state of texas coastal nonpoint source pollution …
TRANSCRIPT
June 20, 2019
A publication funded in part by a Texas Coastal Management Program Grant/Cooperative Agreement from the National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Texas General Land Office and the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its sub-agencies.
STATE OF TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMPROGRAM FOR: WATERSHED PROTECTION, SITE DEVELOPMENT, EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, NEW DEVELOPMENT AND ROADS/HIGHWAYS/BRIDGES IN THE 6217 COASTAL MANAGEMENT AREA
CONTENTSExecutive Summary 6
I. Introduction 9
Management Area StatisticsMajor Land Preservation Types PopulationImpervious CoverCoastal EnvironmentSlopesSoils/GroundwaterDrainage DistrictsRoads/Highways/BridgesUrban Drainage SystemsHurricane Impacts on Potential Development and Re-DevelopmentSea Level RiseSummary
II. Management Area Summary 11
Texas Coastal Resiliency Master PlanLand Acquisitions to Protect Sensitive AreasProjects that Protect Sensitive Areas and Prevent ErosionTexas Coastal Best Management Practices Website and Guidance ManualAransas County LID Stormwater Guidance ManualState ProgramsWatershed Protection Plans, Watershed Characterization, and TMDL Implementation PlansRoad, Highway, Bridge Retrofit Projects
III. Recent and Ongoing Activities that Protect Water Quality 24
Texas Coastal Stormwater Management Guidance ManualOutreach Program and Technical AssistanceTexas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan ImplementationSupport Land Acquisition and Conservation Easement ProgramsExtension of Existing State ProgramsContinuation of Existing WPPs, TMDLs and Funding for New Watershed Plans
IV. Proposed Program to Respond to Outstanding Conditions: Watershed Protection, Site Development, Existing Development, New Development, and Roads/Highways/Bridges 30
© DREW KOLB, FLICKR
Watershed ProtectionSite DevelopmentExisting DevelopmentNew DevelopmentRoads/Highways/Bridges
V. Program Summary by Management Measure 39
VI. Implementation Schedule 42
Process Linking the Implementing Agency with the Enforcement Agency and the Commitment to Use Enforcement Where NecessaryOther Texas Enforcement Mechanisms
VII. Enforcement 44
LIST OF TABLES
Figure 1 State Agencies that Coordinate/Implement the Texas Coastal NPS Program 9
Figure 2 Texas Coastal Nonpoint Program Management Area 10
Figure 3 Coastal Population Density 12
Figure 4 Natural Environments Along the Texas Coast 14
Figure 5 Drainage Districts Along the Texas Coast 16
Figure 6 Depression Storage Areas in Aransas County 17
Figure 7 Constructed Drainage System in Cameron and Willacy Counties 18
Figure 8 Constructed Drains in Drainage Districts 18
Figure 9 Typical Coastal County Roadway 20
Figure 10 Upper Coast Storm Surge Inundation 21
Figure 11 Lower Coast Storm Surge Inundation 21
Figure 12 Destroyed and Flooded Structures in Rockport and Port Aransas 22
Figure 13 Upper Coast Sea Level Rise Inundation 23
Figure 14 Lower Coast See Level Rise Inundation 23
Figure 15 WPPs and TMDLs in the Management Area 28
LIST OF FIGURES
Table ES-1 Solutions to Address Pollution from Urban Runoff in the Coastal Zone Boundary
7
Table 1 Management Area Statistics 11
Table 2 Protected Areas in the Management Area 11
Table 3 Management Area (MA) Population from 1990 to 2010 13
Table 4 Slopes in the Texas Coastal Counties 15
Table 5 Roads, Highways, and Bridges within the Management Area 19
Table 6 Proposed CNPS Program in the Management Area 31
Table 7 CNPS Program Schedule 32
Table 8 Target non-MS4 Cities to Receive Guidance Manual Technical Assistance 36
ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS
BMP Best Management Practice
CEPRA Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act
CMP Coastal Management Program
CNPS Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program
CWA Clean Water Act
CZARA Coastal Zone Area Reauthorization Act
CZMA Coastal Zone Management Area
DO Dissolved Oxygen
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GLO Texas General Land Office
GSI Green Stormwater Infrastructure
LID Low Impact Development
MA Management Area
MM Management Measures
Guidance Manual Coastal Stormwater Management Manual
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NOAA National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration
NPS Nonpoint Source Pollution
NRDA Natural Resource Damage Assessment
NWR National Wildlife Refuge
Plan Coastal Resiliency Master Plan
RESTORE Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act
SLOSH Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes
SWMM EPA
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TNC The Nature Conservancy
TPWD Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
TSS Total Suspended Sediment
TSSWCB Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
TWDB Texas Water Development Board
TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation
TWRI Texas Water Resources Institute
USACE U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WPP Watershed Protection Plan
WMA Wildlife Management Area
6 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this document is to describe the State of Texas (State) program to address watershed protection, site development, existing development, new development, and roads/highways/bridges in the Texas Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program (Coastal NPS Program) 6217 Management Area.
The Management Area, also known as the Coastal Zone Boundary, is delineated by the Texas Administrative Code, Title 31, §503.1, and encompasses 8,849,192 acres (13,827 square miles (an area larger than the State of Maryland)) and is generally described as the area seaward of roads that run parallel to the coast, include areas within one mile of tidal rivers, and extends approximately 10 miles offshore into the Gulf. The Management Area partially covers 18 counties and is home to over 1,750,000 people, or just over 6 percent of Texas’ population, as determined in the 2010 census. Of these 1.75 million people, approximately 85 percent live in just the Port Arthur, Houston, Galveston, Corpus Christi, and Brownsville areas. These urban areas and others are currently regulated through the State’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) program which covers about 92 percent of the coastal population.
The State, through a partnership with the Texas General Land Office (GLO) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), has already taken steps to implement a voluntary program that will meet the requirements of the Coastal Zone Area Reauthorization Act (CZARA), Section 6217. The State has:
• Developed a guidance document for new development and site development;• Engaged stakeholders and developed a priority list of communities to adopt guidance documents;• Established a Coastal BMP Website to educate residents, municipal staff, and elected officials on
the importance of reducing nonpoint source (NPS) pollution;• Provided grant funding to coastal communities through the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) 319(h)
and the Coastal Management Program;• Acquired land in partnership with Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) such as the 17,351
acre Powder Horn Ranch near Port Lavaca to protect marshes, grasslands, and woodlands; and • Completed the first phase of the Texas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan that identified over 500
projects and acquisitions to protect natural resources and the natural environments along the Texas coast.
The five management measures, watershed protection, site development, existing development, new development, and roads/highways/bridges, all share common solutions in controlling pollution and runoff. Due to the connectivity of these management measures, we have combined them into one document, and propose the following tasks, projects, and activities to address them. The State will:
• Disseminate and encourage utilization of the recently completed Guidance for Sustainable Stormwater Drainage on the Texas Coast that includes a model ordinance example for local governments;
• Continue an outreach program based on previous TCEQ NPS program activities including the provision of technical assistance to promote the adoption of the guidance manual;
• Support the implementation of the GLO’s Texas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan that was completed in March 2019, which identified over 500 programs, projects, and land acquisitions to protect coastal resources, waterbodies, and infrastructure with priority projects targeting the protection of nearly 47,300 acres;
• Continue to support land acquisition and conservation easement programs funded by the State, Federal Government, and NGOs;
7
• Extend existing state programs that address these management measures into the foreseeable future;
• Continue working on Watershed Protection Plans (WPPs) and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Implementation Plans being developed or implemented in the 6217 Coastal Management Area; and
• Coordinate with county governments to encourage road and highway staff to participate in Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Local Government Program training.
The purpose of the guidance manual is to provide guidance to communities in the Texas Coastal Zone on the management of stormwater runoff from new development, existing development, and roads. Use of this guidance manual does not replace regulatory requirements. There are separate regulatory programs for MS4s and CWA Section 404. Federal, state, and local regulatory requirements would still apply.
An important consideration when developing the guidance manual for total suspended sediment (TSS) and runoff management was to ensure that it did not place undue burdens on small, rural Texas coastal communities in comparison to the requirements of their larger, urban neighbors. The reason for this is that the 6217 guidance exempts all municipalities that operate under an MS4 permit for the New Development Management Measure. The Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit does not require structural post-construction stormwater treatment or volume reduction in MS4 permits. It is important to develop a flexible, incentivized post construction stormwater management program in growing communities that can rely on the existing low levels of development, generally flat terrain that creates slow channel velocities, and vegetation to achieve the New Development Management Measure targets. This guidance manual was developed so that local communities could use sections of the guidance manual or use it as a wholesale approach.
Table ES-1 connects the proposed activities to control urban runoff, to the individual management measures. This table illustrates how each program, project, or activity provides water quality protection consistent with the CZARA 6217(g) requirements for urban runoff, outside an MS4 jurisdiction.
Program/Project/Activity ED ND SD WP R/H/B ImplementationPeriod
Coastal Stormwater Management GuidanceManual and Model Ordinances
X X X X XPrior to 15-Year Program Period
Coastal Stormwater Management Guidance Manual Distribution
X X X X X Year 1
Outreach Program - Coordination with municipalities, counties, WPPs, TMDLs, and technical assistance to target communitiesto seek Guidance Manual adoption
X X X X X Year 1-15
Land Acquisition - public, private, NGO X X Year 1-15
Promote and track TxDOT training to Countyroad staff
X Year 1-5
Retrofit Planning with local governments X X Year 1-15
Coastal Resiliency Master PlanImplementation
X X X Year 1-15
Table ES-1 Solutions to Address Pollution from Urban Runoff in the Coastal Zone Boundary
8 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Program/Project/Activity ED ND SD WP R/H/B ImplementationPeriod
Extension of Existing State Programs
Year 1-15
Coastal Management Program X X X X X
TPWD Farm and Ranch Lands ConservationProgram
X
Beach Access and Dune Protection X X X
Adopt-A-Beach Program X
Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act X X
WPP and TMDL Implementation X
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act X
LEGENDED = Existing DevelopmentND = New DevelopmentSD = Site Development WP = Watershed ProtectionR/H/B = non-TxDOT Roads/Highways/BridgesSee the detailed Implementation Schedule in Section VI.
In summary, with 1,534,300 acres of the Management Area involved in a WPP or TMDL, combined with the protection from development of 1,578,997 acres of land to preserve habitat and water quality, the State has developed a strong program foundation to manage NPS pollution. The overlap of WPP/TMDL areas with land protected from development was determined to be 141,058 acres. The program set forth in this document will improve water quality that will support recreation and economic development while creating a resilient coastal region.
9
I. INTRODUCTIONCorrespondence with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) indicated that in order to meet the outstanding conditions related to CZARA NPS management measures (MMs) for new development, site development, existing development, watershed protection, and roads/highways/bridges, the State must:
1. Include plans and activities in conformity with 6217(g) guidance, 2. Strengthen the description of voluntary or incentive-based programs to encourage
implementation, 3. Identify the mechanisms or processes linking the implementation and enforcement agencies,
and 4. Strengthen the commitment to use enforcement authority when necessary.
The State’s program to address the outstanding measures is presented in Sections 4 and 5. Due to the connectivity of these MMs in managing NPS pollution, the proposed program defines the linkage between the MMs and how they will function together to deliver a comprehensive Coastal NPS Program. The State will direct its efforts to the appropriate jurisdictions for each MM within the Management Area in the implementation of a cohesive and efficient program. This includes regulatory components that communities can consider when developing incentives and ordinances. Ultimately, the program will be linked to the enforcement authority inherent in the Texas Water Code, Section 26.121.
The Texas Coastal NPS Program is a partnership with multiple agencies who work together to implement the MMs. Figure 1 illustrates the agencies and primary activities they lead related to coastal NPS. Figure 2 delineates the Management Area, water features, and other aspects of this region.
RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS• Lead agency for Section 401 water quality
certifi cations for oil and gas exploration and development activities
TEXAS PARKS & WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
• Reviews Section 404 and 401 permits and wetland certifi cations
• Enhance, conserve and create wetlands• Enforces boat sewage rules• Technical and fi nancial assistance
TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE• Lead CMP agency• Administers Coastal NPS Program• Manages beach/dune systems• TMDL review for 62.17g• Sets conditions for waterfront facilities• Technical and fi nancial assistance
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
• Manages and implements NPS controls for construction and maintenance of state roads, highways and bridges
• Technical assistance
TEXAS STATE SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION BOARD
• Manages agricultural and silvicultural NPS• Develops, certifi es and implements
WQMPs*• WAP, TMDL and WPP development• Technical and fi nancial assistance
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
• Manages urban & other non-agricultural NPS
• WAP, TMDL, WPP development• Conducts Section 401 certifi cation • Enforcement• Data collection and technical & fi nancial
assistance
TEXAS COASTAL NPS PROGRAM
• Projects/activities • Issues coordination• Tracking and reporting• Data review and coordination
Figure 1 - State Agencies that Coordinate/Implement the Texas Coastal NPS Program
10 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Figure 2 – Texas Coastal Nonpoint Program Management Area
11
II. MANAGEMENT AREA SUMMARY The following tables and graphics illustrate the wide range of natural environments along the Texas Coast, the population within the Management Area, urban growth patterns, and protected areas that can limit future development and improve stormwater runoff quality management through natural processes.
Water Features - Gulf of Mexico, bays and estuaries, lakes, and reservoirs. Excludes rivers and streams with a total length of 4,770 miles.
Approximately 70% of the Management Area is a water feature or a protected area.
