About This Guide PurposeThis guide is for state and local public works managers who areinterested in integrating watershed...
Project-based solutions for cost-effectively mitigating the            environmental burden of each activity—with a focus ...
WATERSHED IMPACTASSESSMENT GUIDANCE    FOR PUBLIC LANDS       AND FACILITIES    An Approach for Municipal Managers    to I...
Contents    Preface…. ..............................................................................xi    Acknowledgments…...
2-3 LIMITED INTEGRATION WITH STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT ............ 2-4     2-4 FUTURE RESEARCH TO FURTHER INTEGRATE WATE...
ContentsChapter 5. Select Migration Projects for High Priority     Activities ...............................................
7-4 PRODUCE SUMMARY REPORTS TO TRACK PROJECTS......................... 7-4       7-5 MAINTAINING AND UPDATING YOUR WATERSH...
Contents1-3 ASSESSING BUDGETING ATTRACTIVENESS OF INFRASTRUCTURE      INVESTMENTS ...........................................
THIS PAGE     INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANKx   Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
Preface    Over the 30 years since the enactment of the Clean Water and Safe    Drinking Water Acts, federal, state and lo...
infrastructure. Strategic asset management augments the municipal      asset management approach by integrating municipali...
Acknowledgments    LMI prepared this document under a grant (83050601-0) from the U.S.    Environmental Protection Agency ...
THIS PAGE       INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANKxiv   Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
Chapter 11                                               Chapter                                              Integration ...
1-2 Overview of Municipal Asset Management                          and Strategic Asset Management                      Mu...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management    The concept of asset management is in its infancy, w...
access to unlimited funds to construct or improve any infrastructure      asset that would increase public benefit. Howeve...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management    Exhibit 1-1. Asset Performance Curve and Benefits of...
The modified approach incorporates condition assessments of               infrastructure assets and includes the following...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management                the remaining service life.”4 The net pr...
Exhibit 1-2. Basic Flow of an Asset Management System                                inventory of                         ...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management     Exhibit 1-3. Assessing Budgeting Attractiveness of ...
Other asset management best practices include                              understanding the requirements of the citizens,...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management    Exhibit 1-4. Aligning Strategic Goals and Municipal ...
Municipalities can concurrently manage the financial viability of                       infrastructure investments and str...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management    Watershed management is a critical dimension of stra...
Exhibit 1-6. Federal Laws, Policies, and Plans Related to Watershed             Management and Non-Point Source Regulation...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management             Requiring a permit for or modification of a...
Environmental impact factors into all four strategic asset management       steps. First, enhancing and protecting the env...
Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management    Exhibit 1-8. Integrating Environmental Burden into A...
Exhibit 1-9. Budget Attractiveness of Watershed          Improvement Projects        Low                                  ...
Chapter 2                                                                Steps to Integrate                               ...
this step, you will have developed a watershed priority score        (WPS) for each significant waterbody on or surroundin...
Steps to Integrate Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management          Step 6. Implement solutions, track progres...
on retrofit implementation are included.       The   Retrofit             Assessment is located at http://www.cwp.org.    ...
Chapter 3                                                    Identify Your Watershed                                      ...
alter the initial classification of individual subwatersheds. The             document outlines a basic eight-step process...
Identify Your Watershed and Assess Its Current Condition   3-2 Identify Municipality’s Watershed       and Its Key Charact...
Form 1. Summary of the Municipality’s Receiving Watersheds and Associated      Waterbodies      Instructions: Complete thi...
Identify Your Watershed and Assess Its Current Condition   Complete Form 1 as follows:          Blocks 1 through 3. Enter ...
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Watershed Impact - for Public Lands
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Watershed Impact - for Public Lands

2,381 views

Published on

Watershed Impact - for Public Lands

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,381
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
53
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Watershed Impact - for Public Lands

  1. 1. About This Guide PurposeThis guide is for state and local public works managers who areinterested in integrating watershed management into their strategicmunicipal asset management process.1 Using this guide, thesemanagers can identify municipal infrastructure assets and activities that can adversely affect the surrounding watershed (reducing asset values) and mitigate these potential effects.Using the guide’s step-by-step approach, municipal managers canintegrate watershed management into strategic asset management,using current asset management techniques to achieve municipalstrategic goals.The guide addresses the key environmental conditions within amunicipality’s watershed that influence strategic asset managementdecisions. The guidance consists of a series of self-assessment forms,which, when completed, create a municipal watershed impactassessment and action plan. This plan, which should be incorporatedinto the strategic municipal asset management process, includes thefollowing: A description of the designated uses for the municipality’s waterbodies and associated impairments A baseline of municipal land-use categories and activities that can contribute to the waterbody impairments or adversely affect general watershed health A prioritized inventory of discrete municipal activities that can impact the environment and contribute to known impairments within the watersheds 1 Property owners interested in assessing their property’s impact on thewatershed will also find this guide useful.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities iii
  2. 2. Project-based solutions for cost-effectively mitigating the environmental burden of each activity—with a focus on low- impact development, bioengineering, and pollution prevention— in an easy-to-use format with all the necessary information (such as justification, benefits, regulatory drivers, appropriate funding sources, cost estimates, schedules, and potential project partners) A baseline from which to monitor progress over time. Note: Watershed assessment approaches vary. Municipal managers can integrate the results of other watershed assessment approaches into their asset management approach as long as the assessment results in a prioritized list of activities and projects derived from a quantitative scoring method. Organization Chapter 1 explains how to integrate watershed management into strategic asset management. It begins with an overview of typical municipal asset management issues and their impacts on watersheds. It then examines the strategic asset management approach, explains why watershed management is a critical dimension, and describes how to integrate watershed management into the strategic process. Chapters 2 through 6 contain a series of self-assessment forms and technical information, which give municipal managers the tools necessary to develop a municipal watershed impact assessment and action plan that can be incorporated into their strategic municipal asset management process. Text in sidebars emphasizes action items, tips, and useful tools. Chapter 7 tells how to implement the action plan, track its progress, and update watershed projects as required.iv Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  3. 3. WATERSHED IMPACTASSESSMENT GUIDANCE FOR PUBLIC LANDS AND FACILITIES An Approach for Municipal Managers to Integrate Watershed Management and Asset Management Strategies April 2005
