Epa National B Mps

Welcome to EPA's Storm Water Phase II Menu of Best Management Practices (BMPs).
The menu is intended to provide guidance to regulated small MS4s as to the types of practices they could use to develop and implement their storm water management programs. The menu is intended as guidance only. The Storm Water Phase II rule was published on December 8, 1999, and generally requires operators of small MS4s in urbanized areas to develop and implement a storm water management program which addresses six minimum control measures. A series of fact sheets describe the various components of the Phase II rule. The information below provides guidance for regulated small MS4s developing a Phase II storm water program. The storm water pollution problem has two main components: the increased volume and rate of runoff from impervious surfaces, and the concentration of pollutants in the runoff. Both components are directly related to development in urban and urbanizing areas. Together, these components cause changes in hydrology and water quality that result in a variety of problems, including habitat modification and loss, increased flooding, decreased aquatic biological diversity, and increased sedimentation and erosion. Effective management of stormwater runoff offers a multitude of possible benefits, including protection of wetlands and aquatic ecosystems, improved quality of receiving waterbodies, conservation of water resources, protection of public health, and flood control. In addition to chemical pollutants in storm water, the physical aspects related to urban runoff, such as erosion and scour, can significantly affect a receiving water's fish population and associated habitat (EPA, 2000). Alterations in hydraulic characteristics of streams receiving runoff include higher peak flow rates, increased frequency and duration of bankfull and subbankfull flows, increased occurrences of downstream flooding, and reduced baseflow levels (EPA, 1999). Traditional flood control measures that rely on the detention (storage) of the peak flow (referred to as peak shaving) have been characteristic of many storm water management approaches, have generally not targeted pollutant reduction and in many cases have exacerbated the problems associated with changes in hydrology and hydraulics. EPA recommends an approach that integrates the control of storm water peak flows and the protection of natural channels to sustain the physical and chemical properties of aquatic habitat.
1
Minimum Measures and BMPs The Phase II rule describes six minimum control measures which most regulated small MS4s will need to implement. EPA anticipates that these minimum control measures typically will be implemented by applying one or more BMPs appropriate to the source, location, and climate. The practices listed in the menu of BMPs have been found by EPA to be representative of the types of practices that can be applied successfully to achieve the minimum control measures. EPA recognizes that there is often site-specific, regional, and national variability in the selection of appropriate BMPs, as well as in the design constraints and pollution control effectiveness of practices. The list of practices for each minimum control measure is not all-inclusive and does not preclude MS4s from using other technically sound practices. In all cases, however, the practice or set of practices chosen by the MS4 needs to achieve the minimum measure. EPA recognizes as well that some MS4s may already be meeting the minimum measures, or that only one or two practices may need to be added to achieve the measures. Existing storm water management practices should be recognized and appropriate credit given to those who have already made progress toward protecting water quality. There is no need to spend additional resources for a practice that is already in existence and operational. BMPs as Systems Effective storm water management is often achieved from a management systems approach, as opposed to an approach that focuses on individual practices. That is, the pollutant control achievable from any given management system is viewed as the sum of the parts, taking into account the range of effectiveness associated with each single practice, the costs of each practice, and the resulting overall cost and effectiveness. Some individual practices may not be very effective alone but, in combination with others, may provide a key function in highly effective systems. The Phase II rule encourages such system-building by stating the minimum requirements in more general terms, which allows for the use of appropriate situation-specific sets of practices that will achieve the minimum measures. Prevention vs. Treatment Once pollutants are present in a water body, or after a receiving water body's physical structure and habitat have been altered, it is much more difficult and expensive to restore it to an undegraded condition. Therefore, the use of a management system that relies first on preventing degradation of receiving waters is recommended. BMPs under the each of the minimum measuresparticularly the obvious category of pollution prevention, as well as outreach, education, and erosion and sediment controlfocus on the prevention of pollutants from ever getting into storm water. Similarly, some of the practices under the post-construction runoff control minimum measure address site design issues that can result in pollution prevention. The menu of BMPs is based on Phase II's six minimum control measures. Click on the minimum control measure below to see the Phase II requirements for that minimum measure and the BMPs which could be used to implement the measure. 1. Public education and outreach on storm water impacts. 2. Public involvement/participation.
2
3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination. 4. Construction site storm water runoff control. 5. Post-construction storm water management in new development and redevelopment. 6. Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations.
Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts

Regulatory Text You must implement a public education program to distribute educational materials to the community or conduct equivalent outreach activities about the impacts of storm water discharges on water bodies and the steps that the public can take to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff. Guidance You may use storm water educational materials provided by your state; tribe; EPA; environmental, public interest, or trade organizations; or other MS4s. The public education program should inform individuals and households about the steps they can take to reduce storm water pollution, such as ensuring proper septic system maintenance, ensuring the proper use and disposal of landscape and garden chemicals including fertilizers and pesticides, protecting and restoring riparian vegetation, and properly disposing of used motor oil and household hazardous wastes. EPA recommends that the program inform individuals and groups how to become involved in local stream and beach restoration activities, as well as activities that are coordinated by youth service and conservation corps or other citizen groups. EPA recommends that the public education program be tailored, using a mix of locally appropriate strategies, to target specific audiences and communities. Examples of strategies include distributing brochures or fact sheets, sponsoring speaking engagements before community groups, providing public service announcements, implementing educational programs targeted at school age children, and conducting community-based projects such as storm drain stenciling and watershed and beach cleanups. In addition, EPA recommends that some of the materials or outreach programs be directed toward targeted groups of commercial, industrial, and institutional entities likely to have significant storm water impacts. For example, providing information to restaurants on the impact of grease clogging storm drains, and to garages on the impact of oil discharges. You are encouraged to tailor your outreach program to address the viewpoints and concerns of all communities, particularly minority and disadvantaged communities, as well as any special concerns relating to children.
National Menu of Best Management Practices
BMP Fact Sheets Public outreach/education for homeowner Lawn and garden activities Water conservation practices for homeowners Proper disposal of household hazardous wastes Pet waste management Trash management Targeting public outreach/education Education/outreach for commercial activities Tailoring outreach programs to minority and disadvantaged communities and children Classroom education on storm water Storm water educational materials Public outreach programs for new development Low impact development Pollution prevention programs for existing development Educational displays, pamphlets, booklets, and utility stuffers Using the media Promotional giveaways Pollution prevention for businesses
Public outreach/education for homeowners

Lawn and Garden Activities Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Lawn and garden activities can result in contamination of storm water through pesticide, soil, and fertilizer runoff. Proper landscape management, however, can effectively reduce water use and contaminant runoff and enhance the aesthetics of a property. Environmentally friendly landscape management can protect the environment through careful planning and design, routine soil analysis, appropriate plant selection, use of practical turf areas, water use efficiency, use of mulches, and appropriate maintenance. Additional activities that benefit water resources include maintaining healthy plants and lawns and composting lawn wastes. Healthy plants are less susceptible to diseases and insects and therefore require minimal use of pest control measures. To promote healthy plants, it is often beneficial to till composted material into the soil. Recycling of garden wastes by composting is also effective at reducing waste, although compost bins and piles should not be located next to waterways or storm drains because leachate from compost materials can cause contamination. It is important for municipalities to set a good example for residents. The city of Seattle, Washington, and King County, Washington, voluntarily decided to phase out the use of dozens of pesticides to encourage the use of less-toxic alternatives by municipal crews (Johnson, 1999). This decision followed criticism from local residents because the municipalities were recommending that residents avoid using weed killers or harmful pesticides on yards as a way to help save the chinhook salmon, which was recently listed as an endangered species. While making these recommendations, municipal crews were regularly using herbicides in parks and along roadsides. Based on a study undertaken by the city of Seattle, the municipalities will phase out the use of Tier 1 chemicals, which are deemed most hazardous. There will be exceptions to the phase-out, but only when there are major health and safety concerns from pest outbreaks. Environmental groups support the phase-out and hope to see zero pesticide use in the future. Opposition to the phase-out is mainly by groups representing agriculture, landscaping, and timber interests, who warn that overwhelming weed, mosquito, and rat problems will result from the pesticide phase-out.
Applicability Many environmentally friendly lawn and garden activities can be implemented for any municipal property. Municipalities can encourage residents to use the same practices in their own yards. These practices include landscape planning; integrated pest management; planting indigenous species; soil testing; and reduction, elimination, or judicious use of fertilizers and pesticides. Planting drought-resistant plants and using water conservation practices can be especially useful in areas of low rainfall. Areas of high rainfall experience more erosion, so protecting exposed soils with vegetation and mulches is of particular importance in these areas. Implementation The following guidelines describe ways in which municipalities can promote environmentally friendly landscaping techniques: General Programs. A public education program such as the Florida Yardstick can help landowners understand the value of good yard practices. The Florida Yardstick was designed as part of the Florida Yards & Neighborhoods Program (University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, no date). A 19 x 37 poster of a yardstick helps landowners evaluate their yards by gaining credits for various practices (subjects include yard pests, recycling, mulch, fertilizing, wildlife, and selecting the appropriate plants). The credits are in the form of inches, and the best yards will grow to 36 . When the goal of 36 is met, the landowner receives a certificate for their yard. More information about the Florida Yardstick can be found at www.agen.ufl.edu/~wq/fyn/check.html. Planning and Design. It is important to emphasize that property owners develop a landscape plan that utilizes the natural conditions of the property. For example, the regional and climatic conditions of the site, existing vegetation, topography, intended uses of the property, and the grouping of plants by their water needs are all important considerations in designing a site that promotes natural vegetation growth while minimizing water loss and contamination. Residents and municipal crews can partner with local nurseries and irrigation and lawn services to identify the appropriate landscape design for a specific site and to offer environmentally friendly practices to homeowners. Soil Analysis and Improvements. Residents and municipal crews should be encouraged to test soils every 3 to 4 years to determine the amount of nutrients necessary to maintain a healthy lawn. Municipalities can encourage home and garden centers to market and sell soil test kits so that property owners can perform such tests on their own. Soil analyses can also be performed by a local extension service, and representatives from this agency can then provide suggestions for improving the ability to support specific types of vegetation and retain water at a specific site. Appropriate Plant Selection. Encourage property owners and municipal crews to choose local or regional plants when developing an environmentally friendly landscape. Indigenous plant species are generally more water efficient and disease resistant. Furthermore, exotic plants can potentially impact local waterways. Local nurseries can assist in choosing appropriate regional plant species.
