USWAC UPDATES
REGULATORY BACKGROUND MS4 Program 2010: Utah delegated implementation of the Clean Water Act MS4 storm water permitting program 2014: EPA deferred national rulemaking on post- construction retention in deference to states. 2015: EPA audited Utah’s storm water program and identified lack of post-construction retention as a deficiency.
SMALL 2016: RENEWAL WITH RETENTION MS4 STANDARD AND LID APPROACHES PERMIT: 2017- 2019: DEFERRED IMPLEMENTATION OF REQUIREMENTS 3X UNTIL MARCH 2020 REGULATORY JORDAN 2019: DRAFT RENEWAL FOR PUBLIC VALLEY COMMENT AND PERMIT ADMINISTRATIVELY BACKGROUND MS4 EXTENDED UNTIL RETENTION STANDARD RESOLVED PERMIT JORDAN 2017: DEFERRED COMPLETION OF JORDAN RIVER RIVER TMDL AND OFFERED PRE- TMDL COMPLIANCE CREDIT TO MS4S
Jordan Valley MS4 Permit • September 4, 2018 MS4 Salt Lake City MS4 Permit PERMIT • January 31, 2020 RENEWAL UDOT MS4 Permit DATES • December 3, 2020 General Permit for Small MS4s • February 28, 2021
ADDRESSING ISSUES RAISED BY THE PERMIT Concern DWQ Action Status SWPPP Template is too long. Revised the template and posted to website. Completed May 15, 2018 There’s a conflict of interest with third party Modified permit to prohibit conflict of interest. Currently reviewing public comments on draft consultants inspecting for MS4s as well as Jordan Valley MS4 permit. contractors. Need for more consistency between the MS4s Currently reviewing public comments on draft Jordan Modified permit conditions to provide clarity and what they are requiring. Valley MS4 permit. Draft construction permit revisions and improve consistency. Nov 2018 Modified MS4 permit to include a requirement Require an appeals process for fines and upfront Currently reviewing public comments on draft for the appeals process and upfront enforcement policies. Jordan Valley MS4 permit. presentation of the enforcement policy. Increase communication between inspectors and Provide training on how to inspect, including contractors. educating contractors prior to enforcement. October, 2018 MS4s over-regulating due to fear of audits and Couple with revised RSI class. enforcement. Cities not holding themselves to the same DWQ periodically inspecting city owned May 1, 2018 standards as contractors. projects. 1) Evaluate scope for revising delivery of current RSI training There needs to be better or more training Collaborating with UHBA to deliver. and meet with RSI trainers. options. Consider separate training for contractors and MS4s inspectors.
UTAH PERMIT WATER RETENTION STANDARD UPDATE PREVIOUS PERMIT (AUGUST 1, 2010): “THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS CONTROL MEASURE IS FOR THE HYDROLOGY ASSOCIATED WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT TO MIRROR THE PRE-DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY OF THE PREVIOUSLY UNDEVELOPED SITE OR TO IMPROVE THE HYDROLOGY OF A REDEVELOPED SITE AND REDUCE THE DISCHARGE OF STORM WATER.”
UTAH PERMIT WATER RETENTION STANDARD UPDATE PERMIT RENEWAL: “BY MARCH 1, 2020 , NEW DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS… MUST MANAGE RAINFALL ON-SITE, AND PREVENT THE OFF-SITE DISCHARGE OF THE PRECIPITATION FROM ALL RAINFALL EVENTS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO THE 90TH PERCENTILE RAINFALL EVENT…."
• THE 90TH PERCENTILE STORM IS REQUIRED AS A FLOOD CONTROL MEASURE? FACT OR FICTION • FICTION • THIS CONTROL IS MEANT AS A WATER QUALITY STANDARD.
IMPLEMENTATION • "MS4S ARE TO ENCOURAGE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BMPS, WHERE PRACTICABLE, THAT INFILTRATE, EVAPOTRANSPIRE OR HARVEST AND USE STORM WATER FROM THE SITE..." • "MS4S ARE TO MAKE LID THE ACCEPTED AND COMMONLY USED METHOD FOR MANAGEMENT OF STORM WATER IN THEIR JURISDICTION."
IMPLEMENTATION • "IF MEETING THIS RETENTION STANDARD IS TECHNICALLY INFEASIBLE, A RATIONALE SHALL BE PROVIDED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS FOR THE USE OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CRITERIA.”