  4. 4. Contents Preface…. ..............................................................................xi Acknowledgments…. ........................................................... xiii Chapter 1. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management..................................... 1-1 1-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1-1 1-2 OVERVIEW OF MUNICIPAL ASSET MANAGEMENT AND STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT .................................................................. 1-2 1-2.1 Municipal Asset Management ............................................. 1-2 1-2.1.1 HOW MUNICIPAL ASSET MANAGEMENT RELATES TO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ................................................... 1-3 1-2.1.2 GASB 34 AND MUNICIPAL ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS .......................................................................... 1-5 1-2.1.3 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE .............................................. 1-9 1-2.2 Strategic Asset Management ............................................. 1-10 1-2.2.1 STEPS OF STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT .................... 1-11 1-2.2.2 IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT IN MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT ................................................ 1-11 1-3 WHY WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SHOULD BE INTEGRATED INTO STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT .............................................. 1-12 1-3.1 Drivers for Watershed Approach and Assessments ........... 1-13 1-3.2 Impact of Watershed Regulatory Approaches on Municipal Activities............................................................ 1-14 1-3.3 Incorporating Watershed Management into Strategic Assessment Management ................................................ 1-15 1-3.4 Evaluating Watershed Improvement Projects in Strategic Asset Management............................................ 1-17 Chapter 2. Steps to Integrate Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management.............................. 2-1 2-1 OVERVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL WATERSHED IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS ................................................................................... 2-1 2-2 OTHER WATERSHED ASSESSMENT PROCESSES ................................ 2-3Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities v
  5. 5. 2-3 LIMITED INTEGRATION WITH STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT ............ 2-4 2-4 FUTURE RESEARCH TO FURTHER INTEGRATE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT WITH STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT .................. 2-4 Chapter 3. Identify Your Watershed and Assess Its Current Condition....................................................... 3-1 3-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 3-1 3-1.1 Using Your Existing Information ........................................... 3-1 3-1.2 Using the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process............................................................................... 3-2 3-2 IDENTIFY MUNICIPALITY’S WATERSHED AND ITS KEY CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 3-2 3-2.1 Form 1—Identify the Watershed Name and Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) ............................................ 3-3 3-2.2 Form 2—Calculate WPS for Each Waterbody Listed on Form 1 ................................................................................ 3-8 3-3 CREATE WATERSHED MAP ............................................................. 3-11 3-4 SELECT GOALS AND PERFORMANCE METRICS ................................. 3-13 3-5 CONCLUSION ................................................................................ 3-14 Chapter 4. Assess Potential Impact of Municipal Land Use and Activities ...................................................... 4-1 4-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 4-1 4-2 FORM 3—DEVELOP AN INITIAL LIST OF ACTIVITIES ............................. 4-2 4-3 FORM 4—DEVELOP A SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL LAND USE CATEGORIES (COMPARED WITH WATERSHED AVERAGES OR TARGET VALUES) ....................................................................... 4-2 4-4 FORM 5—IDENTIFY KEY PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ACTIVITIES ................................................................................. 4-5 4-5 FORM 6—MUNICIPAL ACTIVITY DATA SHEET ..................................... 4-8 4-5.1 Form 6, Part 1—Describe the Activity, Its Potential Impacts, and Identify the Watershed or Waterbody ............ 4-8 4-5.2 Form 6, Part 2—Quantify the Activity’s Impact and Determine the Total Activity Burden Score ......................... 4-9 4-5.3 Form 6, Part 3—Assess Potential for Pollution Prevention Opportunities .................................................. 4-15vi Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  6. 6. ContentsChapter 5. Select Migration Projects for High Priority Activities .................................................................... 5-15-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 5-15-2 IDENTIFYING BEST MITIGATION EFFORTS OR BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ................................................................................ 5-1 5-2.1 Form 6, Part 4—Determine Project Objectives..................... 5-2 5-2.2 Factors in Developing Project Objectives ............................. 5-45-3 SELECTING THE BEST SOLUTION ...................................................... 5-55-4 WHAT TO DO IF MULTIPLE MITIGATION EFFORTS ARE POSSIBLE ......... 5-7Chapter 6. Develop Project Partnerships............................ 6-16-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 6-16-2 WHY FORM PARTNERSHIPS?............................................................ 6-16-3 WHAT ARE THE STEPS?................................................................... 6-2 6-3.1 Identify Opportunities ........................................................... 6-3 6-3.2 Identify Potential Partners .................................................... 6-3 6-3.3 Develop Partnerships ........................................................... 6-5 6-3.4 Collaborate to Implement Projects ....................................... 6-5 6-3.5 Share Success and Praise with Outside Stakeholders......... 6-56-4 WORKING WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ............................................ 6-56-5 WORKING WITH REGULATORS .......................................................... 6-5 6-5.1 Working with Regulators During TMDL Determinations ....... 6-5 6-5.2 Working with Regulators to Establish Effluent Trading ......... 6-6Chapter 7. Implement Solutions and Track Progress ......... 7-17-1 PLANNING AND BUDGETING FOR HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS ................ 7-1 7-1.1 Estimating and Projecting Project Costs............................... 7-1 7-1.2 Integrate Project in Municipal Budget ................................... 7-1 7-1.3 Identify Available Funding Sources ...................................... 7-2 7-1.4 Update Zoning and Ordnance Requirements ....................... 7-27-2 SOURCES OF FUNDS FOR IDENTIFIED PROJECTS ................................ 7-27-3 OBLIGATING FUNDS, DEVELOPING SCOPES OF WORK, AND LETTING CONTRACTS .................................................................. 7-3Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities vii
  7. 7. 7-4 PRODUCE SUMMARY REPORTS TO TRACK PROJECTS......................... 7-4 7-5 MAINTAINING AND UPDATING YOUR WATERSHED RESTORATION PROJECTS ................................................................................. 7-5 Appendix A Abbreviations Appendix B Laws Affecting Watershed Management Appendix C List of Typical Municipal Activities Appendix D Data Entry Form for Typical Municipal Activities Appendix E References for Best Management Practices Appendix F Sample Forms Appendix G Sample Project Sheet Format Forms FORM 1. SUMMARY OF THE MUNICIPALITY’S RECEIVING WATERSHEDS AND ASSOCIATED WATERBODIES ................................................. 3-4 FORM 2. WATERSHED PRIORITY SCORE (WPS): A SENSITIVITY SCORING AND DATA COLLECTION FORM FOR WATERBODIES/WATERSHEDS ...................................................... 3-9 FORM 3. SUMMARY LIST OF MUNICIPAL ACTIVITIES THAT POTENTIALLY AFFECT THE WATERSHED............................................................ 4-3 FORM 4. SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL LAND USE CATEGORIES ...................... 4-4 FORM 5. SUMMARY QUESTIONS TO IDENTIFY KEY PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ACTIVITIES THAT MAY POTENTIALLY IMPACT THE WATERSHED ............................................................ 4-6 FORM 6. MUNICIPAL ACTIVITY DATA ENTRY SHEET ................................ 4-17 Exhibits 1-1 ASSET PERFORMANCE CURVE AND BENEFITS OF PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ............................................................................ 1-5 1-2 BASIC FLOW OF AN ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ............................. 1-8viii Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  8. 8. Contents1-3 ASSESSING BUDGETING ATTRACTIVENESS OF INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS ............................................................................. 1-91-4 ALIGNING STRATEGIC GOALS AND MUNICIPAL ASSET MANAGEMENT .......................................................................... 1-111-5 EXAMPLE WATERSHED .................................................................. 1-121-6 FEDERAL LAWS, POLICIES, AND PLANS RELATED TO WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND NON-POINT SOURCE REGULATIONS............... 1-141-7 HOW WATERSHED MANAGEMENT IS PART OF STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT APPROACH ......................................................... 1-151-8 INTEGRATING ENVIRONMENTAL BURDEN INTO ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ........................................................... 1-171-9 BUDGET ATTRACTIVENESS OF WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ............................................................................... 1-183-1 SAMPLE HYDROLOGICAL UNIT CODES ............................................... 3-33-2 EXAMPLE EPA SURF YOUR WATERSHED LOCATOR ........................... 3-53-3 EXAMPLE OF EPA WATERS MAP .................................................... 3-73-4 EXAMPLE EPA TMDL WEBSITE ....................................................... 3-74-1 DEFINITIONS OF LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OR FREQUENCY OF EVENT CATEGORIES ................................................................. 4-104-2 DEFINITIONS OF SEVERITY CATEGORIES FOR POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATER QUALITY ................................................... 4-114-3 DEFINITIONS OF SEVERITY CATEGORIES FOR POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO GROUNDWATER QUALITY...................................................... 4-124-4 DEFINITIONS OF SEVERITY CATEGORIES FOR POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO AIR QUALITY ........................................................................ 4-134-5 DEFINTIONS OF SEVERITY CATEGORIES FOR POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO QUESTIONS 17–19 .............................................................. 4-134-6 DEFINITIONS OF SEVERITY CATEGORIES FOR POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO MUNICIPAL COMPLIANCE BURDEN ......................................... 4-144-7 DEFINITIONS OF IMPACT SCORES IN FORM 6.................................... 4-145-1 TYPICAL BMPS AND MITIGATION EFFORTS FOR HIGH PRIORITY ACTIVITIES ................................................................................. 5-76-1 REGIONAL PARTNERING TEMPLATE ................................................... 6-4Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities ix