Key public protected areas include:
Parameter Measure
Miles of coastline in the Management Area 367 miles
Total Management Area 8,849,192 acres
Water Features 4,299,425 acres
Total Land Area 4,549,767 acres
Existing Protected Land Area 1,578,997 acres
Protected Area as a percent of the Total Land Area 35%
MS4 Municipality Incorporated Area 614,622 acres
Non-MS4 Municipality Incorporated Area 75,528 acres
Non-MS4 Municipality Area as percent of Total Land Area 1.7%
Table 1 - Management Area Statistics
Data Source: GLO
Protected Land Types Area (acres)
Beaches 7,906
Conservation Easements 447,724
Public Protected Areas 835,776
Texas Farm and Ranch Program 12,747
Wetlands 489,287
Total 1,578,997
Table 2 - Protected Areas in the Management Area
Data Source: GLO
• Audubon Society Preserves or Sanctuaries• City and county parks• National Seashore• National Wildlife Refuges• Regional Recreation Areas• State Coastal Preserves and Conservation
Lands• State Parks• Wetlands• Wetlands Reserve Program• Wildlife Management Areas
12 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
To provide perspective, protected land totals about 2,800 square miles which is about 1,000 square miles greater in size than the State of Delaware.
MANAGEMENT AREA POPULATION The population in the Management Area was evaluated to assess growth trends, locations and potential impact on water quality. The high growth areas are primarily within MS4 communities whereas the more rural counties such as Kenedy and Refugio have very low growth or a shrinking population. Data below is provided to illustrate the growth rates, population centers, and impervious cover within the Management Area:
Total Population in the Management Area – 1,757,503 (2010 US Census)
Non-MS4 Municipalities Population – 250,998 (40 incorporated non-MS4 communities)
Non-MS4 Municipalities Population (with rule-making authority) – 150,312
Based on data from 1990 to 2010, 29 of the 40 non-MS4 communities’ average less than 15 new housing units per year, with eight of the communities exhibiting a declining population.
These non-MS4 municipalities represent only 8.6% of the Management Area population.
Table 3 identifies that nearly 1.5 of the 1.75 million people living in the Management Area reside within five counties: Cameron, Galveston, Harris, Jefferson, and Nueces. Significant portions of these five counties include MS4 communities.
As noted in Figure 3, population density for much of the Management Area is less than 25 persons per square mile with a majority of the population within MS4 regulated municipalities.
Figure 3 – Coastal Population Density
13
Cou
nty
Nam
eCo
unty
Po
p.
1990
Coun
ty
Pop.
20
00
Coun
ty
Pop.
20
10
Coun
ty
%
Gro
wth
(1
990
to
2010
)
MA
19
90
Pop.
MA
20
00
Pop.
MA
20
10
Pop.
MA
%
Pop.
G
row
th
(199
0 to
20
10)
% o
f Po
pula
tion
Li
ving
w
ithi
n th
e M
A
%
Impe
rvio
us
Cove
r in
the
M
A
Tota
l Pop
Co
vere
d by
MS4
w
ithi
n th
e M
A
Tota
l Po
p N
ot
Cove
red
by M
S4
wit
hin
the
MA
Aran
sas
17,8
9222
,497
23,1
5829
17,2
7522
,472
23,1
4334
100
2.1
023
,143
Braz
oria
191,
707
241,
767
313,
166
6364
,025
71,8
2772
,868
1423
3.2
50,9
3621
,932
Calh
oun
19,0
5320
,647
21,3
8112
18,4
1920
,444
21,1
6415
991.
40
21,1
64
Cam
eron
260,
120
335,
227
406,
220
5689
,646
122,
149
145,
996
6336
4.8
114,
384
31,6
12
Cham
bers
20,0
8826
,031
35,0
9675
16,5
9521
,464
29,0
5275
832.
45,
786
23,2
66
Gal
vest
on21
7,39
925
0,15
829
1,30
934
177,
127
200,
810
219,
148
2475
12.4
213,
516
5,63
2
Har
ris
2,81
8,19
93,
400,
578
4,09
2,45
945
523,
779
594,
140
635,
496
2116
31.2
622,
169
13,3
27
Jack
son
13,0
3914
,391
14,0
758
1,83
72,
138
2,20
920
160.
50
2,20
9
Jeff
erso
n23
9,39
725
2,05
125
2,27
35
166,
069
174,
980
168,
938
267
6.9
156,
385
12,5
53
Kene
dy46
041
441
6-1
025
926
626
63
640.
30
266
Kleb
erg
30,2
7431
,549
32,0
616
6,14
67,
467
7,86
028
250.
612
7,84
8
Mat
agor
da36
,928
37,9
5736
,702
-18,
879
10,0
719,
825
1127
0.7
09,
825
Nue
ces
291,
145
313,
534
340,
223
1726
1,66
428
4,74
031
1,38
019
929.
229
7,57
013
,811
Ora
nge
80,5
0984
,966
81,8
372
54,1
2654
,904
50,6
00-7
626.
432
,585
18,0
16
Refu
gio
7,97
67,
828
7,38
3-7
3,47
23,
118
2,83
3-1
838
0.5
02,
833
San
Patr
icio
58,7
4967
,249
64,8
0410
44,6
6753
,593
51,9
6316
802.
813
,162
38,8
00
Vict
oria
74,3
6184
,088
86,7
9317
1,18
01,
449
1,34
814
20.
40
1,34
8
Will
acy
17,7
0520
,082
22,1
3425
1,36
32,
409
3,41
315
115
0.4
03,
413
TOTA
L4,
395,
001
5,21
1,01
46,
121,
490
391,
456,
526
1,64
8,44
11,
757,
503
2129
4.5
1,50
6,50
525
0,99
8
Tabl
e 3
– M
anag
emen
t Are
a (M
A) P
opul
atio
n fr
om 1
990
to 2
010
14 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
IMPERVIOUS COVER (Source: GLO)
Management Area existing impervious cover = 4.5 percent
Nine of the 18 counties exhibit impervious cover at 2 percent or less in the Management Area.
Harris County, mostly covered by a MS4 permit, has an impervious cover level near 32 percent. Furthermore, removing Harris County from the impervious cover assessment found that the remaining Management Area has a total impervious cover of 3.2 percent.
COASTAL ENVIRONMENTThe coastal landscape provides the foundation for a range of coastal environments, including beaches and dunes, wetlands, coastal uplands, oyster reefs, and rookery islands. The primary natural coastal environments found along the Texas Gulf coast are shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4 – Natural Environments Along the Texas Coast
15
SLOPESTexas coastal counties exhibit very low relief with most slopes less than 0.1% (GLO). This is smaller by a factor of 10 than the minimum slope recommended for the design of stormwater conveyance swales. The lack of slope provides beneficial stormwater treatment and pollution reduction as low water velocities allow for increased retention time and opportunity for pollutant bio-assimilation and settling. Swales are applicable to a wide range of situations along the coast. They are typically located next to roads, where they replace conventional gutter and drainage pipe systems, but swales are also located in landscape areas, alongside fields, and in other open spaces as illustrated in Figure 8.
Distance from approximately the middle of the coastal zone boundary for each county and measured to the closest tidal waterbody. This table is presented to illustrate the low slope gradients on the Texas coast.
SOILS/GROUNDWATERAbout 28% of the coastal Management Area consists of low permeability clays and muds, and a high-water table (small elevation difference between the ground surface and the groundwater level) is common throughout the area.
The high-water table and low relief precludes the use of some typical Low Impact Development (LID) practices, such as bioretention and infiltration practices. This results in detention facilities designed for flood control being much shallower than systems constructed in areas where the water table is further
County Elev. (feet)Approximate Distance
to Coastal Bay Waterbody (feet)
Slope (%)
Aransas 35 31,000 0.07
Brazoria 35 115,000 0.03
Calhoun 55 72,000 0.08
Cameron 35 116,000 0.03
Chambers 45 52,000 0.09
Galveston 35 40,000 0.09
Harris 65 100,000 0.07
Jackson 55 70,000 0.08
Jefferson 40 95,000 0.04
Kenedy 55 89,000 0.06
Kleberg 55 27,600 0.20
Matagorda 50 70,000 0.07
Nueces 95 114,000 0.08
Orange 50 66,540 0.08
Refugio 50 56,000 0.09
San Patricio 75 29,000 0.26
Victoria 55 54,000 0.10
Willacy 40 111,000 0.04
Table 4 - Slopes in the Texas Coastal Counties
16 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
under the ground surface or a greater slope is present. These shallower detention facilities have a larger footprint to allow runoff from smaller events to sheet flow across the facility before discharge, therefore providing pollutant removal more typical of vegetated filter strips than conventional flood control facilities. The presence of the water table at or near the surface also results in detention facilities having characteristics more typical of constructed wetlands or wet ponds.
A consequence of the above referenced slopes, soils, and groundwater levels is that stormwater basins are larger in size than areas with more traditional slopes, thus, a coastal development site can have more land consumed for stormwater management and potentially affect economic development.
DRAINAGE DISTRICTSDrainage districts were first authorized by the Texas legislature in 1905 and occur in low-lying areas of the State where flood risk management and land drainage are important issues. These districts enabled farming along the Texas coast. There are currently 46 districts as shown in Figure 5 which are organized for the construction of canals, drains, ditches, and levees. Areas without drainage districts are the areas not suitable for farming because of poor soils (e.g., Kenedy and Aransas Counties).
Farming is not feasible in many areas as a result of the low slopes and a high-water table along the coast. Average slopes are less than 0.1% as noted above, which results in a very uneven topography and substantial depression storage. The amount of depression storage in Aransas County is shaded green in Figure 6. Note that this map only includes areas larger than one acre and depressions greater than two feet deep.
Figure 5 - Drainage Districts Along the Texas Coast
17
Figure 6 – Depression Storage Areas in Aransas County
Aransas County recognized the important role the depression storage areas play within the drainage, water quality, and ecological components of the natural stormwater system. Thus, in the Aransas County Stormwater Master Plan and guidance manual, the County requires that “the volume within the natural depressions deeper than 2 feet and with a surface area larger than 1 acre shall be calculated and maintained so as to not adversely affect upstream/downstream properties. If there are no practical alternatives to maintain the depression storage volume at its existing location, the loss of volume shall be mitigated for on-site, and within the same drainage basin. These depressions can be used toward the required detention storage.”
Consequently, drainage districts construct channels to provide both surface drainage and allow the use of drain tiles to reduce groundwater elevations. Figure 7 illustrates the numerous constructed channels in Cameron and Willacy Counties. There are a limited number of natural drainage channels in these areas.
Any development that occurs along the Texas coast is typically in a drainage district since the drainage system is already in place to convey runoff away from the area. As a result, conversion of land to a developed state is typically from an agricultural land use rather than from an undeveloped or natural landscape which does not have good drainage.
18 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Figure 7 –Constructed Drainage System in Cameron and Willacy Counties
Figure 8 – Constructed Drains in Drainage Districts
19
ROADS, HIGHWAYS, AND BRIDGES (OFF-SYSTEM) Roads and bridges in Texas are generally designed, constructed, and maintained by either the TxDOT or by individual counties. “On-system” roads refer to roads administered by TxDOT, while “off-system” roads are those that are not administered by TxDOT; these are almost exclusively county roads. Many of these off-system roads are unpaved. TxDOT roads are designed, constructed, and maintained according to a set of standards which apply statewide http://www.txdot.gov/business/resources/txdot-specifications.html. TxDOT standards are recognized by the EPA and NOAA as being protective of water quality. In addition, roads constructed as part of land development activities are addressed through the State’s new development and site protection program. Consequently, this document presents just the program being implemented by the State to address potential impacts of off-system roadways and bridges constructed and maintained primarily by counties.
It is important to note that off-system roadways in areas outside of MS4 permit areas, and in counties that do not follow TxDOT standards, constitute less than 7% of all roadways in the Management Area.
These roadways inherently incorporate inadvertent/unintentional LID practices to manage stormwater discharges because of the physical characteristics of the Texas coast. In addition, the low slopes along the coast do not require significant cut and fill and increased erosion potential is generally not realized.
Table 5 highlights the miles of roads and bridges within the Management Area, particularly noting the infrastructure that is an off-system road or bridge.
Table 5 - Roads, Highways, and Bridges within the Management Area
For additional information on roads/highways, and bridges, please see the companion document “Program for Off-System Roads in the Texas Coastal Nonpoint Program Management Area”, March 2020.
20 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Figure 9 illustrates that runoff from the road surface will sheet flow across the vegetated side slope and into the roadside bar ditch with subsequent drainage parallel to the roadway, until encountering a creek or constructed drain. With low channel slopes and extensive vegetation, filtering and settling of stormwater pollutants will occur.
URBAN DRAINAGE SYSTEMSOnly one non-MS4 community, Port Isabel in Cameron County, relies on curb, gutter, and storm drain systems to manage stormwater.
For the remaining non-MS4 communities, vegetated swales and channels have remained the primary conveyance system, much of what would be considered LID practices.
Due to the low relief, backwater from tidal influences, and local criteria that promotes open channel vegetated conveyance systems, significant water quality treatment can occur in the drainage systems in the cities within the Management Area. This approach is aligned with LID and Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) practices.
HURRICANE IMPACTS ON POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND RE-DEVELOPMENT (TEXAS COASTAL RESILIENCY MASTER PLAN)Coastal storms and hurricanes present a major threat to people and property near the coast, with many long lasting impacts on communities, the natural environment, and the economy. If sea level rises, the impacts of storms will be magnified by raising the base elevation upon which storm surge builds.
The inland reach of damage from storm surge depends on the topography of the land. In the flat, low-lying areas typical throughout the Management Area, a sizable storm surge can penetrate miles inland, flooding and destroying buildings, disrupting transportation routes, pushing ships onto land, washing debris out to sea, contaminating food and water supplies, and taking out communication lines, power lines, and critical facilities and services.
Figures 10 and 11 show the Texas Coast’s worst-case storm surge inundation for Category 3 and Category 5 hurricanes, derived from an ensemble of Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes
Figure 9 – Typical Coastal County Roadway
21
(SLOSH) model results for hurricanes with various combinations of forward speed, trajectory and high tide levels. A single hurricane trajectory will not cause the regional flooding shown here, but these maps provide important information for resiliency planning in all coastal areas.
In summary, most of the upper Texas coast could be inundated by a Category 3 hurricane, and the entire upper Texas coastal Management Area could be inundated by a Category 5 hurricane. The lower Texas coast is similarly impacted by Category 3 and 5 hurricanes, but not to the degree or impact felt on the upper Texas coast.