Practical Turf Areas. Property owners and municipal crews should be encouraged to plant nonturf areas where possible, because lawns require more water and maintenance than wildflowers, shrubs, and trees. If turf is used, it is important to select a type of grass that can withstand drought and that becomes dormant in hot, dry seasons. Local nurseries can provide property owners and municipal crews with assistance when selecting grass types. In addition, when maintaining lawns, the grass should not be cut shorter than 3 to 4 inches in height, and mulched clippings should be left on the lawn as a natural fertilizer. Efficient Irrigation. Much of the water that is applied to lawns and gardens is not absorbed by the vegetation. When water is applied too quickly, it is lost as runoff along with the top layers of soil. To prevent this, it is important to encourage the use of low-volume watering approaches such as drip-type or sprinkler systems. In addition, encourage property owners and municipal crews to water plants only when needed to enhance plant root growth and avoid runoff problems. Use of Mulches. Mulches help retain water, reduce weed growth, prevent erosion, and improve the soil for plant growth. Mulches are usually wood bark chips, wood grindings, pine straws, nut shells, small gravel, or shredded landscape clippings. Property owners should be encouraged to use mulches and should be informed of the benefits of these materials. Additionally, municipalities can start a program to collect plant materials from municipal maintenance activities as well as yard waste from property owners. These materials can be converted to mulch and used at municipal properties or redistributed to property owners. Fertilizers. Property owners and municipal crews should be discouraged from using fertilizers, or if they are used, from over-applying them. Municipalities can recommend less-toxic alternatives to commercial fertilizers, such as composted organic material. Municipalities can also recommend practices to reduce the amount of fertilizer entering runoff. For example, slow-release organic fertilizers are less likely to enter storm water. Application techniques, such as tilling fertilizers into moist soil to move the chemicals directly into the root zone, reduce the likelihood that the chemicals will be mobilized in storm water. Timing is also important: Warm season grasses should be fertilized in the summer, in frequent and small doses, while cool season grasses should be fertilized in the fall. Also, fertilizer should not be applied on a windy day or immediately before a heavy rain. Municipalities can recommend that property owners apply fertilizer at rates at or below those recommended on the packaging or should apply fertilizer based on the needs of the soil (as determined by a soil test). Safe disposal of excess fertilizer and containers should be encouraged. (See the Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste fact sheet.) Pesticides. Like fertilizers, pesticides should be used on lawns and gardens only when absolutely necessary. Pesticide use can be avoided entirely by selecting hearty plants that are native to the area and by keeping them healthy. It is also important to identify any potential pests to determine if they are truly harmful to the plant. The pests should always be removed by hand if possible chemical pest control should be used only if other approaches fail. If it is necessary to use chemical pesticides, the least toxic pesticide that targets the specific pest in question should be chosen (i.e., boric acid, garlic, insects, etc). If a pesticide is labeled with the word "caution," it is less toxic than one labeled "warning," which is, in turn, less toxic than one that is labeled "danger/poison."
It is also important to follow the label directions on the pesticide. Encourage property owners and municipal crews to wear the appropriate protective equipment listed on the label when working with organophosphate insecticides or concentrated sprays or dusts. Also encourage them to read and follow all safety precautions listed on pesticide labels and to wash their hands and face before smoking or eating. Tools or equipment that were used to apply or incorporate pesticides should always be rinsed in a bucket and the rinse water applied as if it were fullstrength pesticide. Any unused pesticide can be saved and disposed of at a household hazardous waste collection. (See the Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste fact sheet.) The following web sites provide education and information regarding safe pesticide use and disposal:
University of Nebraska's Pesticide Education Resources at a href="http://pested.unl.edu">http://pested.unl.edu. University of Illinois College of Agricultural, Consumer, and Environmental Sciences' Pesticide Safety Education at [http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/~pse/welcome.html. Pennsylvania State University Pesticide Education Program's Pesticide Urban Initiative at http://urbanpested.cas.psu.edu. Washington State University's Pesticide and Environmental Stewardship at http://pep.wsu.edu. National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides' Beyond Pesticides at http://www.beyondpesticides.org. Cornell University's Pesticide Management Education Program at http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu. The Pesticide Education Center's web site at http://www.igc.org/pesticides.
