Vision and Strategic Actions for Managing Stormwater in the 21st Century Vision Manage stormwater as a vital component of California’s water resources, to support human and ecological needs, to protect water quality, and to restore our waterways. California Stormwater Quality Association Version 1 January 2015 Vision and Strategic Actions for Managing Stormwater in the 21st Century Vision Manage stormwater as a vital component of California’s water resources, to support human and ecological needs, to protect water quality, and to restore our waterways. Last Updated: January 2015 Page 1 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Guiding Principles The guiding principles to support this vision are: Principle : Sustainable stormwater management uses runoff as a resource, protects water quality, and efficiently minimizes pollution. Principle : Policies, regulations, and funding need to support sustainable stormwater management. Principle : Public awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the value of stormwater is required. Last Updated: January 2015 Page 2 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Purpose This Vision and Strategic Actions were developed to address the primary issue for stormwater management: The lack of consensus on how best to meet the goals of the Clean Water Act for stormwater. We developed this Vision and Strategic Actions for CASQA, its members and the public to pursue a comprehensive plan for stormwater that will achieve the goals of the Clean Water Act and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of stormwater management. January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 3 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Table of Contents Vision ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 Guiding Principles ................................................................................................................................ 2 Purpose .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................. 4 Principle – Sustainable stormwater management uses runoff as a resource, protects water quality, and efficiently minimizes pollution. ............................................................... 5 Action 1.1 – Integrated Water Resources Management ...................................................................................... 5 Action 1.2 – Identify Constraints and Opportunities for Maximizing Stormwater as a Resource .... 6 Action 1.3 – Provide Effective and Efficient Solutions through True Pollutant Source Control ........ 7 Action 1.4 – Work with DPR to Control Toxicity in Receiving Waters from Pesticide Application .. 8 Principle – Policies, regulations, and funding need to support sustainable stormwater management ............................................................................................................ 10 Action 2.1 – Clarify Regulations ................................................................................................................................... 10 Action 2.2 – Articulate Stormwater Program Priorities .................................................................................... 11 Action 2.3 – Augment and Implement Basin Plan Amendment Process .................................................... 12 Action 2.4 – Develop Policies and Permitting Framework to Support Sustainable Stormwater Management ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Action 2.5 – Establish Guidance/Tools to Support Sustainable Stormwater Programs ...................... 14 Action 2.6 – Establish watershed based or equivalent program ................................................................... 15 Action 2.7 – Create Funding Opportunities ............................................................................................................. 16 Principle – Public awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the value of stormwater is required. ............................................................................................................... 18 Action 3.1 – Create opportunities for multiple agency and collaborative efforts to demonstrate the value of stormwater to the public .................................................................................................................... 18 Action 3.2 – Create statewide message that establishes stormwater as a resource ............................. 19 Vision Background ............................................................................................................................ 21 Drivers for the New Approach ...................................................................................................... 21 January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 4 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Principle – Sustainable stormwater management uses runoff as a resource, protects water quality, and efficiently minimizes pollution. Stormwater is a resource, with social, economic and ecological value. Domestic water supply sources in California are strained, and stormwater will play an important role in maintaining a consistent and resilient domestic supply. Using, and reusing more water within local watersheds will help maintain local water balance, reduce energy use, and avoid environmental impact to ground and surface waters. Stormwater programs must protect the environment and be cost-­‐effective to implement. For each pollutant, there is a most cost-­‐effective point of control. For many pollutants, the most cost-­‐effective point of control will be at the source, before the pollutant contacts stormwater. For other pollutants, a combination of source controls, treatment controls, and regulatory approaches or beneficial use assessment may be needed. Action 1.1 – Integrated Water Resources Management Background Excellent work has been completed on planning and developing California’s water system. But planners and engineers need a framework that describes how our water sources work together. The integrated regional water management plans (IRWMPs) have provided a partial answer to water planning, but can be improved to include more information for stormwater