• HOW IS THE WATER QUALITY INCORPORATED INTO THE RETENTION REQUIREMENT? • THIS IS A NUMERIC INTERPRETATION OF PREVIOUS PERMITS’ NARRATIVE STANDARD. THE PURPOSE IS TO: • REDUCE POLLUTANTS TRANSPORTED VIA STORM WATER CONVEYANCE • RECHARGE GROUNDWATER • TREAT STORM WATER VIA INFILTRATION LID • REDUCE EROSION ASSOCIATED WITH STORM QUESTIONS WATER RUNOFF, CONVEYANCE, DISCHARGE • MIMIC PREDEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS
AUGUST 1993 TO SEPTEMBER 2018
LID TRAINING • 4 TRAININGS ACROSS THE STATE • INTRODUCED THE NEW LID MANUAL
LID QUESTIONS • CAN WE GET RECHARGE CREDITS BECAUSE OF GROUNDWATER RECHARGE? • HOW IS INFEASIBILITY DETERMINED? • THE MS4 DETERMINES WHAT IS INFEASIBLE. AS LONG AS SOUND JUDGMENT IS USED DWQ WILL ACCEPT THE MS4’S DETERMINATIONS.
LID QUESTIONS • ARE THERE PARAMETERS FOR INFILTRATION OR GROUNDWATER DEPTH TO DETERMINE INFEASIBILITY? • NO, IT IS THE MS4’S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE WHAT PARAMETERS THEY ARE COMFORTABLE ACCEPTING WITHIN THEIR MUNICIPALITY.
LID QUESTIONS • IS IT ACCEPTABLE FOR AN MS4 TO CREATE A MAP OF HIGH GROUND WATER OR POOR SOILS FOR THEIR CITY AND USE THAT TO DETERMINE LID CONTROLS ARE INFEASIBLE? • MS4S CAN MAP OUT AREAS OF THEIR CITY WHERE CONDITIONS EXIST THAT MAY MAKE LID INFEASIBLE. THE MS4 MUST STILL REVIEW EACH SITE AND HAVE DOCUMENTATION STATING WHY IT IS INFEASIBLE. • IF THE SITE CAN ONLY RETAIN PART OF THE 90TH PERCENTILE STORM IS IT CONSIDERED INFEASIBLE OR MUST THAT PART BE RETAINED? • IF ONLY RETENTION OF PART OF THE 90TH PERCENTILE STORM IS FEASIBLE THEN THAT PART MUST BE RETAINED.
LID QUESTIONS • ARE THERE CONCERNS ABOUT CONTAMINATION TO GROUNDWATER FROM LID BMPS? ARE THERE ANY PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO INFILTRATION? • ACCORDING TO THE EPA - "IF PROPERLY SITED AND DESIGNED , INFILTRATION PRACTICES SHOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT GROUND WATER" • THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR PRETREATMENT, HOWEVER PRETREATMENT SHOULD BE A CONSIDERATION TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER AND TO INCREASE THE LIFE OF THE BMP. CONTAMINATION TO GROUNDWATER CAN OCCUR AND THIS MUST BE A CONSIDERATION DURING DESIGN.
LID QUESTIONS • HOW DOES LID WORK IN AREAS WITH LAND DRAINS? • IF LAND DRAINS ARE NECESSARY THEN INFILTRATION WILL LIKELY BE INFEASIBLE DUE TO A HIGH GROUND WATER TABLE. OTHER TYPES OF LID MAY BE POSSIBLE IN THESE AREAS.
