Transcript 2013 Alaska Forum on the Environment Antidegradation Powerpoint

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Water
Brock Tabor
Nancy Sonafrank
Alaska Forum on the Environment
2013
Antidegradation
 Overview of today’s presentation:
 What are Water Quality Standards?
 What is “Antidegradation?”
 What is the Antidegradation Workgroup?
 What are the Workgroup recommendations?
 What happens next?
2
Clean Water Act 101
 Passed by U.S. Congress in 1972 to address water
pollution issues
 Each state must develop Water Quality Standards
3
Water Quality Standards
Water Quality Standards are:
 The foundation of state/tribal water quality-based
pollution control programs under the Clean Water
Act
 Are to protect public health or welfare, enhance the
quality of the water and serve the purposes of the
Clean Water Act
4
Water Quality Standards are composed
of three main parts
1.
Designated Uses – how water is used (e.g.
recreational, industrial, aquatic life)
2. Criteria (numeric and narrative limits)
3. Antidegradation (protects high quality waters)
5
Foundation of a Water Quality Standard
Water Quality
Standard
Designated
use(s)
Antidegradation
Criteria
6
What’s a “Designated Use?”
 Designated Uses include:
 Water supply (e.g. Drinking water)
 Water recreation
 Growth and propagation of fish
 Harvesting for consumption
 Uses exist for Fresh AND Marine waters
7
Water Quality Criteria
 Level of pollutant that will support the designated
use
 Based on a dose and a duration of exposure
 Example:
 Use  growth and propagation of fish, shellfish, other
aquatic life, and wildlife

Criteria  total aromatic hydrocarbons (TAH) must be less
than 10 micrograms per liter (10 parts per billion) to
maintain use
8
Antidegradation- Focus of today’s talk
Antidegradation is: A process for determining whether
and to what extent the quality of high quality water
can be lowered towards water quality criteria. Only
allows for degradation if you can ensure that…
• Existing/designated uses are maintained
• Quality will not be less than state criteria
• Lowering of existing quality is necessary for important
social or economic development
9
Antidegradation
 “Tier 1 protection” –Maintain and protect existing uses
for all waters
 “Tier 2 protection” – our focus today
 High quality water
 Most waters in Alaska
 “Tier 3 protection”
 Outstanding National Resource Waters (ONRWs)
 Only allow for temporary degradation
10
Two Examples of High Quality (Tier 2)
(protective threshold)
(low pollutant concentration)
Dissolved Oxygen
Metal Concentration
(concentration)
Baseline for High Quality Water
Water Quality Criterion
(protective threshold)
0
11
Permitting Example
 EXAMPLE: Sewage treatment plant discharges to a
river:
 The river is designated for water recreation
 Recreational criterion is 200 fecal coliforms per 100
milliliters
 Baseline (background) concentration is 20 fecal
coliforms
 Can fecal coliforms be added to the river?
12
Policy & Implementation Methods
 Clean Water Act requires
 Antidegradation Policy
 Antidegradation Implementation Methods
 DEC has
 Antidegradation Policy - 18 AAC 70.015, adopted in 1997
 Interim Implementation Procedures (2010)
 Final implementation methods proposed by the end of
2013 in regulation
13
Antidegradation Workgroup
 Role:
 Advisory in nature
 Inform regulation process
 Representing a variety of interests
 A process oriented effort
 Tasks
 Evaluate seven DEC-identified issues that can influence
how regulations are crafted
 Explore whether other options exist
 Produce a Final Report for DEC to consider
14
Antidegradation Workgroup
 Workgroup Process:
 Compare and evaluate options based on other state
approaches and/or experience in Alaska
 Identify preferred elements for Alaska
 Assemble elements into recommendations included
in the Workgroup report
 Provide recommendation(s) for draft regulatory or
statutory elements
15
Antidegradation Workgroup
 Meetings:
 Meetings were held in Anchorage and open to the
general public
 Public comment took place at the end of morning and
afternoon sessions
 Outcomes:
 Minutes and products produced as a result of the
meetings are publicly available via DEC website
 Final Workgroup Report is available on DEC website-
www.dec.alaska.gov/water.wqsar/Antidegradation
16
Seven Issues the Workgroup addressed
 Issue #1: What Triggers an Antidegradation
Review?
 Issue #2: What information is needed to determine
Baseline Water Quality?
 Issue #3: How are Outstanding National Resource
Waters (ONRWs) designated?
17
Seven Issues the Workgroup addressed
 Issue #4: Tier 2 Analysis- How should DEC evaluate
important social or economic development of a
project?
 Issue #5: Tier 2 Analysis: What level of alternative
analysis is necessary?
 Issue #6: How are waters ranked as Tier 1 and Tier 2?
 Issue #7: Should DEC define significant and/or de
minimis degradation?
18
What Triggers an Antidegradation Review?
 What waters should Antidegradation apply to?
 What CWA activities trigger a review process?
 Is an antidegradation review only needed for new
discharges?
 What about existing permits that didn’t originally have
an antidegradation review (pre-1997)?
19
What Triggers an Antidegradation Review?
Recommendations
 Antidegradation requirements will apply to Waters
of the U.S. in Alaska (surface but not groundwater)
 Only activities regulated by DEC under CWA §401,
402, and 404 should be subject
 Use existing processes when possible
20
What Triggers an Antidegradation Review?
(cont.)
 All activities are subject to Tier 1 antidegradation
reviews  all waters should meet the designated
use criteria
 Tier 2 antidegradation requirements should apply
only to new or expanded discharges
 Documentation of Tier 1 and Tier 2 analysis will
occur during the existing permit and fact sheet
drafting process
21
What Information is needed to determine
Baseline Water Quality?
 How much info is needed from a permit applicant?
 What does the baseline water quality tell the DEC?
 How do you make a determination if you do not
already have baseline information?
22
What Information is needed to determine
Baseline Water Quality?
Recommendations
 DEC should retain the existing permitting approach
 DEC should begin with the assumption that waters
should be protected at the Tier 2 level
 DEC should consider all reasonable, foreseeable uses
of the waterbody when determining its assimilative
capacity
23
How are Waters Ranked as Tier 1 and Tier 2?
 What is the basis for tier ranking?
 Waterbody by waterbody;
 Parameter by parameter; or
 Hybrid approaches
 When a waterbody/parameter is near the water
quality criteria, how is the tier determined?
24
How are Waters Ranked as Tier 1 and Tier 2?
Recommendation
 DEC should use a parameter-by-parameter
approach for Tier 1 & 2
 DEC should use a Waterbody approach for Tier 3
25
Should DEC Define Significant and/or de
minimis Degradation?
Background
 De minimis refers to a small or non-substantial
lowering of receiving water quality without having to
undergo an antidegradation analysis
 Designated uses in the waterbody will be protected
26
Should DEC Define Significant and/or de
minimis Degradation?
 How can assimilative capacity be calculated given the
limited water quality data in Alaska?
 What about cumulative degradation from multiple
discharges?
 Presumptive compliance – should certain categories of
facilities be exempt from analysis?
27
Should DEC Define Significant and/or de
minimis Degradation?
Recommendations
 DEC should NOT adopt a de minimis approach
 New permits or changes in existing permits will trigger
an antidegradation review
 DEC retains discretion on the level of detail required
for a Tier 2 antidegradation review
28
Tier 2 Analysis – How Should DEC Evaluate
Whether a Project Provides Important
Social or Economic Development
 What factors constitute “important”?
 Information required of applicants?
 What level of review and documentation is
needed?
 Should the level of review and documentation
vary based on potential risk?
29
Tier 2 Analysis: Social/Economic
Importance?
Recommendations
 Can be Social or Economic
 Social benefits.



