United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4203)
EPA833-F-99-012
April 1999
Fact Sheet 2.10
vvEPA
Storm Water Phase II
Proposed Rule
Fact Sheet Series
Overview
1.0-Storm Water Phase II
Proposed Rule Overview
Small MS4 Program
2.0 - Small MS4 Storm Water
Program Overview
2.1 - Who's Covered? Designation
and Waivers of Regulated Small
MS4s
2.2 - Urbanized Areas: Definition
and Description
Minimum Control Measures
2.3 - Public Education and
Outreach Minimum Control
Measure
2.4 - Public Participation/
Involvement Minimum Control
Measure
2.5 - Illicit Discharge Detection and
Elimination Minimum Control
Measure
2.6 - Construction Site Runoff
Control Minimum Control Measure
2.7 - Post-Construction Runoff
Control Minimum Control Measure
2.8 - Pollution Prevention/Good
Housekeeping Minimum Control
Measure
2.9 - Permitting and Reporting:
The Process and Requirements
2.10 - Federal and State-Owned
MS4s: Program Implementation
Construction Program
3.0 - Construction Program
Overview
Industrial "No Exposure"
4.0 - Conditional No Exposure
Exemption for Industrial Activity
Storm Water Phase II
Proposed Rule
Federal and State-Owned MS4s:
Program Implementation
This fact sheet is basedon the Storm Water Phase II Proposed Rule. Therefore, the information provided herein is subject to
change upon publication of the final Phase II rule in November 1999. A revised series of fact sheets will be provided at that
time. A comprehensive list of the current fact sheets is in the text box at left.
The program for small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) under the Storm Water
Phase II Proposed Rule would include, in addition to local government jurisdictions, certain
Federal and State-owned and operated small MS4s. Federal facilities currently are not regulated as
part of the existing NPDES storm water program for MS4s; however, the proposed rule would amend
the definition of an MS4 to include the "United States" as an owner or operator of an MS4, thereby
including Federal owners/operators in the NPDES Phase II storm water program. Federal and State-
owned/operated small MS4s can include universities, prisons, hospitals, roads (i.e., departments of
transportation), military bases (e.g., State Army National Guard barracks), parks, and office buildings/
complexes. For more information on the proposed Phase II coverage of Federal and State MS4s, see
Fact Sheet 2.1.
The proposed small MS4 program, largely designed with municipally-owned and operated small
MS4s in mind, could raise implementation issues for Federal and State owners/operators. Federal and
State owners/operators of regulated small MS4s would need to obtain an NPDES permit that would
require the development and implementation of a storm water management program that includes the
following six minimum control measures: public education and outreach, public participation/
involvement, illicit discharge detection and elimination, construction site runoff control, post-
construction runoff control, and good housekeeping/pollution prevention for municipal operations
(for more information on each measure, see Fact Sheets 2.3 through 2.8). This fact sheet highlights
potential implementation issues related to the minimum control measures, then discusses the
implementation options included in the proposed rule that may resolve these issues.
What Are Some Implementation Concerns?
T
I his section profiles the three most common implementation issues raised in the public comments
submitted regarding the Phase II Proposed Rule.
How Does the Proposed Rule Account for Unique Characteristics?
Federal and State small MS4s possess a number of characteristics that set them apart from their
municipal counterparts. For example, whereas municipally-owned MS4s largely serve resident
populations, many Federal or State-owned MS4s, such as medical clinics and departments of
transportation (DOTs), do not. Other types of Federal and State MS4s, such as military bases,
prisons, and State universities, serve a population that is different from a typical municipal population.
Their unique characteristics could lead Federal or State owners/operators to question either the need
to implement the entire suite of minimum control measures or their ability to fully comply with their
Phase II storm water permit. It would be the responsibility of the Federal or State-owned MS4 to
develop a program to address the minimum measures in a way that best matches the MS4's unique
characteristics.
