1. Presented to: Minnesota Chamber of Commerce October 1, 2012

2. antidegradation Why antidegradation? “…restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters.” Designated uses Criteria to support designated uses Antidegradation provisions Designated uses Criteria to support designated uses Antidegradation provisions 2

3. What is antidegradation? 3

4. antidegradation How does antidegradation work? Outstanding resources (Tier 3) Outstanding resources (Tier 3) High water quality (Tier 2) High water quality (Tier 2) Existing uses (Tier 1) Existing uses (Tier 1) Levels of protection 4

5. Tier 2 protection Tier 2 protection Prevents unnecessary degradation of high water quality 5 Variability Long-term average Water quality criterion

6. Long-term average Variability Tier 2 protection Tier 2 protection Permanent exceedance of water quality standard is prohibited 6 Water quality criterion

7. What is antidegradation review? 7

8. What happens if a proposal would lower high water quality? Procedure triggered Antidegradation Assessment: 1.Alternative analysis 2.Social/economic justification Antidegradation Assessment: 1.Alternative analysis 2.Social/economic justification Agency review & preliminary determination Public participation Agency final determination 8

9. Why revise the rule? 9

10. Review trigger Exemptions Proposed changes Scope of implementation Physical alterations / existing uses Clarify Restricted ORVW protection Public participation 10 Parameters of concern

11. Proposed changes 11 Name change

12. Rule format Proposed changes 12 Purpose statement reflects federal regulations More definitions Antidegradation procedures sequentially follows the review process

13. Proposed changes Name change Rule format Scope of implementation Physical alterations / existing uses Clarify Restricted ORVW protection Public participation 13 Parameters of concern

14. Review trigger Proposed changes 14

15. Exemptions Proposed changes Emergency response actions Class 7 waters (under specific conditions) Temporary and limited impacts 15

16. Review trigger Exemptions Proposed changes Name change Rule format Physical alterations / existing uses Clarify Restricted ORVW protection Public participation 16

17. Activities that impact waters of the state CWA regulatory authority exists 17 No regulatory control, but implementation mechanisms may exist (Size ≠ scale of activities) Scope of implementation Current scope of antidegradation implementation

18. Activities that impact waters of the state CWA regulatory authority exists Proposed rule increases scope of implementation 18 No regulatory control, but implementation mechanisms exist (Size ≠ scale of activities) Scope of implementation

19. Proposed changes Separate procedures for: Individual NPDES wastewater permits and individual 401 certifications; and Individual NPDES stormwater permits and general authorizations 19

20. Parameters of concern Proposed changes Parameters to be reviewed are identified early, allowing for an effective alternatives analysis 20

21. Review trigger Exemptions Proposed changes Name change Rule format Scope of implementation 21 Parameters of concern

22. Physical alterations / existing uses Proposed changes 22

23. Clarify Restricted ORVW protection Proposed changes 23

24. Public participation Proposed changes 24

25. Public participation coincides with the comment periods for permits and certifications Public participation 25

26. Review trigger Exemptions Proposed changes Name change Rule format Scope of implementation Physical alterations / existing uses Clarify Restricted ORVW protection Public participation 26 Parameters of concern

27. Rulemaking next steps 2007 Start Initial stakeholder meetings Response to comments/ questions Water quality forum direction Proposed changes Initial draft More internal/ external input 27 Revise rule SONAR development “Administrative” process Adopt EPA approve

29. Why revise the rule? Scope of implementation De minimis discharges Demonstration of necessity through a thorough alternative analysis Establish existing water quality in antidegradation determinations Public participation 29

30. Why revise the rule? 30

31. Rulemaking path 2007 Start Initial stakeholder meetings Response to comments/ questions Water quality forum direction Proposed changes Initial draft More internal/ external input 31