Ordinances. Municipalities can use ordinances as a means of controlling or preventing pesticide usage in the future. For example, the city of Arcata, California, created an ordinance that officially eliminated the use of pesticides on all city properties (Californians for Alternatives to Toxics, 2000). This ordinance followed a 14-year moratorium on pesticides in which the city council and a citizen's task force researched less-toxic alternatives to pesticide use. Municipal workers adapted to the moratorium by devising innovative pest control methods, such as covering the infield dirt in the baseball stadium with tarps between games to prevent weed growth. Other methods that Arcata crews used to prevent weeds included planting local plant species adapted to the city's climate; timely mowing, irrigating, weeding, and thatching lawns; and performing regular street maintenance such as sweeping and crack sealing. The ordinance also mandates the creation of a pest control management plan that will be linked to the city's storm water discharge program and includes a public education component. The text of the ordinance can be found at www.alternatives2toxics.org.
Benefits There are several benefits to environmentally friendly landscape design. First, proper site planning can reduce maintenance requirements by selecting native species and locating plants in areas where conditions are optimal for growth requirements. Soil analysis can prevent overapplication of fertilizers by eliminating uncertainty regarding existing soil fertility. Careful selection of turf can minimize watering and fertilizer requirements by choosing grasses that thrive in a particular climate. Minimizing turf area by replacing it with ground cover, shrubs, and trees reduces mowing requirements, which subsequently reduces air, water, and noise pollution. Efficient watering practices reduce pollutant transport and erosion from runoff of wasted water. Mulches stabilize exposed soils, prevent growth of nuisance vegetation, and improve soil fertility through the slow release of nutrients from decomposition. Finally, the reduction or judicious application of pesticides and fertilizers reduces the probability of contamination, while ensuring that the maintenance requirements of vegetation are being met. Limitations There are virtually no limitations associated with implementing environmentally friendly lawn and garden practices. Some practices are more applicable in certain climates (for example, there is little need for irrigation practices in areas of very high rainfall), but in general, all practices are low cost and relatively easy to implement. With guidance from a local environmental agency, extension service, or nursery, proper decisions can be made regarding which practices are best for the site in question. Effectiveness Using proper landscaping techniques can effectively increase the value of a property while benefiting the environment. Attractive, water-efficient, low maintenance landscapes can increase property values between 7 and 14 percent (USEPA, 1993). These practices also benefit the environment by reducing water use; decreasing energy use (because less water pumping and treatment is required); minimizing runoff of storm and irrigation water that transports soils, fertilizers, and pesticides; and creating additional habitat for plants and wildlife. Costs Proper landscape activities are very cost effective. Promoting the growth of healthy plants that require less fertilizer and pesticide applications minimizes labor and maintenance costs of lawn and garden care. Using water, pesticides, and fertilizers only when necessary and replacing storebought fertilizers with compost material can increase the savings for a property owner as well as benefit the environment.
References Alameda County Waste Management Authority. 2001. Compost Bins.[www.stopwaste.org/compbins.html#lowcost]. Accessed January 2001. Barth, C.A. Toward a low input lawn. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(5):254264. Californians for Alternatives to Toxics. 2000. Arcata Pesticide Ordinance.[www.alternatives2toxics.org/arcata_ord.htm]. Last updated Spring, 2000. Accessed April 4, 2001. Cornell University Pesticide Management Education Program. 2001. The Pesticide Management Education Program at Cornell University [http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu]. Last updated February 20, 2001. Accessed June 18, 2001. Johnson, T. 1999, October 6. City, county to reduce their pesticide use: most-hazardous poisons will be largely avoided. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. [seattlep-i.nwsource.com/local/pest06.shtml]. Kopel, D. 1998. Household Hazardous Waste. Independence Institute. [i2i.org/SuptDocs/Enviro/enhhw.htm]. Accessed July 13, 2000. National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides. No date. Beyond Pesticides. [http://www.beyondpesticides.org]. Accessed June 18, 2001. New England Apple Pest Management Guide. 1996 1997. Your Responsibility as a Pesticide User. [orchard.uvm.edu/uvmapple/pest/9697neapmg/rspnsblty.html ]. Accessed July 12, 2000. NOAA and DEP. No date. Bright Ideas to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution in Your Watershed: Pollution Prevention Starts at Home. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, and Delaware Estuary Program. NOAA and DEP. No date. Bright Ideas to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution in Your Watershed: Household Hazardous Waste. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, and Delaware Estuary Program. NRCS. 1997. Lawn and Garden Care. United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service.[www.ncg.nrcs.usda.gov/lawn.html]. Accessed July 12, 2000. Pennsylvania State University Pesticide Education Program. No date. PA Pesticide Urban Initiative. [http://urbanpested.cas.psu.edu]. Accessed June 18, 2001. Pesticide Education Center. No date. Pesticide Education Center. [http://www.igc.org/pesticides]. Accessed June 18, 2001. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service. No date. Florida Yards & Neighborhoods Program.[www.agen.ufl.edu/~wq/fyn/fyn.html]. Accessed April 4, 2001. University of Illinois College of Agricultural, Consumer, and Environmental Sciences. No date. Pesticide Safety Education. [http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/~pse/welcome.html]. Accessed June 18, 2001.