to ensure that it supports the highest use of other water sources in urban areas. Better guidance is needed for the development of the stormwater portion of IRWMPs, and to help agencies understand how stormwater will be used as a productive part of the state’s water supply. Goal: To develop guidance for IRWMPs that integrates all of California’s water resources to achieve optimum use while protecting the beneficial uses of receiving waters. Proposed Effort Step 1. Meet with State Water Board and Department of Water Resources (DWR) staff to discuss the action goal and develop a problem statement as well as general steps for corrective action. Determine the most appropriate approach to complete principles to guide the development of the stormwater portion of IRWMP’s. Identify other areas; such as the upcoming groundwater management plan requirements, where consideration of stormwater as a resource should be incorporated at an early stage. Step 2. Work with the State Water Board and DWR to develop a guide (model) for the use of all water sources in California and serve as a document to be consulted during the development of IRWMPs. The guide should address the following items: o
o
Recycled and grey water – How can stormwater capture and use complement, rather than complete with recycled and grey water use. Incentives for capture and use § Methods to encourage site based capture and use, including distributed green infrastructure and infiltration strategies in urban areas § Water rights definition for captured stormwater, either at the surface or infiltrated Last Updated: January 2015 Page 5 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions o
o
o
Describe and provide solutions for potential conflicts: Stormwater use, habitat protection, flood control. Criteria for application of model guidelines Steps for integrated planning with others (identify required partners such as water agencies, etc.) Lead: CASQA Support: Department of Water Resources; State Water Board Schedule: Step Action/Deliverable Completion Date 1 Meetings with State Board, DWR and others as appropriate 2015 Develop strategy to incorporate stormwater management into IRWMPs 2 Develop Guidance to better integrate stormwater into IRWMPs 2016 3 Finalize IRWMP stormwater integration Guidance and begin implementation 2017 Action 1.2 – Identify Constraints and Opportunities for Maximizing Stormwater as a Resource Background MS4 permit provisions and other regulatory requirements can result in unintended constraints on the use of stormwater as a resource. Additionally, as new regulations are developed in other areas, such as local site use, groundwater management, consideration of stormwater as a resource is not always maximized or consistently incorporated. This action will demonstrate how local agencies can improve their use of stormwater. Goal: To identify existing constraints and opportunities to incentivize use of stormwater as a natural resource. Proposed Effort Step 1. Survey agencies and review recently adopted MS4 permits to identify key conflicts and constraints for identifying and implementing projects that use stormwater. Step 2. Based on the results of the survey and meetings with DWR and State Water Board in Step 1, develop recommendations for ways in which future regulations can more effectively support use of stormwater as a resource. Provide the State Water Board with ways to incentivize the use of stormwater as a resource and remove constraints that currently exist to support the State Water Board’s Storm Water Strategy Initiative. Step 3. Work with the State Water Board and/or DWR to incorporate consideration of stormwater as a resource into development of new regulations and guidance where appropriate. Establish a statewide goal for capturing stormwater and using it as a resource. Lead: CASQA Support: State Water Board January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 6 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Schedule: Step 1 2 3 Action/Deliverable Survey and technical memorandum identifying constraints Recommendations for incentivizing stormwater use and removing constraints Work with State Water Board and/or DWR to incorporate consideration of stormwater as a resource in future regulations and establish a statewide goal. Completion Date 2015 2016 Ongoing as needed Action 1.3 – Provide Effective and Efficient Solutions through True Pollutant Source Control Background A sustainable stormwater program will implement controls that are recognized as the most effective and economical. For example, it is difficult on a technical basis to remove nutrients from stormwater. The most effective point of control for this pollutant is at the source (e.g., application). The control of some pollutants in stormwater is beyond the direct control of the municipality. True source control and the use of alternative products and green chemistry1 may ultimately offer the most effective and economical approach to the elimination of many chemical compounds that cause beneficial use impairment. New legislation may be needed to implement this action. Goal: Develop a list of pollutants in stormwater that should most appropriately be controlled at the source (true source control). Determine the commercial use of each pollutant, and outline a recommended source control approach. Proposed Effort Step 1. Assemble a scope of work for a technical report to identify pollutants in stormwater that impact local receiving waters. This will largely be a compendium of annual reports around the state. Assemble a technical advisory team to oversee the development of the technical report. Step 2. Prepare technical report that describes the causes of receiving water impairment in urban area, define each pollutant and assess the degree of pollutant control available to the municipality. As an example each pollutant may be assessed according to the following categories: o
o
o
o
Source characterization – sources, pathways, fate; relative amounts / uncertainty per pathway Removal available through cost effective treatment controls True source control Green Chemistry – identify appropriate industry The report should identify partners for collaboration to implement the control for each of the categories defined above. The report should also include a prioritized implementation plan. 1
