Upload
malise
View
47
Download
4
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Or, how we learned to stop worrying about permit compliance and love SUSMPs [a fairy tale?] Greg Gearheart, PE Stormwater Program / SWRCB. Dragon Tails. The Tail End. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Dragon Tails
Or, how we learned to stop worrying about permit compliance and love
SUSMPs [a fairy tale?]
Greg Gearheart, PE
Stormwater Program / SWRCB
The Tail End
• Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of CA’s water resources, and ensure their proper allocation and efficient use for the benefit of present and future generations.
• Who are the present and future generations?
Millions of Californians
• 1980 – 23.7 million
• 2005 – 37 million
• 2030 – 48 million (projected)
• where?
What are some examples of water resources we
should protect?
• Wetlands and streams, including:
– Riparian areas
– Intermittent, ephemeral and headwater streams
– Isolated “wetlands” (e.g., vernal pools)
• Watershed functions and values
• Protect from what?
Paradise Lost – why are they special?
• California has lost 95% of our inland wetlands and streams since 1850's due to “development”
• They are a critical part of the watershed:– support BUs onsite
– maintain the "quality of the water" of watershed
– provide critical watershed functions like generating/moving/storing sediment, removing pollutants, retaining flood flows, and supporting habitat connectivity
Why do they need special protection?
• Highly sensitive ecosystems
• Most threatened by landscape activities (urbanitis, development, industry, etc.)
• It is much more difficult to regulate landscape activities than it is to control point discharges
• It is very difficult to restore them once they are gone
What human activities impact wetlands and streams?
• Bank hardening (rip rap, concrete, refrigerators, cars, etc.)
• Dams and diversions
• Development (stream/swale burial, realignment, concrete-lining, etc.)
• “Agricultural” activities (vineyard development, dairy waste, cattle, stream crossings, clear-cut erosion, etc.)
Could this happentoday?
(Chicken Ranch Slough, Sacramento County – Channelized in 1950's)
CWA 401 regulatory actions at Water Boards for 2003
• 1094 401-related Projects Statewide– 26 projects denied certification– 12 project-related enforcement actions
• 1880 acres of fill to State waters (includes 1280 acres temp. fill)
• 600 acres of permanently filled wetlands/streams/etc.
• 1082 acres of compensatory mitigation
Water Boards nuts and bolts
• Our regulatory actions (e.g., CWA401 Certs, WDRs, enforcement, etc.) require discharges to be protective of our water quality (WQ) standards:– Water quality standard = beneficial uses +
objectives
– Water Boards may “choose to prevent any degradation”
– Statewide General WDRs• for dredge/fill and linear projects
CWA - Water Quality Standards
• Water Quality Standards are made up of:– Beneficial Uses (designated to
specific waterbodies), plus– water quality criteria; and– an antidegradation policy.
• Beneficial Uses (BUs) are:• often not directly related to some key
water resource uses valued by communities (it might take a suite of them to protect wetlands and streams, for example)
Beneficial Uses Used to Protect California Wetlands &
Streams• AGR – Agricultural Supply• FLD – Flood Peak
Attenuation/Flood Water Storage
• FRSH – Freshwater Replenishment
• GWR – Groundwater Recharge
• MAR – Marine Habitat• MUN – Municipal and
Domestic Supply• RARE – Preservation of Rare
and Endangered Species
• REC-1 – Water Contact Recreation
• REC-2 – Non-Water Contact Recreation
• SHELL – Shellfish Harvesting
• SPAWN – Fish Spawning
• WARM – Warm Freshwater Habitat
• WILD – Wildlife Habitat
• WQE – Water Quality Enhancement
Beneficial uses (BUs) and wetlands / streams
• BUs are:– designated in the Basin Plans to a specific
waterbody at a specific location
– are not easily translated to some key wetland/stream functions and values
– frequently it takes a suite of BUs to cover “wetland functions and values” (often includes gaps and overlaps)
Functional Framework:Regulatory Tools
• Landscape / watershed tool(s):– Storm water permits– CEQA ?
• Waterbody tool(s):– CWA 401 Certifications– Waste Discharge Requirements– Waivers
• Laparoscopic techniques
CWA – Permits
• Section 402 – Point Sources– The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) – applies to all point sources of pollutants
– Stormwater outfalls are considered “point sources” and these regulations apply to:
• Industrial Sources (including Construction Activities)
• Municipal Sources (large and small communities)
CWS - NPDES Permits (cont.)
• Traditional “Point Sources” still need attention in sustainable growth context:– Wastewater Treatment Plants– Collection Systems– Factories and mills– E.g., the City of Petaluma building a
new sustainable system to handle both domestic wastewater and stormwater
•CWA – Dredge and Fill Discharges
• Section 404/401 – regulate the direct discharges of dredge and fill material to US Waters
• US Army Corps issues 404 permit, which triggers the State's “401 Certification” (that the project complies with our standards)
• “401 Certifications” are one-time compliance tools that apply to many new developments in California, due in part to our abundance of ephemeral and intermittent streams
• CWC jurisdiction covers isolated waters of the State
401 Certification - One-time compliance measurement
• CWA 401 certification process give the Water Boards one shot at evaluating compliance with our “standards”
• If we get our permitting wrong, the waterbodies and their designated beneficial uses could be lost forever
• Could be a de-facto Basin Plan amendment
• Interesting question: does this process adequately comply with our Basin Plan amendment requirements?
