Are BMP's no longer based on sound engineering or scientific principles?
According to Washington state officials, storm water pollution is the biggest health threat to the Puget Sound region.
House Bill 1806 was an attempt to address the issue by reaching an agreement on the appropriate use of storm water benchmarks in the Industrial Stormwater General Permit (ISGP) and the Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSGP), but the legislation did not pass prior to its cutoff date. See, proposed RCW 90.48.555 – Stormwater Permit Benchmarks Amendment: “(4) In making a determination under subsection (3)(d) of this section, the department shall use procedures that account for: (a) Existing controls on point and nonpoint sources of pollution; (b) The variability of the pollutant or pollutant parameter in the storm water discharge; and (c) As appropriate, the dilution of the storm water in the receiving waters."
Benchmarks are numeric or narrative values within the ISGP and CSGP, they are not numeric effluent limits which are required for impaired or “303(d) listed water bodies”. They simply serve as indicators of the performance of best management practices (BMPs) and other adaptive management practices. The Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) has ruled that the Washington Department of Ecology must require strict compliance with water quality based benchmarks with no presumption of compliance based on implementing Ecology approved BMPs.
This decision begs the query, are BMP’s no longer based on sound engineering or scientific principles?
