Urban Runoff Management: Urban Runoff Management: So Far, So Good. So What?So Far, So Good. So What?

Geoff BrosseauGeoff Brosseau

The RMP 2007 Annual MeetingThe RMP 2007 Annual Meeting

Perspectives on the Impact of the Perspectives on the Impact of the Clean Water Act on San Francisco BayClean Water Act on San Francisco Bay

October 2, 2007October 2, 2007

So FarSo Far

1986 San Francisco Bay Basin Plan 1986 San Francisco Bay Basin Plan 1987 Clean Water Act Amendments1987 Clean Water Act Amendments 1990 Phase I Stormwater Regulations 1990 Phase I Stormwater Regulations

(Municipal, Industrial, Construction)(Municipal, Industrial, Construction) 1990s Phase I permits and programs1990s Phase I permits and programs 1999 Final Phase II Stormwater Regulations 1999 Final Phase II Stormwater Regulations

(Municipal, Construction) (Municipal, Construction) 2003 State Phase II General Permit2003 State Phase II General Permit

So GoodSo Good

Bay Area has been a leader in the State and Bay Area has been a leader in the State and country in developing the stormwater program country in developing the stormwater program and meeting Clean Water Act requirementsand meeting Clean Water Act requirements

~90 Phase I communities~90 Phase I communities ~30 Phase II communities~30 Phase II communities ~1,350 Industrial facilities~1,350 Industrial facilities ~1,500 Construction sites~1,500 Construction sites BASMAABASMAA

So Good (cont’)So Good (cont’) Recognized Surface Cleaner program (1996 - )Recognized Surface Cleaner program (1996 - ) Construction site inspection / education program (1990s)Construction site inspection / education program (1990s) Regional Advertising Campaigns (1996 - )Regional Advertising Campaigns (1996 - ) Brake Pad Partnership (1996 - )Brake Pad Partnership (1996 - ) Start at the SourceStart at the Source manual (1997, 1999) manual (1997, 1999) Our Water, Our WorldOur Water, Our World Program (1998 - ) Program (1998 - ) Hydromodification management plans (2001 - )Hydromodification management plans (2001 - )

So Good (cont’)So Good (cont’)

USEPA Clean Water Act Recognition Award-USEPA Clean Water Act Recognition Award-winning programs - in 12 years California has winning programs - in 12 years California has produced:produced: 7 Municipal award winners 7 Municipal award winners 3 Industrial award winners 3 Industrial award winners

– – fully half from the Bay Area fully half from the Bay Area Santa Clara ValleySanta Clara Valley AlamedaAlameda LockheedLockheed LLNLLLNL

So What?So What?

Case Study: Diazinon Case Study: Diazinon In 1998, using Clean Water Act authority, USEPA:In 1998, using Clean Water Act authority, USEPA:• listed listed waterbodies in virtually every urbanized area waterbodies in virtually every urbanized area

of Californiaof California as impaired by as impaired by pesticides and toxicitypesticides and toxicity• required that TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily required that TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily

Loads) be calculated and that dischargers (local Loads) be calculated and that dischargers (local governments) reduce the amount of these governments) reduce the amount of these pesticides in the waterbodies to the TMDL targets pesticides in the waterbodies to the TMDL targets (max. allowable amount)(max. allowable amount)

So What? (cont’)So What? (cont’) In 1999 – California MS4s pushed USEPA OPP In 1999 – California MS4s pushed USEPA OPP

and OW to coordinate on urban pesticides and and OW to coordinate on urban pesticides and water quality water quality

In 2000 – USEPA announced the phase out of In 2000 – USEPA announced the phase out of diazinon products diazinon products

By 2002 – The amount of reported diazinon By 2002 – The amount of reported diazinon applications had decreased substantiallyapplications had decreased substantially

By 2006 – Aquatic toxicity and diazinon By 2006 – Aquatic toxicity and diazinon concentrations in urban creeks had decreased concentrations in urban creeks had decreased dramatically–in most cases below TMDL targetsdramatically–in most cases below TMDL targets

So What(‘s Next)?So What(‘s Next)?

Effectiveness Assessment Effectiveness Assessment Quantifiable measuresQuantifiable measures True source control (True source control (↓Potential ↓Potential Pollutants Pollutants ↓↓Runoff)Runoff)

Product stewardship / EPR / Green chemistryProduct stewardship / EPR / Green chemistry Start at the SourceStart at the Source / Low Impact Development (LID) / Low Impact Development (LID)

Monitoring Monitoring –– Creeks >> Bay / Ocean / River Creeks >> Bay / Ocean / River

Challenges to measuring Challenges to measuring stormwater program effectiveness stormwater program effectiveness

(Cause (Cause ――?? Effect) Effect)(Action (Action ――?? Outcome) Outcome)

Degrees of separation phenomenonDegrees of separation phenomenon Complicating effects of integrating all inputsComplicating effects of integrating all inputs Outcome Level is defined by:Outcome Level is defined by:

Type of best management practice being measuredType of best management practice being measured Power of BMPPower of BMP

Assessment Outcome LevelsAssessment Outcome Levels

Level 1 – Documenting Stormwater Program ActivitiesLevel 1 – Documenting Stormwater Program Activities

Level 2 – Raising AwarenessLevel 2 – Raising Awareness

Level 3 – Changing BehaviorLevel 3 – Changing Behavior

Level 4 – Reducing Loads from SourcesLevel 4 – Reducing Loads from Sources

Level 5 – Improving Runoff QualityLevel 5 – Improving Runoff Quality

Level 6 – Level 6 – Protecting Receiving Protecting Receiving

Water QualityWater QualityIncreasing Difficulty

Municipal Program Effectiveness Assessment

Manufacture

Sale

Use

Release to urban runoff

Urban runoff discharge

Receiving water

CostsEffectiveness

True SourceControl

Source Control

TreatmentControl

True Source Control (↓Potential Pollutants)True Source Control (↓Potential Pollutants)Product-based Pollutants: Conceptual RelationshipsProduct-based Pollutants: Conceptual Relationships

True Source Control (↓Runoff)True Source Control (↓Runoff)Stormwater Quality Stormwater Quality

Management HierarchyManagement Hierarchy

Reduce

Reuse

Recycle

Treat

Thank youThank you

Implementation Success Story: Implementation Success Story: Pesticides and StormwaterPesticides and Stormwater

By 2006 – Aquatic toxicity and diazinon By 2006 – Aquatic toxicity and diazinon concentrations in urban creeks decreased concentrations in urban creeks decreased dramatically – in most cases below TMDL dramatically – in most cases below TMDL targets - targets - Level 6 Outcome – Protecting receiving Level 6 Outcome – Protecting receiving water qualitywater quality

USEPA and DPR changing the way pesticides USEPA and DPR changing the way pesticides are regulated to address/prevent water quality are regulated to address/prevent water quality problems / Retailer data show less-toxic product problems / Retailer data show less-toxic product sales ↑ - sales ↑ - Level 3 Outcome – Changing behaviorLevel 3 Outcome – Changing behavior

Surveys - Surveys - Level 2 Outcome – Raising awarenessLevel 2 Outcome – Raising awareness