Is There Life after Residual Designation Authority (RDA) ? GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. Presentation to: The New Hampshire Water and Watershed Conference Plymouth, NH March 26, 2011
INTRODUCTION Environmental • Founded in 1964 Scientists • 25 offices throughout Northeast Natural Resources Professionals • Over 500 employees Regulatory Specialists • Highly diversified technical services Water Resources • Proactive by design Engineers Geologists and Hydrogeologists
OVERVIEW • Residual Designation Authority • Long Creek Watershed, Maine • Charles River Watershed, Massachusetts • Comparisons • Lessons Learned
NPDES BACKGROUND Major Categories of National Pollutant Discharge Municipalities Elimination System (NPDES) Permits (MS4) Construction (CGP) Industrial Facilities (MSGP) Discharges prior to 2/4/1987
What is Residual Designation Authority (RDA)? • Two ways stormwater may be considered “designated discharges” – TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) – Violations of Water Quality Standards • Pressure from environmental petitions or potential lawsuits
Applications of RDA Waterways in the Burlington area � June 2003: CLF petition to the VT Agency of Natural Resources www.fredmurphy.com www.bestplaces.net
Applications of RDA Long Creek near South Portland, Maine March 2008: CLF petitions � NPDES permit for post ‐ construction EPA for RDA discharges (i.e., existing development) Dec 2008: Record of Decision Nov 2009: Permit in place, developed in conjunction with: • EPA • DEP • CLF • Stakeholders www.bestplaces.net
Applications of RDA Charles River, Massachusetts � CLF in “collaboration” with the Charles River Watershed Association and EPA (no formal petition filed) www.wikitree.com CHARLES RIVER WATERSHED
Applications of RDA Chesapeake Bay watershed � RDA being considered � Dec 2010: TMDL www.camerondavidson.com
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine • Four municipalities • Two State transportation agencies • At least two utilities • Many commercial and retail properties
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine Urban Impaired Stream (303 ‐ d listed) Ample water quality data and studies Numerous unpermitted discharges Ideal candidate for RDA/petition
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine Proactive approach to deter threat of RDA petition Financial funding for WMP from State/DEP Participation from numerous stakeholders Collaborative DEVELOPMENT OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (WMP) effort
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine Welcome to Long Creek
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (WMP) = Identify prioritized ROAD MAP FOR ACHIEVING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS structural retrofits Outline maintenance and other non ‐ structural BMPs Propose financial mechanism and administrative structure
Include as talking points in previous slides Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine REMEMBER HAVE ROAD MAP (WMP), NOW WHERE DO WE GO? TIMELINE? • Continue stakeholders process 2007 ‐ 2008: • Identify all “designated discharges” Stakeholders • >1 acre of impervious cover (IC) convene • Existing development • Finish WMP March 2008: • Develop PLA CLF petition • Credits Dec 2008: • Easements EPA’s ROD • Financial algorithm • Receive ARRA funding for projects Jan 2009: • Establish District (i.e., LCWMD) WMP submitted • Develop permits Nov 2009: • General (GP) Permit in place • Individual (IP)
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine MEPDES POST ‐ CONSTRUCTION DISCHARGE OF STORMWATER IN LONG CREEK WATERSHED • New permit effective October 29, 2009 thru October 29, 2014 • 180 ‐ day notice period issued by DEP sent in December 2009 � Assessment of impervious area � Evaluation of permit options • General permit requirements � Implementation of collaborative WMP � Annual reporting � Monitoring and assessment of stream � Inspection and maintenance of BMPs � Execute Participating Landowners Agreement (PLA) � Pay fees ($3,000/acre of IA/year) � Allow District to conduct work by granting easements
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine INDIVIDUAL PERMIT OPTION: CMR Chapter 521 • Inspection and Maintenance • Monitoring and assessment of stream • Conduct independently • Contribute to group efforts • Stream restoration fees • Annual reporting • Existing development must retrofit property to meet revised standards • VERY CO$TLY!! • $30K to $50K per acre of IA
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine FACTORS LONG CREEK OVERVIEW RDA CLF threatened and filed petition Regulatory Oversight EPA and DEP Affected Parties 4 Municipalities 2 Transportation Agencies 2+ Utilities Numerous commercial properties Minimal residential properties Designated Discharge >1 acre of Impervious Cover (IC) Impairment “Adverse impact of impervious surfaces” (e.g., land use, %IC, urban runoff, etc.) Target Reduce effective IC Approach Watershed Management Plan (WMP) Extensive outreach to stakeholders Lengthy stakeholders process
Long Creek Watershed From effective date of permit: South Portland, Maine WATERSHED STATISTICS LONG CREEK OVERVIEW Land Area 3.5 square miles (mainly in one municipality) Main branch: 3.84 miles long Waterbody 4 Tributaries: 5+ additional miles Shallow, narrow streambed Sand, silt and clay with some rocks %IC 28% 7 subwatersheds: 10 ‐ 62% IC Commercial Primary Land Use Population Growth Low WQ Data Extensive amount (low DO, chlorides/ionic strength, altered flow, temperature, aquatic organisms, etc.)