Figure 10 – Upper Coast Storm Surge Inundation
Figure 11 – Lower Coast Storm Surge Inundation
22 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Hurricane Harvey struck the coast in August of 2017 and greatly impacted cities and towns that exhibited higher projected growth rates, for instance Port Aransas and Rockport. As a result, these communities will be rebuilding in the coming years as over 1000 of the 1300 businesses in Rockport were damaged and remained closed at the time of this report, and over 75% of the homes in Port Aransas were severely damaged or destroyed. Figure 12 illustrates the number of destroyed and/or flooded structures in Rockport and Port Aransas (Source: NY Times). Each dot is one building showing damage ranging from destroyed to some flooding. These two cities were found to be some of the fastest growing non-MS4 communities in the Management Area, now, following the impacts of Hurricane Harvey, these cities are in a rebuilding mode rather than in a growth scenario.
www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/01/us/hurricane-harvey-damage-texas-cities-towns.html
Figure 12 – Destroyed and Flooded Structures in Rockport and Port Aransas
23
SEA LEVEL RISE (TEXAS COASTAL RESILIENCY MASTER PLAN)The combined impacts of land loss due to both subsidence and sea level rise, known as relative sea level rise, is a variable that can dramatically decrease the resiliency and new development occurring in coastal communities. Global mean sea level has risen close to 8 inches since 1880 and is projected to rise another 1 to 4 feet by 2100. Rates of relative sea level rise are higher along the upper Texas Coast because these coastal land areas are also subsiding due to groundwater pumping and sediment compaction. The combination of these pressures will create a setting for greater storm surge impacts that can reach farther inland, particularly with the annual increase of high tides and severe flooding events. Such events can also increase the salinity of groundwater and potentially affect the drinking water supply. This ongoing change in sea levels can reduce future development in the Management Area as noted in Figures 13 and 14 (Texas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan, 2017).
SUMMARYThe above information regarding topographic and groundwater constraints, flooding, hurricane storm surge threats, potential sea level rise, recovery from Hurricane Harvey, and limited population change in non-MS4 communities, suggests that a majority of the Management Area will not experience significant population growth or new development in the coming years. Increased growth is forecasted to occur primarily in existing MS4 communities.
These findings illustrate the importance in developing appropriate management measures that work with the natural environment to manage NPS pollution to the maximum extent practicable through passive, low impact development practices. The State will work with these communities to finalize these management measures with input from the local communities to enhance resiliency and function for most rainfall events as well as other weather-related challenges while managing NPS pollution in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance.
Figure 13 – Upper Coast Sea Level Rise Inundation
Figure 14 – Lower Coast Sea Level Rise Inundation
24 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
III. RECENT AND ONGOING ACTIVITIES THAT PROTECT WATERQUALITY
In the recent past, the State of Texas has initiated activities, projects, programs, developed guidance documents and acquired valuable land to provide nonpoint source pollution benefits and provide coastal environmental protection. In addition, local governments have also played a role to promote low impact development strategies and water quality protection. A few highlights of these efforts are listed below:
TEXAS COASTAL RESILIENCY MASTER PLANTexas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan, March 2017
The GLO is leading the development and implementation of this effort to protect communities and natural resources along the Texas Coast. The Texas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan (Plan) will provide a framework for community, socio-economic, ecologic and infrastructure protection from coastal hazards, including short-term direct impact (e.g., flooding, storm surge) and long-term gradual impacts (e.g., erosion, habitat loss). The Plan was developed with the support and input of statewide and regional coastal decision makers and technical experts working in state and federal agencies, universities, local governments, non-profit organizations, engineering firms, ports, foundations, and regional trusts. The GLO is committed to protecting coastal resources and infrastructure by reducing vulnerability and protecting assets and the environment.
The Plan also provides a list of projects and strategies to address those problems – ensuring that the Texas coast is more resilient for generations to come. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) provided critical input throughout the process to identify and evaluate candidate projects. The initial screening process resulted in approximately 500 projects, programs, and land acquisitions warranting further evaluation. The Plan will continuously evolve along with the concerns and needs of the coast and its residents to ensure that recurrent and up-to-date coastal management is provided to the coastal communities.
Key Project Types Pertinent to the Coastal NPS Program include:
• Restoration of beaches and dunes
• Bay shoreline stabilization and estuarine wetland restoration
• Freshwater wetlands and coastal uplands conservation
• Delta and lagoon restoration
• Water quality and restoration projects
LAND ACQUISITIONS TO PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS
Powder Horn Ranch near Port Lavaca | Calhoun County• Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation, The Nature Conservancy, The Conservation Fund• Area = 17,351 acres• Acquired in 2016, and will be transferred to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in 2018• Protects marshes, grasslands, and woodlands with more than 11 miles of tidal bay frontage
Matagorda Wetlands Conservation | Matagorda County• Colorado River Land Trust• Area = 600 acres• Acquired –in 2016 at Matagorda Bay• Preserves 600 acres of coastal wetland habitat and tidal marshes
25
Falcon Point Ranch Conservation and Wetland Restoration | Calhoun County• The Nature Conservancy, Texas• Area = 600 acres and completes the protection of 16,100 acres of marshes, wetlands, prairies • Acquired –in 2015 at San Antonio Bay• Provides enhanced habitat and heads off potential impacts of planned development
Sabine Ranch Acquisition | Jefferson County• The Conservation Fund• Area = 4,085 acres as part of a larger 12,376-acre tract to be conveyed to the McFaddin NWR• Acquired –in 2017 • Preserves fresh and tidal marsh, coastal prairie, and pond habitats, part of 135,000 acres of
protected lands on the Texas Chenier Plain.
Nueces Delta Preserve | San Patricio and Nueces Counties• Coastal Bend Bay and Estuary Program• Area more than 10,000 acres• Extensive education and outreach activities • Preserves fresh and tidal marsh, coastal prairie, and pond habitats
PROJECTS THAT PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS AND MANAGE EROSION
Salt Bayou Watershed Hydrologic Restoration | Jefferson County• Jefferson County in partnership with the GLO, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), Texas
Water Development Board (TWDB), NOAA, and others • Cost = $4,500,000• Constructing siphons to restore freshwater flow to 18,000 acres to preserve and protect
grasslands, prairies, tidal flats, creeks, and basins
Salt Bayou Beach Ridge Restoration Engineering | Jefferson County
• Jefferson County in partnership with the GLO• Cost = $1,500,000• Complete the engineering and design for the restoration of 20 miles of beach ridge and will also
protect the largest contiguous estuarine marsh complex in Texas.
Bahia Grande Restoration Phase I Cameron County
• USFWS and Ducks Unlimited• Cost = $400,000• Completing engineering and permitting to enhance 670 acres of wetlands and provide essential
bird habitat. The project is part of a multi-year effort to restore hydrologic connection to Laguna Madre.
26 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
TEXAS COASTAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WEBSITE – SUSTAINABLE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Guidance Documents include:
Guidance for Sustainable Stormwater Drainage on the Texas Coast (July 2014)The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to communities on the management of stormwater runoff from new development. New development may include a variety of projects such as residential, commercial, and office projects.
• Coastal Model Ordinance • Coastal Model Rule• Maintenance of Coastal Best Management Practices• Residents Guide to Improving Water Quality
Aransas County LID Stormwater Guidance ManualAransas County developed this manual to better serve the community in presenting a clear and concise set of criteria for developing a stormwater management plan to serve as an overview of the design requirements, approach, and criteria. The Manual is not meant as a detailed description of developer requirements but is a guide in developing an integrated stormwater management plan. This document is a technical resource that can be shared with other coastal communities.
STATE PROGRAMS Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP)
• Administered by the GLO• Awards approximately $2.2M annually in grants• Supports the protection of natural habitats and wildlife• Provides baseline data on the health of gulf waters
Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act (CEPRA)• Administered by the GLO• Implement erosion response projects to protect beaches, natural resources, coastal development• Shoreline stabilization and habitat restoration
Coastal Dunes Dune Protection and Improvement Manual for the Texas Gulf Coast• Protects dunes with vegetation to preserve beaches and areas of significant biological diversity• Describes measures that landowners, city and county planners, developers, and industry can use
to preserve sand dunes and promote dune restoration
Adopt-A-Beach Program• Administered by the GLO• In operation since 1986 with more than 481,000 volunteers• Collected and removed more than 9,100 tons of trash
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act • Funds to be used for coastal conservation, restoration, and hurricane protection, projects, funds
for coastal conservation, restoration, and hurricane protection.
27
Texas Farm and Ranch Lands Conservation Program• Administered by Texas Parks and Wildlife • Protects working lands from fragmentation• Maintains ecological and agricultural productivity through conservation easements
WPPS AND TMDL IMPLEMENTATION Currently, there are 32 WPPs and TMDLs that are being developed or in effect. Primary managers of these efforts include TCEQ, Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB), Texas Water Resources Institute (TWRI), Houston-Galveston Area Council, and multiple cities. These plans address bacteria, dissolved oxygen (DO), and pH concerns and apply to over 1.5 million acres within the Management Area and 4.8 million acres outside the Area as shown in Figure 15. Water quality improvements in watersheds upstream from the Management Area will help manage and reduce pollutant loads as they move downstream into the coastal region. Alternative approaches in addition to WPPs and TMDLs incorporate adaptive management and are developed by river authorities, cities, or other local government entities to determine how to best solve the water quality problems that often cross multiple jurisdictions and to define implementation activities needed to attain or maintain water quality standards.
Some of these watershed protection programs include Low Impact Development retrofit projects that also serve as demonstration projects. The “Update to the Arroyo Colorado Watershed Protection Plan”, August 2017, lists retrofit projects funded by the CWA Section 319(h) program. Projects include
• City of La Joya – pervious surface parking lot at the library
• City of Alton – pervious pavement parking lot at a new fire station
• City of San Juan – City building retrofit with a green roof, rainwater collection system, rain garden, and a bioswale
• City of Alamo – Rainwater harvesting, bioswale, and a rain garden at the Alamo Sports Complex
• City of Weslaco – Rainwater harvesting system at the library
• City of Weslaco – at the Valley Nature Center, upgrades included a rainwater harvesting system, green roof, pervious walking trails, and a wetland treatment system
• Cameron County District #1 – a park was constructed that included bioretention areas, wetlands for biofiltration, pervious pavement and rainwater harvesting.
• Aransas County – Tule Creek West: Sediment Trap Pond and Habitat Enhancement – One-acre sedimentation basin, shoreline stabilization, riparian enhancements, improve wetland function, and reduced creek bank erosion.
28 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Figure 15 - WPPs and TMDLs in the Management Area
29
ROAD, HIGHWAY, BRIDGE RETROFIT PROJECTSBelow is a summary of recently completed projects and one about to start that indicates the potential watershed protection benefits of bridge and culvert modifications on coastal roads. These retrofit projects enhance wetland restoration and improve habitat to restore hydrology and manage salinity.
Egery Flats: funded by NFWF GEBF with construction beginning in July-August. Photographic analysis conducted by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department staff in 2012 indicated that the Egery flats area lost approximately 100 acres of estuarine marsh since the 1950s (FM-136 was constructed in the late 1940s). Data collected during a feasibility study showed hypersaline conditions (as high as 85 on the surface) and the lack of circulation and hydrology to be the primary causes of marsh loss in Egery Flats. The goal of this project is to replace culverts under FM-136 to improve hydrological connectivity from Copano Bay/Aransas River Mouth to Egery Flats. Improved flow should improve salinity conditions and create a better environment for marsh growth. Project will replace (at 2 locations) 2 – 24” culverts with 3 – 3’x6’ culverts. Goal to improve water quality for 300 acres of marsh habitat.
Matagorda Island Restoration: Planning funded by USFWS-Coastal Program, TCEQ, and EPA. Engineering and Construction funded by TGLO CIAP. Completed 2016. During the 1950’s ranchers constructed levees on Matagorda Island so they could drain large areas of wetlands for cattle production. In the 1970’s dozens of culverts were installed to attempt to restore hydrology but since then many culverts had collapsed or filled in. Goal of the project was to restore 2,500 acres of wetlands on Matagorda Islands western marsh by installing 1 new culvert, repairing 2 culverts and removing 4 levees.
Goose Lake Circulation Enhancement: Funded by EPA GOMP. Completed April 2018. Goose Lake is an area in the Nueces Delta Preserve that has experienced lack of circulation and connectivity due to blocked culverts and reduced freshwater inflows. A road over Goose Lake was thought to have been installed in the 1950’s during ranching operations on the property. The road had 2 culverts with one completely filled in and other with highly restricted flow. The project replaced the 2 pipe culverts with 4 - 4’x2’ box culverts to improve circulation. Restoration improved circulation to 82 acres.
30 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
IV. PROPOSED PROGRAM TO RESPOND TO OUTSTANDING CONDITIONS: WATERSHED PROTECTION, SITE DEVELOPMENT, EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND ROADS/HIGHWAYS/BRIDGESThe State will implement the following projects, programs, and activities to meet the outstanding conditions in the State’s Coastal NPS Program as set forth in Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA):
• Create a guidance manual that will expand upon the recently completed Guidance for Sustainable Stormwater Drainage on the Texas Coast and include an example of a model ordinance for local governments;
• Initiate an outreach program to promote the adoption of the guidance manual including technical assistance, over 100 different organizations in all 18 counties (cities, counties, state, federal, NGOs, foundations and conservancies) were identified and could serve as potential partners in this effort;
• Develop a system to track outreach efforts and adoption of voluntary or incentive-based programs;
• Support the implementation of the Texas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan that was completed in March 2017
• Continue to support land acquisition and conservation easement programs funded by the State, Federal Government, and NGOs;
• Extend existing State programs that support coastal protection and planning into the foreseeable future;
• Continue developing and implementing WPPs or TMDL Implementation Plans in the Management Area;
• Provide resources for future CWA 319(h) projects;
• Partner with the Texas Trustee Implementation Group of the RESTORE and Natural Resources Damage Assessment programs, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund to coordinate and track upcoming land acquisitions, conservation easements, and projects; and
• Coordinate with county governments to encourage road and highway staff to participate in TxDOT Local Government Program training.
