150 likes | 395 Views
Bureau of Watershed Management Regulatory Proposal. Chapter 105 Dam Safety and Waterway Management. February 21, 2007. The Purpose of Today’s Presentation. Review and revise existing Chapter 105 regulations ~24 month process…January 2007 to December 2008
E N D
Bureau of Watershed ManagementRegulatory Proposal Chapter 105 Dam Safety and Waterway Management February 21, 2007
The Purpose of Today’s Presentation • Review and revise existing Chapter 105 regulations • ~24 month process…January 2007 to December 2008 • Solicit ideas, suggestions and advice
Scope of Current Regulations • Anyone who plans to modify the course, current or cross section of a waterbody (including wetlands) • Individuals • Corporations • Farmers • Government • Annual Activity • 750 individual permits issued • 4000 general permit coverage authorized
The Basics • Water obstructions and encroachments • Activities in wetlands • Government flood control projects • Submerged Lands of PA
Themes for Change • Focus DEP’s resources by streamlining permitting processes • Three tiered system • Clarify application requirements • Broaden resource replacement options
Proposed Changes • Dam safety • Require proof of financial responsibility to operate an existing Hazard Potential Category 1 Dams • Increase the time limit of a construction permit from 2 years to 5 years • Require owners of Category 2 and 3 dams to submit one quarterly report by April 1st • Category 1 dams will include any dam whose failure could lead to the loss of life • Direct applicant to consider the potential for sinkholes or solution channels in karst areas • Require EAP’s to be updated once every 5 years
Proposed Changes • Convert waivers to Permits-by-Rule (Tier I) • This tier requires no notification and no review • Permit-by-Rule examples • Aerial service lines crossings • Agricultural activity • Ford for private use • Navigational aids and fish habitat enhancement approved by PFBC
Ag activities covered under permit-by-rule • Maintenance of field drainage systems, constructed prior to October 26, 1991 and continue to be used for crop production • Crop production includes plowing, cultivating, seeding, grazing, harvesting, crop rotation, and government set aside programs • Fences that do not create a threat to safe navigation or flooding
Proposed Changes • General Permits Requiring Registration Only (Tier II) • This tier requires no review • Tier II GP Examples • Ag activities conducted pursuant to a conservation plan • Maintenance of ponds to original storage capacity • Temporary Road Crossings, less than 1 yr • Footbridges, trails and pathways • Streambank stabilization and rehabilitation
Proposed Changes • General Permits requiring registration, review and DEP approval (Tier III) • Review could be delegated (e.g. BAMR and County Conservation Districts) • Tier III GP Examples • Removal of abandoned obstructions and encroachments • Restoration activities conducted under a DEP-approved plan • Abandoned mine reclamation projects • Breaching an existing dam
Proposed Changes • Permitting requirements • Permit application requirements are put in one place • Redundant information requests eliminated • Sensitive local conditions (i.e. karst, legacy sediments)
Proposed Changes • Existing wetland replacement criteria would remain the same • Minimum 1:1 replacement requirement for permitted activities • Minimum 2:1 replacement requirement for un-permitted activities
Proposed Changes • Proposed alternative wetland compensation • Replacement credits from a wetland bank • Financial contribution to a DEP-approved wetland restoration program • Permanently protect on-site wetlands through easements or deed restrictions • Other restoration, enhancement or preservation measures of wetlands or “other aquatic resources” (stream buffers)
Proposed Changes • Increased review of stream enclosure and floodway proposals • Compensatory mitigation requirements for streams (one or more) • Fish enhancement structures • Streambank restoration and stabilization • Riparian corridor management • AMD treatment and remediation • Other habitat restoration or protection efforts approved by DEP (dam removal)
Proposed Changes • Clarify language to enable County Conservation Districts to charge fees for General Permit processing