Lines 1315-1317:

"9VAC25-875-100 G. A VESMP authority may require, excluding state and federal entities, the submission of a reasonable performance bond or other financial surety and provide for the release of such sureties in accordance with the criteria set forth in § 62.1-44.15:34 of the Code of Virginia."

This section references release of surety bonds per criteria in § 62.1-44.15:34 , but § 62.1-44.15:34 does not have sufficient criteria to define release requirements or procedures.  A good model for this procedure can be found in § 15.2-2245 and should be mirrored here. 

I think we should maintain the RGGI to prevent damage from the change in climate. Also, when I go camping during the warm months, I see where livestock are wading in the streams. Where this can be prevented I think it would be beneficial to the quality of the water for fish and recreational use. I not sure what can be done to prevent this and farmers may have an issue with this. I propose they receive assistance to maintain buffers to prevent this and runoff of feces from livestock. This could also reduce health problems and save money in the long run.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this draft regulation.  Our comments are as follows:

1. On line 2966, it appears this line numbering should be changed from a (g.) to a (17) to align with current E&S minimum standard 17
2. On line 2975, it appears this line numbering should be changed from a (h.) to an (18) to align with current E&S minimum standard 18
3. On line 2981, it appears this line numbering should be changed from an (i.) to a (19) and all subsequent line numbering should be updated accordingly to align with current E&S minimum standard 19

The code of Virginia Section 62.1-44.15:34.E.2.a, indicates  "Soil erosion control requirements and water quantity technical criteria adopted pursuant to this article shall apply to any activity that disturbs 10,000 square feet or more, although the locality may reduce this regulatory threshold to a smaller area of disturbed land. A plan addressing these requirements shall be submitted to the VESMP authority in accordance with subsection A. This subdivision shall also apply to additions or modifications to existing single-family detached residential structures."

If we are interpreting this section correctly, any land disturbance activity greater than 10,000 square feet would require compliance with water quantity criteria (channel and flood protection). 

The current draft of the regulation "Part V. Criteria and requirements for Regulated Land- Disturbing Activities" line 2464 in particular does not refer to 9VAC25-875-600 but only to 9VAC25-875-560 which might create confusion when interpreting the land disturbance area threshold for water quantity requirements 

"Ten-year storm" definition is duplicated at lines 949 and 971

Line 525: "municipal separate storm sewer" definition appears to be missing the word "System"

Line 130: The definition of "certified Plan reviewer for SWM" refers to a "program administrator". Shouldn't this refer to "Plan Reviewer"?

• Line 62: Recommend clarifying “watercourse” within the “Adequate channel” definition or create a new definition. The word “watercourse” can be implied as a natural channel in its context of the “Adequate channel” definition; however, the word “adequate” (line 3041) is implied as a man-made channel. Suggest “watercourse” be defined or clarified as a natural channel, man-made channel, or restored channel. The whole document should be reviewed for consistency in definition and context of channels and watercourses to avoid confusion.
• Lines 2609-2610: Consider specifying a reasonable time period (i.e., 21 days) within which completion of stabilization activities is required. Deferring responsibility for determining when complete stabilization is required to the VESMP Authority produces wide-ranging and arbitrary timeframes, which are often too lenient (lengthy) to adequately protect Commonwealth resources or too strict (short) to enable practicable compliance. Specifying a timeframe for completion of stabilization would both better protect the resources of the Commonwealth and enable the development community to plan and implement required compliance measures.
• Line 2615: Consider expounding on what makes use of a skimmer device infeasible, i.e., “unless documented as technically infeasible or unreasonably cost prohibitive”.
• Line 2881: Consider specifying the time period within which completion of stabilization is required.
• Line 2948: Item 16 should be qualified to state its criteria do NOT apply to underground utility lines installed within the limits of a permitted land disturbance activity otherwise controlled by Department-approved methods. Item 16 contains several requirements which are unreasonable for, and should not apply to, construction sites where the chief land disturbing activity is not the installation of underground utility lines.
• Lines 2966-3082: Part 25-875-560 contains the erosion and sediment control minimum standards, commonly referred to as MS-19, except that the numbering ceases at Item 16. Beginning on line 2966, Items 17, 18, and 19(a-n) are erroneously listed as a continued subset of Item 16 (specifically, sub-items g-i).
• Line 3321: Consider modifying item E. to expand the specification of “good hydrologic condition” to include allowable predevelopment cover types. For example, Pennsylvania regulations’ allowable predevelopment cover types are ONLY forested, meadow, and impervious. Doing so would preclude arbitrary assignment of predevelopment cover types by permittees and better align with water quality objectives in the VRRM, which only considers FOS/COS, Turf, and Impervious.
• Line 3415: Please reconsider the use of the Modified Rational Method for drainage areas of 200 acres or less. Acreage is more limited in other requirements (PWC DCSM – 20 acres), and the method is simplified and less accurate when determining detention volumes during hydraulic basin routing (Iowa Design Manual 2B-1 limits hydraulic routing to 5 acres).
• Proprietary BMPs for post-construction stormwater management are discussed; however, they are not discussed for during-construction erosion and sediment control. Recommend a section discussing the use of the expansive (since the 1992 Virginia ESC Handbook was written) industry and research of proprietary erosion and sediment control measures.