Table 6 connects the proposed projects, programs, and activities to the individual management measures to illustrate a comprehensive CMP that meets the CZMA requirements. The plan includes commitments by the State in previous submittals such as:
• Operation and enforcement of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan program for construction activities;
• Continuance of TXDOT training courses on stormwater pollution prevention plans, and erosion and sediment control management for highway construction; and
• Continuing to fund CWA 319 projects and programs that support coastal protection and planning.
Table 7 outlines the program schedule and links activities to the management measures.
Additional details follow Tables 6 and 7 to define the program.
31
Man
agem
ent
Mea
sure
TEX
AS
COA
STA
L ST
ORM
WA
TER
MA
NA
GEM
ENT
GU
IDA
NCE
MA
NU
AL
Retr
ofit
Plan
ning
an
d St
ate
Prog
ram
s
Curr
ent
& F
utur
e W
PPs
&
TMD
Ls
Coas
tal
Resi
lienc
y M
aste
r Pl
an
Land
A
cqui
siti
on
(Sta
te,
Fede
ral,
NG
O)
Smar
t Si
te
Des
ign
Wet
land
&
Str
eam
B
uffer
s
Cut/
Fill
&
Eros
ion
Sedi
men
t Co
ntro
l
Wat
er
Qua
lity
& R
unoff
St
anda
rds
& B
MP
Gui
danc
e
Impe
rvio
us
Cove
r In
cent
ives
/LI
D
Mea
sure
s
Road
, B
ridg
e &
H
ighw
ay
Plan
ning
G
uida
nce
Wat
ersh
ed P
rote
ctio
n
Avoi
d co
nver
sion
of a
reas
sus
cept
ible
to e
rosi
onX
XX
X
Pres
erve
are
as fo
r w
ater
qua
lity
bene
fits/
habi
tat
XX
XX
X
Site
dev
elop
men
t to
prot
ect w
ater
bodi
esX
XX
Site
Dev
elop
men
t
Prot
ect a
reas
to p
rovi
de w
ater
qua
lity
bene
fits
XX
X
Lim
it in
crea
ses
of im
perv
ious
are
asX
X
Lim
it la
nd d
istu
rban
ce a
ctiv
itie
s, c
lear
ing,
gra
ding
XX
X
Lim
it d
istu
rban
ce o
f nat
ural
dra
inag
e fe
atur
esX
X
New
Dev
elop
men
t
% R
educ
e To
tal S
uspe
nded
Sol
ids
load
ings
by
80X
XX
X
Mai
ntai
n pr
e-de
velo
pmen
t run
off v
olum
e/ra
teX
XX
Exis
ting
Dev
elop
men
t
Iden
tify
pri
orit
y po
lluta
nt r
educ
tion
opp
ortu
niti
esX
XX
Sche
dule
for
Impl
emen
ting
con
trol
sX
X
Lim
it d
estr
ucti
on o
f nat
ural
con
veya
nce
syst
ems
XX
XX
XX
Pres
erve
/enh
ance
/est
ablis
h w
ater
body
buff
ers
XX
XX
Road
s/H
ighw
ays/
Brid
ges
Pro
tect
are
as to
pro
vide
wat
er q
ualit
y be
nefit
sX
XX
X
Lim
it la
nd d
istu
rban
ce a
ctiv
itie
sX
XX
Lim
it d
istu
rban
ce o
f nat
ural
dra
inag
e fe
atur
esX
XX
Tabl
e 6:
Pro
pose
d CN
PS P
rogr
am in
the
Man
agem
ent A
rea
Out
reac
h Pr
ogra
m a
nd T
echn
ical
Ass
ista
nce
– Th
e gu
idan
ce m
anua
l will
be
dist
ribut
ed a
cros
s th
e M
anag
emen
t Ar
ea a
nd in
clud
e te
chni
cal a
ssis
tanc
e to
iden
tified
co
mm
uniti
es.
32 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Program/Project/Activity ED ND SD WP R/H/B ImplementationPeriod
Coastal Stormwater Management GuidanceManual and Model Ordinances X X X X X
Prior to 15-Year Program Period
Coastal Stormwater Management Guidance Manual Distribution X X X X X Year 1
Outreach Program - Coordination with municipalities, counties, WPPs, TMDLs, and technical assistance to target communitiesto seek Guidance Manual adoption
X X X X X Years 1-15
Land Acquisition - public, private, NGO X Years 1-15
Promote and track TxDOT training to Countyroad staff X Years 1 -5
Retrofit Planning with local governments X X Years 1-15
Coastal Resiliency Master PlanImplementation X X X Years 1 - 15
Extension of Existing State Programs
Years 1 - 15
Coastal Management Program X X X X X
TPWD Farm and Ranch Lands ConservationProgram X
Beach Access and Dune Protection X X X
Adopt-A-Beach Program X
Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act X X
WPP and TMDL Implementation X
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act X
LEGENDED = Existing DevelopmentND = New DevelopmentSD = Site Development WP = Watershed ProtectionR/H/B = non-TxDOT Roads/Highways/Bridges
Table 7 – CNPS Program Schedule
33
1. TEXAS COASTAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE MANUAL(Watershed protection, site development, new development, existing development, and roads/highways/bridges Management Measures)
Prior to initiating the 15-year Coastal NPS Program, the State will update the “Guidance for Sustainable Stormwater Drainage on the Texas Coast”, July 2014, to become the Texas Manual. Chapters noted below will be added and others will be modified to provide water quality protection in compliance with Section 6217 of the CZMA. The guidance manual will be developed with input from representatives from MS4 and non-MS4 communities along the Texas Coast to maximize future potential adoption by local governments and provided to MS4 and non-MS4 communities. An example of a model ordinance for local governments will be included with incentives such as conservation development alternatives to encourage adoption of Low Impact Development practices. The guidance manual will be designed for local governments, their staff, and the development community. There are separate regulatory programs for MS4s and CWA Section 404. Federal, State, and local regulatory requirements would still apply.
The “Guidance for Sustainable Stormwater Drainage on the Texas Coast” was completed in 2014 and provides guidance to communities on the Texas Coast to protect water quality. The Guidance includes the following Chapters:
• Chapter 1 – Introduction to Water Quality in the Texas Coastal Zone
• Chapter 2 – How Residents Can Help Protect Water Quality
• Chapter 3 – Guidance for Sustainable Site Design
• Chapter 4 – Structural Practices for Sustainable Drainage Design
• Chapter 5 – Incorporating Structural Practices into Development
• Chapter 6 – Bibliography
The proposed guidance manual will add new chapters or amend existing chapters. Local and national stormwater manuals will be used as resources in conjunction with input from EPA, NOAA, and select communities within the Management Area to develop a document that functions with the natural characteristics in the coastal region, manages nonpoint source pollution, and can be adopted by municipalities. Resources for this effort will be the Harris County Low Impact Development and Green Infrastructure Design Criteria for Stormwater Management, Coastal Supplement to the Georgia Stormwater Management Manual, and previous reports from the Center for Watershed Protection.
• Add an Erosion and Sediment Control Chapter that will provide guidance, measures, and details to limit impacts from cut-and-fill and land grading activities while promoting construction practices to limit land disturbance activities. Resources that can be used include:
• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Edwards Aquifer Technical Guidance Manual• TCEQ Stormwater General Permit for Construction Activities• Aransas County Stormwater Guidance Manual• Lower Colorado River Authority Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Field Guide
• Add a Wetland and Riparian Buffers Chapter that will provide guidance to preserve areas for water quality/habitat benefits, limit disturbance of natural drainage features, and enhance waterbody buffers. Resources that can be used include:
• City of Austin Watershed Protection Ordinance• Lower Colorado River Authority Highland Lakes Watershed Ordinance Technical Manual• Georgia “Model Coastal Riparian Buffer Ordinance for Georgia’s Local Governments”
34 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
• Georgia “Coastal Riparian Buffer Guidance Manual”• Update and insert low impact development and local government impervious cover incentives
into Chapter 3 to promote approaches for site development to protect waterbodies, limit impervious cover increases, and limit land disturbance. Resources to be used include:
• Lower Colorado River Authority Highland Lakes Watershed Ordinance Technical Manual• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Edwards Aquifer Technical Guidance Manual• Aransas County Stormwater Guidance Manual• San Antonio River Authority Low Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual• Harris County Low Impact Development and Green Infrastructure Design Criteria
• Update and insert TSS and runoff management guidance into Chapter 4 to promote post construction water quality treatment and peak runoff management to meet the 80 percent TSS standard and manage post development runoff. Resources that can be used include:
• North Carolina Coastal Zone Nonpoint Management Program• Georgia Coastal Stormwater Supplement• Maryland Stormwater Management Manual
An important consideration when developing the guidance manual for TSS and runoff management will be to ensure that it does not place undue burdens on small, rural Texas coastal communities in comparison to the requirements of their larger, urban neighbors. The reason for this is that the 6217 guidance exempts all municipalities that operate under an MS4 permit for this Management Measure. The Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit does not require structural post-construction stormwater treatment or volume reduction in MS4 permits. It is important to develop a flexible, incentivized post construction stormwater management program that can rely on the existing low levels of development, generally flat terrain that creates slow channel velocities, and vegetation to achieve the targets in this Management Measure.
The Guidance for Sustainable Stormwater Drainage on the Texas Coast specifies a rainfall depth of 1 inch to establish the design volume. This depth was based on an analysis of expected pollutant washoff and a comparison with other approved programs in areas with similar rainfall patterns. The one-inch value was analyzed using the pollutant exponential washoff concept incorporated in the EPA Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). In the SWMM model the fraction of material washed off the watershed during an event is expressed as (Charbeneau and Barrett, 1998):
1 - e-kv
Where k = washoff coefficient and V is the runoff depth. The washoff coefficient has been estimated by various researchers as 0.18 (Alley, 1981; Di Modugno et al., 2015). Using this value, a one-inch rainfall would remove 99% of the TSS watershed load present at the beginning of the event. We note that North Carolina, which has a fully approved program and similar storm depths for the 2-year, 24-hour storm as Texas, uses a 1.5-inch design storm for water quality controls. Georgia has similar 2-year, 24-hour rainfall depths and uses a 1.2-inch design storm for water quality controls. We also found that Maryland uses a one-inch rainfall depth in their Stormwater Management Manual to meet the water quality requirements, however, their 2-year 24-hour rainfall depth is a little less than found on the Texas coast. We did note that these three states provide 24-hour extended detention of the 1-year, 24-hour storm to assist in channel protection.
At this point in time, we envision that the guidance manual water quality design criteria will recommend the use of a 1.5-inch rainfall to establish the water quality volume and will include extended detention of the 1-year, 24-hour storm to provide channel protection. This 1-year volume could be accomplished in drainage channels and swales as the maximum slopes are typically less than 0.1% which will promote long detention times, sediment removal, and pollutant treatment. This approach will provide TSS management and help protect waterways
35
while promoting designer flexibility in the use of LID options such as permeable pavement, disconnected runoff, filter strips, vegetated swales, rainwater harvesting, and other measures. To encourage voluntary adoption, impervious cover incentives can be included to foster low impact development and efficient site planning approaches that will achieve the goals of the New Development Management Measure.
• Add a Model Ordinance Chapter. Resources that can be used include:
• Texas Coastal Best Management Practices Website • Aransas County Stormwater Guidance Manual
• Add a Retrofit Planning Section that will connect with the Retrofit Planning effort to help meet Existing Development MM requirements. This process will evaluate existing urban areas, identify pollution hotspots, recommend water quality management solutions, and prioritize and rank potential opportunities. The retrofit planning will include highways and roads in the study area to optimize solutions that manage runoff from developed areas and highways. This section will also identify potential partners and grant resources to help local communities implement projects. Resources include:
• Rapid Watershed Planning Handbook, Center for Watershed Protection• LID retrofit planning taking place in ongoing WPPs and TMDLs• On-line resources
• Create a Road, Highways and Bridges Guidance Manual to provide guidance on methods to limit land disturbance, protect natural drainage features, and incorporate pollution prevention measures in road, highways, and bridges operation and maintenance. This guidance manual will point to existing TxDOT guidance and will serve as an overview to direct users to existing resources and training. Other resources that can be used include:
• Coastal Zone Guidance, Chapter 4: Management Measures for Urban Areas • TxDOT manuals and publications
2. OUTREACH PROGRAM AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE(Watershed protection, site development, new development, existing development, and roads/highways/bridges (off-system) Management Measures)
Texas will design and implement a program to promote and document the use of sustainable storm water management practices by communities in the Management Area. The program will include education and outreach and technical and financial assistance program elements that will target community officials, land owners, land developers, engineers, financiers, and other local land development professionals and interest groups. The program will emphasize the goal of institutionalizing the use of sustainable storm water management practices within each community and jurisdictional area and builds upon the extensive outreach the TCEQ NPS Program conducted in recent years regarding the implementation of LID management practices.
