|
|
|
|
 |
|
StormCon News
|
|
Interview with the EPA’s Stormwater Champion: Nikos Singelis, Senior Program Analyst, US Environmental Protection Agency |
By Laura Funkhouser
 |
|
Nikos Singelis
|
Nikos Singelis, Lisa Nisenson, John Kosco, and David Hirschman will present the popular full-day pre-conference workshop “EPA Presents Post-Construction, LID, and Smart Growth as Stormwater BMPs” on Monday, August 20, 2007, in Phoenix, AZ. See www.stormcon.com for more information.
The stormwater Phase II regulations went into effect in 2003. How are things going? What do you see as the biggest challenges for the next couple years?
Overall I’d have to say it is going pretty well but, in some cases, perhaps a little slower than we had expected. For example, let’s look at the Phase II communities or MS4s [municipal separate storm sewer systems]. The regulations give the Phase II MS4s five years to get their programs up and running. In my experience talking to people, and considering that we’re more than halfway there, I believe there will be a number of communities that won’t meet that goal. We realize it’s a complex program and they’re struggling. We’re providing assistance, but it’s difficult for smaller communities that might not have the budget or staff.
On the construction side, the Phase II regulations cover construction sites between 1 and 5 acres. We’re seeing more and more people who realize they need permit coverage. But I think there is a long way to go before we see a more universal recognition of what is required on the ground.
Those, I think, are two big challenges that we face over the next couple of years.
You’ve been traveling all over the country for the last several years to teach workshops and you also do live Web casts for municipal stormwater managers. What are the trends that you’re seeing in general?
Take the MS4s—there are a wide variety of approaches right now. Some have started with one minimum measure. Some have implemented them all at the same time. Some have taken a watershed planning approach. There are a wide variety of approaches out there. One of the things we’re trying to push is a focus on the big picture. We would like to see communities focus more on things like smart growth and overall watershed issues. As you know, the EPA’s water programs have been focused on the watershed approach for many years now. However, our focus is broadening a bit. My office didn’t start smart growth and we didn’t start LID, but these are things that we’ve looked at and they make sense to us for the stormwater program. The way we conceptualize these things has been refined, and as a result, we’re trying to encourage MS4s to design their stormwater programs to incorporate these ideas so that they succeed now and in the future.
How do smart growth and LID work together?
We see them as being complementary. Smart growth takes a broad, landscape view, analogous to the ideas behind the watershed approach. You’re looking at the landscape and the land uses and projecting growth patterns into the future. You’re looking at development and how that might affect your watershed. Smart growth is broader than just water quality and gets into many other areas, such as air quality and transportation issues. Its value to us in the stormwater program is that it gets us to look at a broad area or watershed as it is now and as it will be or could be in the future. That view will help us plan future growth and incorporate stormwater management with the hope that our watersheds will not be degraded.
LID is more site-specific. It looks at ways to maintain or restore the natural hydrology of a site or area. LID uses techniques that infiltrate runoff to compensate for the increases in impervious surfaces that are created during development.
Smart growth and LID can work in tandem, where you have this broad view and you set expectations and standards through local planning, zoning, and stormwater ordinances. That way you have new development set in the right place in the watershed and you use LID techniques to help prevent or minimize degradation of the watershed.
Why should we be using LID and smart growth principles?
We’re finding more and more that our watersheds are being impacted by our development patterns. There’s probably still a perception out there from the 1970s that the big sources of water pollution are industries and sewage plants. But that’s not the case anymore—overwhelmingly the sources are stormwater related. We have a growing population in the US and development is continuing. So we need to focus on the quality of that development and how it impacts watersheds—and many other environmental issues and our quality of life. These issues of planning and development seem incredibly important to me. These are things that if we don’t get right now, we will have to live with for a long time to come.
How do stormwater managers and engineers get involved in zoning or comprehensive planning? Isn’t that the tail wagging the dog, since it’s usually the job of planners?
That is one of the big challenges because the kinds of things we’re talking about aren’t under the strict control of the typical local stormwater manager. It involves people at many levels (planners, city councils, mayors, developers, et cetera) and it takes partnerships with all of these other people who are making these big picture decisions.
We are hoping that the dialogue that is going on now about smart growth issues will help to bring all of these people together. It would be great if municipal and county planners would have a stronger awareness of stormwater issues.
What about retrofitting?
The Phase II regulations require communities to focus on new development and redevelopment, and there really isn’t a piece of it that talks about retrofitting existing areas. That being said, retrofitting is a really important area if we are serious about meeting water-quality goals. This is something that we encourage communities to think about especially in highly developed areas that have water-quality problems. If you are in a community that’s not expecting any growth but have stormwater problems, you really only can retrofit.
If we had a stormwater hall of fame, who would be in it?
Ah, a very difficult question—particularly for an EPA person! There are many communities out there that are doing a good job. The examples I have in mind are those that have excelled at a particular aspect of the six minimum measures in the Phase II program. For example, Austin, TX; Boulder, CO; Burlington, VT; and the State of Maine have done a great job with education and outreach, sometimes with very little funding. For illicit discharge, Wayne County, MI, and Boston, MA, have very good programs. Douglas County, CO, has a great construction program, and some innovative things are happening in construction in Pennsylvania. Prince George’s County, MD, of course, was the leader in LID. That’s not a very comprehensive list and I hope I don’t get e-mails because I left someone out! We have a number of stormwater case studies on our Web site, and, of course, Stormwater magazine is another good place to learn about innovative programs.
So what about the construction industry? How are things going there and what has the EPA been doing to reach them?
It’s always hard to measure these things exactly, but anecdotally, there seems to be a growing awareness of the requirements among the small and medium-sized construction companies. The bigger companies are more experienced and have been operating within the regulatory context since the early 1990s. It seems to me that it is the smaller companies where there’s a need to raise awareness and provide more information. We need to do more and we are trying to develop materials that are useful to the construction industry. We have targeted some of our outreach and education efforts toward the construction industry over the past couple of years. Recently, we released a new SWPPP [stormwater pollution prevention plan] template and guide that we hope will be useful and will help improve the quality of SWPPPs. We did a Web cast in January on this topic and had about 5,000 attendees. It was our biggest Web cast so far! We’ll be doing more this year—working with the trade associations and appearing at conferences, like StormCon, to help get the information out there.
People were surprised at how much fun your workshop was last year at StormCon. You made a game out of smart growth planning. What have you learned from teaching so many workshops?
Thanks. It did seem that people enjoyed that workshop and particularly the planning game we put together. We gave them Legos to play with, so that probably helped! On a more serious note, the main thing that I’ve learned from all the workshops and talking to people is that stormwater management really is a tough job. I think for a medium or small community, putting together a comprehensive program that covers the six minimum measures can be a pretty daunting challenge. I’ve become very aware of that doing these trainings and talking with people in these communities who don’t (yet!) have the necessary budget or staff. That’s why we try to provide clear and concise materials, like the illicit discharge and the education and outreach manuals, so they can find exactly what they need in one spot and not have to search around for it. For construction sites it’s a tough job too, in different ways. They have to do their job and do it quickly. The level of activity at some construction sites can be very intense; they have many people coming on and off the site, many subcontractors, changing conditions, rain events, et cetera. Managing all of that is a challenge as well. Having said all that, I do think given time, understanding, and effort that these things are solvable. Personally, I think stormwater is an area where we, all of us working together, can make a real difference.
SW May 2007 |
