SEATTLE, Washington, February 16, 2009 (ENS) – The Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board has found provisions in the state’s 2007 Phase II municipal stormwater general permit to be legally inadequate. The permit regulates stormwater controls in 85 cities and portions of several counties around Puget Sound.
In its February 3 ruling, the Board affirmed its August 2008 ruling that the largest Puget Sound cities and counties must take more aggressive steps to reduce stormwater runoff, including mandatory use of low impact development techniques.
While finding that the smaller Phase II cities and counties do not need to mandate the default use of low impact development immediately as the larger Phase I jurisdictions do, the Board concluded that the state Department of Ecology must do more to implement low impact development in these areas in the near future.
The ruling indicates that greater use of low impact development techniques such as reduced impervious areas, greater protection of native vegetation, and onsite stormwater management will be necessary.
“The Board effectively affirmed what we all know to be true – existing stormwater programs are not adequate to meet our shared goals of protecting and restoring the health of Puget Sound by 2020,” said Sue Joerger of Puget Soundkeeper Alliance. “It’s time to aggressively implement stronger controls before more damage is done.”
Stormwater runoff from roads and rooftops that is discharged to the lakes, rivers, streams that empty into Puget Sound has been cited as the number one threat to the health of the water body.
Beckoning Cistern, a stormwater sculpture by Buster Simpson at 81 Vine Street, Seattle, collects roof water flow and spills the water into an adjacent planter. (Photo courtesy City of Seattle)
Stormwater contains toxic metals, oil and grease, pesticides and herbicides, and bacteria and nutrients. Recent research of stormwater runoff from industrial areas and highways indicates that when it rains, toxic metals, particularly copper and zinc, are discharged in amounts that degrade water quality and kill marine life, said Joerger.
Stormwater volumes erode stream banks, deposit sediment, and widen channels enough to damage fish and wildlife habitat. Some studies show urban creeks in the Puget Sound area to be so degraded that adult salmon are killed within minutes of entering the stream.
“The Puget Sound Partnership, the National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. EPA, and countless other scientific bodies are telling us that we need to dramatically change the way we manage stormwater,” said Kathy Fletcher, executive director of the nonprofit People for Puget Sound. “The region should begin aggressively implementing the most effective practices immediately.”
Still, the Board decided not to require immediate use of low impact development as a default technique wherever feasible, opting instead for a suite of measures to phase in greater use of low impact development in these smaller jurisdictions during the remainder of the five year permit term.
The Board ordered the Department of Ecology to set forth “additional requirements with respect to broader use of low impact development during this permit term, and in anticipation of the next.”
Specifically, the Board directed the state agency to amend the permit to:
require the identification and elimination of barriers to implementing low impact development
require the identification of low impact development practices that can be implemented immediately
require the establishment of goals and metrics to “identify, promote, and measure” low impact development use, including schedules by which Phase II jurisdictions will require such techniques.
“The future of Puget Sound is at stake,” said Jan Hasselman, an attorney for Earthjustice who represented the nonprofit groups. “While the Board gave the Phase II jurisdictions more flexibility in the timing, there is no doubt that the region will have to transition to much greater reliance on low impact development and better land use planning. There’s no more excuse for delay.”
The Board ruled against the environmental appellants on several other challenges, including the permit’s coverage area, the regulatory thresholds, and the lack of monitoring. No decision has been made on appeals.
Click here [www.earthjustice.org] for a copy of the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board decision.