The EPA defines green chemistry as, “the design of chemical products and processes that reduce or eliminate the generation of hazardous substances.” True source control is the elimination of the pollutant at its source. January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 7 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Step 3. Provide State Water Board with recommended actions to support true pollutant source control consistent with the Storm Water Strategic Initiative. Work with the State Water Board to support development of partnerships and collaboration and other actions identified in the technical report to support true pollutant source control. Lead: CASQA Support: Pollutant-­‐dependent Schedule: Step Action/Deliverable Completion Date 1–2 Reports by pollutant 2015 3 Coordination with State Water Board and EPA 2016 Action 1.4 – Work with DPR to Control Toxicity in Receiving Waters from Pesticide Application Background Pesticides represent a special and specific challenge to municipal stormwater programs since they are licensed for use by the State and U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but are commonly found in sufficient quantities to cause toxicity in receiving waters. Pesticides are present in very low concentrations in receiving waters, making it impractical to remove them from stormwater. They may also be synergistic in effect, combining to cause greater toxicity than individually. Goal: Develop a regulatory system implemented by EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) and California Department of Pesticides Regulation (DPR) to identify whether urban uses of a pesticide pose a threat to water quality, and then restrict or disallow those uses proactively so that water quality impacts are avoided. Proposed Effort Step 1. Work with EPA and DPR to develop a registration/reregistration process that clearly evaluates risks and potential water quality impacts of pesticides. The process for registration and registration reviews must include effective evaluations for the potential of all pesticide active ingredients and formulated products to impact urban waterways. The process must include consideration of all urban use patterns, and data required of manufacturers must support proactive evaluations. Cumulative risk assessments must be conducted, especially for pesticides with similar modes of action. Step 2. Work with the Water Boards, DPR, EPA’s Office of Water (OW) and OPP to develop a consistent definition of what comprises a water quality problem. CASQA will work with EPA’s Office of Water and OPP to develop consistent methodologies and approaches to allow evaluation of the potential impacts of pesticides on aquatic life. Step 3. Develop recommendations for a coordinating statewide pesticide monitoring efforts by considering monitoring requirements from DPR and the Water Boards and be designed to identify emerging pesticide problems in urban waterways before they become widespread and severe and minimize duplication between the programs. January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 8 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Step 4. For pesticides that are identified as a problem, identify mechanisms to use pesticide regulations and statutes, rather than total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) and permit requirements, to mitigate the problems. When needed, urban-­‐specific, use-­‐
specific mitigation measures will be used to address water quality problems. Lead: CASQA Support: DPR; State Water Board; EPA Schedule Step Action/Deliverable 1 2 3 4 Quarterly Meetings with DPR Technical Memorandum Technical Memorandum on Monitoring Program Structure Quarterly review of monitoring data, Technical Memorandum on recommended changes to pesticide regulations and statutes Completion Date Ongoing 2015 2015 Ongoing January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 9 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Principle – Policies, regulations, and funding need to support sustainable stormwater management To achieve sustainable stormwater management, re-­‐examination of regulatory and management structures is warranted. We must ensure regulations support the use of adaptive management and alternative control approaches for existing and new development. The public will support programs that address demonstrated water quality issues. This will require collaboration between agencies and industries to effect the biggest change for the lowest cost, as well as modification to regulatory requirements to accommodate beneficial uses of receiving waters that are deemed essential. Action 2.1 – Clarify Regulations Background Stormwater is a point source in name only. Stormwater is a non-­‐point source but is being addressed through a point source regulatory program (i.e., the NPDES program). Some of the compliance issues that MS4s are facing can be traced to the application of the current regulatory model, which is based on 30+ years of experience with point sources (i.e., wastewater), with limited acknowledgement for the non-­‐point source nature of stormwater (e.g., maximum extent practicable (MEP) and best management practice (BMP) concepts). Court cases have stipulated that stormwater is a point source and subject to the NPDES program, therefore the only option available to correct this interpretation is to clarify through rulemakings, or amend the Clean Water Act to refine the regulatory approach to better support the non-­‐point source nature of stormwater pollution. We believe this is a significant undertaking and will confer with all interested parties to develop a broad based consensus of how best to clarify regulation to reduce pollution in stormwater and improve the cost efficiency of stormwater programs. Goal: Propose rulemaking or legislation that clarifies stormwater as a non-­‐point source, and clearly outlines expectations of stormwater as different from wastewater and other point sources. Proposed Effort Step 1. Confer with national stormwater organizations (e.g., National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies, Natural Resources Defense Council and others) to explore ideas about rulemaking or legislation that would redefine stormwater as a non-­‐
