Issue #4: Social and Economic benefits of proposed activity

1. Notebook Ref. 4.3 Issue #4: Social and Economic benefits of proposed activity

2. Summary of the Issue ADEC policy states: “If the quality of a water exceeds levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality must be maintained and protected unless the department… finds that(A) Allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area where the water is located; (B) … reducing water quality will not violate the applicable criteria of 18 AAC 70.020 or 18 AAC 70.235 or the whole effluent toxicity limit in 18 AAC 70.030; (C) the resulting water quality will be adequate to fully protect existing uses of the water;

3. Summary of the Issue What is required to demonstrate that social or economic benefits of a proposed activity justify the potential lessening of water quality of a waterbody segment is an important part of Tier II reviews. DEC needs to identify: • What is considered a satisfactory demonstration? • What determines whether a requested activity is “necessary”?

4. What factors should be considered? • Arizona, Delaware, West Virginia and Region 8 states: • Increased production • Employment • Improved tax base • Housing • Correction of environmental or public health problem • Where information is inadequate or unavailable for determination, applicant may be required to submit the following: • Information pertaining to water uses • Information on potential environmental impacts • Facts pertaining to current state of economic development • Government fiscal base • Land-use in surrounding area

5. What factors should be considered (cont’d)? • Oregon – Similar factors as previous slide with the inclusion of: • Local Economy • Household income • Indirect effects to other businesses • Increases in sewer fees • Financial impact analysis assessing whether allowing lower WQ provides socioeconomic benefits that outweigh the environmental costs • Washington: • Potential alternatives • Economic and social benefits of maintaining or degrading WQ • Cost of action as well as alternatives

6. Pennsylvania’s detailed list • 1. Effect on Public Need/Social Services • Identify any public services, including social services, that will be provided to or required of the communities in the affected area as a result of the proposed project. Explain any benefits that will be provided to enhance health/nursing care, police/fire protection, infrastructure, housing, public education, etc. • 2. Effect on Public Health/Safety • Identify any health and safety services that will be provided to or required of the communities in the affected area as a result of the proposed project. Explain any benefits that will be provided to enhance food/drinking water quality, control disease vectors, or to improve air quality, industrial hygiene, occupational health or public safety, including the benefits resulting from reclamation of abandoned mine land hazards. • 3. Effect on Quality of Life • Describe the impacts of the proposed project on the quality of life for residents of the affected area with respect to educational, cultural and recreational opportunities, daily life experience (dust, noise, traffic, etc.) and aesthetics (viewscape).

7. Pennsylvania’s detailed list (cont.) • 4. Effect on Employment • Explain the impacts of the proposed project on employment practices in the affected area. Identify the number and type of jobs projected to be gained or lost as a result of the proposed project. Will the proposed project improve employment or mean household income in the affected area? Explain. • 5. Effect on Tax Revenues • Explain the impact of the proposed project on tax revenues and local or county government expenditures in the affected area. Will the project change property values or the tax status of properties? If yes, explain whether that change is a beneficial or detrimental to residents/businesses in the affected area. • 6. Effect on Tourism • Discuss the effects the proposed project may have on the economy of the affected area by creating new or enhancing existing tourist attractions. Conversely, describe any impacts resulting from the elimination of or reduction in existing attractions. • 7. Other Factors • Provide any other information that would explain why it is necessary to lower water quality to accommodate this proposed project. This category should be used to address any social or economic factors not considered above.

8. What level of information should be required of applicants? • Washington: • Consideration of 9 alternatives • Test of importance • Description of economic and social benefits • Wyoming: • Test of economic and social importance • West Virginia • List of available and cost-effective alternatives • Identification of least-degrading alternative or mix of alternatives • Social and economic importance analysis

9. What level of review and documentation is needed? • Wyoming: • Public comment period • Substantial weight given to determinations by local governments and land-use planning authorities • West Virginia: • Social and economic importance analysis • State considers views and concerns of public and selected governmental agencies • Arizona and Delaware: • Copies of antidegradation review and/or public notice are provided to state and federal agencies along with written request for comment.

10. Should level of review and documentation vary based on potential risk? • Some states say they vary the level of review based on risk potential but don’t have a prescribed methodology for doing so. • Most states make the distinction between need for a review or not based on risk potential (i.e., de minimus approach) but don’t clearly distinguish the level of review.