  9. 9. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANKx Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  10. 10. Preface Over the 30 years since the enactment of the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Acts, federal, state and local government agencies, citizens, and the private sector have worked together to make dramatic progress in improving the quality of U.S. surface waters and drinking water. Before these regulations, roughly two-thirds of the surface waters assessed by states were not attaining basic water quality goals and were considered polluted. Some of the Nation’s waters were acting as open sewers, posing health risks; many water bodies were so polluted that traditional uses, such as swimming, fishing, and recreation, were impossible. Through a massive investment of federal, state, and local funds, a new generation of sewage treatment facilities provides “secondary” treatment or better. In addition, sustained federal and state efforts to implement “best management practices” have helped reduce runoff of pollutants from diffuse, or “nonpoint,” sources. Much of the dramatic progress in improving water quality is directly attributable to investment in municipal infrastructure—the land, pipes, and facilities that treat sewage, convey stormwater and sustain healthy habitat. This job, however, is far from over. In 2000, the EPA reported that one or more designated uses are impaired in 39 percent of rivers and streams (miles), 46 percent of lakes (acres), 51 percent of estuaries (square miles), and 78 percent of the Great Lakes (shoreline miles). Furthermore, 14 percent of rivers and 16 percent of lakes did not support their drinking water use designation. Addressing these challenges over the next decade requires more than technologies and regulations—it requires municipal managers to integrate an environmental ethic into all municipal asset management activities. Municipalities face the challenge of improving watershed conditions with limited fiscal resources—funds that are also required to plan, replace aging infrastructure, meet growing infrastructure demands fueled by population growth, rehabilitate urban habitat, and secure their infrastructure against threats. This report presents a framework for municipal managers to integrate environmental stewardship (using a watershed management approach) into its strategic municipal asset management process. Municipal asset management is primarily a financial approach to managing municipalWatershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities xi
  11. 11. infrastructure. Strategic asset management augments the municipal asset management approach by integrating municipality strategic goals, such as environmental stewardship, into the management of its infrastructure asset portfolio. The approach provides a mechanism for municipalities to integrate strategic environmental planning with capital budgeting and infrastructure management. The focus of strategic asset management is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of infrastructure investments. Why focus on cost effectiveness? Optimally, municipalities would have access to unlimited funds to construct or improve any infrastructure asset that would increase public benefit. However, the reality is that municipalities have limited resources for infrastructure investment. The challenge will be to invest these limited resources to generate the greatest net public benefit (that is, to focus on cost effectiveness). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made this document possible via a grant. We acknowledge the efforts of the many people who participated in the development and completion of this guidance. In particular, we are grateful to the staffs of the American Public Works Association, the Low Impact Development Center, and EPA’s Office of Water.xii Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  12. 12. Acknowledgments LMI prepared this document under a grant (83050601-0) from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Water. Research staff from our Facilities and Asset Management Group led this effort. The team was comprised of Emil Dzuray, Julian Bentley, Erica Rohr, Heather Cisar, Lisa Powell, Emily Estes, and Diana Lanunziata. We acknowledge the efforts of the many other people who participated in the development and completion of this document. In particular, we are grateful to Ms. Ann Daniels from the American Public Works Association, Mr. Neil Weinstein from the Low Impact Development Center, and Mr. Robert Goo from the EPA Office of Water. The views, opinions, and findings contained in this document are those of LMI and should not be construed as an official agency position, policy, or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation. Furthermore, LMI makes no warranty, expressed or implied, with the respect to the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this document or assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this document. LMI is a not-for-profit government consulting firm, dedicated exclusively to advancing the management of the government. We help managers in public agencies make decisions that enable immediate action, achieve desired outcomes, and deliver enduring value. We provide a broad range of services across six mission areas: acquisition, logistics, facilities and asset management, financial management, information and technology, and organizations and human capital. (For more information about LMI, visit www.lmi.org.)Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities xiii
  13. 13. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANKxiv Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  14. 14. Chapter 11 Chapter Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management 1-1 Introduction Municipal managers constantly struggle to balance the conflicting goals of investing in municipality improvements and maximizing future asset value under the restrictions of limited budgets. How can municipal managers successfully budget to enhance current municipality welfare and increase long-term asset value? An approach that integrates watershed management with strategic asset management solves the dilemma of concurrently improving public services, enhancing local environmental conditions, and investing in the long-term value of the municipality assets. Furthermore, municipal managers must achieve these objectives while cost-effectively complying with numerous federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations. This management role has become increasingly difficult because requirements of major environmental laws have increased exponentially over the past few decades while municipal environmental budgets have remained flat. Specific revisions to the rules promulgating the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) have the potential to not only result in more stringent limits for existing environmental permits, but to impose operational limits on currently unregulated activities that adversely affect the quality of surface water, groundwater, habitat, or air. This guide provides a consistent, cost-effective decision-making approach that state and local managers can use to integrate watershed management into their strategic municipal asset management process. It enables them to identify municipal infrastructure assets and activities that can adversely affect the surrounding watershed (reducing asset values) and to find ways to mitigate the effects.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-1
