Stormwater Permits: Only a Trickle
- By Angela Neville
- Sep 01, 2007
It seems ironic that the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency is barely
dribbling out the permits intended to
help control flood waters.
According to a report from the Government
Accountability Office (GAO)
issued on May 31, almost 11 percent of
municipal storm sewer systems have not
received permits as of December 2006
despite the fact that the federal application
deadline for large communities
occurred in 1993 and the deadline for
small communities was in 2003.
Once considered a backwater issue,
stormwater management has become an
important matter to many U.S. cities as a
result of the enactment in recent years of
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permitting program
under the Clean Water Act that
addresses stormwater discharges.
Published in 1990, Phase I of the
NPDES stormwater regulations pertains
to operators of large and medium
municipal separate storm sewer systems
(MS4s). Under the Phase I rules, large
MS4s that serve a population of
250,000 or more or medium MS4s that
serve a population of 100,000 or more,
but less than 250,000, are required to
obtain NPDES permits and manage their
stormwater discharges. In 1999, Phase
II regulations were enacted that require
certain regulated small MS4s, which
serve populations of less than 100,000,
and construction sites that disturb 1 to
5 acres, to obtain stormwater management
permits. For more information on
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s (EPA) NPDES regulations, go to
www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater.
Stormwater discharges are generated
by runoff from land and impenetrable
areas, such as paved streets, parking
lots, and building rooftops, during rainfall
and snow events. Under the NPDES
program, most stormwater events are
considered point sources and therefore
require coverage by an NPDES permit.
Stormwater events have two main components
that municipalities have to
address: the increased volume and rate
of runoff from impervious surfaces and
the concentration of pollutants in the
runoff. According to EPA officials, both
components are directly related to
development in urban areas. Together,
these components cause changes in
hydrology and water quality that result
in a variety of problems, including habitat
modification and loss, increased
flooding, decreased aquatic biological
diversity, and increased sedimentation
and erosion.
Typically, cities have several main
goals related to stormwater management:
reducing pollutant loads, maintaining
groundwater recharge and quality,
protecting stream channels, and
safely conveying extreme floods. As well,
effective stormwater management offers
a multitude of other possible benefits,
including protection of wetlands and
aquatic ecosystems, improved quality of
receiving water bodies, conservation of
water resources, and protection of public
health.
In its research, GAO determined that
11 of the 220 bigger urban areas and
809 of the approximately 5,000 smaller
communities were not yet permitted as of
late 2006. More than half of all state
and federal permitting authorities have
not issued all of their permits. Even more
surprising, the report states that some
permitting authorities – including those
in Texas, Washington, and EPA Region 6
– have not issued any of their Phase II
permits for the smaller communities.
The GAO report pointed out that the
delay in issuing municipal separate
storm system permits was caused, in
part, by legal challenges to both the
process of issuing stormwater permits
and the conditions of these permits. In
addition, GAO found other factors,
including budget constraints, have contributed
to state and federal delays in
issuing stormwater permits.
Another point brought out in the
GAO report is that there is limited and
inconsistent data being provided by
communities. The GAO report recommends
that EPA issue new guidance and
consider regulatory changes to ensure
communities report more consistently
on their efforts to reduce stormwater
pollution. GAO notes that EPA’s guidance
published in January 2007 did
instruct community evaluators to identify
the total number of sites a municipal
system must inspect, but had no
requirements for providing detailed data
on costs and other related information.
To access the GAO’s report, Clean Water:
Further Implementation and Better Cost
Data Needed to Determine Impact of EPA’s
Stormwater Program on Communities
(GAO – 07-479), go to
www.gao.gov/new.items/d07479.pdf.
In a letter dated May 22, Benjamin
Grumbles, the EPA assistant administrator
for water, responded to the GAO
findings by stating the agency would
investigate ways to gather better cost
information through communities’
annual reports.
Our cities need to take aggressive
action now to advance successful
stormwater management for both our
current needs and for future growth. If
strongly promoted by both EPA and U.S.
communities, effective programs to control
stormwater runoff can have a big
impact on the long-term protection of
our nation’s watersheds.
This article originally appeared in the 09/01/2007 issue of Environmental Protection.
About the Author
Angela Neville, JD, REM, is the former editorial director of Environmental Protection.