CWA – Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
• If the beneficial uses are impaired, the State must adopt a TMDL
• Result in pollutant Waste Loads Allocations – WLAs – applied to “all” sources in watershed
• TMDLs take decades to implement
CWA – TMDLs
• They are watershed-based, but they are also pollutant (or impairment cause) specific, so they may or may not lead communities towards more sustainable approaches to Water Resource planning
• Resulting WLAs are implemented via permits
Sustainability and Water Resources
• Sustainability has many definitions and applications (some very specialized)
• In our communities there are three main test / elements (each of which is undergoing a paradigm shift today).
Sustainability Tests
• Resource – protection to enhancement and reuse (“runoff is a resource”)
• Technical – complex, technological standard-based to simple, natural, performance-based solutions
• Institutional – centralized, subsidized approaches to decentralized, self-supporting approaches
• Community – healthy individual, societal cost driven equations to healthy community, community opportunity equations
NPDES Stormwater Permits – help or hindrance?
• Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s), in both large and small communities, are required to comply with MS4 requirements
• Much of the permit requirements focus on traditional BMPs and general, indirect municipal efforts (like general planning, outreach/education etc.)
• In 2002, Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs – but they are called “performance standards” in some parts of the State) became mandatory for all MS4 permits
SUSMPs & HMMPs & Performance Standards,
oh my!
• SUSMPs - Standardized Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plans
• HMMPs - Hydrograph Modification Management Plans
• WQMPs• Performance Standards – specifically for
new and redevelop activities in MS4s
SUSMP History (brief)
• 1996 - NPDES Permit for LA County MS4s first suggested SUSMPs (R4-1996-054)
• 1999 - NPDES Permit for LA County Required “improved” SUSMPs (R4-1999-060)
• 2000 - SB upheld RB4-99-060 with WQ-2000-11
• Precedent - all new MS4 permits after WQ-2000-11 must comply with general principles of R4-1999-060 SUSMP lang.
SUSMPs and Sustainability
• SUSMPs and other “performance standards” in MS4 permits require new developments and, in some cases, “significant” redevelopments to apply rigorous measures to mitigate the effects of urbanization.
• The technical approaches and science behind some of the issues are still being debated in the State.
• Q: Does Low Impact Development = SUSMPs and HMP compliance?
Yes, LID = SUSMPs
• In theory, a well designed and executed LID project would fully comply with MS4 permit requirements (and probably avoid 404/401 permits, too).
• Translators are needed to help communities demonstrate compliance with MS4 requirements
LID and SUSMPs (cont.)
• Clearly SUSMP=LID works best for new development and significant redevelopment
• But strategic LID projects could also be used to retrofit urban landscapes to address other watershed problems
• State Board staff are working on developing translator tools for municipal officials who must comply with SUSMPs and wish to use LID-like approaches
SUSMPs in the Regions
• As expected, most RBs took the liberty to “improve” on the SUSMP language in R4-1999-060
• Some RBs have evolved at least one generation since the original SUSMP approach
Los Angeles Region
• SUSMP Architects• Multiple generations – new draft
coming for Ventura County in June 2006:– Numerical Hydromodification Criteria
based on Stream Bank Erosion Potential
– Limiting Directly Connected Impervious Area to no more than 5 pecent of Total Construction Project Area
LA Region (cont.)
• Ventura updates (cont.)– Low Impact Development
Technical Document to comply with SUSMPs and Hydromod Criteria
– Post Construction BMP Inspection Program
– Stream Bank Restoration Planning based on Southern CA Integrated Biological Index
S.F. Bay Region:One Permit Approach
• Phase I for 4 urbanized counties
• Consistent requirements• Consistent deadlines (with a
few exceptions)• Detail formerly in Stormwater
Management Plans now in the Permit
SF Bay Super Permit (cont.)
• BMPs, Level of Implementation and Reporting specified for all Performance Standards
• Major improvements in Monitoring and TMDL implementation
• Only minor changes to New Development Measures, Inspections, Public Information and Municipal Maintenance
San Diego Region:Watershed Approach
• Tackle priority stormwater problems in each watershed, in addition to Baseline BMPs
• Adding HMP requirements similar to S.F. Bay Area approach
• Setting minimum inspection # requirement
Other Regions &Approaches within CA
• Santa Ana Region – like RB4• Lahontan Region – no SUSMP
requirements• North Coast Region – like RB2 (2
year, 24 hour storm event, hydrograph modification management plan, etc.)
• Central Coast Region – not sure• Phase II• Caltrans
Other States
• MD – Recharge / LID credits• PA – Recharge• DE – Recharge / LID• NJ – Recharge / LID• [Handout available]
Sustainable Projects Present Real Community
Opportunities• If done right, more sustainable projects
will deliver:– NPDES compliance– Clean Water Act promises– Low Lifetime Costs to operate,
maintain, decommission, etc.– Community buy-in and support through
meeting multiple objectives, etc.– Unpredictable community economic
opportunities (e.g., tourism and other ancillary benefits to the community)
Evidence of Shift
• Performance measures that would SHOW we are moving in the right direction.
• NPDES permits for MS4s contain LID-type requirements for New Development
• Increased judicial support
Shift (cont.)
• Planning departments and land use agencies are excited about natural systems (we see this now)
• Natural Systems (low tech, natural function-based technologies) are embraced as cornerstones of “sustainable development”
• A number of disciplines integrated into stormwater management.
What can WE do to help implement / enforce the
CWA?• Appropriate designation, development and
enforcement of appropriate Beneficial Uses would encourage smarter growth.
• We also need to develop effective criteria for protecting uses from pollutants and/or habitat disturbance associated with urbanization impacts.
• Apply all our tools to encourage avoidance and minimization of impacts through better siting and management practices.
• Get out of the way of good practices
Greg Gearheart916-341-5892