  15. 15. 1-2 Overview of Municipal Asset Management and Strategic Asset Management Municipalities share a similar mission: to proactively enhance the health, safety, and welfare of current and future generations through responsible stewardship of municipality infrastructure, development, and What is maintenance functions. Municipalities endeavor toinfrastructure? create safe and livable communities,Long-lived,normally fuel economic growth,stationary capitalassets—such as build cohesive communities,roads, bridges,tunnels, drainage support human growth and development,systems, water develop public infrastructure systems that adequately and efficientlyand sewer serve communities, andsystems, dams,and lighting enhance and protect the environment.systems—preserved for Achieving these goals requires that municipalities simultaneouslysignificantly more optimize three independent asset dimensions: condition, functionality,years than most and environmental impact. Few would argue that current managementcapital assets. approaches attempt to optimize asset condition and functionality. In fact, most infrastructure investments are made using a purely financial assetBuildings, which management approach. Most current asset management techniques,have a shorter however, fail to integrate municipal strategic goals, includingservice life, are environmental conditions, in the decision-making process.not consideredinfrastructure, Integrating watershed management into strategic asset managementexcept those that enables municipalities to simultaneously optimize condition,are an ancillary functionality, and environmental impact; as a result, they canpart of an concurrently optimize financial, environmental, health, community, andinfrastructure service aspects of infrastructure investments. However, before we canfacility (such as a show how the watershed assessment approach can be integrated into awastewater strategic asset management approach, we need to review bothtreatment traditional asset management and strategic asset managementbuilding). approaches. 1-2.1 Municipal Asset Management Municipalities rely on an extensive infrastructure, consisting of transportation networks, power supply, water supply, drainage, sewerage, solid waste management services, and other assets. These assets represent an immense investment built over many generations, made to fulfill anticipated benefits such as increased productivity and enhanced citizen welfare. Municipalities face the constant challenge of maximizing net public benefit with a limited amount of resources. 1-2 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  16. 16. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management The concept of asset management is in its infancy, with varying definitions. The American Public Works Association’s (APWA’s) asset management task force created a common asset management definition, “to efficiently and equitably allocate resources amongst valid What is asset and competing municipal asset goals and objectives,”1 from its review of management? various asset management methods. The APWA further defines asset management to include the following: The APWA’s definition of asset Efficiently allocate funds: The allocation of funds must be management is to efficient within a particular class of assets (like roads or efficiently and bridges), and within the entire reservoir of assets being equitably allocate managed (roads versus water networks versus buildings resources versus parks versus…). The latest engineering and economic amongst valid and principles, like value engineering and life cycle cost analysis competing or similar concepts are part and parcel of the asset management policy. municipal asset goals and Equitably allocate funds: The allocation of funds must be objectives. equitable as well as efficient. In this context, equitability refers mostly to constraints, limitations, or orientations that an administration needs to impose on the process in order to avoid being faced with solutions that fail to take in all factors, that are beyond its means, or that are unrealistic or unacceptable. In this context also, equitability allows for the consideration of expressed user needs and of any particular overriding one-time need. Valid and competing needs: This refers to all the needs of a community. Needs are valid if they are determined by individual management systems or if they are expressed to and accepted by the managers through any recognized approval process. The needs can be past unsatisfied needs (deferred maintenance), current maintenance needs, current capital improvement needs validated by a value engineering analysis, or future maintenance needs as determined in life cycle cost analyses. They are linked directly to the service levels demanded by the community. The needs are competing against one another in each class of assets as well as competing between different classes of assets. Even when funding is not an issue, competition must still exist to ensure that the extra dollars are spent in the most efficient way possible.2 1-2.2 How Municipal Asset Management Relates to Financial Management Asset management focuses on the evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of infrastructure investments. Optimally, municipalities would have 1 N. Danylo and Andrew Lemer, Asset Management for the Public Works Manager: Challenges and Strategies: Findings of the APWA Task Force on Asset Management, August 31, 1998. Available from www.apwa.net/documents/resourcecenter/ampaper.rtf. 2 See note 1.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-3
  17. 17. access to unlimited funds to construct or improve any infrastructure asset that would increase public benefit. However, the reality is that municipalities have limited resources. The challenge is to invest the limited resources to generate the greatest net public benefit (that is, focus on cost-effectiveness). The optimization of net public benefit is commonly measured by asset valuation expressed in two ways, functionality and condition: Functionality is the net benefit to the public of the asset’s function. Functionality measures the asset’s maximum potential value and depends on the public use of the asset. Not all assets within the same class have similar functional value. For example, a critical thoroughfare road has a higher functional value than a rarely used rural road. Condition is the ability of the asset to provide function over time. Condition measures the percentage of the maximum functional value provided during the asset’s life. It can depend on the level of preventive maintenance. The asset performance curve, shown in Exhibit 1-1, graphs the relationship between asset performance, condition, and preventive maintenance, as well as the benefits of preventive maintenance. As the asset ages, its condition deteriorates from requiring preventive maintenance to more costly maintenance and rehabilitation. Once the condition reaches a minimum level, the asset is unusable and requires costly reconstruction. However, if the asset receives preventive maintenance, the rate of deterioration decreases, thereby extending its life.1-4 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  18. 18. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Exhibit 1-1. Asset Performance Curve and Benefits of Preventive Maintenance Source: Federation of Canadian Municipalities and National Research Council Canada, National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure: Innovations and Best Practices 1-2.3 GASB 34 and Municipal Asset Management Systems Depreciation approach Accurately quantifying the public benefit of infrastructure is a complex task, one of the greatest challenges in asset management. For example, there is no simple financial analysis for placing a value on the net benefit Reduces asset value of the presence of a sewer system or road. over the estimated useful life. In June 1999, the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) established GASB Statement 34 (GASB 34) to assist in this effort. The Does not value assets rule requires municipalities to account for the value of major capital based on condition. assets (including bridges, roads, water systems, and dams) in their financial statements. GASB 34 serves as the basis for today’s municipal Focuses on asset management systems. addressing infrastructure needs GASB 34 provides two methods for reporting infrastructure assets, through new depreciation and the modified approach: infrastructure development. Depreciation involves completing an extensive inventory of assets, including their costs and the dates when they were Often fails to address created or purchased. Each asset’s value is then calculated on life-cycle costs of the basis of depreciation over the estimated useful life. The maintaining, method does not value assets on the basis of condition. operating, and renewing assets.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-5
  19. 19. The modified approach incorporates condition assessments of infrastructure assets and includes the following requirements: Maintain an up-to-date inventory of eligible infrastructure assets. Assess the condition of the eligible infrastructure assets every 3 years and summarize the results using a measurement scale. Annually estimate the costs to maintain and preserve the eligible infrastructure assets at the condition level established and disclosed by the government entity. Under the modified approach, the municipality reports the actual costs of maintaining and preserving infrastructure assets at a determined condition level instead of calculating depreciation charges. The depreciation method, the easier of the two approaches to implement, instead focuses on replacing or developing new infrastructure to address infrastructure needs rather than addressing the life-cycle costs of maintaining, operating, and renewing these infrastructure assets. The APWA endorses the modified approach since it enables municipalities to incorporate the benefits of maintenance into municipal asset valuation.3 Exhibit 1-2 outlines the basic flow and components of an asset management system, which are as follows: 1. Inventory of Infrastructure Assets. The first stage is to conduct an inventory of infrastructure assets. Data collected include location, construction cost, physical characteristics, usage information, accident history, and maintenance performed. 2. Infrastructure Asset Valuation. Next, a municipality must place a value on the asset. Valuation begins by assessing the condition of all infrastructure assets. GASB 34 requires municipalities to do so using a replicable measurement method every 3 years. The municipality also must estimate the useful asset life. For each year of the infrastructure’s life, the net public benefit of the asset is determined from the current predicted condition levels and planned maintenance. Asset value is then calculated as the sum of these annual benefits discounted at the cost of capital. Asset values are calculated based on functional value and condition. The modified approach uses a productivity- realized asset valuation method in which the asset value is calculated as the “net present value of the benefit stream for 3 American Public Works Association, APWA Policy Statement—GASB 34, November 2000.1-6 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  20. 20. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management the remaining service life.”4 The net present value captures the functional value over the lifetime of the asset as well as the benefits of maintenance on improving the function of the asset and extending its life (reflected in condition). 