Community Services
Public health and safety
Infrastructure improvements
 Economic benefits.



Employment
Tax base impact
Transportation network access
Courtesy: Eklutna
Water Treatment
Plant.
30
Tier 2 Analysis: What Level of Alternatives
Analysis is Necessary?
 An Alternative Analysis is:
“the proposed degradation to water quality is
“necessary” and the methods of pollution prevention
control and treatment are the most effective and
reasonable.”
 What information should DEC be using to determine
this?
31
Tier 2 Analysis: What Level of Alternatives
Analysis is Necessary?
Recommendations
 DEC should use the term “practicable” since it accounts for
“available and capable of being done after taking into
consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of
overall project purposes.”
 DEC should use all information available
 Applicant should be required to provide a range of alternatives
 Range should be reasonable
32
How are Outstanding National Resource
Waters (ONRWs) Designated?
 What types of waters should be designated as
ONRWs?
 What process should be used to nominate, evaluate,
and designate an ONRW?
 How would this affect permitted activities on that
waterbody?
33
How are Outstanding National Resource
Waters (ONRWs) Designated?
Recommendations
 ONRWs should be waters that are unique to Alaska difficult to compare with waters in lower 48
 Nomination process: Keep it simple
 DEC should perform an initial completeness review of
application
34
How are Outstanding National Resource
Waters (ONRWs) Designated?
Recommendations (cont.)
 A multi-agency board should be created to
evaluate nominations
 The legislature may be involved via:
 Direct action
 Delegating decision-making authority to DEC
 Nominations will be reviewed periodically (e.g.
every three years)
35
Now What?
 Continue to conduct Outreach to different stakeholder
groups
 DEC is currently drafting regulations based in part on
workgroup recommendations
 The Draft Regulations will be made available for public
review and comment by the end of 2013
36
Staying Involved
 Website:
http://dec.alaska.gov/water/wqsar/Antidegradation
 Antidegradation List Serve:
http://list.state.ak.us/soalists/DEC.Water.Quality.Antidegradation
/jl.htm
 Water Quality Standards List Serve:
http://list.state.ak.us/soalists/DEC_WaterQualityStandard/jl.htm
 Wastewater Discharge (APDES) List Serve:
http://dec.alaska.gov/water/npdes/npdes_email_list.htm
37
Thank you for your time!
Thoughts? Suggestions?
Questions?
We want to hear from you!
38