DEC defends 3-acre stormwater retrofit program as critical to Lake Champlain TMDL; lawmakers press on funding and timelines

Neil Kamen, deputy commissioner of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, told the Natural Resources & Energy Committee that the 3-acre stormwater retrofit program is a necessary regulatory increment for meeting the Lake Champlain TMDL and that the program requires additional implementation time and funding.

"It is important. We need those pounds. That regulatory program is part and parcel of what EPA authorized as part of their TMDL, and expects in order to comply with the TMDL," Kamen said, framing the statute-driven role of the program and the agency’s support for the bill under consideration.

Kamen and Terry Purcell, operational section supervisor in the DEC stormwater program, answered questions from legislators about why some sites are included, how legacy (pre-2002) stormwater controls are treated, and how municipal roads interact with the 3-acre requirement and the Municipal Roads General Permit (MRGP).

Key points officials made: - Program role and scale: Kamen said the 3-acre retrofit program, though costly per pound of phosphorus removed, comprises about 13% of the regulatory load reductions required by the TMDL (contrasting that with the often-cited "1 percent" figure for total TMDL reductions that mixes regulatory and voluntary measures). He described the program as the "last increments of the phosphorus reductions" needed in some watersheds such as the Winooski River and Otter Creek. - Costs and funding gap: DEC estimated a long-term price tag far above current program funding; Kamen characterized the total problem as on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars and said existing public investment so far covers only a fraction of identified needs. He traced the funding framework back to the Clean Water Fund and Act 76 (2019), which set prioritization tiers for fund spending. - Pace and permitting: Kamen said the program’s permitting cadence has accelerated: the number of fully permitted sites rose from 77 in January to 204 (as of the testimony), with additional sites actively pursuing permits. Once permitted, site owners have five years to complete required construction. - Targeted assistance: DEC reported using American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and other federal funds to support particularly difficult sectors (public schools, manufactured housing communities). Kamen said most public school sites subject to the requirement could be assisted through existing state/federal funding and many manufactured housing communities were being offered targeted ARPA support to complete permitting. - On-site vs. off-site and redevelopment: DEC said it pursues natural and green infrastructure methods when practicable, but off-site trading of pounds across sectors is constrained by the TMDL framework and is not a straightforward substitute for on-site retrofits. Relying on future redevelopment as a compliance path could shift costs to developers and risk missing TMDL deadlines. - MRGP and municipal co-permitting: DEC staff described a practical distinction between MRGP (focused on road-runoff and erosion issues) and the operational 3-acre permits (broader site-based stormwater treatment), and said co-permitting is required where roads and sites overlap to ensure maintenance and integrated system responsibility; DEC staff acknowledged this raises complex questions in some developments where municipal roads were originally built by developers and later assumed by towns.

Committee members pressed for more data: legislators requested a sortable table of 3-acre sites showing permitting status, property types (schools, manufactured housing communities, commercial parcels), and prioritization potential (cost-per-pound and watershed ranking). Kamen said DEC already maintains program lists and would supply updated tables and supporting information to the committee.

Kamen emphasized workforce constraints, grid and infrastructure implications of other climate policies (raised earlier in the hearing), and the need to be pragmatic about funding and timing. He urged constituents who are confused about permitting to contact the stormwater program directly; he said many site-level concerns have been resolved after program staff engaged with property owners.

Committee members asked Kamen and Purcell to return for further questioning; legislators flagged the study committee created in the bill as a forum to explore complex policy questions and funding mechanisms.

No votes or formal actions were taken during the testimony session.