3. List of Potential Infrastructure Improvements. At the top of any municipality’s wish list is having the resources to complete an infrastructure improvement that has a “return on investment” greater than the capital cost. However, municipalities, faced with limited resources, must develop a list of potential infrastructure improvements that best allocates their limited funds. The list includes all potential new infrastructure investments as well as asset maintenance, retrofitting, or modifications not currently planned or funded. 4. Resource Allocation Model. Employing a resource allocation model enables municipalities to rank potential infrastructure investments and establish funding requirements. The resource allocation model serves as the heart of municipal asset management and incorporates the municipality’s key asset management decision-making method. The primary inputs to the model are infrastructure improvement cost estimates, current and future asset condition estimates, and current and future functional value estimates. The model calculates a net present value of each infrastructure improvement using (1) the annual cost expenses for the improvement, (2) the estimated annual benefits (calculated using the difference of the current and future asset values), and (3) the predicted current and future asset life. The most important output is a ranking of the potential infrastructure improvements based on return on investment and total cost. These variables are the primary input to the infrastructure budgeting process. 5. Infrastructure Budget. Though decision-making logic is incorporated in the research allocation model, decisions are ultimately made through infrastructure budgeting. Selecting infrastructure investments for funding is largely a subjective process. Though return on investment and total cost provide decision-making criteria, there is no exact science to developing an infrastructure budget. On the basis of these criteria, we have developed nine primary categories of infrastructure investments. Exhibit 1-3 shows the attractiveness to municipalities for funding infrastructure investments within these categories. 4 Sue McNeil, “Asset Management and Asset Valuation: The Implications of the GASB Standards for Reporting Capital Assets,” Proceedings of the Mid-Continent Transportation Symposium, 2000.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-7
  21. 21. Exhibit 1-2. Basic Flow of an Asset Management System inventory of Infrastructure Assets Infrastructure Asset Valuation Current Asset List of Potential Current Asset Condition Functional Infrastructure Value Improvements Forecast Asset Resource Forecast Asset Condition Allocation Functional Improvement Value Model Improvement Return on Investment - Net Asset Value Improvement - Total Infrastructure Improvement Infrastructure Budget1-8 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  22. 22. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Exhibit 1-3. Assessing Budgeting Attractiveness of Infrastructure Investments Return on investment Total cost Budgeting attractiveness 1 High Low High: Almost always funded; very cost-effective 2 High Medium High: Generally funded, except when budgets are very tight 3 High High Medium/Low: Although these investments have high returns, limited resources mean only a handful can be funded 4 Medium Low High: Generally funded, except when budgets are very tight 5 Medium Medium Medium: Most subjective of budgeting decisions; depends on attractiveness of other investments 6 Medium High Low: High cost, high return investments are likely funded instead of these 7 Low Low Medium/Low: Projects with higher returns are funded 8 Low Medium Low: Projects with higher returns are funded 9 Low High Low: Projects with higher returns are funded 1-2.4 Preventive Maintenance Much of the municipal core infrastructure is aging, overused, and lacking investment in maintenance (repair, rehabilitation, and replacement)—all of which severely strain the assets. To add to the problem, citizens demand additional new infrastructure to address growth. Although municipalities attempt to maximize the returns on their infrastructure investments, their asset management practices often hinder meeting these objectives. The primary impediment is budgeting. Few municipalities can split their capital budgets between new projects and renewal/maintenance. As a result, they fuel inefficiency, investing in costly new infrastructure while failing to address asset deterioration. A solution to the problem, in lieu of additional resources, is to perform preventive maintenance. Preventive maintenance is a best management practice that optimizes the public’s benefit from infrastructure investment. Preventive maintenance is the most cost-effective approach to increasing asset values. It reduces the rate of asset condition deterioration over time, extends the asset life, and increases functional value. Municipal asset management must shift from a “dire need” maintenance approach to a preventive system of maintenance and renewal.5 Preventive maintenance focuses on providing sustained value to citizens at the lowest cost over the asset life cycle. 5 CartêGraph Systems, Inc., Getting Started in Public Works Asset Management, 2004. Available from www.cartegraph.com.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-9
  23. 23. Other asset management best practices include understanding the requirements of the citizens, understanding the cost of sustaining the value of assets for at least 15 years, understanding demand for new assets and services, constructing new assets and services only with appropriate allocations of real operating costs, and selecting an optimal strategy for the municipality, ratepayers, and social community. 1-2.5 Strategic Asset ManagementStrategic asset Asset management is a financially based approach to infrastructure management investment. Although effective at managing the economic health of a municipality, the approach is only loosely linked to serving theStrategic asset municipality goals, that is, optimizing citizen welfare. Thus, the approachmanagement cannot achieve strategic goals because municipalities often fail toaugments the evaluate infrastructure investments on the basis of their alignment tomunicipal asset municipal strategy. They fail to incorporate in funding decisions themanagement ability of the asset to (1) create safe and livable communities, (2) buildapproach by cohesive communities, (3) support human growth and development, (4) adequately and efficiently serve communities, and (5) enhance andintegrating protect the environment.municipalitystrategic goals into Strategic asset management augments the municipal assetthe management of management approach by integrating municipality strategic goals intoits infrastructure the management of its infrastructure asset portfolio. It provides aasset portfolio. mechanism for municipalities to integrate long-term strategic planning with capital budgeting and infrastructure management. The focus is on the evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of infrastructure investments. Exhibit 1-4 presents an evaluation of the financial and strategic performance of municipalities based on different management approaches. Municipalities that focus on achieving strategic goals through a poor or non-existent asset management approach fail to optimize the financial performance of asset investments. Similarly, municipalities that make infrastructure investment decisions solely on the basis of financial returns fail to realize their strategic goals. Only the best performing municipalities employ a strategic asset management approach to align infrastructure management and investment with municipal strategic goals.1-10 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  24. 24. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Exhibit 1-4. Aligning Strategic Goals and Municipal Asset Management Aligned Poor Financial Best Performing Alignment with Strategic Goals Performance Municipalities Poor Financial and Strategic Little Strategic Performance Direction Not Aligned None Best Practices Asset Management 1-2.6 Steps of Strategic Asset Management Strategic asset management consists of the following four steps: 1. Evaluate projects. The municipality evaluates how the project results align with the municipal goals (mission need). 2. Perform a cost analysis. The municipality analyzes the cost of the projects, evaluating the design, implementation, and operating and maintenance costs. 3. Quantify and qualify the project benefits. It quantifies and qualifies the benefits of the project in improving municipality asset value (the difference between value before and after the implementation of the project). 4. Select projects. The municipality selects projects on the basis of the greatest net financial benefit and associated mission. 1-2.7 Implementing Strategic Asset Management in Municipal Management Critical to the implementation of strategic asset management is an asset management system that integrates strategic goals into final decisions. Current asset management systems focus on optimizing asset condition and functionality. The goal is to maximize the net present value of the benefit streams from infrastructure investments, rather than to achieve strategic goals.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-11