References (Continued). University of Nebraska. 2001. Pesticide Education Resources. [http://pested.unl.edu]. Last updated June 6, 2001. Accessed June 18, 2001. USEPA. 1993. Xeriscape Landscaping: Preventing Pollution and Using Resources Efficiently. EPA/840/B-93/001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Washington State University. No date. Pesticide and Environmental Stewardship. [http://pep.wsu.edu]. Accessed June 18, 2001. Water Quality Consortium. 1998. Surface Water Quality BMP: Fertilizer. Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle, WA. [www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/surfacewater/bmp/fertiliz.htm]. Last updated November 18, 1998. Accessed April 4, 2001. Water Quality Consortium. 1998. Surface Water Quality BMP: Landscape Maintenance. Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle, WA. [www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/surfacewater/bmp/fertiliz.htm]. Last updated November 18, 1998. Accessed April 4, 2001.
Water Conservation Practices for Homeowners Public Education, and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Water use has soared in recent years. In many parts of the United States, the limited availability of drinking water has made water conservation practices mandatory. With water consumption at an all-time high, the costs of water and sewer services continue to climb. The good news, however, is that widespread reduction in water consumption could limit the need for new or expanded water and sewage treatment plants. Applicability According to the Chesapeake Bay Program and the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay (1993), only about 4 of the estimated 100 gallons of water that each person uses daily is actually necessary. Water usage in the home can easily be reduced by 15 to 20 percentwithout major discomfortby implementing a program to conserve water in the home. Municipalities should establish a public education and outreach program to demonstrate to homeowners that by making minor changes in water use habits, each household can reduce its water consumption while saving money on water and sewage bills. Implementation Municipalities can help their homeowners conserve water through community education efforts. For example, a municipality can establish a Check For Leaks program that instructs homeowners how to determine if their plumbing fixtures (faucets, toilets, hoses, and pipes) are leaking. Even a leak as small as a 1/32-inch opening can waste approximately 6,000 gallons of water per month. A continuous drip from a faucet wastes about 20 gallons of water per day. Toilet leaks are usually silent but waste up to 200 gallons of water each day. Recommend that homeowners check water meters when no water is being used. For example, they can record the number on the meter prior to leaving for a trip and then check the meter again upon return. Also, the position of the meter can be marked and checked. If the needle moves or values change, there is a leak present. Municipalities should emphasize to the homeowner the benefits that can be realized from this type of program, such as lower water utility bills and reduced municipal costs for sewers and wastewater treatment. Emphasize that if leaks are detected, it is important for homeowners to repair them immediately. A Check For Leaks program can be advertised in a utility insert, community newsletter, or mass mailing campaign.
10
Municipalities can encourage good water use habits by making citizens aware of daily activities that consume a large volume of water. Some water conservation practices that can be recommended include:
Run the dishwasher and laundry machines only with full loads. Use the shortest wash and rinse cycles and the lowest water level setting possible. Avoid the permanent press cycle, which uses an additional 10 to 20 gallons of water. When hand-washing dishes, do not let the water run continuously. Avoid using garbage disposal systems. When buying a new washing machine, choose a suds-saver model. In the bathrooms, place two half-gallon plastic bottles filled with water in the toilet tank to reduce the amount of flush water used. Take shorter showers and use a water-conserving showerhead (less than 2.5 gallons per minute) rather than taking baths, which use 30 to 50 gallons of water. When shaving, brushing teeth, or washing your face, do not let the water run continuously. When washing your car, use a bucket, and wash and rinse sections individually. Use a high-pressure, low-volume hose with a nozzle. Water the lawn only when absolutely necessary. More water is consumed using sprinkler and irrigation systems than if a hand-held hose is used (International Turf Producers Foundation, no date). (Trickle irrigation systems and soaker hoses are 20 percent more efficient than sprinklers.) Water lawns only during the coolest time of day to avoid evaporation of the water.