-------
Fact Sheet 2.10 - Federal and State Owned Small MS4s: Program Implementation
Page 2
What If the Owner/Operator Appears to Be Lacking the
Necessary Legal Authority?
Three of the minimum control measures (illicit discharge
detection and elimination, and the two construction-related
measures) would require enforceable controls on third party
activities to help ensure successful implementation of the
measure. Some Federal and State owners/operators, however,
may not have the necessary legal regulatory authority to adopt
these enforceable controls in the same manner as do local
governments. For example, a State DOT that is responsible for
the portions of its roads running through urbanized areas may not
have the legal authority to impose restrictions on, and penalties
against, illicit (i.e., non-storm water) discharges into its MS4 if
the source of the discharge is outside the DOT's right-of-way or
jurisdiction. As in the case of local governments that may lack
such authority, State and Federal MS4s would be expected to
utilize the authority they do possess and to seek cooperative
arrangements where they lack necessary authority.
How Would the Program Be Implemented Among with
Multiple Regulated Jurisdictions?
Since the proposed rule provides automatic coverage of all small
MS4s within an urbanized area, regardless of political boundaries,
the result will likely be coverage of multiple governments and
agencies with multiple jurisdictions in a single area. For example,
a city government located within an urbanized area that owns or
operates a small MS4 would be designated alongside the county,
State, and Federal DOTs if they all own or operate a portion of
the roads in the city. All four entities would be responsible for
developing a storm water management program for their MS4s
(or portions thereof) within the city limits. EPA would encourage
State and Federal small MS4s to establish cooperative agreements
with cities and counties in implementing their storm water
programs.
What Are the Implementation Strategies that
Would Help Address the Issues?
This section offers two hypothetical strategies for resolving the
implementation issues raised above. The best solution may
include a creative combination of strategies.
STRATEGY #1
A Focus on Choosing Appropriate BMPs
The proposed rule would require the permittee to choose
appropriate best management practices (BMPs) for each
minimum control measure. In other words, EPA would expect
Phase II permittees to tailor their storm water management plans
and their BMPs to fit the particular characteristics and needs of
the permittee and the area served by their MS4. Therefore, the
Federal or State owner/operator of a regulated storm sewer system
could take advantage of the flexibility provided in the proposed
rule by applying each minimum control measure in a way that best
fits their MS4. Below is an example of tailored activities and
BMPs that Federal or State owners/operators could identify and
implement for each measure:
Q Public Education and Outreach. Distribute brochures
and post fliers to educate employees of a Federal hospital
about the problems associated with storm water runoff
and the steps they can take to reduce pollutants in storm
water discharges. For example, employees could be
advised against carelessly discarding trash on the ground
or allowing their cars to leak oil/fluids in the parking lot.
Q Public Participation/Involvement. Provide notice of
storm water management plan development and hold
meetings at which employees of a Federal office complex
are encouraged to voice their ideas and opinions about the
effort. Request volunteers to help develop the plan.
Q Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination. Develop a
map of the storm sewer system on a military base.
Perform visual dry weather monitoring of any outfalls to
detect if any non-storm water is being discharged into the
storm sewer from the base. If a dry weather flow is
found, trace it back to the extent possible and stop the
discharge. In the case of a Federal or State DOT, the
DOT could develop and implement a program to detect
and eliminate illicit discharges, but when a discharge is
discovered and traced to the boundary of its system, they
could then refer the discharge to the adjoining regulated
MS4 for further action.
Q Construction Site Runoff Control. Require the
implementation of erosion and sediment controls, and
control of other waste, for any construction concerning
Federal or State DOT's roads. Review site plans for
proper controls, perform periodic inspections, and
establish penalties in the construction contract if controls
are not implemented. If construction is done directly by
the regulated DOT, it could be penalized by the NPDES
permitting authority for non-compliance with its small
MS4 permit if controls are not properly implemented.
