Water Quality Regulations and Legislation Affecting the Construction Industry

AGC of California Spring 2011 Conferencea presentation by

Mark Grey, Ph.D., Technical DirectorConstruction Industry Coalition on Water Quality

Building Industry Association of Southern California

Remarks On: • Construction General Permit; First year reaction to

new requirements; training requirements update

• Phase 1 California Communities and Caltrans MS4 Permits; new emphasis on runoff volume control and BMPs required to achieve volume control

• EPA Policy on Numeric Limits for Stormwater Discharges; Effluent Limit Guidelines for Construction

• Current Proposed Water Quality Legislation; potential SWPPP developer PE requirements and changes to income restrictions for regional water board members

Issue/Requirement 1999 Permit 2009 PermitIterative BMP Approach Permit based on Iterative BMP

Approach applied to the MEPMoves away from MEP standard to include numeric performance measurements demonstrating compliance

Risk Approach to Establish BMPs No YesNumeric Effluent Limit (NEL) No Yes, Risk Level 3 sites for turbidity and pH; trash and

organics prohibitionNumeric Action Level (NAL) No Yes, Risk Level 2 and 3 sites for turbidity and pH

Construction Site Discharge Monitoring No monitoring required unless visual observations indicate pollutant source

Requires monitoring at Risk Level 2 and 3 sites when the amount of rainfall is greater than 0.5 inches (known as a qualifying rain event)

Receiving Water Monitoring No Requires monitoring in a receiving water when NEL is exceeded at a Risk Level 3 site

Bioassessment Monitoring No Yes for Risk Level 3 sites greater than 30 acres and discharging to sensitive receiving water

Design Storm for Compliance No Yes, 5-year 24-hour storm for NALs and NELs10-year, 24 hour storm when using ATS

Requirements for sizing and using Advanced Sediment Treatment Systems

No Yes

SWPPP Developer and SWPPP Practitioner Training Requirements

No Yes

Post-Construction Runoff Reduction Requirements/Measures

No Yes, for sites not located within MS4 Phase I or Phase II communities that have post- construction runoff reduction requirements

Documentation of Rain Event Readiness Measures

No, voluntary preparation of weather-triggered action plans

Yes; Rain Event Action Plan (REAP and forms) required for every rain event with a greater than 50% probability of occurrence

Electronic/digital submission of Documents (SWPPP) and Required Reports

No Yes

QSD/QSP Program OverviewRequirements for becoming a Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) or a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner

(QSP)

QSD Qualifications:(Effective Now)

1. Reg. Civil Engineer2. Reg. Professional Geologist3. Reg. Landscape Architect4. Reg. Professional Hydrologist5. Certified Professional in Erosion and

Sediment Control (CPESC)6. Certified Professional in Storm Water

Quality (CPSWQ)7. Professional in Erosion and Sediment

Control Registered through NICETAND

Must attend a state-sponsored or approved training course by 9/2/2011 and pass exam

QSP Qualifications: (Effective on 9/2/2011)

Be a QSD

OR OBTAIN

1. Certified Erosion, Sediment, and Storm Water Inspector (CESSWI)

2. Certified Inspector of Sediment and Erosion Control (CISEC)

AND

Must attend a state-sponsored or approved training course by 9/2/2011 and pass exam

To prepare and certify a SWPPP as of July 1, 2010, you must have the QSD credentials shown in the box on the left and within 2 years attend and pass a training course. Anyone can implement the SWPPP in the field now; but persons working in the field must become a QSP by 9/2/2011 (see box on right side above)

Will there be enough QSPs to manage and inspect job sites on or after 9/2/2011?

• CASQA reports that more than 4,000 people have taken a QSD/P Class as of April 15, 2011

• 438 people are registered as QSDs (also qualified to be QSPs)

• 124 people are registered with the state as QSPs

• State Water Board reports there are ~6,400 registered construction sites in California as of April 2011

• Question: will there be enough QSPs by September 2, 2011 to manage construction job sites in California?

Latest Generation of Phase 1 MS4 Permits in California

Location Regional Board Date Adopted/ProposedSan Diego County San Diego 1/24/2007Sacramento County Central Valley 9/11/2008North Orange County Santa Ana 6/3/2009San Francisco Bay Area San Francisco Bay 10/14/2009South Orange County San Diego 12/16/2009Western Riverside County Santa Ana 1/29/2010San Bernardino County Santa Ana 1/29/2010Ventura County Los Angeles 7/8/2010Southern Riverside County San Diego 10/13/2010Los Angeles County Los Angeles 2011?

