EPA Stormwater & Water Regulations: Local Impacts & Balancing Power

1. 2011 Congressional City Conference EPA Stormwater & Water Regulations:Local Impacts & Balancing Power

2. Who am I? Randy Neprash, P.E.

3. Basic Concepts #1 Stormwater pollution and water quality are legitimate and important issues for cities

4. Basic Concepts #2 • Writing good regulations is very, very hard to do • Regulations are always clumsy • We are still learning about stormwater and water quality • Very few regulators understand how cities function • This means they need our assistance • Regs should be meaningful & manageable

5. Delegated Permit Authority

6. Local Impacts – types of regs • TMDLs • Total Maximum Daily Load • NPDES permits • Wastewater • Construction sites • Industrial facilities • MS4 • Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems

7. TMDLs • Waste Load Allocations are linked to NPDES permits – legal liabilities for MS4 cities • Achievability is not the highest priority • It’s the receiving water and “science” that count • The TMDL must result in meeting the WQ standard • Some WLAs have very large load reductions

8. TMDLs • Reasonable Assurance for MS4s is very weak • Typical “boilerplate” language in Minnesota • “Under the MS4 program, each permitted community must develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program, or SWPPP, that lays out the ways in which the community will actively and effectively manage its stormwater. SWPPPs are required to incorporate the results of any approved TMDLs within their area of jurisdiction, subject to review by the MPCA.”

9. TMDLs • Inexorable logic • WLA reductions are enforced through permits • LA reductions are voluntary • Incentive money will go to LA sources • Permits will get more stringent for MS4 cities

10. MS4 Permitting Program NPDES permits for urban stormwater runoff EPA rules – 1990, 1999, now 761 Phase I MS4s 5,862 Phase II MS4s – 5,182 MS4 cities

11. MS4 Permitting Program • Six Minimum Control Measures • Public Education & Outreach • Public Participation • Illicit Discharge Detection & Elimination • Construction Site Runoff Control • Post-Construction Stormwater Management • Pollution Prevention/Municipal Good Housekeeping

12. MS4 Permitting Program 140 employees 11 departments 9 external partners

13. MS4 Permitting Program

14. MS4 Permitting Program

15. MS4 Permitting Program

16. MS4 Permitting Program MCMs #1 & 2 - $101,385 MCM #3 - $131,500 MCM #4 - $174,840 MCM #5 - $236,118 MCM #6 - $839,200 Admin & Asset Depreciation - $1,697,600 Total - $3,180,643 Does not include cost to city construction projects

17. City Participation in the Regulatory Process • Driven by local impacts • Meaningful participation • Develop our own guidance materials • Genuine partner with state agency – MPCA • Be involved in water quality & stormwater stakeholder groups • Influence policy, legislation, and regulations • Communicate among cities – share materials

18. Challenges • Multiple aspects of “meaningful participation” • Policy • Politics • Technical – water resources engineering • Implementation experience • Beyond the capacity of any individual cities • Very difficult if many individuals are doing separate activities

19. Challenges • Genuine partnership with state agency • Know the staff • Know internal protocols • Know the agency’s intent • Know the legal aspects – Federal and state • Know the politics – at the Legislature • Make use of administrative functions • Formal comments, contested case hearing petitions • Balance of power

20. We formed the MCSC • Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition • Membership of 87 cities • of 162 MS4 cities • Affiliated with the League of Minnesota Cities • Fiscal administration • Political & policy alliance • Technical consultant – 80 hours per month

21. MCSC • Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition • 11-member Steering Committee • Meets monthly • Annual budget = $85,000 • Annual membership fee • Annual membership meeting

22. MCSC – Annual Fee Schedule

23. MCSC’s Actions • Guide Plan Project • For Phase II cities – in 2002 • Created our own program guidance • Consistent format for submittals • Contested case hearing petition – 2006 • Negotiated significant permit revisions • Solution for nondegradation court ruling • We generated the strategy to resolve the problem

24. MCSC’s Actions - Current • Minimal Impact Design Standards • Credit system for the broad range of Best Management Practices • Draft MS4 Permit • Technical seminars for member cities • PAH stormwater pond sediment contamination • TMDL guidance for member cities • Communication & sharing materials • Address challenges with volume control

25. Summary • Water quality & stormwater pollution are important issues that have to be addressed by cities • The impacts of WQ & SW regs is significant and will increase • A coalition of regulated cities is useful for: • Coordination • Sharing information & materials • Balancing power with state agencies

26. Federal Rulemaking • Informed by National Research Council report • 46 people involved • Committee members • Advice & input • Reviewers • 4 from Phase I cities • 0 from Phase II cities • Out of 5,182 regulated cities

27. Randy Neprash • randy.neprash@bonestroo.com • 651-604-4703