point source of pollutants, or change how stormwater is permitted as a point source. Develop a consensus strategy with interested stakeholders to accomplish this objective. Step 2. Reach out to state and national governmental organizations (e.g., League of California Cities, County Associations of Government, etc.) to educate local and state elected officials on the issue. Coordinate with EPA and NGOs. Step 3. Implement strategy that would redefine stormwater as a non-­‐point source of pollutants. Lead: NACWA, WEF, NAFSMA, NLC, NACO Support: CASQA January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 10 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Schedule Step Action/Deliverable Completion Date 1 Confer with National Organizations and develop legislative strategy 2016 2 Educate Public officials 2016 3 Implement legislative strategy 2017 Action 2.2 – Articulate Stormwater Program Priorities Background Municipalities face many challenges in developing and implementing an effective and sustainable stormwater program that supports green infrastructure. Such challenges may be regulatory, technical, or financial in nature. We believe it is important to identify the water quality priorities that municipalities can best address so that resources are allocated accordingly. The first step in crafting a long-­‐term sustainable approach to stormwater management is to identify the challenges and then to identify strategies to address these challenges. The State Water Board can help provide guidance/policy to address critical water quality issues associated with stormwater. Currently, the State Water Board is addressing trash through amendments to the State Implementation Plan for Inland Surface Waters and has initiated efforts to develop a bacteria initiative relevant to wet weather conditions. The State Water Board is also developing a Storm Water Strategic Initiative that will help prioritize the State’s actions. Goal: To ensure the most critical water quality issues associated with stormwater are identified and a corresponding strategy developed to address the issue. Proposed Effort Step 1. Identify the highest priority issues for the stormwater program as a part of the Triennial Review process or the other mechanism (e.g., State Stormwater Policy – see Action 2.4, Step 4). Step 2. Engage stakeholders in a collaborative effort to prioritize the water quality issues associated with stormwater discharges relevant to the region or State. The effort may be led by any of the stakeholders (e.g., Regional Water Board, permittee, environmental NGOs). Step 3. Identify priorities of the region or state by considering impacts on beneficial uses, maximum benefit of the water body, water use opportunities, and other considerations that affect prioritization. Prioritize pollutants based on considerations. Step 4. Collectively develop strategies for high priority stormwater program issues. Such strategies may include developing consistent permit requirements, modifying Basin Plans, and providing guidance to support technical and regulatory issues. Lead: CASQA Support: State and Regional Water Boards January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 11 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Schedule Step 1 2 3 4 Action/Deliverable Completion Date Identify a mechanism to address high priority issues Ongoing Engage stakeholders to prioritize issues 2015 Identify high priority stormwater issues 2015 Develop strategies for identified issues through a collaborative process 2016 Action 2.3 – Augment and Implement Basin Plan Amendment Process Background Porter Cologne (Section 13240) provides an opportunity for the Regional Boards to periodically review their Basin Plans to ensure the Plans reflect the newest information/data, are current with State and Federal policies, and support the priorities of the Regional Water Board. Basin Plans were primarily developed in the 1970s and 1980s and as a result have limited consideration of wet weather issues. This action will review adopted water quality objectives and beneficial uses (i.e., water quality standards) to ensure they are applicable for wet weather conditions. Some Regional Water Boards have started to address this concern but with the incorporation of TMDLs into municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permits, this action will be designed to support those efforts. Goal: Modify water quality standards to reflect sustainable beneficial uses and the nature and impact of stormwater Proposed Effort Step 1. Initiate the Basin Plan amendment process or equivalent state or regional planning effort based on recommendations and priorities established under Actions 1.3 and 2.2 respectively. Step 2. Assess Water Quality Standards per the California Water Code Section 13241. Working with the State Water Board to develop an assessment method reflective of wet weather conditions and that would address the following factors to support a Basin Plan amendment: o
o
o
o
o
o
§13241(a): past, present, and probable future beneficial uses of water. One of the more difficult factors to evaluate and further guidance by the State is needed to assist Regional Boards in defining “existing” and “probable” uses. §13241(b): environmental characteristics of the hydrographic unit under consideration, including the quality of water available thereto. §13241(c): Water quality conditions that could reasonably be achieved through the coordinated control of all factors that affect water quality in the area. §13241(d): economic considerations. Another critical factor as there is significant disagreement between the discharger and environmental community regarding the method used to comply with this section. Others (Little Hoover Commission, California Council for Economic and Environmental Balance) have recommended that further guidance by the State is needed. §13241(e): the need for developing housing within the region. §13241(f): the need to develop and use recycled water. January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 