Phase 1 MS4: > 250,000 pop.Phase 2 MS4: >100,000 < 250,000 pop.

MS4 Permits Require Storm Water Runoff Controls for Development Projects

• Applies to new and redevelopment projects generally more than 5,000 ft2

• Applies to most public and private development projects, including roads

• Requires preparation of a water quality management plan to treat runoff

• Requires installation of water treatment and quantity controls

MS4 Permit Requirements Examples of Priority Projects

Priority ProjectsRequired Submission of Project-

Specific WQMP

Significant redevelopment > 5,000 ft2 YES

New development >10,000 ft2 YES

Automotive repair shops YES

Restaurants > 5,000 ft2 YES

Hillsides > 5,000 ft2 and >25% slope YES

Development of >2,500 ft2 impervious surface discharging to an ESA YES

Parking lots > 5,000 ft2 YES

Retail Gasoline Outlet >5,000 ft2 YES

Linear Utility Projects > 5,000 ft2 ?

Emergency Public Safety Projects in Above Listed Categories

NOWith Conditions

The latest generation of MS4 permits in California includes requirements for:

• Incorporating Low Impact Development (LID) principles

• Conducting a hard engineering feasibility analysis of using LID controls for runoff

• Incorporating numeric standards for compliance (ex: EIA; Volume Capture; BMP performance)

• Creating off-site or fee programs for non-compliance with LID requirements

• Including hydromodification controls for stream protection– Generally integrated with LID and

conventional runoff controls

Some of these measureswill be required in Caltrans projects

LID principles incorporated into MS4 permits in California

• Integrated Water Resources Management– Treating stormwater as a

resource at all scales– Integrating stormwater into

regional capture and groundwater augmentation

• Mimic Predevelopment Hydrology– Use natural features– Use site design– Use LID BMP controls– Use distributed controls, not

centralized facilities in all cases

Possible LID Best PracticesInfiltration Harvest and Use Evaporative Biotreat/Biofilter

$ to $$ $$ to $$$ $$$$ $ to $$Bioretention without Underdrain Rain Barrels Green Roof BioretentionRetention Swale Cisterns Brown Roof Planter Box

Retention Grading Tanks Blue Roof Constr. Wetland

Infiltration Trench Canopy Intercept Vegetated Swale

Infiltration Basin Uses: Soil Amendment Vegetated Strip

Drywell Irrigation Runoff Dispersion Proprietary Device

Subsurface Infiltration Gallery

Toilet FlushingVehicle Washing

Note: Biotreatment allows underdrains

French Drain Evaporative Cooling and overdrains

Perm. Asphalt Industrial Process

Perm. Concrete Dilution Water

Perm. Pavers Other Non-Potable

Conducting a LID feasibility analysis: What does this mean practically speaking?

• Requiring a detailed examination of Infiltration, Harvest and Use, Evapotranspiration and Biofiltration before considering c conventional treatment control

• Considering technical feasibility and perhaps economic feasibility of each or a combination of options for runoff controls

• Considering environmental and societal factors in evaluating feasibility– Accommodating legacy issues, like

Brownfields – Encouraging development in the

urban footprint

Federal Stormwater Regulatory Initiatives and Efforts (US EPA)

• Numeric Effluent Limits in Stormwater Permits– Use in TMDLs– Incorporated into MS4

Permits– Moves away from

iterative BMP approach– Ignores development

context in watershed– EPA taking comments

on guidance memo

• Construction Site Effluent Limit Guidelines– Similar to CA CGP NALs

and NELs ( for turbidity)– EPA published a limit,

then court ordered EPA to reevaluate

– EPA to release “menu” of options in June, with some recognition of local variability

Pending Water Quality-related Legislation under Consideration in Sacramento

• AB 1210 (Garrick). This bill seeks to require that a registered professional civil engineer prepare all construction SWPPPs– Creates considerable confusion and is at odds with CGP training

requirements in 2009 adopted permit

• AB 900 (Steinberg). This bill seeks to allow Regional and State Board members to act under California Political Reform Act of 1974; eases conflict of interest standards– Also tries to tackle 10% income rule

For more information contact:Mark Grey, Ph.D.

Director of Environmental Affairs, BIA of Southern CaliforniaTechnical Director, Construction Industry Coalition on Water Quality

3891 11th StreetRiverside, CA 92501

(951) 781-7310 (office)(909) 525-0623 (cell)(951) 781-0509 (fax)

mgrey@biasc.orgmark@cicwq.com

www.biasc.orgwww.cicwq.com