discharger of FOG may not cause or contribute to a SSO or blockage • Conventional Grease Interceptor recognized as Best Conventional Technology (BCT) • Kitchen BMPs required for all FSEs in the program • Permit - Establishes the detailed requirements for the program

22. FOG Characterization Building BlocksProgrammaticFOG Characterization 1.Determine What is Causing Your Blockages • Excessive grease loading • Roots • Improper sewer line design or structural issues • Ineffective sewer line cleaning 2. Manage or Mitigate Those Causes = Prevention of Sewer Blockages

23. FOG Characterization Approach • Identification of grease-related sewer line “hot spots” and “hot spot” areas • Identification of the true cause(s) of the hot spots (CCTV inspection) • Inspection or auditing of FSEs • Integration of this information to be used for the development of an effective FOG Control Program • Recommend developing interactive database/GIS system

24. Sewer Hot Spots • Hot Spots – Those portions of the sewer system that have experienced blockages or require more frequent cleaning • Examples • Two SSOs in the past 3 years • Monthly or quarterly cleaning cycle

25. “Middle-of-the-Pipe” Problem Sewer line grease blockage developing

26. FOG Characterization Strategy Excessive Grease Loading Blockage Sewer Line Design, Structural Issues, or Roots Ineffective Sewer Line Cleaning

27. FOG Characterization Questions • Hot Spots • How many and where? • What is the true cause of each? • Excessive Grease Loading • Which FSEs do not have grease control devices? • Which residential sources are unusually excessive? • Sewer Line Design, Structural Issues, or Roots • Where are the blockages occurring? • Where are the siphons and sags? • Where are the roots and where are they originating? • Ineffective Sewer Line Cleaning • Are we thoroughly cleaning the hot spots? • What is preventing thorough cleaning?

28. FOG Characterization Data • Hot Spots • ??? hot spots, 50% in commercial areas, 50% in residential areas • ??? are grease only, ??? are grease/roots, ??? are grease/structural • Excessive Grease Loading • ??? of the FSEs do not have grease control devices or are out of compliance • ??? residential sources are unusually excessive • Sewer Line Design, Structural Issues, or Roots • Blockages are occurring in ???” diameter lines • ??? siphons and ??? severe sags • Roots are at ??? locations • Ineffective Sewer Line Cleaning • ??? monthly hot spots, ??? quarterly hot spots • ??? are difficult to clean due to ???

29. Map It

30. FOG Characterization Outcome • Hot Spot #1: Many FSEs upstream, grease, no roots, pipe sag • Approach: Evaluate sag, FSE source control & education, evaluate sewer line cleaning

31. FOG Characterization Outcome • Hot Spot #2: Some FSEs & apartments upstream, grease, offset in sewer • Approach: Sewer line upgrade immediately, evaluate other strategies after second characterization

32. FOG Characterization Outcome • Hot Spot #3: FSEs upstream, grease, roots, no structural issues • Approach: Root control immediately, evaluate other strategies after second characterization

33. FOG Characterization Benefits • Primary Benefits • Attack Major Problems First = Rapid Reduction in Preventable SSOs in the First Year of the Program • Attack Other Problems in a Logical Prioritized Fashion = Continued Reduction in Preventable SSOs • Secondary Benefits • Gather the Necessary Data to Develop and Defend Fair and Effective Ordinances • Determine Resources Needed and Costs of FSE FOG Control Program • Develop Prioritized FSE Inspection and Enforcement Program • Determine Resources Needed and Costs of Residential FOG Control Program • Develop Focused Education and Outreach Program • Connect Source Control and Sewer Line Maintenance Departments

34. Residential FOG CharacterizationWhy? • Less Source Control for Residential vs. FSEs • Abundance of garbage disposal units • No permits • Difficult education and outreach • No grease control devices • Many Residential FOG-related Hot Spots Have Contributing Factors • Roots • Structural problems • Sewer line cleaning issues

35. Orange County FOG-Related SSO ReductionsFOG Characterization Approach * These Agencies Were Still Conducting Their FOG Characterizations as of 10/1/05

36. Resources • OCSD Website • FOG Control Study - Phase I & Phase II Reports • Other SSO Reduction Work Products • www.ocsd.com/services/city/wdr/resources.asp • Cal FOG • www.calfog.org

37. Speaker Contact Information Environmental Engineering & Contracting, Inc. John Shaffer, President e-mail: jshaffer@eecworld.com Stan Steinbach, P.E., Sr. Project Engineer II e-mail: ssteinbach@eecworld.com Santa Ana, CA Office 501 Parkcenter Drive, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Ph: (714) 667-2300