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 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 1 st –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