  25. 25. Municipalities can concurrently manage the financial viability of infrastructure investments and strive to achieve strategic goals. The implementation of strategic asset management requires them to integrate variables that measure the realization of strategic goals into asset management decisions. They can do so by modifying current asset management systems to include additional variables in their evaluation of infrastructure investments. For example, when evaluating the investment in constructing a bridge, the asset management system should provide the project’s net economic benefit as well as different measures of its alignment with a number of strategic goals. The manager weighs both variables in making an investment decision. 1-3 Why Watershed Management Should Be Integrated into Strategic Asset Management Watershed management is the most comprehensive approach to environmental stewardship. A watershed is simply the land that water flows across or through on its way to a common stream, river, or lake, as shown in Exhibit 1-5. A watershed can be very large (thousands of square miles that drain to a major river, lake, or ocean) or very small (20 acres that drain to a pond). A small watershed that nests inside of a larger watershed is referred to as a subwatershed. Watersheds, geographical areas defined by natural hydrology, are the most logical basis for managing the impacts of human activity on the environment What is a (air, water, and habitat). Focusing on the natural resource, rather than watershed? the specific sources of pollution, enables municipalities to evaluate the overall conditions in a geographic area and manage the stressors thatA watershed is affect those conditions.simply the landthat water flows Exhibit 1-5. Example Watershedacross or throughon its way to acommon stream,river, or lake.Watersheds can beany size, from a Watershedfew acres to boundarythousands ofsquare miles. River mouth Groundwater recharge (aquifer)1-12 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  26. 26. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Watershed management is a critical dimension of strategic asset management. Minimizing environmental impact (i.e., watershed What is management) and enhancing local environmental conditions are integral watershed to achieving one of the key municipality strategic goals: enhancing the management? welfare of future generations by maximizing long-term asset value. A framework to 1-3.1 Drivers for Watershed Approach and Assessments assess a Watershed management approaches are particularly important to waterbody’s municipal managers. Over the past 10 years, municipalities have faced ability to meet its increasingly complex regulations as the U.S. Environmental Protection intended use, Agency (EPA) has revised much of its legislation. Working to better integrate watershed approaches, the EPA revised the Clean Water Act, determine the Safe Drinking Water Act, and other regulations concerning water quality, pollutants and effluent standards, source water protection standards, and stormwater potential management. These changes, along with the move by regulators to sources of issue permits by watershed, require municipal managers to reevaluate impairments, how municipal activities impair water resources and to develop action plans to prevent or correct the identified impairments. incorporate assessment The main compliance drivers behind adopting a watershed approach results into a and completing watershed assessments to manage water issues are as plan aimed at follows: achieving water quality Clean Water Act. National pollutant discharge elimination system objectives, and (NPDES), total maximum daily loads (TMDL), spill prevention control and countermeasures (SPCC), wetland 404 permits and foster mitigation, sludge disposal or reuse, and point and non-point collaboration stormwater management programs. with all Safe Drinking Water Act. Source water assessment and landowners in protection program (which includes wellhead protection), and the watershed underground injection control (UIC) program. Coastal Zone Management Act. Required the 29 states with federally approved Coastal Zone Management Act programs to develop coastal NPS programs. Exhibit 1-6 shows the relevant federal laws, policies, and plans related to watershed management. Appendix B summarizes the key federal laws and policies governing water resources that provide the basis for watershed protection activities.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-13
  27. 27. Exhibit 1-6. Federal Laws, Policies, and Plans Related to Watershed Management and Non-Point Source Regulations Category Title Federal laws Clean Water Act (CWA) and amendments Part 130 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Water Quality Planning and Management Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and amendments Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) Clean Air Act (CAA) and amendments Comprehensive Environmental Restoration, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) Endangered Species Act (ESA) Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Policies and EPA’s National Water Program Strategic Plan 2004 -2008, April 2004 plans EPA’s Watershed-Based NPDES Permitting Policy, January 2003 EPA Memo, Committing EPAs Water Program to Advancing the Watershed Approach, December 2002 EPA’s Draft Watershed-Based NPDES Permitting Implementation Guidance, August 2003 1-3.2 Impact of Watershed Regulatory Approaches on Municipal Activities What is a The CWA’s TMDL and stormwater regulations are the primary TMDL? regulations directing the development of watershed management policies. However, in their efforts to restore an impaired waterbody,A written regulators are increasingly using the broad scope of these regulations,quantitative among others:analysis of animpaired Modifying a municipality’s NPDES, RCRA, or CAA (in the case ofwaterbody, which CAA, it would be pollutants found in a waterbody that are directlyis established to related to air deposition) discharge permits toensure that thewaterbody’s require monitoring or limits for new pollutants,designated usesare attained and reduce discharge limits of existing pollutants, ormaintained in allseasons. prohibit discharges of particular pollutants Requiring stormwater control devices that provide flow control, treatment, or both1-14 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  28. 28. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Requiring a permit for or modification of activities that may be generating non-point sources of pollution and are not typically covered under the NPDES program Requiring sites to implement best management practices (BMPs) for construction, agriculture, timber operations, and other ground-disturbing activities Implementing land use controls or restrictions on activities located on properties surrounding waterbodies Requiring development of additional riparian buffer zones, stream bank stabilization, or additional wetlands Restricting the site use of surface water and groundwater. 1-3.3 Incorporating Watershed Management into Strategic Assessment Management Watershed management is a critical dimension of strategic asset management (Exhibit 1-7); it is integral to achieving one of the key municipality strategic goals: enhancing the welfare of future generations by maximizing long-term asset value. Ignoring the environmental impact of an asset decision may only have a minimal impact on the value of the municipality assets in the short term. However, in the long term, a degraded surrounding environment can reduce asset value and impede an asset’s functional use. Exhibit 1-7. How Watershed Management Is Part of Strategic Asset Management Approach Current municipal The watershed asset management assessment approach techniques fail to addresses incorporate other environmental strategic goals in condition as part of infrastructure Strategic Goal: Strategic Goal: the entire strategic investment Optimize return Optimize management decisions on investment environmental approach (i.e., minimize condition costs) Strategic Goal: Strategic Goal: Support human Create safe and growth and livable communities developmentWatershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-15
  29. 29. Environmental impact factors into all four strategic asset management steps. First, enhancing and protecting the environment is one of the pillars of the municipality mission. Second, the cost analysis must include quantifying the financial consequences of environmental degradation. Finally, projects that improve environmental conditions improve asset value. Net financial impact would be incomplete without integrating environmental condition. Current management approaches attempt to optimize asset condition and functionality. They do not address minimizing the environmental impact. Achieving environmental strategic goals requires municipalities to simultaneously optimize three independent asset dimensions: condition, functionality, and environmental burden. By concurrently evaluating the environmental impacts (as measured by environmental burden) and financial performance (as measured by functional value and condition), municipalities can manage infrastructure investments to reach both financial and environmental strategic goals. Environmental burden measures the impact of an infrastructure investment on the receiving environment. Infrastructure investments where the main purpose is not to improve the environment (such as roads and bridges) have a negative environmental burden, and investments designed to improve the receiving environment have a positive environmental burden. Environmental burden fits nicely within the current asset management system, integrated as a component of asset condition. This technique reduces the value of infrastructure investments that have a negative impact on the receiving environment. This approach also allows municipalities to evaluate funding for projects designed only to improve environmental condition compared with other infrastructure investments (weigh the benefits environmental projects generate from improvements to condition compared with project costs). Exhibit 1-8 shows the impacts of integrating environmental burden on each component of the asset management system.1-16 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  30. 