12 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Step 3. Develop an implementation program consistent with §13242 to support revised Water Quality Standards including a schedule and monitoring program. Working with the State Water Board, develop a framework for defining the implementation program required to support the revised water quality standards. Step 4. Amend Basin Plans consistent with assessment and framework developed above for wet weather conditions. During the Triennial review provide input and data to support the reconsideration of water quality standards including assessment of current beneficial uses and application of water quality objectives during wet weather conditions. Lead: Regional Water Boards Support: CASQA Schedule Step 1 2 3 4 Action/Deliverable Completion Date Initiate Basin Planning statewide Ongoing Develop 13241 Assessment 2016 Develop 13142 Framework 2016 Amend Basin Plans Ongoing Action 2.4 – Develop Policies and Permitting Framework to Support Sustainable Stormwater Management Background EPA regulations, policies, and guidance provide the opportunity to address water quality issues through an adaptive management and sustainable process. EPA has recently adopted a strategy to support the adoption of green infrastructure as a means of supporting water quality and community development goals. These actions will provide policy guidance to assist MS4 and other permittees with an overall approach to protect water quality through an adaptive management process. This guidance may be provided in a Statewide Stormwater Policy, standard permit conditions, or equivalent document. Goal: Develop a regulatory framework for stormwater that will provide statewide consistency in permitting and TMDL implementation and support the implementation of sustainable stormwater programs. Provide definitions and requirements as needed to clarify expectations for MS4 programs. Ensure that the framework is implemented statewide. Proposed Effort Step 1. Identify constraints and inconsistencies. Confer with interested parties to identify the constraints and inconsistencies as well as benefits and challenges of existing policy and permitting efforts. Prioritize the challenges for subsequent attention in Step 2 below. It is likely that two of the most important challenges will be defining MEP and creating sustainable compliance pathways for TMDLs and receiving water limitations (RWL). Step 2. Define MEP, RWL and TMDL compliance. Stipulate the mandatory requirements for stormwater program implementation to define MEP using the work already completed by CASQA and the Regional Water Boards’ Executive Officers. Likewise, develop an adaptive January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 13 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions management approach for TMDL development and implementation and compliance with receiving water limitations. Step 3. Define baseline monitoring requirements. Convene stakeholders to clarify purpose of the monitoring effort, to clarify standard monitoring methods and procedures, and establish mandatory reporting requirements and format. Step 4. Develop a statewide policy for stormwater. The policy should support an approach that incorporates adaptive management, provides a logical and progressive pathway to water quality protection and promotes green infrastructure. As such the approach should progress from a narrative definition of technology based effluent limits to numeric based technology based effluent limits to narrative water quality based effluent limits (WQBELs) and ultimately and, if required, numeric WQBELs. Step 5. Incorporate Adaptive Management as a pathway for compliance with water quality standard and TMDLs into all MS4 NPDES permits. This approach would also include the need to provide options for reviewing and modifying TMDLs based on new information/technology, monitoring results, etc. Lead: State and Regional Water Boards Support: CASQA Schedule: Step 1 2 3 4 5 Action/Deliverable Completion Date Identify Constraints 2015 Define MEP, RWL, and TMDL compliance strategies 2016 Develop baseline monitoring requirements 2016 Develop statewide policy for stormwater 2017 Incorporate Adaptive Management as compliance pathway Ongoing Action 2.5 – Establish Guidance/Tools to Support Sustainable Stormwater Programs Background We need updated technical guidance to support the long-­‐term success of the stormwater program.. Some of the current guidance is dated and does not reflect new priorities of sustainable water use and a focus on low impact development / green infrastructure and true source control. It will be necessary to provide updated or additional guidance to address these priorities and strategies identified in Action 2.2. Goal: To ensure technical and regulatory guidance is provided to support sustainable stormwater programs. January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 14 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Proposed Effort Step 1. Update CASQA BMP Handbooks. As new information and technical advances take place the CASQA BMP Handbooks will need to be updated. Such updates should coincide with the updates of the relevant General Permit. Step 2. Develop Guidance for Regulatory Priorities. Pending the results of Action 2.2, it may be necessary to provide guidance to develop site specific objectives, develop technology based effluent limits, characterize natural sources, support a high flow suspension, or develop wet weather standards. Step 3 Update CASQA Program Effectiveness Assessment Manual. MS4s are continually trying to improve their stormwater programs both in effectiveness in addressing water quality issues and in efficiency in minimizing program costs. The CASQA program effectiveness assessment provides the basis for such improvements but should be revised to reflect the watershed approach currently being provided for in permits (see Action 2.6 below) that allow agencies to focus their resources on water quality priorities. Lead: CASQA Support: State and Regional Water Boards Schedule Step Action/Deliverable Completion Date 1 Update BMP handbooks Ongoing 2 Guidance for Regulatory