1. N ORTHEAST W ISCONSIN S TORMWATER C ONSORTIUM (NEWSC) J ESSICA S CHULTZ - D IRECTOR A PPLYING E NVIRONMENTAL S CIENCE & P OLICY IN THE N ONPROFIT S ECTOR

2. S TORMWATER D ISCHARGE P ERMIT

3. R EGULATORY R EQUIREMENTS B ACKGROUND The Federal Clean Water Act of 1972

4. R EGULATORY R EQUIREMENTS B ACKGROUND Stormwater Discharge Permit Program Rules published in 1988 Phase I – Industrial Stormwater Discharge Permits Phase II – Construction Activities disturbing 5 acres or more Phase III – Municipal Stormwater Discharge Permits in 2 phases 1.Phase I (cities over 100,000) – 1990’s 2.Phase II (cities 10,000 – 99,999) - 2005

5. W HAT IS AN MS4? MS4 - Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Any system of open or closed pipes or ditches that carry runoff from rainwater or snowmelt (not sanitary sewer discharge) Owned & operated by a government entity (Town, City, Village, State, County, etc.)

6. R EGULATORY R EQUIREMENTS B ACKGROUND To meet the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act MS4s are permitted in Wisconsin through NR 151 & 216

7. N ORTHEAST W ISCONSIN S TORMWATER C ONSORTIUM  in 2004  in response to the coming Phase II Stormwater Permit  as a subsidiary of the Fox-Wolf Watershed Alliance which holds the 501c3 NEWSC was created

8. N ORTHEAST W ISCONSIN S TORMWATER C ONSORTIUM  Fostering Partnerships  Sharing Information  Administrative Efficiency  Pooling Financial Resources

9.  Menomonee River Group  Southeast Wisconsin Clean Water Network  La Crosse Urban Stormwater Group  Madison Area Municipal Storm Water Partnership  North Central Wisconsin Stormwater Coalition  Waukesha County Storm Water Information and Education Partnership  Chippewa Valley Stormwater Forum  North East Wisconsin Stormwater Consortium R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION

10. B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION

11.  Updates on Rules & Regulations B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION

12.  Standardized sample ordinance language

13. B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION  Simplified guidance and procedures / processes

14.  A Larger Voice B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION

15.  Use of developed brand & materials for stormwater education.

16. B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION  Shared broadcast media – radio & television, billboards

17. B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION  Exhibiting and Education

18. B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION  Training  Employees  Business/Industry

19.  Opportunity to network with neighboring communities B ENEFITS OF R EGIONAL C OLLABORATION

20. T OTAL M AXIMUM D AILY L OADS

21. W HAT ’ S A TMDL? A TMDL is the maximum amount of a particular pollutant that a water body can receive while still meeting water quality standards. TMDL – Total Maximum Daily Load

22. W HY DO WE NEED A TMDL? The Federal Clean Water Act requires all “impaired waters” to have TMDLs. Impaired waters are waters that are not meeting expectations for fish and aquatic life, recreation, public health and welfare and wildlife. Currently there are more than 700 rivers, streams and lakes on Wisconsin’s list of impaired waters. Algae growth in lake resulting from too much phosphorous

23. I NFORMATION U SED TO D EVELOP THE L OWER F OX R IVER TMDL Land Use

24. I NFORMATION U SED TO D EVELOP THE L OWER F OX R IVER TMDL Sources of Total PhosphorousSources of Total Suspended Solids

25. W HAT HAPPENS AFTER A TMDL IS SET ? 1.WDNR determines how to achieve the reduction needed. 2.Allowable amounts of pollution are allocated to permitted industries, municipalities and wastewater treatment plants. 3.Updates to individual permits are made to account for the reduction needed to meet the TMDL. A TMDL determines the allowable amounts of a particular pollutant in a certain water body. If the amount of that pollutant entering a water body exceeds the TMDL then …

26. H OW M IGHT A TMDL AFFECT Y OUR MUNICIPALITY?  Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facility  Municipal Stormwater System For many communities affected by a TMDL, large reductions must be met by both the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facility and the Municipal Stormwater System – this increased reduction has the potential to come at a high cost for both facets. Fox River in Kimberly, June 2007. Photo credit Bruce Cleland, Tetra Tech

27. H OW CAN Y OUR M UNICIPALITY MEET TMDL R EQUIREMENTS ? Example: Currently, XX,XXX tons per year of Phosphorous (TP) are loaded into the Example River. Best Management Practices WDNR determined that the TMDL allocates XX,XXX tons per year of TP. A XX% reduction.

28. H OW CAN Y OUR M UNICIPALITY MEET TMDL R EQUIREMENTS ? Example: Currently, XX,XXX tons per year of Phosphorous (TP) are loaded into the Example River. New options to meet permit requirements:  Water Quality Trading  Adaptive Management WDNR determined that the TMDL allocates XX,XXX tons per year of TP. A XX% reduction. Fox River at the Bay of Green Bay, April 2011. Photo credit Steve Seilo, Photodynamix

29. M EETING PERMIT OPTIONS OPTIONBMPsWater Quality TradingAdaptive Management AVAILABILITYAvailable to all permit holders Available to NR 217 permit holders (wastewater) NR 216 permit holders (stormwater) are able to partner if available Ponds, Sweeping, Rain Gardens, Bio- filters, plant upgrades Using trading ratios, set by DNR, purchase credits for lbs. removed by BMP of another stakeholder – could be a WWTF, Agriculture or another community. Create and implement a plan to meet the impaired waterbody’ s water quality criteria. This may mean a combination of bricks & mortar projects and partnering with agriculture to install BMPs. GOALEnd goal to reach permit requirements End goal to reach to permit requirements End goal to reach water quality criteria Potentially highest cost / least risk Potentially lower cost / less risk than AM Potentially lowest cost / highest risk Regional collaboration for highest success rate

30. F OX -W OLF W ATERSHED A LLIANCE FWWA is an independent, non-profit organization that identifies issues and advocates effective policies and actions to protect, restore and sustain the water resources of Wisconsin’s Fox-Wolf River Basin.

31.  Contract with 5 WWTFs  Green Bay  Heart of the Valley  Appleton  Grand Chute/Menasha West  Neenah/Menasha Adaptive Management Economic Feasibility Study  Contract with McMAHON Associates

32. S TAKEHOLDER C OMMUNICATION E FFORTS

33. Photo Credit: Capital Times

34. S TAKEHOLDER C OMMUNICATION E FFORTS

36. Fox River at the Bay of Green Bay, April 2011. Photo credit Steve Seilo, Photodynamix