There are many resources for water conservation information, including the following:
The Groundwater Foundation is a nonprofit organization dedicated to informing the public about groundwater. One of their education programs, Groundwater Guardian, attempts to encourage communities to begin groundwater awareness and protection activities. When communities participate in this program, the Groundwater Foundation supports the communities in their efforts and recognizes their achievements. Communities that participate form a Groundwater Guardian team, consisting of citizens, business and/or agricultural representatives, educators, and local government officials. This team develops Result-Oriented Activities (education and awareness, pollution prevention, public policy, conservation, and best management practices) to address the community's groundwater protection concerns. An annual conference allows teams from all around the country to exchange success stories and ideas (www.groundwaterfoundation.org/index.htm).
11
The American Water Resources Association (2001) sponsors WaterWiser: The Water Efficiency Clearinghouse (www.waterwiser.org), which provides links to books, articles, and web sites related to water conservation. Topics include conservation tips, drought information, public education, irrigation, landscaping, water reuse/recycling, efficient fixtures/appliances, water savings calculators, water-related organizations and agencies, and links to state and local water conservation web sites. The Rocky Mountain Institute (no date) created a resource for household water efficiency that contains guidance for homeowners, utilities, and civic groups. Especially useful for municipalities is the page entitled Civic Action: Promoting Water Efficiency, Protecting Rivers (www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid123.asp), which provides links to information that can help watershed groups and municipalities inform the public about ways they can reduce water use in the home. The Chesapeake Bay Program (2000) presents information on water conservation practices at a web site called Ways You Can Help the Bay, which is located at www.chesapeakebay.net/helpbay.htm.
Benefits For the citizen, the greatest benefit of water conservation in the home is cost savings. By reducing the amount of water used, monthly water bills are reduced. If homes are served by septic systems, reducing water use reduces the amount of wastewater to be treated, thereby minimizing strain on the system and improving pollutant removal performance. For the municipality, a successful water conservation campaign can help to reduce the frequency of sanitary sewer surcharges, reduce the load on wastewater treatment facilities, and reduce the need to expand the sanitary sewer system. Limitations It is sometimes difficult to change the habits of the public. Some people value long showers and strong water pressure. Others might have older appliances and plumbing that are difficult to retrofit with water-saving devices. Still others might be reluctant to change lawn-watering practices because they like the low-effort sprinkler or irrigation systems and don't want to water by hand. However, in many cases, people are not aware that alternative practices and products are available that only minimally impact comfort and convenience, if at all. Education programs should target this latter category of people who may be willing to change their habits when they are made aware of alternatives. Effectiveness By following these suggested water conservation measures, water use in the home can be reduced by 15 to 20 percent (Chesapeake Bay Program, 1993). The cumulative effects of using water conservation practices can significantly reduce the burden on water storage, purification, distribution, and treatment facilities.
12
Cost Water conservation is not only "environmentally friendly," but it is also very economical. Reducing water use can amount to substantial savings on monthly sewer, energy, and water bills. When hot water use is reduced, less energy is required to heat the water. Consequently, gas and electric bills will be reduced as well. References American Water Works Association. 2001. WaterWiser: The Water Efficiency Clearinghouse. [www.waterwiser.org]. Accessed April 4, 2001. Chesapeake Bay Program. 2000. Ways You Can Help the Bay. [www.chesapeakebay.net/helpbay.htm]. Last updated May 17, 2000. Accessed April 4, 2001. Chesapeake Bay Program and Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. 1993. Baybook: A Guide to Reducing Water Pollution at Home. Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, MD, and Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, Baltimore, MD. The Groundwater Foundation. 2001. The Groundwater Guardian Program. [www.groundwater.org/Guardian/ggindex.htm]. Accessed January 2001. International Turf Producers Foundation. No date. Water Right--Conserving our Water, Preserving Our Environment. International Turf Producers Association, Rolling Meadows, IL. Available for download in PDF format at [www.turfgrasssod.org]. Iowa City/Coralville Area Online Resource. 1995. Drop by Drop, A How To Guide: Starting a Water Conservation Program. [www.jeonet.com/city/water.htm]. Last updated March 1999. Accessed April 4, 2001. Louisiana USA. 1997. Leaky Faucet. [www.louisianausa.com/local/home/leakyfaucet/leakyfaucet.htm]. Accessed January 2001. Rocky Mountain Institute. No date. Household Water Efficiency. [www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid123.asp]. Accessed April 4, 2001. USEPA. 1999. Water Drop Patch Program. EPA 840/B-99/001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
13
Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Wastes Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Many products found in homes contain chemical ingredients that are potentially harmful to people and to the environment. Chemicals such as oven cleaners, paint removers, bug killers, solvents, and drain cleaners are just a few common hazardous products in the home. Over the last 20 years, concern about the disposal of such products has been growing. In 1976, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was passed, regulating the procedures governing the generation, storage, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials. Although this legislation has mitigated some of the problems associated with commercial hazardous material disposal, more efforts need to be made to reduce and properly dispose of hazardous waste in the home. Hazardous products include the following:
Cleaning products: oven cleaner, floor wax, furniture polish, drain cleaner, and spot remover Car care and maintenance: motor oil, battery acid, gasoline, car wax, engine cleaner, antifreeze, degreaser, radiator flush, and rust preventative Home improvement products: paints, preservatives, strippers, brush cleaners, and solvents Other products labeled toxic, flammable, or corrosive, or containing lye, phenols, petroleum distillates, or trichlorobenzene
Applicability Municipal household hazardous waste programs are widely applicable and vary in scope. They can range from simply informing the public about the hazards of some commonly used household chemicals to establishing a household hazardous waste collection facility. More elaborate programs are best suited to larger communities that have existing facilities such as a municipal solid waste collection area. Municipalities with more limited resources can implement a small education campaign and expand the program as resources become available.