Priorities Ongoing 3 Improve/Revise Program Effectiveness Manual 2015 Action 2.6 – Establish watershed based or equivalent program Background The National Research Council noted the greatest improvement to EPA’s stormwater program would be to convert to a watershed based permitting system. The Little Hoover Commission in California has also recommended the State emphasize a watershed-­‐based approach. Recent MS4 permits in California (e.g., Los Angeles countywide and San Diego countywide) have reflected a focus on watersheds. Goal: Develop process for implementing watershed based approaches for the MS4 program. Proposed Effort Step 1. Assess efforts in Los Angeles, Bay area, and San Diego to identify the benefits, the challenges, and any recommended changes. Step 2. Work with the State Water Board to incorporate watershed based planning into all MS4 NPDES permits. The permits should highlight the need to prioritize watershed based water quality issues and encourage implementation of stormwater programs at the watershed level. January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 15 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Step 3. Create opportunities for regional solutions. Initial stormwater permits discouraged regional solutions to water quality issues but more recently this approach has been updated and regional approaches are allowed. The State Water Board should be encouraged to find ways to incentivize regional solutions as part of the State’s Storm Water Strategic Initiative. Step 4. Create a pollutant trading/credit program framework. Water quality trading is an innovative approach to achieve water quality goals more efficiently and is especially suited for projects and programs that are watershed based and subject to a TMDL. A pilot project should be identified and implemented. Lead: CASQA Support: State and Regional Water Boards Schedule Step 1 2 3 4 Action/Deliverable Completion Date Conduct assessment of watershed programs 2015 Incorporate Watershed Planning into Permits Ongoing Create opportunities for regional solutions Ongoing Create pollutant trading framework 2015 Action 2.7 – Create Funding Opportunities Background Municipal stormwater systems are public facilities, but they differ from other public utilities such as water, sewer, gas, electric and trash in one key aspect: other utilities existed prior to the passage of Proposition 218 and are financially supported by service fees. By comparison, most stormwater programs rely on the public agency’s general funds. This presents a major challenge for elected officials to balance the funding of the stormwater program with other programs supported by the general fund, including such things as law enforcement, fire, paramedics, parks, street lighting, and libraries. Stable and sufficient revenue sources are required to support stormwater programs. The passage of AB 2403 provides an option for funding for the capital portion of projects that conserve or use stormwater. Implementing any of the potential available funding scenarios will be successful with broad public support. For the purpose of this action, it is assumed that either an exemption to, or vote under Proposition 218, must be undertaken. To implement this action, we will develop and coordinate the development of educational materials and information to inform the Governor’s Office, California State Legislators, and the regulated community on the fiscal issues public agencies face in complying with NPDES permit requirements using general fund resources. We will provide coordination among the MS4s to ensure that there is a unified voice promoting the same message to all of the identified audience. Goal: To develop and implement one or more viable funding options for municipalities to support their stormwater programs to completely or partially eliminate reliance on general funds. Proposed Effort Step 1. Determine an appropriate method(s) to fund stormwater programs. Options will include an amendment to Proposition 218, or a Proposition 218 vote for stormwater fees (statewide), January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 16 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions or developing a program based on producer fees or a combination of revenue sources. Following this determination, a technical committee will be formed to implement the preferred course of action. Step 2. Develop a message using the results of Action 3.2 to highlights the stormwater quality issues facing California, and specific information on required funding to achieve program goals. These documents will be used to help educate legislators whose districts are located in the region and key stakeholders in the region (local chambers of commerce, etc.). Step 3. Secure the support of key businesses, non-­‐governmental and trade organizations. Below is a partial list of organizations that need to be contacted: o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
California Building Industry Association and local chapters California Business Properties Association National Association of Industrial and Office Properties and local chapters Building Owners and Managers Association of California and local chapters International Council of Shopping Centers Associated General Contractors of California California Alliance for Jobs ACEC California Construction Employers Association CICWQ California Chamber of Commerce Local Chambers of Commerce Various non-­‐governmental organizations Water Agencies Southern California Stormwater Committee Step 4. Coordinate the development and distribution of information regarding the challenges of financing and maintaining improvements for stormwater infrastructure. Initiate contact with the following (partial list): o
o
o
o