The CNPS Engagement program includes the following:
• Distribute the guidance manual to 48 MS4 and 40 non-MS4 communities and the county road departments (Year 1);
• Provide technical assistance to the targeted 11 most rapidly developing non-MS4 communities to aid in potential adoption of guidance manual, see Table 8 below (Years 1 through 15);
• Distribute the guidance manual to the Association of Water Board Directors (Year 1);
• Distribute the Coastal Dunes Dune Protection and Improvement Manual to MS4 and non-MS4 coastal communities (Year 1);
36 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Table 8: Target non-MS4 Cities to Receive Guidance Manual Technical Assistance
• Website will be developed to highlight activities, water quality protection techniques, upcoming events, and promote partnership opportunities to encourage retrofit planning;
• Retrofit Planning outreach will be conducted to with partner communities to develop retrofit plans per the Implementation Schedule found in Section VI. Retrofit planning will focus on existing developed areas, hot spots, and roads to improve runoff quality through constructed measures, improved maintenance and operations, and IMP plans;
• Promote TxDOT training opportunities in concert with the guidance manual guidance to the county road departments (Years 1 through 5). The GLO will contact the six county road departments that do not implement TxDOT or equivalent standards up to four times per year;
• Develop a system to track outreach efforts and adoption of voluntary or incentive-based programs. The system will be administered by the GLO and include annual check-ins with the targeted 11 communities (Years 1 through 15);
• Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program - Milestones for coastal nonpoint source pollution control can be reported in the Nonpoint Source Management in Texas Annual Report and by the GLO on their public website;
• Education Program - Milestones for the statewide educational program relate to the number of nonpoint source educational programs in the State. Activities are scheduled for these programs in consultation with collaborating entities; and
• Prepare a report every 5 years that is managed by the GLO to document progress and identify communities that may require additional technical assistance (Years 1 through 15). The report will be provided to the partner agencies implementing the program.
An assessment of population and housing use change from 1990 to 2010 was used to prioritize the more rapidly growing non-MS4 communities in the Management Area. Currently, there are 40 non-MS4 municipalities in this area. The study recommended that communities with housing that starts exceeding 15 per year serve as the priority group to receive technical assistance in the outreach effort to promote the adoption of the guidance manual. To provide a sense of scale, Jamaica Beach averages 16 housing unit changes per year while Rockport averages 160 units per year. Port Aransas is also in this group as it averaged 57 units per year. However, the recent devastation of Rockport and Port Aransas by Hurricane Harvey has most likely significantly slowed development in these cities as it will take years to rebuild and recover.
While providing the guidance manual, the State will also coordinate with these cities to evaluate retrofit programs and projects to address existing development. At the same time, the guidance manual includes guidance on buffer zones, setbacks, and protection of tidal waters to enhance watershed protection.
37
3. TEXAS COASTAL RESILIENCY MASTER PLAN (Watershed Protection and Existing Development Management Measures)
As noted above, the GLO is leading the development and implementation of this effort to protect the natural resources in the Management Area. A plan was developed with the support of statewide and regional coastal decision makers and technical experts working in State and federal agencies, universities, local governments, non-profit organizations, engineering firms, ports, and regional trusts. The GLO is committed to protecting coastal resources and infrastructure by reducing vulnerability and protecting assets and the environment. Numerous potential projects were identified to preserve areas for water quality and habitat benefits, and avoid conversion of areas that are susceptible to erosion. These activities help address the Watershed Protection, Existing Development, and Site Development Management Measures.
As part of the Coastal Nonpoint Source Program, the following tasks and activities will occur:
• GLO will continue to lead this effort and seek funding with multiple partners to implement projects and programs to address priority areas that protect habitat and water quality, current priority projects include:
• Four freshwater wetlands and coastal uplands conservation projects that would protect nearly 47,300 acres; and
• Twenty-one bay shoreline stabilization and wetland restoration projects that would protect nearly 17 miles of shoreline and restore about 7,200 acres of wetlands.
• The guidance manual will be provided to the TAC and an effort will be made to adopt water quality retrofit goals that apply to future projects in urban areas to reduce runoff pollution in addition to the primary project goal of habitat restoration, shoreline restoration, and wetland restoration (Year 1)
• Develop a system that tracks the implementation or projects, programs, and land acquisitions. An annual report will be prepared by the GLO (Years 1 through 15)
4. SUPPORT LAND ACQUISITION AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT PROGRAMS (Watershed Protection and Existing Development Management Measures)
The State will continue to coordinate with multiple public, private, and non-governmental organizations to acquire and conserve land that provides important water quality benefits and/or maintains riparian and aquatic habitat. These future land acquisitions or conservation easements will add to the local and State park system, preserves, wildlife refuges, historic sites, wetlands reserve programs, and wildlife management areas.
• The State will develop a tracking system to provide a summary report of the land protected through acquisition and conservation. The system will identify location, area preserved, primary benefits, and the land manager. The GLO will prepare annual summaries with reports generated in Years 5, 10, and 15 with a final report illustrating the entire acquisition and conservation portfolio over the 15-year implementation period.
• The GLO will coordinate this activity in concert with the implementation of the Coastal Resiliency Master Plan.
Key organizations to collaborate with include:• Audubon Society• Ducks Unlimited• Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist, Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the
Gulf Coast States Act (RESTORE Act) partners• U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Program
38 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
• Texas Farm and Ranch Program• Texas Parks and Wildlife• The Nature Conservancy• United States Fish and Wildlife Service• United States Natural Resources and Conservation Service
5. EXTENSION OF EXISTING STATE PROGRAMS (Watershed protection, site development, and existing development Management Measures)
The State will continue to fund and administer the following programs that help meet the CZMA requirements. A system will be developed to track projects, grants awarded, areas protected, areas preserved, and pounds of trash collected each fiscal year. A report will be prepared every five years by the GLO to document progress. At the end of the 15 years, all program reports will be compiled into a final Texas Coastal Nonpoint Source Program report.
• Clean Water Act Section 319 NPS Program
• Texas Coastal Management Program
• Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act
• Adopt-A-Beach Program
• The Beach Access and Dune Protection Program
• Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act
• Texas Farm and Ranch Program
6. CONTINUE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF WPPS, AND TMDLS (Existing Development Management Measure)
Numerous WPPs and TMDL Implementation Plans are being developed or implemented to address existing water quality impairments. These plans apply to an area of about 470,000 acres (734 square miles) in the Management Area.
The State will perform the following:
• Continue to fund and lead these watershed protection processes and seek to provide additional future funding to implement local and/or regional pollutant reduction projects (Years 1 through 15);
• Continue to encourage the identification of potential LID retrofit projects and funding sources in WPP and TMDL watersheds and the inclusion of those LID retrofit projects in the WPPs and TMDL Implementation Plans;
• Provide the guidance manual to the responsible party of each watershed planning process to illustrate potential LID retrofit planning approaches and practices and opportunities (Year 1);
• Promote education and outreach activities through the watershed-based plan process;
• The State will continue to provide outreach about future grant opportunities (Years 1 through 15); and
• The State will utilize existing systems or develop new system(s) as needed to track grant funding and project deliverables within the Management Area. A coastal nonpoint source program summary will be prepared (Years 1 through 15).
39
V. PROGRAM SUMMARY BY MANAGEMENT MEASUREWATERSHED PROTECTION MANAGEMENT MEASUREThis Management Measure applies to MS4 and non-MS4 communities. The following actions are proposed to address the conditions:
• Continue to coordinate with State, private, and NGOs in the acquisition and conservation of sensitive lands that preserve areas to provide important water quality benefits;
• Continue to participate in the development of the Coastal Resiliency Master Plan CMP process to promote projects that preserve areas that provide important water quality benefits to coastal communities. The 2017 Plan identified priority projects that total nearly 47,300 acres in area with an additional 17 miles of shoreline stabilization and 7,200 acres of wetland restoration;
• Develop the guidance manual that will include buffer zones and sustainable site design guidance to preserve areas that provide water quality benefits, avoid conversion of land susceptible to erosion, and site development to protect water bodies and natural drainage systems;
• Distribute the guidance manual to MS4 and non-MS4 communities;
• Provide technical assistance through State programs to the targeted 11 non-MS4 communities to encourage adoption of the guidance manual;
• Distribute the guidance manual to the Association of Water Board Directors;
• Continue State programs such as the Beach Access and Dune Protection, Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act, and the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act to protect the integrity of water bodies and beaches; and
• Distribute the Coastal Dunes Dune Protection and Improvement Manual to MS4 and non-MS4 coastal communities to share with residents and land owners to preserve areas that provide water quality benefits and site development away from natural drainage systems.
SITE DEVELOPMENT MMThis Management Measure applies to MS4 and non-MS4 communities. The following actions are proposed to address the conditions:
• Develop the guidance manual that will include buffer zones and sustainable site design guidance to limit increases in impervious cover, promote low impact development practices, limit land disturbance activities, and limit impacts to natural drainage systems;
• Distribute the guidance manual to MS4 and non-MS4 communities;
• Provide technical assistance to MS4 and non-MS4 communities to encourage guidance manual adoption;
• Distribute the guidance manual to the Association of Water Board Directors;
• Continue to participate in the development of the Coastal Resiliency Master Plan process to promote projects that preserve areas that provide important water quality benefits;
• Continue State programs such as the Beach Access and Dune Protection to protect areas that provide water quality benefits and limit disturbance of vegetation; and
• Distribute the Coastal Dunes Dune Protection and Improvement Manual to MS4 and non-MS4 coastal communities to share with residents and land owners to protect areas that are susceptible to erosion and limit disturbance of vegetation and natural drainage features.
40 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT MMThis Management Measure applies to non-MS4 communities. The following actions are proposed to address the conditions:
• Continue to solicit CWA Section 319(h) NPS program funding opportunities to retrofitexisting development that contributes to water quality impairment;
• Develop the guidance manual that will include local and/or regional watershed practicesthat can be added to existing drainage conveyance systems and urban runoff controlstructures. The guidance manual will also include a retrofit planning section and bufferzones to improve existing water quality, limit destruction of natural conveyance systemsand preserve waterbodies and their tributaries;
• Distribute the guidance manual to MS4 and non-MS4 communities;
• Provide technical assistance to the MS4 and non-MS4 communities to encourage guidancemanual adoption;
• Distribute the guidance manual to the Association of Water Board Directors;
• Continue to coordinate with State, private, and NGOs in the acquisition and conservation ofsensitive lands that preserve areas to provide important water quality benefits;
• Continue the Adopt-A-Beach Program to remove trash and debris from the coastal regionwaterbodies;
• Continue the Beach Access and Dunes Protection program to limit destruction of naturalconveyance systems; and
• Continue to lead and coordinate with the ongoing WPPs and TMDLs to assist in theprioritization, scheduling, and obtaining funds to implement water quality retrofits toreduce pollutant loadings. The State will coordinate with the plan responsible party in Year1 to share the guidance manual and outline Best Management Program implementationplanning practices.
• Implement a retrofit planning process that prioritizes retrofit opportunities outside of MS4areas. The retrofit planning will also address the road/highways/bridges retrofit goals.
NEW DEVELOPMENT MMThis Management Measure applies to non-MS4 communities.
New development in areas subject to municipal requirements in the Management Area are primarily regulated through the State’s MS4 program, with about 92% of the coastal population covered by this program. Consequently, the State program to manage NPS impacts from new development activities is primarily regulatory, rather than voluntary. The voluntary efforts in this plan are focused on the remaining 8% of the coast’s population, which is a relatively minor source of NPS pollution compared to larger cities like the Houston metropolitan area, Beaumont/Port Arthur, Corpus Christi, and Brownsville.
The following actions are proposed to address the conditions:
• Develop the guidance manual that will include water quality design standards to manageTSS and post development runoff goals consistent with practices, geologic, and topographicconditions along the Texas coast. The guidance manual will include low impact developmentand impervious cover reduction incentives to manage stormwater runoff quality from asustainable design perspective;
• Include an example of a model ordinance in the guidance manual;
• Distribute the guidance manual to MS4 and non-MS4 communities, and
41
• Provide technical assistance to the targeted 11 non-MS4 communities to encourageguidance manual adoption.
ROADS/HIGHWAYS/BRIDGES (OFF-SYSTEM) MANAGEMENT MEASURE This Management Measure applies to coastal counties. The following actions are proposed to address the conditions:
• Develop a Road/Highway/Bridges Handbook that will provide guidance on methods to limit land disturbance, protect natural drainage features, and incorporate pollution prevention measures in road, highways, and bridges operation and maintenance. This Handbook will be based on guidance provided in the CZARA Manual, Chapter 4.
• Develop the Erosion and Sediment Control chapter in the guidance manual that addresses road construction and includes guidance directing guidance manual users to the Texas Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan requirements;
• Distribute the Handbook to coastal counties that do not currently follow TxDOT roadway standards for new roadways or participate in the TxDOT training programs for their staff;
• Distribute the Handbook to the County Road department directors within the Management Area;
• Provide technical assistance to counties to encourage guidance manual adoption;
• Promote TxDOT training opportunities in concert with the guidance manual guidance to the six county road departments that do not implement TxDOT or equivalent standards. The GLO will contact the relevant county road department staff up to four times per year;
• The website “Texas Coastal Best Management Practices” provides links to road and bridge training opportunities, manuals, maintenance practices, drainage design, stormwater design, bridge planning, and a stormwater field inspector’s guide. http://txcoastalbmp.org/
• For the 12 counties that adhere to TxDOT or equivalent standards, the State will contact officials at least once every four years to confirm that these standards are being used; and
• Retrofit planning to address Existing Development MM goals will include developed areas and roads/highways. Thus, a retrofit plan in a community would address local water quality issues and roads/highways/bridges in one plan. There could be opportunities to manage road runoff in right-of-way areas that could compensate for uncontrolled runoff from developed areas that lack available green space or conveyance systems.
42 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
VI. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
YEARS 1 – 15: IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ONGOING ACTIVITIES: YEARS 1 THROUGH YEAR 15• Program website, branding, and story maps available by June 2019
• Outreach, awareness, education through the website; email; conference post cards/flyers; mailers; updated annually
• Engagement through presentations, meetings, sharing of technical resources
• Implementation of existing State programs coordinating Coastal NPS program initiatives
• Land acquisition and conservation easement actions; support efforts and track
• Coastal Resiliency Master Plan implementation
• Promote Roads, Highways, and Bridges training; prioritize and schedule retrofit opportunities
• Engage local decision-makers to determine how to improve NPS management
• Develop, update, maintain contact information database for State, regional, county, local staff
• Assess and track program elements and conduct analysis to optimize results; revise and adapt methods and strategies based on outcomes and new information
YEAR 1• Distribute the guidance manual to all MS4, non-MS4 communities, and county staff
• Post the guidance manual on the website
• Participate in the State’s WPP/TMDL and other related meetings; present coastal program; ensure 6217g MMs integrated
• Distribute the Roads/Highways/Bridges Handbook to the appropriate local governments.