Q Post-Construction Runoff Control. Require the
consideration and implementation of post-construction
storm water controls for any new construction on the
grounds of a prison. This can be required as part of a
construction contract, instituted as internal policy, and
considered during site plan review.
Q Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for
Municipal Operations. Train maintenance staff at a
State university to employ pollution prevention
techniques whenever possible. For example, routinely
pick up trash/litter from the university grounds, use less
salt on the parking lots and access roads in the winter,
perform any maintenance of university vehicles under
shelter only, limit pesticide use to the minimum needed,
add vegetative buffer strips in the parking lots to filter
runoff, and keep dumpster lids closed.
-------
Fact Sheet 2.10 - Federal and State Owned Small MS4s: Program Implementation
Page 3
STRATEGY #2
Working with Other Entities
There could be instances when the Federal or State permittee has
limited capabilities to satisfy one or more of the minimum control
measures. For example, as discussed above, the permittee could
lack the proper legal authority to enforce controls (although it
should try to obtain the necessary legal authority if at all
possible).
In the case of limited capabilities, the permittee could work
with neighboring owners/operators of regulated small MS4s,
preferably on a watershed basis, to form a shared storm water
management program in which each permittee is responsible for
activities that are within individual legal authorities and abilities.
The proposed rule would allow the permittee to rely on other
entities, with their permission, to implement those minimum
measures that the permittee is otherwise unable to implement.
Three examples:
Q A State DOT with limited regulatory legal authority could
reference a local sewer district's illicit detection and
elimination program in its permit application, but only to
the extent that the program sufficiently addresses the
measure with respect to discharges into the DOT's storm
sewer system.
Q The permittee or NPDES permitting authority could
reference such programs as coastal nonpoint pollution
control programs, State or local watershed programs,
State or local construction programs, and environmental
education efforts by public or private entities.
Q The permittee also could become a co-permittee with a
neighboring Phase IMS4 through a modification of the
Phase I MS4's individual permit. This may be the most
logical and preferable option for those Federal and State
entities located in Phase I municipal areas.
Choosing to work with other governmental entities as a co-
permittee, or referencing parts of each other's plans, could help to
resolve issues that may arise due to multiple regulated
jurisdictions in the same area. If multiple jurisdictions work
together, they could avoid duplicative efforts, as well as territorial
or regulatory disputes. See Fact Sheet 2.9 for more information
on permitting options for regulated small MS4s.
Suggested Steps to Working with Other Entities
(1) Identify the boundaries of the urbanized area (see Fact
Sheet 2.2 for more information on urbanized areas)
(2) Identify the owners and operators of the storm sewer
systems or portions of the systems within the urbanized
area such as local, State, Tribal or Federal governments
or other entities.
(3) In seeking permit coverage, choose to:
(A) Identify where another entity may satisfy one or
more minimum control measure. If its program is
the equivalent to a minimum control measure's
required elements, the owner/operator of the
regulated small MS4 may reference the existing
program if the other entity gives it permission to do
so. While such an arrangement would relieve the
owner/operator from performing the minimum
measure itself, the owner/operator would remain
ultimately responsible for the measure's effective
implementation (see Fact Sheet 2.9 for more
information on this option)
OR
(B) Team with an owner or operator of a Phase IMS4
and become a co-permittee on its existing Phase I
individual permit (see Fact Sheet 2.9 for more
information on this option)
For Additional Information
Contact
"^ U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management
• Phone : 202 260-5816
E-mail: SW2@epa.gov
• Internet: www.epa.gov/owm/sw2.htm
Reference Documents
ISP Storm Water Phase II Proposed Rule Fact Sheet
Series.
Contact the U. S. EP A Water Resource Center at
202 260-7786 or at waterpubs@epa.gov
Internet: www.epa.gov/owm/sw2.htm
"^ Storm Water Phase II Proposed Rule, published on
Jan. 9, 1998 in the Federal Register (63 FR 1536).
Internet: www.epa.gov/owm/sw2.htm
------- |