14
Implementation First and foremost, communities should make their residents aware of the potential impacts of hazardous household materials on water quality and inform residents of ways to properly store, handle, and dispose of the chemicals. Oftentimes, bad habits that lead to water pollution stem from the fact that citizens don't know the chemicals are dangerous to the environment. Once they are informed, they can adjust their behavior to help protect water quality. Municipalities can also inform residents about less-toxic alternatives to household hazardous wastes. The use of alternative products can be promoted through pamphlets, inserts in utility bills, or workshops. These nontoxic products can offer the same effectiveness as hazardous products with less impact on the environment. Elements of a good community household hazardous waste collection program include providing the public with information on how to dispose of hazardous items in their household, the hours and location of collection facilities, and items that are acceptable or unacceptable at the collection facility. This information can be provided through pamphlets, handbooks, posters, magnets, workshops, or other means. Local scout troops and other service organizations could also be recruited to help distribute door hangings or flyers as part of their projects. Municipalities should try to partner with the solid waste disposal services in their communities for help with public education. If disposal services make it clear that they do not pick up hazardous materials, then residents will be alerted to the need for alternative disposal. These solid waste collection companies can also provide users with hazardous waste collection site information through their company's web site, newsletter, and billing statements. In the spring of 1998, four Pennsylvania counties (Lehigh, Northampton, Monroe, and Schuylkill) partnered with two private waste-disposal companies, Safety-Kleen Services and Curbside, Inc., and two volunteer groups, Pennsylvania's Senior Environment Corps and the Environmental Alliance for Senior Involvement (EASI), to launch the first curbside pickup service for household hazardous waste on the East Coast. Known as the Door-to-Door Collection program, this new initiative will allow residents in the four counties to properly dispose of paints, paint thinners, solvents, motor oil, and other substances that should not be disposed of with household garbage. The partnership not only provides a curbside pickup program for household hazardous waste, but also educates citizens on how to prevent the accumulation of chemicals in the home environment. A key element of this service is convenience for area residents. Customers can make a phone call, put their waste in a container, and schedule a pickup. Information on public outreach documents should include information about storing household hazardous wastes. For example, municipalities can recommend that when residents store paint, they should tightly seal the paint can and store it upside-down so that the paint will form a seal around the lid. Paint should also be kept in dry areas that will not freeze, and away from sparks or flames. Pesticides should be stored in a dry area in their original containers with the labels intact. They should be stored in a separate, locked cabinet or other secure structure, away from children and pets, food, medical supplies, cleaning products, heat, flames, or sparks.
15
Citizens should also be made aware of the proper use of hazardous materials, especially how much to use and how to avoid releasing materials into the environment. For example, many people who change their own automobile oil might think that draining and filling the oil is the only time that oil might be released. Approximately 420 million oil filters are sold annually, and at least 75 percent are disposed of in landfills. If these used oil filters were recycled, they could yield 17.8 million gallons of oil and 161,500 tons of steel. Furthermore, approximately 850 million gallons of collected used oil is reclaimed for use as a fuel supplement or lubricant (Arner, 1996). To minimize the disposal of hazardous products, it is important that citizens know that it is best to use only those products that are absolutely necessary and to use nontoxic alternatives whenever possible. For example, it is possible to clean ovens by applying table salt to spills, then scrubbing with soda water. Also, approximately a cup of baking soda combined with a cup of white vinegar and 1 cup of ammonia in a gallon of warm water makes an excellent multipurpose cleaner. (See the alternative products fact sheet for more information about less toxic alternatives.) Disposal of hazardous products used in the home also requires special attention. When use of hazardous household products is unavoidable, municipalities should emphasize to citizens that household hazardous wastes should not be flushed down the drain because these drains lead to either a home septic system or a municipal treatment plant, neither of which has adequate capability to remove hazardous chemicals from wastewater. Toxic chemicals might also disrupt microbial processes in septic tanks and treatment plants, reducing their effectiveness. Some of the toxins can be removed, but a significant portion of these chemicals passes through treatment processes and ultimately contaminates water resources. They should also be informed that hazardous products used in the home should never be poured on the ground, into gutters, or down storm drains where they will eventually enter storm sewers and be transported into nearby waterbodies untreated. Some municipalities have started hazardous waste disposal and recycling centers. In fact, many communities have established hazardous waste collection days when hazardous products are collected from homes and taken to an approved facility for disposal. The municipality must make the effort to inform its citizens of the hours and locations of such sites and what materials are accepted there. The city of Austin, Texas, provides information about their household hazardous waste disposal program on the city's web site, located at www.ci.austin.tx.us/sws/hhw.htm (City of Austin, Texas, 2001). The site includes background information, the hours and location of the collection facility (with a map), materials accepted at the facility, details about disposing of business waste, hazardous waste recycling opportunities, and chemicals management.