• Engage target cities to determine interests/needs
• Utilize State programs to fund and enhance NPS pollutant loading and stormflow reductions
YEARS 2 - 5• Participate in the State’s WPP/TMDL and other related meetings; present coastal program
and provide technical assistance; solicit integration of 6217g MMs
• Engage up to three non-MS4 communities (identified in Year 1), pursue guidance manual adoption, and provide other assistance
• Develop retrofit planning and prioritization process; develop up to three retrofit plans for target communities
• Host technical workshops
• Host (multi-agency) funding workshops
• Pursue guidance manual adoption by three additional communities
• Utilize State programs to fund and enhance NPS pollutant loading and stormflow reductions
43
YEARS 5 – 8• Participate in the State’s WPP/TMDL and other related meetings; present coastal program
and provide technical assistance; solicit integration of 6217g MMs
• Engage up to three non-MS4 communities (new communities identified in Years 2-5), pursue guidance manual adoption, and provide other assistance
• Host technical workshops
• Host (multi-agency) funding workshops
• Develop up to three retrofit plans for target communities
• Provide technical assistance to three cities
• Utilize State programs to fund and enhance NPS pollutant loading and stormflow reductions
YEARS 8-12• Participate in the State’s WPP/TMDL and other related meetings; present coastal program
and provide technical assistance; solicit integration of 6217g MMs
• Engage up to three non-MS4 communities (new communities identified in Years 5-8), pursue guidance manual adoption, and provide other assistance
• Host technical workshops
• Host (multi-agency) funding workshops
• Develop up to three retrofit plans for target communities
• Provide technical assistance to three cities
• Utilize State programs to fund and enhance NPS pollutant loading and stormflow reductions
YEARS 12-15 • Participate in the State’s WPP/TMDL and other related meetings; present coastal program
and provide technical assistance; solicit integration of 6217g MMs
• Engage up to three non-MS4 communities (new communities identified in Years 8-12), pursue guidance manual adoption, and provide other assistance
• Host (multi-agency) funding workshops
• Host technical workshops
• Develop up to three retrofit plans for target communities
• Provide technical assistance to three cities
• Utilize State programs to fund and enhance NPS pollutant loading and stormflow reductions
44 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
VII. ENFORCEMENT1. Process Linking the Implementing Agency with the Enforcement Agency
and the Commitment to Use Enforcement Authority Where NecessaryBecause Texas has chosen to rely on voluntary approaches to meet remaining management measures, Texas had to provide a legal opinion from the Attorney General or an attorney representing the agency with enforcement jurisdiction to prevent NPS pollution and require management measure implementation as necessary. As referenced in detail in Section 4.6, Enforcement Mechanisms for the Coastal Nonpoint Program, 4.6.1 Texas Water Code §26.177, and 4.6.2 Texas Water Code §26.121, of the 1998 Texas Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, this requirement has been met. Texas’ legal opinion and back-up authority was approved by EPA and NOAA on March 31, 2003.
The Coastal NPS Program, which is administered by GLO, is comprised of six networked agencies who coordinate to implement approved Management Measures. The division of responsibility for each agency is described in the State of Texas CNPS program and is also available in outline form in Texas CNPS Framework document. The linked networked agencies are coordinating programs and staff activities on an on-going basis. Regular meetings are held and communications among program staff are frequent.
A reporting system will track progress, funding, land conserved and/or protected, projects, outreach, guidance manual distribution, technical assistance and other activities.
2. Other Texas Enforcement MechanismsTexas has an “enforceable policy” within the meaning of Section 304 (6a) of the CZMA. Texas Water Code (TWC) Section 26.121 is a legally binding law by which Texas can exert control over private and public land and water uses and natural resources in the coastal zone. Further, through TWC Section 26.121, TCEQ has existing enforcement policies and mechanisms to regulate NPS pollution and to implement the applicable requirements of the NPS program.
TWC Section 26.121 generally prohibits any discharge of waste into or adjacent to water in the State except as authorized by TCEQ. The term “discharge” is defined in TWC Section 26.001(20) as “…to deposit, conduct, drain, emit, throw, run, allow to seep, or otherwise release or dispose of, or to allow, permit, or suffer any of these acts or omissions.” Based on this definition, TCEQ can regulate NPS pollution that constitutes a discharge under TWC Section 26.121.
TWC Sections 5.103, 26.011, and 26.121 also provides statutory authority for adopting rules to prevent NPS pollution and require management measures to be implemented. In addition to enforcing such rules, TCEQ can regulate NPS pollution by directly enforcing the prohibition against discharges contained in TWC Section 26.121. Enforcement actions can be initiated under TWC Chapter 7 for violations of Section 26.121.
TCEQ relies on Section 26.121 as its primary authority for implementing regulatory programs to prevent NPS pollution and as its backup authority to address NPS pollution through non-regulatory programs. This strategy has proven effective and will continue to be used to regulate NPS pollution. Accordingly, through TWC Section 26.121, Texas’ approach is backed by enforceable State authority which ensures that the management measures will be implemented.
If participation in the non-regulatory program does not effectively implement the plan, TWC Section 26.121 provides Texas the authority to develop additional incentives or mandatory requirements to achieve the necessary implementation of management measures.
TCEQ is tasked by the legislature and by statute to address matters within the scope of the TWC, including coastal NPS pollution. TWC Section 26.121 provides authority to take enforcement actions where significant harm to coastal water is found or threatened. In the event Texas undertakes a regulatory approach, it would have the authority to include permit programs, and/or direct requirements contained in State statutes. Additionally, Texas would have the authority and responsibility to undergo enforcement under the regulatory approach for failure to obtain or comply with a permit, and/or direct statutory requirement.
45
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS FOR THE COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM
Texas Water Code §26.177Section 26.177 of the Texas Water Code (TWC) is a regulatory program with a built-in enforcement mechanism. It can be used as a stand-alone program to address water pollution problems in urban areas, or it can be used as backup enforcement authority for other programs in the State, including the TMDL process and the Coastal Nonpoint Source Program.
Section 26.177 establishes statutory responsibilities for cities in the abatement and control of water pollution within their jurisdictions. The statute requires cities with populations greater than 10,000 persons to establish water pollution control and abatement programs when: (1) water quality assessments and studies identify water pollution in the city which is attributable to non-permitted sources of pollution, (2) the city has had reasonable time to correct the problem, and (3) a public hearing has been held on the matter. Section 26.177 is incorporated into Title 30 of the Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Chapter 216, Subchapter B, entitled Municipal Water Pollution Control and Abatement.
The rule defines a permitted source of water pollution as a source that discharges pollution with a valid permit or authorization granted pursuant to the TWC, the federal Clean Water Act, or other applicable State or Federal law. The definition of pollution specified in the rule includes, but is not limited to, nonpoint sources of pollution as those sources are defined and identified pursuant to applicable State and Federal statutes, regulations, policies, and guidance. Water quality assessments and studies which may be used by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to identify nonpermitted sources of water pollution in a city are identified in the rule as follows:
• State Water Quality Inventory - The State program which assesses the quality of surface and ground waters resulting in a report describing the status of water quality in the State in accordance with §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act.
• Clean Rivers Program - Watershed water quality assessments conducted in accordance with §26.0135 of the TWC.
• State Nonpoint Source Assessment - The State program implemented in compliance with §319(a) of the federal Clean Water Act which identifies surface and ground waters in the State which cannot reasonably be expected to attain or maintain applicable water quality standards or the goals and requirements of the federal Clean Water Act without additional controls for nonpoint sources of pollution.
• Total Maximum Daily Load Analyses - Water quality analyses required by §303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act for water bodies in the State not supporting or not expected to support the beneficial uses designated for the water body.
• Other - Special studies, pilot projects, reports, or other quality assured assessments of water quality in the State prepared, approved, or accepted by the Executive Director of the TCEQ which identify non-permitted sources of water pollution within cities including information used by the Executive Director for the purpose of updating the State’s list of impaired waters prepared in accordance with §303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act.
The rule provides for the TCEQ to give notice to cities which may be subject to the requirements of TAC Chapter 216. The notice is to specify the basis for determining that a city may be subject to the requirements of TAC Chapter 216, that additional water quality assessments and studies may be performed in the area of interest, that the city may undertake additional water quality assessments and studies of non-permitted sources of water pollution within its jurisdiction, and the time period (not to exceed five years) within which the city may try to correct the problem. A public meeting must be conducted if the Executive Director determines a city still meets the applicable criteria specified in the proposed regulation. The rule requires a notice of the public meeting, and the public must be provided with an opportunity to submit comments to the TCEQ on whether a city should be required to develop and implement a water pollution control
46 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
and abatement program. At the public meeting, the TCEQ may take one of the following actions: refer the matter to a contested case hearing, determine that a city does not have to submit a water pollution control and abatement program, require the city to develop and implement a water pollution control and abatement program, or issue any other order the TCEQ deems to be appropriate.
The rule specifies the requirements of a water pollution control and abatement program including its jurisdictional extent, municipal personnel, services, and functions. The services and functions specified in the rule include: develop and maintain an inventory of significant waste discharges; inspect and monitor these discharges including collecting and analyzing samples; determine if these discharges are in compliance with any applicable regulations; obtain compliance by these dischargers with applicable regulations, including where necessary the use of enforcement proceedings; and, develop and execute reasonable plans for controlling pollution resulting from generalized discharges of waste.
The rule provides for cities to submit water pollution control and abatement programs to the Executive Director of the TCEQ. The water pollution control and abatement programs must be signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer in Texas certifying that the program is designed to abate and prevent nonpermitted sources of water pollution in a city. Cities may amend their water pollution control and abatement program by submitting a new program signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer to the Executive Director of the TCEQ. The Executive Director may require a city to amend a water pollution control and abatement program for a city when new or additional information or circumstances warrant.
Linking §26.177 with the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control ProgramThe development and implementation of water pollution control and abatement plans, where appropriate, will provide significant protection for coastal natural resources and will be an integral part of the State’s coastal nonpoint source pollution control program. The rules state that cities should develop “reasonable and realistic plans” for the control of nonpermitted sources. Since this is a statewide program, no specific provisions are included for plans within the §6217 Management Area. However, cities within these areas will implement (g) measures or equally effective alternative management measures in conformity with the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program. The TCEQ may develop additional guidance for cities related to the development and implementation of water pollution control and abatement plans. Such a guidance document could be linked with the requirements of §6217.
The timing of development and implementation of water pollution control and abatement plans will depend in part on the water quality assessments and studies which trigger §26.177. For example, under the TMDL process, cities and other stakeholders located in watersheds of water bodies that do not meet applicable water quality standards would be encouraged and given an opportunity to work with the TCEQ in the development of TMDLs for the segment. If, during the development of a TMDL, sources, other than permitted, in a city are determined to be contributing to the violation of water quality standards, the city will be notified by the Executive Director of the TCEQ and given a reasonable amount of time to correct the problem. Actions undertaken by the city to correct the problem would need to be coordinated with the TMDL Implementation Plan adopted for the water body.
Texas Water Code §26.121Section 6217 specifies that Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs include enforceable policies and mechanisms sufficient to ensure implementation of the management measures. States may use voluntary or incentive-based programs if these programs are backed by existing enforcement authorities and the following is provided:
1. a legal opinion from the attorney general or an attorney representing the agency with jurisdiction for enforcement that such authorities can be used to prevent nonpoint pollution and require management measure implementation, as necessary;
47
2. a description of the voluntary or incentive-based programs the State will use to encourage implementation of the management measures, including the methods for tracking and evaluating those programs; and
3. a description of the mechanism or process that links the implementing agency with the enforcement agency and a commitment to use the existing enforcement authorities where necessary.
The primary programs discussed previously, including the TMDL process, the State’s nonpoint pollution program, the agricultural/silvicultural nonpoint pollution control program, the SB 503 WQMP program, NPDES program, certification under §401 of the Clean Water Act, and §26.177 of the TWC will all be utilized to implement the Coastal Nonpoint Source Program. Additional programs and initiatives that will be used to implement specific (g) measures are discussed in Chapter 5 of the State of Texas Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program (1998). Since many of these primary and secondary programs rely on voluntary compliance, a backup authority is required under the program guidance.
Texas proposes to use §26.121 of the TWC as the overall backup authority to ensure implementation of the (g) measures. Section 26.121 will come into play as an enforcement authority for any voluntary programs that lack their own specific enforcement authority or backup mechanism. The need for backup enforcement will be determined through regular program monitoring and evaluation, as discussed in Chapter 9 of the State of Texas Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program (1998).
Section 26.121 of the TWC is the general TCEQ authority which prohibits the unauthorized discharge of sewage, municipal waste, recreational waste, agricultural waste, or industrial waste into or adjacent to any water in the State. It also prohibits the discharge of any other waste into or adjacent to any water in the State which in itself or in conjunction with any other discharge or activity causes, continues to cause, or will cause pollution of any of the water in the State. This includes nonpoint sources of pollution. This authority has generally been used as the basis for enforcement permitting to address unpermitted pollution when no specific permitting authority covers the activity.
Commitment To Using Enforcement AuthoritiesAs stated in Texas’ legal opinion and cited backup authority, Texas is committed to enforcing the laws of the State to address water pollution problems within the state’s coastal boundaries. The State of Texas renews its commitment to using its legal backup authority to the fullest extent possible to ensure the implementation of the CZARA 6217(g) management measures as necessary to protect the State’s natural resources.
The TCEQ is the State agency given primary responsibility by legislative mandate to implement the Constitution and laws of the State relating to the conservation of natural resources and the protection of the environment. Tex. Water Code §5.012. Texas agrees to the continued use of the TWC Chapters 5, 7 and 26 as the overall legal authority to ensure the implementation of the CZARA management measures. This authority includes, under Section 26.121(a)(1), a general prohibition against any unauthorized discharge of sewage, municipal waste, recreation waste, agricultural waste, or industrial waste into or adjacent to water in the State without the authorization of the Commission and has generally been cited as the basis for enforcement to address unpermitted water pollution.
