| (ii) If an approval for nonconforming or innovative
technologies is requested, engineering proposals for processes, equipment,
or construction materials not covered in these criteria shall be fully
described in the submitted planning materials and the reasons for
their selection clearly outlined. Processes considered to be nonconforming
or innovative should also be supported by results of pilot or demonstration
studies. Where similarly designed full scale processes exist and
are known to have operated for a reasonable period of time under conditions
similar to those suggested for the proposed design, performance data
from these existing full scale facilities shall be required to be
submitted to the executive director in addition to, or in lieu of,
pilot or small scale demonstration studies. Any warranties or performance
bond agreements offered by the process, equipment, or material manufacturers
shall be fully described in the request.
(iii) Approvals of processes, equipment, or construction
materials which are considered to be innovative or nonconforming will
be granted only in cases where the commission or review authority
determines, after an engineering evaluation of the supporting information
provided in the submitting engineer's design report, that the technology
will not result in a threat to public health or the environment.
(iv) The executive director or review authority may
require the manufacturer or supplier to obtain and furnish evidence
of an acceptable two-year performance bond from an approved surety
which insures the performance of the innovative or nonconforming technology.
The performance bond shall cover the cost of removal or abandonment
of the innovative or nonconforming facility and equipment, replacement
with previously agreed upon facilities or equipment, and all associated
engineering fees necessary for the removal and replacement.
(v) Approval of innovative and nonconforming technologies
may include a condition which states that after some predetermined
period of time after the installation and startup of the innovative
or nonconforming technology, requiring an engineering report to be
submitted after start-up, detailing the performance of the nonconforming
or innovative technology. The engineering report shall include unbiased
calculations and data supporting the technology's performance; and
written submittals from the design engineer and permittee which state
that the nonconforming or innovative technology has satisfied its
manufacturer's claims.
(C) Conditional approval. The executive director or
review authority may grant approvals which contain detailed conditions,
stipulations, or restrictions. Examples of such conditions and stipulations
include, but are not limited to, testing requirements, reporting requirements,
operational requirements, and additional installation and design requirements
which may be necessary to ensure compliance with this chapter. Any
conditional approval granted may be issued for a specific set of flow
situations, wastewater characteristics, and/or required effluent quality.
If a conditional approval is granted, both the sewage system owner
and design engineer, as appropriate, shall be responsible for ensuring
that the approval conditions outlined by the commission or review
authority have been met.
(5) Municipalities performing technical reviews of
sanitary sewer collection systems under TWC, §26.034, within
90 days of the effective date of this rule and/or within 90 days of
a boundaries change, shall submit maps to the agency's Wastewater
Permits Section detailing the boundaries of the review authority.
If a municipality decides to perform technical reviews of sanitary
sewer collection systems after the effective date of this rule, the
municipality shall submit maps detailing the boundaries of the review
authority, within the 30 days before starting these reviews. If at
any time a municipality, which has chosen to implement this review
authority, decides to cease review of sanitary sewer collection system
plans and specifications, the municipality shall notify the executive
director within 30 days of the date on which the final plans and specifications
review is expected to be performed. In order to meet the standards
specified in TWC, §26.034, municipalities shall incorporate the
items detailed in subparagraphs (A) - (E) of this paragraph into their
review programs:
(A) The municipality's review and approval process
shall ensure compliance with the rules of this chapter.
(B) All reviews performed by an employee of the municipality
shall be conducted by a professional engineer, registered in the State
of Texas, or the employee conducting the review shall be under the
direct supervision of a professional engineer, registered in the State
of Texas, who is ultimately responsible for the review and approval
of each collection system submitted and installed in the municipality's
jurisdiction.
(C) The responsible review engineer shall be either
an employee of the reviewing municipality, or a consultant to the
municipality, separate from the private consulting firm charged with
the design work under review. For purposes of this section, the term
"separate" means that the responsible review engineer is not employed
by and does not receive compensation from the private consulting firm
and from any of its parent companies, subsidiaries, or affiliates
charged with the design. The municipality shall provide on request
documentation of its agreements with private consultants sufficient
to allow the agency to audit its compliance with this subsection.
(D) A participating municipality may review and approve
engineering reports, plans, and specifications only for projects
which transport primarily domestic waste within the boundaries of
jurisdiction of that municipality. For each project approved for construction,
the municipality shall issue an approval letter or other indication
of the approval which clearly details the project being approved.
(E) The municipality shall maintain complete files
of all review and approval activities carried out under its authority
and shall make any existing project files available to the commission
upon request and/or during audits performed in accordance with paragraph
(6) of this subsection.
(6) The executive director may perform periodic audits
of the review and approval process of municipalities which perform
technical reviews of sanitary sewer collection systems in lieu of
the commission, to ensure that the projects approved by the municipalities
are in compliance with this chapter. If the executive director decides
to perform an audit of a municipality's review and approval process,
the executive director will provide the municipality with a minimum
of five working days advance notice of the pending audit. The executive
director may, for auditing purposes only, review specific projects
which have previously been approved by the review authority. The municipality
shall provide to the executive director, on request, documentation
of all agreements between the private consultants and the municipality,
which relate to the wastewater collection system review program. If
the executive director finds through reviews of specific projects
or through audits of the municipality's review and approval process
that a municipality's review and approval process does not provide
for compliance with the minimum design and installation requirements
detailed in this chapter, the review and approval authority shall
address these findings within a time established by the executive
director. If compliance cannot be achieved, the review authority shall
be voided for that municipality. If such authority is voided for a
municipality, the executive director shall notify the municipality
in writing and shall include the justification for voiding the authority
of the municipality. If the authority of a municipality is voided,
all new projects proposed to be constructed within that municipality's
jurisdiction shall be submitted to the executive director in accordance
with paragraph (3)(D) of this subsection.
(b) Preliminary engineering report.
(1) Definition. The preliminary engineering report
shall form the conceptual basis for the collection, treatment, and/or
disposal system proposed. This document shall bear the signed and
dated seal of the registered professional engineer responsible for
the design.
(A) For projects receiving United States Environmental
Protection Agency construction grants assistance, a facility plan
may serve as the preliminary engineering report.
(B) For all other projects, a preliminary engineering
report proposing processes, methods, or procedures may be submitted
as early in the planning stage as is practical. Submission of a preliminary
engineering report at this point is only necessary to resolve any
potential disagreements between the design engineer and the commission
regarding the essential planning information, design data, population
projections, and other requirements of the commission. Agreement is
desirable to eliminate delays or inconveniences and to avoid the possibility
of having to revise the final plans and specifications.
Cont'd... |
