Update: Virginia’s Stormwater p g

Management Regulationsg g

b 9 2009December 9, 2009

Virginia Soil & Water Conservation Board

Adopts Final RegulationsAdopts Final Regulations

Parts I, II, and IIIa ts , , a d

Virginia Stormwater Management Program(VSMP) Permit Regulations

January 14, 2010

Virginia Soil & Water Conservation Board

Suspends

Parts I, II, and III

Virginia Stormwater Management Program(VSMP) Permit Regulations

July 23, 2010

Regulatory Advisory Panel (RAP)

meets to discuss issues with

Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit Regulations

RAP Issues - VSMP Permit Regulations

GrandfatheringgOffsets/CreditsW t Q litWater QualityWater QuantityQ y

Local Program Criteria (Part III)

Grandfatheringg

No Blue BlobsPlans to have SWM calculations

BMPs to have design specifications

Permit Coverage - July 1, 2014

Grandfathered - June 30, 2019

Water Quality - Phosphorus

Proposed by RAPNew Development - 0 41 lbs/acre/yrNew Development 0.41 lbs/acre/yr

(forest load included)

Prior Developed LandsVariable % Improvement

Water Quantity - Channel ProtectionWater Quantity - Channel Protection

Manmade Conveyance System

Restored Conveyance Systemy y

Natural Conveyance SystemNatural Conveyance System

Water Quantity

Energy Balance Equation

Qdev < I.F.*[Qpre*RVpre] / RVdev

I.F. = 0.8 for > 1acreI.F. = 0.9 < 1 acre

Qdev < QpreQdev < Qpre

Water Quantity

1% Rule

Watershed vs Site Area

Watershed vs Site Peak Flow Rate

Offsets/CreditsOffsets/Credits

New Development> 5 acres disturbance or load reduction > 8 lbs

75% on site

New Development< 5 acres disturbance or load reduction < 8 lbs< 5 acres disturbance or load reduction < 8 lbs

All through offsets

Offsets/Credits

Prior Developed LandsDisturbance > 5 acresDisturbance > 5 acresLoad reduction > 8 lbs

10% i10% on siteRemainder through offsets

St t M t PStormwater Management Program Administration

Localities with MS4 permits and localities within the CBPA Area

t d t l l t t

All other localities may elect to adopt a local SW construction

(O t i ) Oth imust adopt a local stormwater management program. (yellow)

program (Opt-in). Otherwise, DCR will operate a program within a locality. (red)

#S

HANO VER

#S

#S#S

HANO VER

#S#S

Locality / DCR Program

Locality / DCR Programs - Different

Revised Language to Reflect Difference

Addressed Locality & DCR Needs

Contact InformationL Hill A i iLee Hill, Assistant Director

Stormwater Management ProgramsDivision of Soil and Water ConservationDivision of Soil and Water Conservation

Department of Conservation and Recreation

lee.hill@dcr.virginia.gov(804) 786-3998

www.mcguirewoods.com

The Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Stormwater in Virginia

Presented by:Heather N. Stevenson, Counsel

McGuireWoods LLP

Richmond, VA

McGuireWoods LLP | 2

VERY FAST

Overview

•

Bay TMDL Basics

•

Development of the Bay TMDL

•

Recent appeal of the Bay TMDL

McGuireWoods LLP | 3

Chesapeake Bay Watershed

•

64,000 square mile watershed•

Includes parts of . . .–

Virginia

–

Maryland

–

Delaware

–

District of Columbia

–

Pennsylvania

–

New York

–

West Virginia

McGuireWoods LLP | 4

Bay Water Quality

• Poor water quality that has been declining for many years• Degraded habitats• Low fish and shellfish populations• Primary culprits:

– Excessive loads of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediments– Agriculture: largest source of nutrients and sediments– Other sources: point sources, airborne sources, non-point sources

other than agriculture

McGuireWoods LLP | 5

What is a TMDL?

•

TMDL means “total maximum daily load”

•

A TMDL is comprised of (i) wasteload allocations

for point sources like sewage

treatment plants, urban stormwater systems and large animal feeding operations, (ii) load allocations

for non-point sources such as

polluted rainfall runoff from agricultural lands, and (iii) a margin of safety.

McGuireWoods LLP | 6

Bay TMDL Basics

•

TMDL required by –

Impaired waters listings

–

Federal consent decrees

•

92 TN, TP, and sediment TMDLs

for the entire watershed (35 in Virginia)

•

TMDL supersedes and replaces the 2005 Bay Program Tributary Strategies process

•

EPA issued the Bay TMDL on December 29, 2010

McGuireWoods LLP | 7

Accountability and Goals

• Chesapeake Bay TMDL is unique in this regard– WIPs– 2 year milestones– EPA tracking and assessment of restoration– Federal backstops

• This framework established to provide demonstration of the reasonable assurance provision of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL

McGuireWoods LLP | 8

2010 Bay TMDL Development Activities

•

States submitted preliminary WIPs: June 1, 2010•

EPA sets draft watershed limits for TN and TP: July 1•

EPA sets range of sediment limits: August 13•

Draft Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) were due to EPA from the states on September 1 (Virginia WIP submitted September 3rd)

•

Draft Bay TMDL issued September 24•

Public comment period on the draft Bay TMDL: September 24 through November 8

•

18 Public meetings during the public comment period•

Final WIPs

due to EPA November 29•

Final Bay TMDL by EPA –

December 29, 2010•

American Farm Bureau Federation appeal filed January 10, 2011

McGuireWoods LLP | 9

Virginia’s Final WIP and Urban Stormwater

• VA’s urban stormwater load reductions: more achievable and still aggressive

• VA committed to finalize a stormwater rule in 2011 that improves new and redevelopment performance standards