The TWC grants the Commission authority to regulate NPS pollution by directly enforcing Section 26.121(a)(1) and to adopt and implement rules necessary to prevent NPS pollution under Sections 5.103 and 26.011, which may require management measures to be implemented.
Enforcement actions citing Section 26.121(a)(1) are regularly pursued by the Commission under TWC Chapter 7 and regularly result in the adoption and enforcement of Commission-issued orders requiring corrective action, among other remedies. This strategy has proven effective and will continue to be used to regulate NPS pollution. Accordingly, through the TWC,
48 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
Texas’ approach is backed by enforceable State authority which ensures that the management measures will be implemented as necessary.
Texas is committed to using its legal authority under the TWC to ensure implementation of 6217(g) management measures, when needed.
TEXAS STATUTE AND RULE CITATIONS
Texas Water Code (TWC) Sections §5.012 and §5.013. Sec. 5.012. DECLARATION OF POLICY. The commission is the agency of the State given primary responsibility for implementing the constitution and laws of this state relating to the conservation of natural resources and the protection of the environment.
Sec. 5.013. GENERAL JURISDICTION OF COMMISSION.(a) The commission has general jurisdiction over:(3) the State's water quality program including issuance of permits, enforcement of water quality
rules, standards, orders, and permits, and water quality planning;
TWC Section §5.103 Sec. 5.103. RULES. (a) The commission shall adopt any rules necessary to carry out its powers
and duties under this code and other laws of this State.
(b) The commission shall adopt reasonable procedural rules to be followed in a commission hearing. The executive director may recommend to the commission for its consideration any rules that he considers necessary.
(c) Rules shall be adopted in the manner provided by Chapter 2001, Government Code. As provided by that Act, the commission must adopt rules when adopting, repealing, or amending any agency statement of general applicability that interprets or prescribes law or policy or describes the procedure or practice requirements of an agency. The commission shall follow its own rules as adopted until it changes them in accordance with that Act.
(d) The commission shall include as a part of each rule the commission adopts, and each proposed rule for adoption after the effective date of this subsection, a citation to the statute that grants the specific regulatory authority under which the rule is justified and a citation of the specific regulatory authority that will be exercised. If no specific statutory authority exists and the agency is depending on this section, citation of this section, or Section 5.102 or 5.013, is sufficient. A rule adopted in violation of this subsection is void.
TWC Section §7.002Sec. 7.002. ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY. The commission may initiate an action under this chapter to enforce provisions of this code and the Health and Safety Code within the commission's jurisdiction as provided by Section 5.013 of this code and rules adopted under those provisions. The commission or the executive director may institute legal proceedings to compel compliance with the relevant provisions of this code and the Health and Safety Code and rules, orders, permits, or other decisions of the commission. The commission may delegate to the executive director the authority to issue an administrative order, including an administrative order that assesses penalties or orders corrective measures, to ensure compliance with the provisions of this code and the Health and Safety Code within the commission's jurisdiction as provided by Section 5.013 of this code and rules adopted under those provisions.
TWC §26.121Sec. 26.121. UNAUTHORIZED DISCHARGES PROHIBITED. (a) Except as authorized by the
commission, no person may:
49
(1) discharge sewage, municipal waste, recreational waste, agricultural waste, or industrial waste into or adjacent to any water in the State;
(2) discharge other waste into or adjacent to any water in the State which in itself or in conjunction with any other discharge or activity causes, continues to cause, or will cause pollution of any of the water in the State, unless the discharge complies with a person's:
(A) certified water quality management plan approved by the State Soil and Water Conservation Board as provided by Section 201.026, Agriculture Code; or
(B) water pollution and abatement plan approved by the commission; or
(3) commit any other act or engage in any other activity which in itself or in conjunction with any other discharge or activity causes, continues to cause, or will cause pollution of any of the water in the State, unless the activity is under the jurisdiction of the Parks and Wildlife Department, the General Land Office, the Department of Agriculture, or the Railroad Commission of Texas, in which case this subdivision does not apply.
(b) In the enforcement of Subdivisions (2) and (3) of Subsection (a) of this section, consideration shall be given to the State of existing technology, economic feasibility, and the water quality needs of the water that might be affected. This subdivision does not apply to any NPDES activity.
(c) No person may cause, suffer, allow, or permit the discharge of any waste or the performance of any activity in violation of this chapter or of any permit or order of the commission.
(d) Except as authorized by the commission, no person may discharge any pollutant, sewage, municipal waste, recreational waste, agricultural waste, or industrial waste from any point source into any water in the State.
(e) No person may cause, suffer, allow, or permit the discharge from a point source of any waste or of any pollutant, or the performance or failure of any activity other than a discharge, in violation of this chapter or of any rule, regulation, permit, or other order of the commission.
TWC §26.0135 and §26.0136Sec. 26.0135. WATERSHED MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY. (a) To ensure
clean water, the commission shall establish the strategic and comprehensive monitoring of water quality and the periodic assessment of water quality in each watershed and river basin of the State. In order to conserve public funds and avoid duplication of effort, subject to adequate funding under Section 26.0291, river authorities shall, to the greatest extent possible and under the supervision of the commission, conduct water quality monitoring and assessments in their own watersheds. Watershed monitoring and assessments involving agricultural or silvicultural nonpoint source pollution shall be coordinated through the State Soil and Water Conservation Board with local soil and water conservation districts. The water quality monitoring and reporting duties under this section apply only to a river authority that has entered into an agreement with the commission to perform those duties. The commission, either directly or through cooperative agreements and contracts with local governments, shall conduct monitoring and assessments of watersheds where a river authority is unable to perform an adequate assessment of its own watershed. The monitoring program shall provide data to identify significant long-term water quality trends, characterize water quality conditions, support the permitting process, and classify unclassified waters. The commission shall consider available monitoring data and assessment results in developing or reviewing wastewater permits and stream standards and in conducting other water quality management activities. The assessment must include a review of wastewater discharges, nonpoint source pollution, nutrient loading, toxic materials, biological health of aquatic life, public education and involvement in water quality
50 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
issues, local and regional pollution prevention efforts, and other factors that affect water quality within the watershed. The monitoring and assessment required by this section is a continuing duty, and the monitoring and assessment shall be periodically revised to show changes in the factors subject to assessment.
(b) In order to assist in the coordination and development of assessments and reports required by this section, a river authority shall organize and lead a basin-wide steering committee that includes persons paying fees under Section 26.0291, private citizens, the State Soil and Water Conservation Board, representatives from other appropriate State agencies, political subdivisions, and other persons with an interest in water quality matters of the watershed or river basin. Based on committee and public input, each steering committee shall develop water quality objectives and priorities that are achievable considering the available technology and economic impact. The objectives and priorities shall be used to develop work plans and allocate available resources under Section 26.0291. Each committee member shall help identify significant water quality issues within the basin and shall make available to the river authority all relevant water quality data held by the represented entities. A river authority shall also develop a public input process that provides for meaningful comments and review by private citizens and organizations on each basin summary report. A steering committee established by the commission to comply with this subsection in the absence of a river authority or other qualified local government is not subject to Chapter 2110, Government Code.
(c) The purpose of the monitoring and assessment required by this section is to identify significant issues affecting water quality within each watershed and river basin of the State. Each river authority shall submit quality assured data collected in the river basin to the commission. The commission shall use the data to develop the statewide water quality inventory and other assessment reports that satisfy federal reporting requirements. The data and reports shall also be used to provide sufficient information for the commission, the State Soil and Water Conservation Board, river authorities, and other governmental bodies to take appropriate action necessary to maintain and improve the quality of the state's water resources. The commission shall adopt rules that at a minimum require each river authority to:
(1) develop and maintain a basin-wide water quality monitoring program that minimizes duplicative monitoring, facilitates the assessment process, and targets monitoring to support the permitting and standards process;
(2) establish a watershed and river basin water quality database composed of quality assured data from river authorities, wastewater discharge permit holders, State and federal agencies, and other relevant sources and make the data available to any interested person;
(3) identify water quality problems and known pollution sources and set priorities for taking appropriate action regarding those problems and sources;
(4) develop a process for public participation that includes the basin steering committee and public review and input and that provides for meaningful review and comments by private citizens and organizations in the local watersheds; and
(5) recommend water quality management strategies for correcting identified water quality problems and pollution sources.
(d) As required by commission rules, each river authority shall submit a written summary report to the commission, State Soil and Water Conservation Board, and Parks and Wildlife Department on the water quality assessment of the authority's watershed. The summary report must identify concerns relating to the watershed or bodies of water, including an identification of bodies of water with impaired or potentially impaired uses, the cause and possible source of use impairment, and recommended actions the commission may take to address those concerns. The summary report must discuss the public benefits from
51
the water quality monitoring and assessment program, including efforts to increase public input in activities related to water quality and the effectiveness of targeted monitoring in assisting the permitting process. A river authority shall submit a summary report after the report has been approved by the basin steering committee and coordinated with the public and the commission. A river authority shall hold basin steering committee meetings and shall invite users of water and wastewater permit holders in the watershed who pay fees under Section 26.0291 to review the draft of the work plans and summary report. A river authority shall inform those parties of the availability and location of the summary report for inspection and shall solicit input from those parties concerning their satisfaction with or suggestions for modification of the summary report for the watershed, the operation or effectiveness of the watershed monitoring and assessment program authorized by this section, and the adequacy, use, or equitable apportionment of the program's costs and funds. A river authority shall summarize all comments received from persons who pay fees under Section 26.0291 and from steering committee members and shall submit the report and the summaries to the governor, the lieutenant governor, and the speaker of the house of representatives not later than the 90th day after the date the river authority submits the summary report to the commission and other agencies.
(e) Each local government within the watershed of a river authority shall cooperate in making the assessment under Subsection (a) of this section and in preparing the report by providing to the river authority all information available to the local government about water quality within the jurisdiction of the local government, including the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality.
(f) If more than one river authority is located in a watershed, all river authorities within the watershed shall cooperate in making the assessments and preparing the reports.
(g) For purposes of this section, solid waste and solid waste management shall have the same meaning as in Chapter 361, Health and Safety Code. Each river authority and local government is authorized and encouraged, but not required, to manage solid waste and to facilitate and promote programs for the collection and disposal of household consumer and agricultural products which contain hazardous constituents or hazardous substances and which, when disposed of improperly, represent a threat of contamination to the water resources of the State. Such programs may include the establishment of a permanent collection site, mobile collection sites, periodic collection events, or other methods which a river authority or local government may deem effective.
(h) The commission shall apportion, assess, and recover the reasonable costs of administering the water quality management programs under this section. Irrigation water rights, non-priority hydroelectric rights of a water right holder that owns or operates privately owned facilities that collectively have a capacity of less than two megawatts, and water rights held in the Texas Water Trust for terms of at least 20 years will not be subject to this assessment. The cost to river authorities and others to conduct water quality monitoring and assessment shall be subject to prior review and approval by the commission as to methods of allocation and total amount to be recovered. The commission shall adopt rules to supervise and implement the water quality monitoring, assessment, and associated costs. The rules shall ensure that water users and wastewater dischargers do not pay excessive amounts, that a river authority may recover no more than the actual costs of administering the water quality management programs called for in this section, and that no municipality shall be assessed cost for any efforts that duplicate water quality management activities described in Section 26.177.
(i) In this section:
(1) "Quality assured data" means data that complies with commission rules for the water quality monitoring program adopted under Subsection (c)(1), including rules governing the methods under which water samples are collected and analyzed and data from those samples is assessed and maintained.
52 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
(2) "River authority" means:
(A) a river authority as defined by Section 30.003 of this code that includes 10 or more counties; and
(B) any other river authority or special district created under Article III, Section 52, Subsection (b)(1) or (2), or Article XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution that is designated by rule of the commission to comply with this section.
Sec. 26.0136. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT. (a) The commission is the agency with primary responsibility for implementation of water quality management functions, including enforcement actions, within the State. Water quality management functions shall be oriented on a watershed basis in consideration of the priorities identified by river authorities and basin steering committees. The commission by rule shall coordinate the water quality responsibilities of river authorities within each watershed and shall, where appropriate, delegate water quality functions to local governments under Section 26.175 of this code. The State Soil and Water Conservation Board shall coordinate and administer all programs for abating agricultural or silvicultural nonpoint source pollution, as provided by Section 201.026, Agriculture Code.
(b) Nothing in this section is intended to enlarge, diminish, or supersede the water quality powers, including enforcement authority, authorized by law for river authorities, the State Soil and Water Conservation Board, and local governments. Nothing in this section is intended to enlarge, diminish, or supersede the responsibilities of the Texas Agricultural Extension Service and the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station to conduct educational programs and research regarding nonpoint source pollution and related water resource and water quality matters.
(c) The commission shall establish rules to make the optimum use of State and federal funding and grant programs related to water quality programs of the commission.
(d) In this section, "river authority" has the meaning assigned by Section 26.0135(i) of this code.
TWC §26.177Sec. 26.177. WATER POLLUTION CONTROL DUTIES OF CITIES. (a) A city may establish a water
pollution control and abatement program for the city. If the watershed water quality assessment reports required by Section 26.0135 or other commission assessments or studies identify water pollution that is attributable to non-permitted sources in a city that has a population of 10,000 or more, the commission, after providing the city a reasonable time to correct the problem and after holding a public hearing, may require the city to establish a water pollution control and abatement program. The city shall employ or retain an adequate number of personnel on either a part-time or full-time basis as the needs and circumstances of the city may require, who by virtue of their training or experience are qualified to perform the water pollution control and abatement functions required to enable the city to carry out its duties and responsibilities under this section.