Meet with the Governor’s Legislative Unit Meet with the State Water Board, Strategic Growth Council, others as identified Meet with any legislators that have introduced legislation that may provide solutions to the issue Ensure stakeholders are meeting with their State Assembly Members and State Senator. Lead: League of California Cities; California State Association of Counties Support: CASQA Schedule: Step Action/Deliverable 1–3 Two technical memorandums: Message Development, and Stakeholder Coordination 4 Technical Memorandum describing proposed funding plan January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Completion Date 2015 2015 Page 17 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Principle – Public awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the value of stormwater is required. Stormwater agencies need to educate the public about the value of water. Domestic water is relatively inexpensive and abundant in the U. S. The recurring drought and population increases have begun to strain the storage and delivery infrastructure in California and the southwest. CASQA believes that management of water resources in California must change. To make the necessary changes, we must have public support. Action 3.1 – Create opportunities for multiple agency and collaborative efforts to demonstrate the value of stormwater to the public Background The public is more likely to support infrastructure projects that are multi-­‐objective and multi-­‐benefit as compared to single-­‐purpose projects. The potential number of funding sources is greater for multi-­‐
objective projects. Multi-­‐objective projects are more complex owing to disparate funding sources, and the requirements of various public agencies. However, multi-­‐objective projects have additional benefits as compared to single use projects, and generally will have a comparatively higher return on investment for the public. An example would be a green street project that is also a complete street to enhance mobility, as well as safe routes to schools project. Goal: Establish and define a basic set of multi-­‐benefit projects and programs that a stakeholder agency can initiate. Proposed Effort Step 1. Identify stakeholder agencies to participate in this action. Potential candidate projects and programs we will consider: o Water Supply o Groundwater Recharge o Recreational Facilities o Transportation o Municipal Infrastructure Identify funding sources that each agency uses for capital improvements, programs, maintenance, and land acquisition and the limitations on the use of those funds. Step 2. We will identify at least one multi-­‐benefit project type or program that includes two or more agencies listed in Step 1 that can be implemented by municipalities or other stakeholders. We will create demonstration projects that can be implemented by Permittees statewide. For each multi-­‐benefit project or program, we will develop a detailed ‘road map’ or model manual for the project describing: o
o
o
o
o
January 2015 Approval processes Funding sources and limitations Benefits of project Preferred application environment Idealized schedule California Stormwater Quality Association Page 18 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Multi-­‐benefit projects should focus on urban infrastructure and include the following: o Transform existing flood control facilities to optimize use of stormwater o Day lighting of streams o Volume and flow reduction – hydromodification controls o Protect stream habitat Step 3. Publish a report on the findings of this action with completed project scenarios. Lead: CASQA Support: Agencies – To be determined Schedule Step 1 2 3 Action/Deliverable Identify Stakeholders to participate Identify Multi-­‐benefit projects – Produce Technical Memorandum summarizing results Publish report of findings Completion Date 2015 2016 2017 Action 3.2 – Create statewide message that establishes stormwater as a resource Background We believe the MS4 programs should have a consistent message to use in public education and outreach to create the best potential for change in public opinion and education. Ideally, a common message will be used across agencies as well including by the State Water Board, Regional Water Boards and Department of Water Resources. The statewide consistent message should be supported by the State and Regional Water Boards through MS4 Permits, as an option available to the Permittee for public education. Goal: Develop a message and outreach materials promoting stormwater as a resource for use in public education. Proposed Effort Step 1. Convene a steering committee to direct the development of the message. Steering committee members will be comprised of members from the following entities: o
o
o
o
Municipalities State and Regional Water Boards Department of Water Resources Water Districts Step 2. Draft a scope of work. The steering committee will draft a scope of work and request for proposal (RFP) for services to develop the outreach message, materials and method of dissemination to the public. The scope of services will include an action to identify the appropriate and unique target audiences, and messages and delivery customized to each target audience. Work will also include a public outreach plan that uses all traditional and January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 19 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions social media formats. Step 3. Implement the public outreach plan. We will coordinate outreach statewide with all cooperating agencies. Lead: CASQA Support: State Water Board, Caltrans, environmental NGOs Schedule Step Action/Deliverable Completion Date 1–2 Scope of Work and selection of consultant, completion of statewide message 2015 3 Incorporation of option into MS4 Permits, implement recommended plan 2016 January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 20 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions Vision Background The stormwater program is entering its third decade of implementation by MS4 programs. Permittees have made great strides to address stormwater and to minimize its impact on local receiving waters through focused outreach to the public, and an increased knowledge base on effective pollutant removal strategies. Municipal NPDES permits have evolved substantially, generally building on the original approach framed by the EPA for the Phase I program. The approach described in current Permits is to reduce pollutants in runoff to the maximum extent practicable through the implementation of best management practices. MEP was designed as a flexible technology-­‐based standard