SUMMARY OF GALLATIN RIVER OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATER (ORW) DESIGNATION Presented to: Water Pollution Control Advisory Council August 31, 2006 Presented.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Stormwater Program Videoconference April 23, 2013 Bill Cole, Water Quality Standards Unit.
Advertisements

Presented to: Minnesota Chamber of Commerce October 1, 2012.
Watershed Staff Videoconference October 17, 2012.
A tool to protect Minnesota's waters Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Sept. 10, 2012.
Ministry of Environment Environmental Protection Division Presentation to CRD Sewage Forum, Sept. 26, 2005 Sewage is regulated in British Columbia by the.
Welcome! Water Pollution Control Advisory Council.
1 Effluent Guidelines for Construction Greg Davis USEPA
Bureau of Water Overview Wastewater issues Drinking water issues Wrap up topics.
What are our big water quality problems? Impaired waters: springs, lakes, rivers & streams Closed beaches Contaminated seafood.
Legislative Changes Affecting Water Quality at a Local Level October 2011 Robert Kollinger, P.E. Water Resources Manager Polk County Parks and Natural.
Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) Utah Sewer Management Program (USMP)
State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards Regulatory Authority Review and Concepts for a Statewide Order for Composting.
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services A Clean Water Agency Presented to the Environment Committee November 9, 2010 Information Item Master Water.
RIPDES Storm Water Program: Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s)
Mobile Washing Policy Florida Statutes Section contain the basic requirement for DEP regulation. Must be a stationary pollution source, such as.
Central Massachusetts Regional Stormwater Coalition Part 2 Sump Pump Discharge Policy September 26, 2013 Community Innovation Challenge Grant 2013.
Michele Robertson, PG Is Deep Injection a Disposal Option in Arizona? GATEKEEPER REGULATORY ROUNDUP 2011 February 16, 2011.
Chapter 5 Water. Point Source Pollution Comes from a specific source Can be monitored and controlled by a permit system.
California’s New Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Policy Richard Sanchez, REHS, MPH President California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health.
May 2005 Petition for Rulemaking for Regulation of CBM Development Bob Bukantis Water Quality Standards DEQ Planning Division.
Water Quality Standards for Protection of Irrigated Agriculture in the Powder River Basin Bob Bukantis MT Dept Environ Quality.
Rule Change Update MPCA 1/13/ Mid-Sized ISTS (MSTS)
Expedited Projects + Innovative Teamwork = Measurable Improvements to the Health of Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Estuaries.
The Compact  Legally enforceable contract among the Great Lakes States  Provided for in the U.S. Constitution  Ratification by State legislatures 
Substantive environmental law driven by European Council (summits) Council (of env ministers) –Approve Commission strategies Commission –Environmental.
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.
Water Quality Standards: Rulemaking Pipeline Adrienne Nemura Geosyntec Consultants US Conference of Mayors Water Council Washington, DC April 30, 2015.
WEKIVA BASIN ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM STUDY Bureau of Onsite Sewage Programs Division of Environmental Health Florida Department of.
Identifying and Visiting Small Businesses for Water Pollution Prevention Presented by: Richard Hoiland - City of Vancouver, WA NAHMMA Conference – Tacoma.
Implementation of Antidegradation Policies for Indiana Waters.
Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems: New Regulations & Issues for Localities Potomac Watershed Roundtable January 7, 2011 Thomas E. Crow, Director Division.
Lake Erie HABs Workshop Bill Fischbein Supervising Attorney Water Programs March 16, 2012 – Toledo March 30, Columbus.
Open Space Residential Development Bylaw Town of Rehoboth.
OH NO! WHAT DO WE DO NOW. WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU DISCOVER THAT YOU’VE NOT BEEN DOING SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO DO? THE STORY OF RCW WATER.
Introduction to PA Act 167 Stormwater Management Planning Little Juniata River Watershed April 21, 2005.
Table 3 SWMI – Water Matters –Topics – 1Dangerous Substances 2Forestry 3Septic Tanks (Unsewered Properties) Shannon International River Basin District.
Summit #1 San Juan County Shoreline Master Program Update March 1 st, 2 nd, and 3 rd
Nutrient Management in the Urban Landscape Rebecca Kluckhohn, P.E. Watershed Engineer West Metro Water Alliance Forum, May 18 th 2011 W W e n c k Engineers.
Gallatin Outstanding Resource Water (ORW): Background & Process Bob Bukantis.
Steve Harrison, Environmental Manager Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control -Mosquito Control Section.
Proposed Amendments to Chapter 32, Article V, Solid Waste Management, and to Chapter 38, Zoning Orange County Code Presented by the Orange County Environmental.
May 5, 2015 Water Resources Meeting Heather Gutherless Jefferson County Planning & Zoning
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Water Brock Tabor Nancy Sonafrank Alaska Forum on the Environment 2013.
Review of the Nipissar Lake Replenishment Project, Rankin Inlet, Nunavut September 25, 2014 NWB Hearing Presentation Type A Water License Amendment Application.
Regional Water Council Planning Update Dargan “Scott” Cole Hall Booth Smith & Slover, P.C. 191 Peachtree Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia
Integrated Constructed Wetlands Regulatory Aspects - the EPA’s role Aoife Loughnane Inspector, Environmental Licensing Programme Environmental Protection.
How Does Sprawl Affect Water Quality Eric Hammerling, Executive Director Farmington River Watershed Association.
Short and Long Range Water Supply Planning and Aquifer Performance Test (APT)
Stormwater Treatment and Flow-Control Requirements in Phase I and Phase II Municipal NPDES Permits Dan Cloak, Principal Dan Cloak Environmental Consulting.
Regulatory Developments Affecting Southwest Washington Land Use in Southwestern Washington Law Seminars International Vancouver, WA February 11, 2008 Bill.
Orange County Board of County Commissioners Update on USEPA Rulemaking for Numeric Nutrient Criteria Utilities Department January 26, 2010 Utilities Department.
Report of the NPDES Subcommittee. Conference Call Meetings July 8 and August 19 Mercury Discharges – Utility Request to Address Permit Requirements for.
WATER POLLUTION Chapter 11. Where does the pollution come from? Point source = single, identifiable source -can you point your finger at the polluter?
Oregon Department of Transportation Stormwater Management Initiative: Meeting New Challenges Presented by: William Fletcher, ODOT February 5, 2008.
KWWOA Annual Conference April 2014 Development of a Kentucky Nutrient Strategy Paulette Akers Kentucky Division of Water Frankfort, KY.
An Overview of our Community’s Stormwater Management Program
Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR) Community Systems Rychel McKenzie Jason Pushard December 2015.
1 Water Quality Antidegradation: Guidance to Implement Tier II Summary of Discussion: Review the Tier II Rule requirements. Clarify what feedback we are.
IDEM FIELD HEARING Renewal of ASU Operating Permit December 15 th, 2015 Protect Our Ground Water and the Indian Creek Watershed STOP!
What is Stormwater? Direct result of rainfall Recharges groundwater by infiltration Produces “runoff” (excess rainfall after infiltration) May be concentrated.
Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.
1 Staff Public Workshops Fall 2011 Policy for Siting, Design, Operation and Management of Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems San Luis Obispo: October.
WaterSection 3 Water Pollution Water pollution is the introduction into water of waste matter or chemicals that are harmful to organisms living in the.
Hydraulic Fracturing: Gas Drilling at What Cost? DAVID A. LUDDER 2012 Alabama Water Rally Camp Beckwith March 18, 2012.
The Dane County Regional Hydrologic Study. Conceptualized groundwater flow system for Dane County Source: Bradbury and others, 1999.
FUTURE REQUIREMENTS AND GOALS
Hydrosphere Notes Parts 4- Watersheds.
An example of Finland's approach to wastewater treatment for households in rural areas Kimmo Tiilikainen Minister of the Environment Finland
Clean Water Act (CWA) Purpose
MS4 OVERVIEW 2015.
Presentation transcript:

SUMMARY OF GALLATIN RIVER OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATER (ORW) DESIGNATION Presented to: Water Pollution Control Advisory Council August 31, 2006 Presented by: Eric Regensburger DEQ, Water Protection Bureau

Discussion Topics ORW LOCATION ORW RESTRICTIONS AFFECTED ACTIVITIES DRAFT EIS & ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION OF ORW DESIGNATION POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON DEVELOPMENT DUE TO ORW DESIGNATION

ORW Restrictions  REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN THE WATER QUALITY ACT  Cannot allow “…new or increased point source discharge that would result in a permanent [measurable] change in the water quality of an ORW”  Source has to meet all 3 criteria to be impacted by ORW designation  HIGHER LEVEL OF PROTECTION THAN UNDER NONDEGRADATION RULES  No authorizations to degrade  No “narrative” nonsignificant determinations

Affected Activities 1.NEW OR INCREASED SOURCES  Discharges that aren’t existing, or haven’t been approved, authorized, licensed or permitted by DEQ by the effective date of designation  Examples:  NEW PROPOSED DISCHARGE (new subdivision; lifting sanitary restrictions)  EXPANSION OF EXISTING DISCHARGES (increase of Big Sky Sewer permitted discharge load; expansion of a business such as a hotel)  Not Included:  REPLACEMENT WASTEWATER SYSTEM IN A NEARBY LOCATION

Affected Activities 2. POINT SOURCE  Direct discharges to Gallatin River (or to tributaries when the discharge will create permanent change in the Gallatin)  Ground water discharges with a direct hydrologic connection to surface water  Examples:  SINGLE-FAMILY SEPTIC SYSTEM WITH A DIRECT HYDROLOGIC CONNECTION TO GALLATIN RIVER  DISCHARGE PIPE FROM BIG SKY SEWER DIST.  Not Included:  LOGGING STORMWATER RUNOFF  ROAD CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF  RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES (fishing; rafting …)