(b) The water pollution control and abatement program of a city shall encompass the entire city and, subject to Section 26.179 of this code, may include areas within its extraterritorial jurisdiction which in the judgment of the city should be included to enable the city to achieve the objectives of the city for the area within its territorial jurisdiction. The city shall include in the program the services and functions which, in the judgment of the city or as may be reasonably required by the commission, will provide effective water pollution control and abatement for the city, including the following services and functions:
(1) the development and maintenance of an inventory of all significant waste discharges into or adjacent to the water within the city and, where the city so elects, within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city, without regard to whether or not the discharges are authorized by the commission;
53
(2) the regular monitoring of all significant waste discharges included in the inventory prepared pursuant to Subdivision (1) of this subsection;
(3) the collecting of samples and the conducting of periodic inspections and tests of the waste discharges being monitored to determine whether the discharges are being conducted in compliance with this chapter and any applicable permits, orders, or rules of the commission, and whether they should be covered by a permit from the commission;
(4) in cooperation with the commission, a procedure for obtaining compliance by the waste dischargers being monitored, including where necessary the use of legal enforcement proceedings;
(5) the development and execution of reasonable and realistic plans for controlling and abating pollution or potential pollution resulting from generalized discharges of waste which are not traceable to a specific source, such as storm sewer discharges and urban runoff from rainwater; and
(6) any additional services, functions, or other requirements as may be prescribed by commission rule.
(c) The water pollution control and abatement program required by Subsections (a) and (b) of this section must be submitted to the commission for review and approval. The commission may adopt rules providing the criteria for the establishment of those programs and the review and approval of those programs.
(d) Any person affected by any ruling, order, decision, ordinance, program, resolution, or other act of a city relating to water pollution control and abatement outside the corporate limits of such city adopted pursuant to this section or any other statutory authorization may appeal such action to the commission or district court. An appeal must be filed with the commission within 60 days of the enactment of the ruling, order, decision, ordinance, program, resolution, or act of the city. The issue on appeal is whether the action or program is invalid, arbitrary, unreasonable, inefficient, or ineffective in its attempt to control water quality. The commission or district court may overturn or modify the action of the city. If an appeal is taken from a commission ruling, the commission ruling shall be in effect for all purposes until final disposition is made by a court of competent jurisdiction so as not to delay any permit approvals.
(e) The commission may adopt and assess reasonable and necessary fees adequate to recover the costs of the commission in administering this section.
(f) A city may contract with a river authority or another political subdivision to perform any or all services and functions that are part of a water pollution control and abatement program established under this section.
(g) The commission may assist cities in identifying and obtaining funds and technical assistance that may be available to assist a city, or a river authority or other political subdivision with whom a city has contracted, in performing any or all of the services or functions that are part of a water pollution control and abatement program established under this section.
(h) Property subject to a permit or plat in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality may not be subjected to new or additional water pollution regulations if the property is transferred to another municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, and all provisions of Chapter 245, Local Government Code, shall apply to the property. If the release of extraterritorial jurisdiction for the purpose of transferring it to another municipality results in property not being subject to any municipality's water pollution regulations on the date of release, the releasing municipality retains its jurisdiction to enforce its water pollution regulations until the property is included in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the receiving municipality.
TITLE 30 TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (TAC) CHAPTER 216, SUBCHAPTER B:
54 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
MUNICIPAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AND ABATEMENT
RULE §216.21 Purpose and Policy:(a) The purpose of this subchapter is to establish procedures and measures in accordance
with Texas Water Code, §26.177(a) to address water pollution that is attributable to non-permitted sources in cities that have a population of 10,000 or more persons.
(b) An unauthorized discharge is a violation of Texas Water Code, §26.121. An unauthorized discharge relates to a discharge of waste and pollutants as it is defined in the Texas Water Code. Nothing in this subchapter is intended to limit or prevent the commission from abating or preventing the pollution of water in the State through permits, orders, or other enforcement actions authorized under the Texas Water Code, Chapter 26, or other applicable State or federal law.
RULE §216.22 Applicability:(a) This rule applies to any city with a population of at least 10,000 persons, based on the
most recent federal decennial census, and in which a water quality assessment report required by Texas Water Code, §26.0135 or other commission assessment or study, as described in §216.24 of this title (relating to Water Quality Assessments and Studies), has identified water pollution that is attributable to non-permitted sources, excluding sources over which a municipality does not have regulatory jurisdiction. Cities meeting applicability shall be required to satisfy applicable provisions of this subchapter upon receipt of notice issued by the executive director pursuant to §216.25 of this title (relating to Notice of Initial Determination).
(b) A city whose population falls below 10,000, based on the most recent federal decennial census, will no longer have a duty to satisfy the applicable provisions of this subchapter upon the executive director's receipt from the city of the most recent federal decennial census indicating that the population has fallen below 10,000.
(c) A Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program submitted under this subchapter is not a Water Pollution and Abatement Plan as provided by Texas Water Code, §26.121(a)(2)(B).
RULE §216.23 DefinitionsTerms defined in Chapter 3 of this title (relating to Definitions) will have the same meaning
when used in this subchapter unless the definition is specifically modified in this section.
(1) City--A municipality or city existing, created, or organized under the general, home rule, or special laws of this State.
(2) Extra territorial jurisdiction-An area outside the corporate limits of a municipality as defined in Local Government Code, §42.021.
(3) Non-permitted sources--Sources of water pollution that are not authorized to discharge pollution into or adjacent to waters in the State by a valid permit, general permit, or rule pursuant to Texas Water Code, Chapter 26, the federal Clean Water Act, or other applicable State or federal law. This definition includes, but is not limited to, non-point sources of pollution as those sources are defined and identified pursuant to Chapter 220.2 of this title (relating to Regional Assessments of Water Quality), the federal Clean Water Act, the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, §6217, and other applicable State and federal statutes, regulations, policies, and guidance. This definition does not include discharges authorized by an NPDES or TPDES permit for municipal stormwater discharges.
(4) Pollution--The alteration of the physical, thermal, chemical, or biological quality of, or the contamination of any water in the State that renders the water harmful, detrimental, or injurious to humans, animal life, vegetation, or property, or to public health, safety or welfare, or impairs the usefulness or the public enjoyment of the water for any lawful or
55
reasonable purpose.
(5) Significant waste discharge--Point source discharges of waste or pollutants to receiving water that have been identified to cause pollution without regard to whether or not the discharges are authorized by the commission.
RULE §216.24 Water Quality Assessments and StudiesWater quality assessments and studies that may be used by the executive director to identify
water pollution that is attributable to non-permitted sources shall consist of one or more of the following.
(1) State water quality inventory. The State program which assesses the quality of surface and ground waters resulting in a report describing the status of water quality in the State in accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act, §305(b).
(2) Clean rivers program. Watershed water quality assessments conducted in accordance with Texas Water Code, §26.0135.
(3) State nonpoint source assessment. The State program implemented in compliance with Federal Clean Water Act, §319(a), which identifies surface and ground waters in the State which cannot reasonably be expected to attain or maintain applicable water quality standards or the goals and requirements of the federal Clean Water Act without additional controls for nonpoint sources of pollution.
(4) Total maximum daily load. Pursuant to Clean Water Act, §303(d), States are required to develop total maximum daily loads for waters within the State for which the effluent limitations required by the Clean Water Act, §301(b)(1)(A) and (B) are not stringent enough to implement any water quality standard applicable to such waters.
(5) Other. Special studies, pilot projects, reports, or other quality assured assessments of water quality in the State prepared, approved, or accepted by the executive director that identify non-permitted sources of water pollution within cities, including information used by the executive director for the purpose of updating the State's list of impaired waters prepared in accordance with the federal Clean Water Act, §303(d).
RULE §216.25 Notice of Initial DeterminationIf it is determined by the executive director that a city has met the criteria set forth in §216.22(a)
of this title (relating to Applicability) or the executive director is requiring the city to amend an existing water pollution control and abatement program, the executive director shall notify the city. This notice shall specify the following:
(1) the basis for the executive director's determination;
(A) that the city meets the criteria set forth in §216.22(a) of this title; or
(B) that the city's existing Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program should be amended;
(2) that the executive director may undertake additional water quality assessments and studies in the impacted area as set out in §216.24 of this title (relating to Water Quality Assessments and Studies);
(3) that the city may undertake additional water quality assessments and studies in the impacted area within its jurisdiction which comply with quality assurance requirements of the executive director; and
(4) the time period (not to exceed five years) within which the city may try to correct the problem. The executive director may extend this time period when new or additional information or circumstances warrant such an extension.
56 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
RULE §216.26 Final Determination of Applicability(a) After expiration of the time period specified in §216.25(a)(4) of this title (relating to Notice
of Initial Determination) , the executive director shall determine whether a city still meets the criteria set forth in §216.22(a) of this title (relating to Applicability) based on water quality assessments and studies set out in §216.24 of this title (relating to Water Quality Assessments and Studies) performed subsequent to the initial determination, taking into consideration any measures taken and improvements that have resulted or that will result from allowing full implementation of the city's efforts to correct the problem.
(b) If the executive director determines that a city continues to meet the criteria set forth in §216.22(a) of this title, the executive director at a regularly scheduled meeting held by the commission shall recommend that the city be required to submit a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program or, when appropriate, amend an existing Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program.
(c) Consideration at a regularly scheduled meeting of the commission shall not be required if the executive director and the city agree that the city will develop and implement a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program, or amend an existing Program. In lieu of a public meeting, the city, based on an agreement with the executive director, may request that the commission issue an agreed order to submit a Program as described in §216.27 of this title (relating to Water Pollution Control and Abatement Programs) or an amendment to an existing Program as described in §216.29 of this title (relating to Amendment Procedures for Water Pollution Control and Abatement Programs).
(d) The burden of demonstrating that the city meets the criteria set forth in §216.22(a) of this title shall rest on the executive director.
(e) The executive director shall cause notice of the regularly scheduled meeting to be published in the Texas Register informing the public of the meeting and that the public has 30 days prior to the regularly scheduled commission meeting to provide written comment to the commission on whether the city should be required to develop and implement a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program or amend an existing Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program.
(f) In considering the matter at the regularly scheduled meeting, the commission may:
(1) upon its own motion or upon the request of a party, conduct a contested case proceeding and consider evidence and hear oral argument of the parties, or refer the matter to SOAH for a contested case hearing conducted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to determine whether the city continues to meet the criteria set forth in §216.22(a) of this title;
(2) determine that the city is not required to submit a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program;
(3) determine that the city continues to meet the criteria set forth in §216.22(a) of this title and approve the executive director's recommendation that the city be required to develop, or where appropriate amend, and implement a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program; or
(4) issue any other order the commission deems appropriate.
(g) Should the commission determine under subsection (f)(3) of this section that a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program is required, the commission order shall specify the pollutants and non-permitted sources of concern and the deadline for the submission of a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program.
(h) The regularly scheduled meeting held by the commission pursuant to this section shall satisfy the requirement of the public hearing mandated by Texas Water Code, §26.177.
57
(i) A commission order issued pursuant to subsection (f) of this section is a final and appealable order under Texas Water Code, §5.351. As a prerequisite to appeal, a motion for rehearing under §80.271 of this title (relating to Motion for Rehearing) must be filed within 20 days after the date the city or the city's attorney of record is notified of the commission's final decision or order under this subchapter.
RULE §216.27 Water Pollution Control and Abatement Programs(a) The Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program of a city shall encompass the area
within a city's municipal boundaries and, subject to Texas Water Code, §26.179 (relating to Designation of Water Quality Protection Zones in Certain Areas), may include areas within its extra-territorial jurisdiction which in the judgment of the city should be included to enable the city to achieve its objectives for the area within its territorial jurisdiction.
(b) The city shall include in the Program the services and functions which, in the judgment of the city or as may be reasonably required by the commission, will provide effective water pollution control and abatement for the city to address water pollution attributable to non-permitted sources, including the following services and functions:
(1) the development and maintenance of an inventory of all significant waste discharges into or adjacent to the water within the city and, where the city so elects, within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city, without regard to whether or not the discharges are authorized by the commission;
(2) the regular monitoring of all significant waste discharges included in the inventory prepared pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection;
(3) the collecting of samples and the conducting of periodic inspections and tests of the waste discharges being monitored to determine whether the discharges are being conducted in compliance with this chapter and any applicable permits, orders, or rules of the commission, and whether they should be covered by a permit from the commission;
(4) in cooperation with the commission, a procedure for obtaining compliance by the waste dischargers being monitored, including where necessary the use of legal enforcement proceedings;
(5) the development and execution of reasonable and realistic plans for controlling and abating pollution or potential pollution resulting from generalized discharges of waste which are not traceable to a specific source, such as storm sewer discharges and urban runoff from rainwater; and
(6) any additional services, functions, or other requirements as may be prescribed by commission rule to effectuate the purposes of this subchapter.
RULE §216.28 Submittal of Water Pollution Control and Abatement ProgramA Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program shall be submitted to the executive director of the commission in accordance with the order issued pursuant to §216.26 of this title (relating to Final Determination of Applicability). Those elements requiring engineering design in the Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program for the city shall be signed and sealed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Texas who shall certify that the city's Program is designed to abate and prevent water pollution attributable to non-permitted sources located within the city.
RULE §216.29 Amendment Procedures for Water Pollution Control and Abatement Programs(a) A city may amend the Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program for that city at any
time by submitting an amended Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program to the
58 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
executive director of the commission. Those elements requiring engineering design in the amended Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program for the city shall be signed and sealed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Texas who shall certify that the city's Program is designed to abate and prevent water pollution attributable to non-permitted sources located within the city.
(b) The commission, upon its own motion or in response to a petition filed by the executive director, may require a city to amend a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program for that city when new or additional information or circumstances warrant such changes to effectuate the purposes of this subchapter.
(c) The provisions for notice of initial determination under §216.25 of this title (relating to Notice of Initial Determination) and final determination of applicability under §216.26 of this title (relating to Final Determination of Applicability) shall apply to an amendment of a Water Pollution Control and Abatement Program.
59
60 TEXAS COASTAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
© SHANNON PATRICK, FLICKR