30. Integration of Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Exhibit 1-8. Integrating Environmental Burden into Asset Management Systems Impact of integrating Component Current system environmental burden Inventory of List all infrastructure assets and Collect environmental condition (that is, infrastructure associated data managed by the watershed condition) data as part of assets municipality, including location, infrastructure inventory management construction cost, physical system characteristics, and usage Infrastructure Conduct condition assessments of all Factor environmental burden into asset asset valuation infrastructure assets and calculate net condition calculation present value of asset benefits over useful life List of potential List all infrastructure improvements that Add environmental condition infrastructure have a return on investment greater than improvement projects to list improvements the cost of capital Resource Rank the potential infrastructure Incorporate environmental burden as a allocation improvements on the basis of return on variable in the model to evaluate the model investment and total cost effects of environmental condition on investment returns Infrastructure Select infrastructure investments for Integrate environmental impacts in budget funding budgeting decisions 1-3.4 Evaluating Watershed Improvement Projects in Strategic Asset Management Evaluation of watershed improvement projects begins with a baseline valuation assessment. Municipal managers calculate baseline asset value based on optimal functional value discounted by condition, as measured by both watershed condition (i.e., environmental burden) and ability of the asset to provide functional use. Municipal managers then evaluate and rank potential watershed improvement projects based on two factors, return on investment and total project cost. Return on investment is calculated using the increase in future asset value (from improved environmental burden) measured against the total project cost. Finally, municipal managers select watershed improvement projects for funding. Although the process is often subjective, return on investment and total cost are the primary decision-making criteria. Exhibits 1-3 and 1-9 outline the attractiveness for funding projects based on return on investment and total cost.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 1-17
  31. 31. Exhibit 1-9. Budget Attractiveness of Watershed Improvement Projects Low High Priority Projects Total Project Cost Secondary Priority Projects Lower Priority High Projects Low or High Negative Return on Investment1-18 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  32. 32. Chapter 2 Steps to Integrate Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management 2-1 Overview of the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process The remainder of this guide describes the steps you can take to integrate watershed management into your strategic asset management process. These steps, the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process, are organized in an easy-to-use format. Using this guidance, you can assess the impact of your municipality on the local waterbodies and develop a prioritized list of solutions that can be integrated into your municipality’s strategic asset management goals and process. The six major steps of the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process are as follows: Step 1. Establish and refine strategic asset management goals. Review current municipal goals, laws, and regulations and any watershed restoration action plans. You will use this information to establish or refine integrated goals and associated performance objectives. Step 2. Calculate the watershed condition score for each watershed using Forms 1 and 2. Assess the condition and vulnerability of watersheds, subwatersheds, and waterbodies; determine designated uses; and identify impairments of concern. You complete Forms 1 and 2 to identify and prioritize the watersheds, subwatersheds, waterbodies, and regional watershed partners located on or along the municipal boundary on the basis of current conditions, future vulnerability, and compliance requirements. The guide walks you through the process of documenting the designated uses and impairments of concern. At the end ofWatershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 2-1
  33. 33. this step, you will have developed a watershed priority score (WPS) for each significant waterbody on or surrounding your municipality. Step 3. Calculate the total burden score for each significant infrastructure asset or municipal activity using Forms 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Parts 1, 2, and 3). Assess the potential impact of municipal activities. This part of the process is divided into three sections: 1. Using the checklist of typical municipal activities found in Appendix C, identify those in your municipality that may contribute to the impairments of concern. 2. Complete Form 3 to create a baseline of municipal activities by land uses. Use Form 4 to compare your municipality’s land use with that of the watershed. Use Form 5 to summarize the municipality’s land-use characteristics. 3. For each activity, use Form 6, Parts 1–3, to calculate the activity’s impact score, and to create a total activity burden score (TABS). The TABS is a sum of the activity impact score (AIS) and WPS. The guide pays particular attention to the amount of impervious surfaces in your municipality. Step 4. Identify cost-effective solutions to mitigate high priority impacts using Form 6 (Parts 4 and 5). Identify whether the municipality needs additional projects to mitigate high priority activities or land-use conditions. Compare the prioritized list of activities and their associated impairments with available BMPs. This guide contains references to sources of cost-effective BMPs and innovative projects that can help you mitigate an activity’s potential impact on the watershed. Integrate project criteria into the municipality strategic asset management framework to rank projects. Compare improvement in asset condition (and value) and project costs to select the most cost-effective projects. Develop a project description, justification, and cost. Track funding requests and the project through completion. Step 5. Identify partnerships and funding sources using Form 6 (Part 6). Identify and develop partnerships with other stakeholders to implement the selected BMPs and other watershed restoration efforts that reduce the municipality’s impact on the watershed. Form 6 allows you to list partners, agreements, benefits, addresses, and points of contact for tracking purposes. This guide provides links to groups active in watersheds around the country as well as types of groups that may provide assistance and support. Chapter 6 contains a partnership template for tracking regional and project partners.2-2 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  34. 34. Steps to Integrate Watershed Management and Strategic Asset Management Step 6. Implement solutions, track progress, and reassess as part of strategic asset management. Incorporate the solutions into your municipality’s strategic asset management decisions, implement the identified solutions, track their progress, and update the plan and project requests as required to adjust management direction as new information becomes available. The majority of the information needed to complete the Municipal Watershed Assessment Process should be readily available from existing records and federal or state regulatory agencies. In particular, the EPA has created a database and interactive map site containing a wealth of information about the nation’s watersheds. The database is available through the EPA’s Surf Your Watershed website at http://cfpub.epa.gov/ surf/locate/index.cfm. It also has created the Watershed Assessment, Tracking & Environmental Results (WATERS) website, located at http://www.epa.gov/waters/enviromapper/index.html. WATERS is a tool that unites water quality information previously available only on individual state agency homepages and at several EPA websites. It is a web-based geographic information system (GIS) that shows watershed delineations, waterbodies, permitted discharges to all media, TMDL status, and water quality standards. You can quickly identify the status of individual waterbodies and generate summary reports on all waters that influence your municipality. 2-2 Other Watershed Assessment Processes Other watershed assessment processes available for municipal managers include the following: The Watershed Protection Audit establishes a baseline of current strategies and practices within a municipality’s watershed. The audit can be used to determine the watershed tools currently available in a watershed. The audit is located at http://www.cwp.org. The Watershed Vulnerability Analysis provides guidance on delineating subwatersheds, estimating current and future impervious cover, and identifying factors that would alter the initial classification of individual subwatersheds. This guidance outlines a basic eight-step process for creating a rapid watershed plan for either a large watershed or a jurisdiction. The Watershed Vulnerability Analysis is located at http://www.cwp.org. The Retrofit Assessment includes the Eight Steps to Stormwater Retrofitting, which outlines the eight steps of performing a retrofit inventory. This involves examining existing stormwater management practices and pinpointing locations that might benefit from additional practices. DetailsWatershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 2-3