• VA to request that Phase 1 MS4 wasteload allocations more explicitly demonstrate urban runoff load that each jurisdiction is expected to achieve

• Commitment to implement Bay-wide (and perhaps statewide) program to limit fertilizer application on urban lands

McGuireWoods LLP | 10

American Farm Bureau Federation Appeal

• Issues on appeal– Models not properly validated or calibrated– Lack of adequate public notice and comment– EPA exceeded authority in establishing TMDLs and did not

provide states the opportunity to establish the TMDLs– EPA exceeded authority in establishing allocations for multiple

constituents in multiple water body segments– EPA exceeded authority by establishing allocation for sources

upstream of the Bay– EPA exceeded authority by encompassing nonpoint sources within

point source wasteload allocations

McGuireWoods LLP | 11

Questions or Comments?

Heather N. Stevenson804.775.1380hstevenson@mcguirewoods.com

900 Lawyers | 17 Offices

www.mcguirewoods.com

2010 McGuireWoods LLP

StormwaterStormwater NPDES / MS4NPDES / MS4Chesapeake BayChesapeake BayStormwater Stormwater Regulations Regulations

(DCR)(DCR)

NPDES / MS4 NPDES / MS4 Permit ReissuancePermit Reissuance

(EPA/DCR)(EPA/DCR)20112011

Chesapeake Bay Chesapeake Bay TMDLTMDL

(EPA/DCR)(EPA/DCR)July 2011July 2011 201120112010/20112010/2011

Significant Impacts to:Significant Impacts to:g pg p

County Programs & Operating Costs County Programs & Operating Costs New DevelopmentNew DevelopmentNew DevelopmentNew DevelopmentRedevelopmentRedevelopmentExisting DevelopmentExisting Developmentg pg p

CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL

Final Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Nov 29 2010 Identifies how and when loadNov. 29, 2010 – Identifies how and when load reductions will be met.

WIP assigns pollutant loads to different source sectors for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment.

Wastewater Treatment Plants

Urban StormwaterPlantsAgriculture Air Sources

Forest On Site / Septic

FINAL WIPU b /S b b St tUrban/Suburban Stormwater

Commonwealth will utilize MS4 permits (NPDES) to p ( )assure BMP implementation on Existing Developed Lands to achieve reductions.

9% nitrogen16% phosphorous Impervious Regulated Loads20% sediment

6% nitrogen6% nitrogen7.25 phosphorous Pervious Regulated Loads8.75% sediment

Henrico County has in excess of 20,000 acres of Henrico County has in excess of 20,000 acres of yyimpervious cover.impervious cover.

Cost for “retrofitting” Existing Development will beCost for “retrofitting” Existing Development will beCost for retrofitting Existing Development will be Cost for retrofitting Existing Development will be significant.significant.

Still waiting on allocation for Henrico Still waiting on allocation for Henrico

Not sure what numbers were used in EPA’s BayNot sure what numbers were used in EPA’s BayNot sure what numbers were used in EPA s Bay Not sure what numbers were used in EPA s Bay Model (i.e. Regulated Impervious Cover)Model (i.e. Regulated Impervious Cover)

Assume Cost will be passed on to Citizens Assume Cost will be passed on to Citizens (Residential, Business, Churches, etc.) Via a (Residential, Business, Churches, etc.) Via a Stormwater Utility or TaxStormwater Utility or Tax

Several Preliminary Cost Estimates have been made Several Preliminary Cost Estimates have been made by consultants based on assumptions and raw data.by consultants based on assumptions and raw data.y py p

Henrico’s average unit costs Henrico’s average unit costs Residential = $117Residential = $117 -- $454$454Residential $117 Residential $117 $454 $454 Businesses =Businesses = ??Churches =Churches = ??

Localities will develop action plan identifying “means Localities will develop action plan identifying “means and methods” to achieve required reductions.and methods” to achieve required reductions.

2 Year Milestones2 Year Milestones

Engineering in a New Regulatory Environment 

Presented toHampton Roads ULI 

Presented byColleen E Collins PEColleen E. Collins, P.E.Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI 

What’s ChangedgPast Design Practice: • Central BMPS• Performance or Technology Based Sizing impervious area only• Performance or Technology Based Sizing ‐ impervious area only• Average land cover pre‐developed• 10% Phosphorous Reduction ‐ Redevelopment

Future Design Practice: • Small BMPs at the source• VA Runoff Reduction Method (VRRM) – includes managed turfC i t t b li f d l d diti (0 41 lb / / )• Consistent baseline for pre‐developed condition (0.41 lbs/ac/yr)

• Channel Protection Volume (1‐year storm)• 20% Phosphorous Reduction – Redevelopment 

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI 

Then…………………………………………….…and nowe …………………………………………….…a d o

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI 

VA Runoff Reduction Method (VRRM)VA Runoff Reduction Method (VRRM)

Results in more practices than current method (VSMH)p ( )

Focus on treating stormwater at the source

Reduction of volume as first step

Install conventional BMPs as last resort

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI 

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI 

Regional DifferencesRegional DifferencesESD Measures in Good Soils/Deep Groundwater: • Bioretention• Infiltration• Permeable Pavement

ESD Measures in Lower Coastal Plain: • Impervious area disconnectionR i t H ti• Rainwater Harvesting

• Vegetated swales, filter strips, sheetflow to conservation areas• Minimal grade drop across the site• Constructed wetlandsConstructed wetlands

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI 

ABC’s of Pending Stormwater Regulations – ULI