Affected Activities 2. POINT SOURCE (…continued)  Direct Hydrologic Connection  BASED ON SITE HYDROGEOLOGY  POLLUTANT TRAVEL TIME TO RIVER IS BIGGEST FACTOR  AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS  HYDRAULIC GRADIENT,  HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,  DEPTH TO GROUND WATER,  FRACTURES  TIME OF TRAVEL DOESN’T PROVIDE ENOUGH TIME FOR ADEQUATE TREATMENT  AREAS OF DIRECT HYDROLOGIC CONNECTION IS TERMED THE “FOOTPRINT” IN DEIS

Affected Activities 3. PERMANENT SOURCES  Permanent [& measurable]  Use DEQ-7 trigger values as guide to “measurable” change  Examples:  SINGLE-FAMILY SEPTIC SYSTEM  COMMUNITY SEPTIC SYSTEM  MANY INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES  Not Included:  SHORT TERM AUTHORIZATIONS (CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER, SUCTION DREDGE, 318 TURBIDITY)

Draft EIS & Alternatives  3 ALTERNATIVES IN DEIS  No Action (no ORW designation)  Proposed Action (designate ORW)  Cumulative Impacts (incorporate some elements of ORW designation into future nondegradation reviews using existing rule authority)  PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE NOT IDENTIFIED

No Action Alternative  BER DOES NOT RECOMMEND ORW DESIGNATION  Current nondegradation review process continues  Each development reviewed separately with respect to trigger value impacts to surface water  DEQ could incorporate use of the footprint identified in DEIS for determining when surface water impact reviews are required  Each development reviewed cumulatively with surrounding sources with respect to ground water impacts

Proposed Action Alternative  BER INITIATES ORW DESIGNATION RULE-MAKING  Must still be approved by legislature …  DEQ reviews new discharges inside footprint and directly to Gallatin River cumulatively to maintain no permanent change in surface water quality (trigger value for nutrients)  No authorizations to degrade  No narrative standard review

Cumulative Impacts Alternative  BER RECOMMENDS NON-ORW ALTERNATIVE  Future nondegradation reviews use footprint defined in DEIS to review cumulative effects of new discharges to maintain no permanent change in surface water quality (trigger value for nutrients)  Authorizations to degrade allowed  Narrative standard reviews allowed

ORW Implementation  DEQ MAINTAINS TRACK OF ALL NEW APPROVALS  WHEN TRIGGER VALUE EXCEEDED NO MORE DISCHARGES INSIDE FOOTPRINT OR DIRECTLY TO RIVER  Trigger value exceedence based on calculations, not in-stream measurements  Under Current Zoning, 652 single family equivalents (SFE) allowed within the footprint  Using conventional or level 2 septic systems, 119 septic systems allowed within the footprint (phosphorus is controlling nutrient)

Potential Impacts on Development Due to ORW Designation  Reduce number of SFEs within footprint – allow only ~100 SFEs  Encourage alternative wastewater treatment and disposal inside footprint – allow >100 SFEs  Encourage development of new regional wastewater system(s) with disposal not regulated by ORW designation – allow up to all 652 SFEs  Encourage hookup to existing wastewater treatment system with disposal not regulated by ORW designation – allow up to all 652 SFEs

Potential Impacts on Development Due to ORW Designation (cont…)  Lots inside footprint without existing systems or previous state approval (including sanitary restriction lots) may not be able to get septic system on lot  “Mad Rush” for those first ~100 SFEs  If regional wastewater system developed, zoning could be changed (??) to allow >652 SFEs inside the footprint

Summary of Regulatory Changes ACTIVITYGALLATIN Current GALLATIN ORW TRIBS Current TRIBS ORW MPDES (surface water discharge) Nonsig. change allowed. Authorization to degrade allowed Nonsig change allowed until T.V. reached. Then no new/increased permanent point sources. No auth. to degrade. Nonsig. change allowed. Authorization to degrade allowed Nonsig change allowed until T.V. reached. Then no new/inc. perm. point sources that cause meas. change in Gallatin Authorization to degrade allowed Groundwater Discharge (inside footprint) Nonsig. change allowed. Authorization to degrade allowed Nonsig change allowed until T.V. reached. Then no new/increased permanent point sources. No auth. to degrade. Nonsig. change allowed. Authorization to degrade allowed Nonsig change allowed until T.V. reached. Then no new/inc. perm. point sources that cause meas. change in Gallatin Authorization to degrade allowed Groundwater Discharge (outside footprint) Nonsig. change allowed. Auth to degrade g.w. allowed Nonsig. change allowed. Auth to degrade g.w. allowed Nonsig. change allowed. Auth to degrade allowed Nonsig. change allowed. Auth to degrade allowed

QUESTIONS ?