that would change over time to reflect evolving understanding of pollutant sources and stormwater treatment technologies. An additional requirement in permits is to comply with water quality standards, especially as implemented through TMDLs. The MEP approach has been applied by Permittees to both the built environment during redevelopment projects and the urbanizing fringe with new development projects, with varying levels of success. New development programs for control of runoff water quality from the urbanizing fringe have been relatively successful. Permittees have used low impact development (LID or green infrastructure) and end of pipe treatment (gray infrastructure) to improve water quality. Permittees have been less successful improving water quality from existing development. Traditional urban design principles resulted in a landscape that moves stormwater quickly off-­‐site for conveyance to receiving waters. Permittees have found that retrofit of the stormwater system with LID measures and end of pipe treatments in the existing environment is costly, technically difficult, and requires time to plan and significant resources to fund the capital improvement projects. Permittees have also found that it is not technically feasible to retrofit all existing development with treatment BMPs and they do not believe this would be the most environmentally and cost-­‐effective approach for improving water quality. We have identified a fundamental flaw in the current approach to improving water quality, which is that the municipalities have limited control over the generation and release of pollutants into the environment, and a limited number of cost-­‐effective tools to improve runoff water quality. The new outcome-­‐based Permit strategies developed by the Water Boards will require increased accountability of the Permittee, but the current technical constraints will limit improvements in receiving water quality. The stormwater program manager needs regulatory assistance along with new source control and treatment control tools to comply with Permit requirements. Drivers for the New Approach We have identified several drivers for change for the stormwater program. At the most basic level, we find the current program is failing to meet the goals of the Clean Water Act within a timeframe deemed reasonable by the stakeholders. We find the drivers for a new approach are: •
303(d) listings and TMDLs. More and improved monitoring has identified water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards. These water bodies are being listed as impaired under Section 303(d) of the CWA with pollutant-­‐specific waste load allocations incorporated into municipal stormwater NPDES permits. The number of 303(d) listed waters and the number of existing and proposed TMDLs are growing rapidly. The 2008-­‐2010 303(d) list in California has 3,500 waterway-­‐pollutant listings. Adding additional TMDL water bodies is ultimately unsustainable from both a regulatory and permittee (implementation) standpoint. •
Compliance with Water Quality Standards. As currently regulated in MS4 NPDES permits, municipal discharges must comply with water quality standards. This interpretation has been January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 21 Version 1 Vision and Strategic Actions recently been supported by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. This court’s decision has accelerated the need to identify a long-­‐term solution to stormwater management. •
Water quality objectives were initially developed to protect water bodies from the continuous and relatively homogenous discharges of wastewater. The receiving water quality standards do not reflect the dynamic conditions found in stormwater discharges, or the intermittent nature of the discharges. As a result, we find that Basin Plans are of limited value in defining standards for wet weather conditions; however, we are in non-­‐compliance with water quality standards. Permittees must be able to clearly communicate the need and consequences of inaction to the public, so that stormwater program resources can be prioritized along with other social programs funded by local and state governments. The public will not invest resources to correct ‘administrative’ water quality problems when no actual beneficial use impairments exist, or exist from natural sources. We find this problem to be particularly acute for sanitary quality standards, where body contact regulation is not a practical beneficial use during periods of high flows. •
Stormwater as a valuable resource. The current drought conditions in California have spotlighted the value of stormwater as part of the solution to providing a reliable and sustainable water supply. Thus we need to address stormwater more as an important resource and less as a source of pollution. •
Program Funding. We have not been able to dedicate enough resources for water quality. . Most stormwater programs are paid for with the general funds of cities and counties (primarily through property and local sales taxes). This presents a major challenge for elected officials to balance the funding of the stormwater program with other programs supported by the general fund, including such things as law enforcement, fire protection, and other essential services. •
Sustainable Infrastructure. In October 2014 EPA joined with others to support the Green Infrastructure Collaborative2. By joining the Collaborative, the signatory organizations commit to using the network to advance the adoption of green infrastructure as a means of supporting water quality and community development goals. These collective efforts will highlight the broad community benefits of green infrastructure including improved air quality, reduced energy use, mitigated climate change effects, and enhanced economic and social impacts. The Collaborative is intended to facilitate cooperation, coordination, and effective communication among the signatory organizations in a way that will encourage widespread adoption of green infrastructure where appropriate. 2
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi_partners.cfm January 2015 California Stormwater Quality Association Page 22