Please consider the following comments on the proposed amendments to the Virginia Erosion and Stormwater Management Regulation, 9VAC25-875. Also note that these are staff comments and do not represent an adopted position of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors.

1) Based on the wording in repealed 9VAC-870-114, the "subsection B" reference in 9VAC25-875-140.D should be "subsection C." Note: this section is not included in the proposed amendments but is a needed technical correction to the regulation.

2) By deleting old paragraph C in 9VAC25-875-490, the grandfathering for public projects under old paragraph B has been made permanent. Under old paragraph B, such projects are subject to the "one additional permit cycle" criteria. Was this intentional? This appears to be beyond the scope of what is stated in the regulatory action description as correcting technical errors.

3) There appears to be a consistency issue between 9VAC25-875-470.A.2 and 9VAC25-875-740. 9VAC25-875-470.A.2 references 9VAC-25-875-670 but 9VAC25-875-740 does not.

4) Why is the reference to June 30, 2012, being retained in 9VAC25-875-740.B? Clearly the date has passed and is no longer relevant. Note: this section is not included in the proposed amendments.

5) The proposed action to delete 9VAC25-875-490 paragraph A will eliminate the grandfathering for privately funded projects. Without that text in the regulation, any revisions that are submitted/needed while a qualifying grandfathered project is still under construction will not have a code basis for approval under the "old" technical criteria. The intent of grandfathering is to allow projects that started construction by the specified time to continue under the "old" technical criteria so they would not have to redesign stormwater management facilities. Deleting paragraph A removes the certainty of that protection. Paragraph A should be retained.