IS RDA PROBLEM SOLVED? CAN SAME SOLUTION BE APPLIED ELSEWHERE?
Upper Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts Three municipalities Headwaters of larger Charles River watershed www.mass.gov
Upper Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts Urban Impaired Stream (303 ‐ d listed) Ample water quality data and studies (TMDLs for nutrients) Mix of discharges (non ‐ permitted and permitted) Another candidate for RDA/petition
Upper Charles River Watershed Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts GENERAL PERMIT FOR DESIGNATED DISCHARGES IN THE CHARLES RIVER WATERSHED WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITIES OF MILFORD, BELLINGHAM AND FRANKLIN, MASSACHUSETTS 2± acres of impervious • surfaces Aggregation of – contiguous lots Commercial, industrial, • educational, hospitals, condominiums Exempts single family • homes or areas covered by the MS4 permit
Upper Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts • 65% Phosphorus removal • CMPP
Upper Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts SUSTAINABLE STORMWATER FUNDING DEVELOPMENT east ‐ wenatchee.com
Upper Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts SUSTAINABLE STORMWATER FUNDING crwa.org
Upper Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts FACTORS UPPER CHARLES OVERVIEW RDA CRWA and CLF threatened petition Regulatory Oversight EPA (minimal DEP involvement) 3 Municipalities to enforce Affected Parties 0 Transportation Agencies (exempt since MS4) Numerous commercial and industrial properties Large residential properties >2 acre of Impervious Cover (IC) Designated Discharge Phosphorus equated to adverse impact of Impairment impervious surfaces (e.g., land use, %IC, urban runoff, etc.) Certified Municipal Phosphorus Program (CMPP) Approach Draft Permit followed by stakeholder cooperation Target Phosphorus reduction
Charles River Watershed From effective date of permit: Milford, Bellingham, & Franklin, Massachusetts WATERSHED STATISTICS UPPER CHARLES OVERVIEW Land Area 48 sq. miles (spread throughout 3 municipalities) Main branch: 70 miles long Waterbody Only headwaters included in 3 towns (~15 miles) %IC 14% Franklin 15% Bellingham 20% Milford Primary Land Use 42.5% Residential 7.9% Commercial/industrial Population Growth High WQ Data Extensive Amount
RDA COMPARISON WATERSHED INFORMATION UPPER CHARLES LONG CREEK 48 sq. miles 3.5 sq. miles Land area % Impervious Cover (IC) 14 ‐ 20% 28% Residential Commercial Land Use 3 (disbursed) 4 (primarily 1) Municipalities (within watershed) > 2 acres of IC > 1 acres of IC “Designed Discharge” CMPP WMP Proposed Approach District/Permit Development Proposed Implemented Annual Cost of Compliance $?/acre of IC $3000/acre of IC Target for reduction Phosphorus IC Perceived Role of “Enforcer” Aggressive Cooperative Available WQ Data Extensive Extensive Waterbody (Total miles/in WS/plus Tribs) 70/15/>>15 3.84/3.84/<10
Recommend
More recommend