LID QUESTIONS • IS THERE ANY GRANT MONEY AVAILABLE FOR RETROFITS USING LID? • ACCORDING TO THE DEQ - THERE IS SOME NON-POINT SOURCE FUNDING THAT CAN BE APPLIED FOR. FOR MORE INFORMATION SEE: HTTPS://DEQ.UTAH.GOV/WATER- QUALITY/UTAH-NONPOINT-SOURCE-MANAGEMENT-PROGRAM • WHAT ARE THE STORM WATER HARVESTING AND REUSE RESTRICTIONS? • THE MAXIMUM STORM WATER STORAGE CAPACITY WITH REGISTRATION IS 2,500 GALLONS. • WITHOUT REGISTERING, A PERSON MAY COLLECT AND STORE IN A MAXIMUM OF TWO CONTAINERS IF NEITHER CONTAINER EXCEEDS 100 GALLONS. • HTTPS://LE.UTAH.GOV/XCODE/TITLE73/CHAPTER3/C73-3-S1.5_1800010118000101.PDF
LID QUESTIONS • WHEN DEVELOPING LARGE SUBDIVISIONS OR PROJECTS IS RETENTION REQUIRED AT THE SOURCE/LOT LEVEL OR IS PROJECT LEVEL ACCEPTABLE? • DWQ WOULD LIKE TO SEE STORM WATER RETAINED AS CLOSE TO THE SOURCE AS POSSIBLE, HOWEVER THE USE OF RETENTION AT THE DEVELOPMENT/PROJECT LEVEL IS ALLOWED AND MAY BE MORE PRACTICAL IN SOME INSTANCES COMPARED TO HAVING RETENTION AT EACH LOT OR SOURCE.
LID QUESTIONS • HOW DOES DWQ FEEL ABOUT THE USE OF REGIONAL RETENTION CONTROLS (OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA) OR THE USE OF TREATMENT WHEN LOCAL RETENTION IS NOT POSSIBLE? • DWQ AGREES WITH THE USE OF EITHER OF THESE ALTERNATIVES WHEN RETENTION AT THE SOURCE IS INFEASIBLE. THE MS4 MUST DETERMINE IF THEY WANT TO REQUIRE A SPECIFIC ALTERNATIVE IN THESE CASES.
LID QUESTIONS • IS THERE ANY FURTHER GUIDANCE ON GAP ANALYSIS AND ZONING DEVELOPMENT? • THE MANUAL REFERENCES A GAP ANALYSIS TOOL FROM CALIFORNIA THAT CAN BE USED FOR A GAP ANALYSIS: HTTPS://WWW.CASQA.ORG/SITES/DEFAULT/FILES/DOWNLOADS/20171109_GAP_ANALYSIS_USER_ GUIDE.PDF • THE CENTER FOR WATERSHED PROTECTION ALSO HAS AN ORDINANCE WORKSHEET: HTTPS://OWL.CWP.ORG/MDOCS-POSTS/BETTER-SITE-DESIGN-CODE-AND-ORDINANCE- COW-WORKSHEET-2017-UPDATE/
LID QUESTIONS • IS THERE GUIDANCE FROM DWQ ON HOW TO MEASURE INFILTRATION RATES AND WHICH METHODS ARE BEST TO USE? • NO, BUT THE UCEA GROUP IS WORKING ON SOME RECOMMENDATIONS • IS THERE AN AFFORDABLE METHOD FOR ESTABLISHING THE HISTORIC GROUNDWATER TABLE ELEVATION?
LID QUESTIONS • HOW SHOULD POTENTIAL CAPACITY REDUCTIONS BE ACCOUNTED FOR? • OTHER COMMON CONCERNS: • HTTPS://WWW3.EPA.GOV/REGION1/NPDES/STORMWATER/ASSETS/PDFS/A DDRESSINGBARRIER2LID.PDF
FACT OR FICTION • LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT IS CHEAPER TO INSTALL AND MAINTAIN?
LID QUESTIONS • COSTS OF LID PRACTICES • " WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS, TOTAL LID CAPITAL COSTS WERE LOWER THAN CONVENTIONAL METHODS, WITH SAVINGS RANGING FROM 15 TO 80 PERCENT." REDUCING STORMWATER COSTS THROUGH LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) STRATEGIES • AND PRACTICES, DECEMBER 2007, EPA 841-F-07-006 • THE PARAGRAPH CONTINUES - "THE EPA LID STUDY DID NOT COMPARE MAINTENANCE COSTS, BUT ANOTHER EPA STUDY FOUND THAT LID HAS SIMILAR MAINTENANCE COSTS COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL METHODS." • PRELIMINARY DATA SUMMARY OF URBAN STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, EPA- 821-R-99-012
PROPOSED CGP CHANGES AND UPDATES • REVISED NOT FORM IS POSTED ON THE STATE WEBSITE • ALLOWS FOR PARTIAL NOT • "HOW TO GET A PERMIT SHEET" DEVELOPED AND SHARED
Recommend
More recommend