  35. 35. on retrofit implementation are included. The Retrofit Assessment is located at http://www.cwp.org. The Codes and Ordinances Worksheet is a simple worksheet used to compare local development rules in a community with the model development principles outlined in the Better Site Design. The worksheet is located at http://www.cwp.org. 2-3 Limited Integration with Strategic Asset Management Although this Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process is designed to be integrated into your strategic asset management process, the integration is not seamless. Municipalities may use the outputs of the process, environmental burden improvement and project costs, as inputs to their strategic asset management systems. These inputs are then used in those systems to evaluate and rank projects based on “return on investment” (as calculated by increase in long-term asset value) and total cost (see Exhibit 1-8). The strategic asset management approach is in its infancy, especially the use of condition assessments to value assets. The lack of a standardized asset valuation method that incorporates environmental (and watershed) burden complicates a seamless integration of the process with strategic asset management. Over the next few years, the strategic asset management approach will mature and standardized systems are expected to be available for implementation by municipalities. At that time, we suggest updating the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process to seamlessly integrate it with your strategic asset management process. 2-4 Future Research to Further Integrate Watershed Management with Strategic Asset Management We suggest further research into incorporating environmental burden into strategic asset management systems. As more municipalities become familiar with GASB 34 and its modified approach, we expect techniques for valuing assets on the basis of environmental burden to improve and become more available. More research is needed to determine the best method to factor environmental burden into asset condition (and valuation) calculations. Once a standardized method is established for valuing assets on the basis of environmental burden, we suggest revising the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process to include asset valuation in evaluating watershed projects. In addition, the process may be updated for integration with any new standardized strategic asset management tools that become available to municipalities.2-4 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  36. 36. Chapter 3 Identify Your Watershed and Assess Its Current Condition 3-1 Introduction Summary In this chapter, you learn to identify your municipality’s watersheds This chapter walks and determine their current conditions by completing Forms 1 and 2. It you through the also presents an approach for developing goals and selecting key completion of performance metrics to measure progress. The instructions help you Forms 1 and 2. The information identify watershed names and hydrological unit codes (HUCs); contained in Forms 1 and 2 create a map of the watershed and its boundaries; enables you to identify your prepare a list of regulatory and local designated uses, watershed and its impairments of concern, and an overall watershed condition characteristics. score using available information; calculate a condition score for each receiving waterbody; identify key stakeholders active in the watershed; and I already have my watershed identify key goals and performance metrics to guide the information prioritization of projects and enable the tracking of progress over time. You may have already identified 3-1.1 Using Your Existing Information the watersheds and waterbodies to In addition to the one this guide describes, other methods and which your sources are available for determining the conditions of your municipality drains. watershed: If so, ensure you have all of the infor- Environmental office documentation. The municipal mation in Forms 1 environmental office may have already identified the and 2 and that you watersheds and assessed the conditions of the waterbodies to have quantitatively which your property drains. scored their condition. Watershed vulnerability analysis. This analysis provides guidance on delineating subwatersheds, estimating current and future impervious cover, and identifying factors that wouldWatershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 3-1
  37. 37. alter the initial classification of individual subwatersheds. The document outlines a basic eight-step process for creating a rapid watershed plan for either a large watershed or jurisdiction. It is available at http://www.cwp.org/Vulnerability Analysis.pdf. Watershed protection audit. This audit establishes a baseline of current strategies and practices within the watershed. By understanding the current state of development, watershed groups can assess strategies, practices, strengths, and weaknesses and can better plan future efforts. This document can help watershed organizations audit the watershed protection tools currently available in their watershed. It is available at http://www.cwp.org/Community_Watersheds/Watershed Protection_Audit2.pdf. If you already have the watershed background information, you have already begun the first step of the watershed assessment process. You need to ensure you have all of the information in Forms 1 and 2 and that you have quantitatively scored the condition of your municipality’s receiving waterbodies. You can convert your information into Forms 1 and 2 or leave them in their original format. 3-1.2 Using the Municipal Watershed Impact Assessment Process The remainder of this chapter walks you through the steps for completing Forms 1 and 2. Complete Forms 1 and 2 by relying on existing information and tools primarily available in municipal documents and from EPA, state, and local regulators. Form 1 enables you to create a summary of key watershed information—including the name of the watershed, its HUC, the significant municipal waterbodies, and their condition and vulnerability scores—using existing information related to watershed indicators. Complete a Form 2 for each significant waterbody identified in Form 1, and then use the results of Form 2 to select key performance metrics to serve as the baseline for measuring your municipality’s progress.3-2 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  38. 38. Identify Your Watershed and Assess Its Current Condition 3-2 Identify Municipality’s Watershed and Its Key Characteristics Locate your EPA, states, and local groups have established extensive online tools to help you identify the watershed in which your municipality resides watershed and assess its characteristics. The two most relevant sites are Locate your municipality and EPA’s Surf Your Watershed site at http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/ its watershed locate/index.cfm and using the locator function on EPA’s EPA’s WATERS website at http://www.epa.gov/waters/. The Surf Your WATERS system is a tool that unites water quality information Watershed Internet previously available only on individual state agency site at http:// homepages and at several EPA websites. It can also be used cfpub.epa.gov/surf/ to generate summary reports on all waters of a state. locate/index.com, or contact your state Both applications provide links to a GIS mapping tool and to related water permitting water program information, including a list of impaired waters from the program. 303(d) list, water quality standards, and designated uses. The following sections provide instructions on using these sites to locate and document key characteristics of your watershed and print out a map. 3-2.1 Form 1—Identify the Watershed Name and Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) The first step is to fill in Form 1 about your municipality’s watershed and its 8-digit HUC using information provided by EPA, your state, and other resources. A HUC is a numbering system the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed, which uniquely identifies all A HUC is a watersheds in the United States. The HUC, commonly called a watershed’s "watershed address," ranges from 2 to 16 digits—the higher the address number is, the smaller the watershed. Exhibit 3-1 shows examples of 2- to 12-digit HUCs. The watersheds HUC is commonly Exhibit 3-1. Sample Hydrological Unit Codes called its "watershed address." The U.S. Description Proper name HUC Digits Geological Survey provides access to Region Ohio River 05 2 watershed GIS Subregion Wabash and White Rivers 0512 4 boundary files on its Basin Wabash River 051201 6 Internet site at http://water.usgs.gov/ Subbasin Vermilion River 05120109 8 GIS/huc.html. Watershed North Fork Vermilion 0512010909 10 Subwatershed Lake Vermilion 051201090905 12Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 3-3
  39. 39. Form 1. Summary of the Municipality’s Receiving Watersheds and Associated Waterbodies Instructions: Complete this form for each 8-digit HUC watershed. Enter watershed priority scores (WPS) from Form 2. Please attach your watershed map to all Form 3s. 1. Name 2. State and County 3. Zip Code(s) 4. Name of 8-digit HUC watershed(s) 5. 8-digit HUC(s) 6. List of the Receiving Watersheds or Waterbodies Listed as Impaired by the Federal or State Regulators HUC, 8- to 16-digit, List of impaired Summary of impairments WPS Name of waterbody or state identifier designated uses of concern (from Form 2) (from Form 2) 7. List of the Receiving Watersheds or Waterbodies Listed as Impaired by the Federal or State Regulators HUC, 8- to 16-digit, List of designated Summary of impairments of WPS Name of waterbody or state identifier uses concern (from Form 2) (from Form 2)3-4 Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities
  40. 40. Identify Your Watershed and Assess Its Current Condition Complete Form 1 as follows: Blocks 1 through 3. Enter the municipality’s name, state, and zip code. Blocks 4 and 5. Go to EPA’s Surf Your Watershed site at http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/index.cfm as shown in Exhibit 3-2. Enter your municipality’s zip codes into the “Locate by geographic unit” box. This provides the “Watershed Profile” (at the 8-digit HUC) for your municipality. Enter the watershed name and 8-digit HUC into blocks 4 and 5. Exhibit 3-2. Example EPA Surf Your Watershed Locator Enter Zip Code You may also use the “search by map” function at the top of the screen to locate the watershed. If using the mapping function, select the state your municipality is in, and drill down to your general location until the “watershed profile” page is returned.Watershed Impact Assessment Guidance for Public Lands and Facilities 3-5

×