16
Following is an advertisement for a household hazardous waste collection event created by the Shelby County, Tennessee government for its citizens (Shelby County, Tennessee, no date). HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION EVENT Here's your opportunity to dispose of Household Hazardous Waste FREE! Bring your adhesives, household batteries, herbicides, pesticides, oil/fuel additives, paints, and thinners! When: Saturday, May 19, 2001 8:30 - 2:30 p.m. Where: Shelby Show Place Arena South Parking Lot 105 S. Germantown Road Limitations: 100 lbs. per household Open to residents of Memphis & Shelby County only! Sponsors: Shelby County Environmental Improvement Commission Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation Co-sponsored by: Memphis Light, Gas & Water Memphis & Shelby County Health Department Shelby County Roads & Bridges Department For more information, call the Shelby County Environmental Improvement Commission at 3875707. The Shelby County web site (www.co.shelby.tn.us/county_gov/ boards_commissions/SCEIC/waste_disposal/index.htm) also provides information to citizens on alternatives to toxic household chemicals and options for paint and solvent disposal. Some communities establish partnerships with service stations to collect hazardous waste. This way, citizens from throughout the community can go to the location that is most convenient to them. The number of collection centers will depend on the size of the population and the resources available to the municipality. A general guideline is to have one collection center for 3,500 to 25,000 residents, two for 25,000 to 100,000 residents, and three for populations of more than 100,000 (Arner, 1996). Hazardous waste collection days should be highly publicized to ensure the message is received. Setting a schedule for collection days, such as the first Monday of every month, will help ensure that citizens know when they can drop off household hazardous wastes. When materials are collected, they must be managed as hazardous wastes. Therefore, time and resources must be allocated to obtain the services of a registered hazardous waste management firm to safely remove and dispose of chemicals. In many cases, these firms can take over the operation of the collection event to maximize safety and ensure that no spills occur. 17
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) published an excellent guidance manual for municipalities and other groups to start a household hazardous waste program. The manual includes information about budgeting and funding, restrictions, materials to collect and exclude, estimating collection amounts, suggested timelines, and operational tips. This manual can be downloaded from the Pennsylvania DEP site at www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/ deputate/airwaste/wm/HHW/Documents/TechMan.htm. Benefits Properly disposing of household hazardous wastes ensures that contamination through leaks and spills does not occur. If such wastes are disposed of with regular garbage, the toxic materials could destroy landfill liners or other disposal areas. Limitations Municipalities might have limited resources to collect hazardous wastes and to advertise the program. Partnerships with private sanitary services and environmental or service groups can help. Municipalities must make an effort to establish these partnerships at the outset of the program so that the groups can take over a portion of the administrative planning and implementation. Effectiveness No matter what the scope of the household hazardous waste program, whether it is an educational campaign or a full-fledged collection program, citizens will have an increased awareness of the problems caused by mishandling and disposal of hazardous chemicals. Municipalities can gauge the effectiveness of their household hazardous waste program by surveying residents about their perceptions and behavior after education materials have been distributed. If a collection program is in place, effectiveness can be measured by the amount of materials collected at amnesty days or on a monthly or yearly basis at full-time collection facilities. Cost Costs for household hazardous waste programs can be high, especially if a collection program is selected. In some states, grants are available to assist municipalities with collecting household hazardous wastes. In Pennsylvania the Household Hazardous Waste Funding Act of 1994 reimburses municipalities for 50 percent of the developmental and operational costs associated with HHW collection programs, up to a total of $100,000 per county per year (Pennsylvania DEP, 1999). Any municipality that registers a HHW collection program with DEP is eligible to apply for a grant. Grants are provided on a first-registered, first-conducted basis, prioritized according to criteria laid out in the Act. (Priority is given to existing programs and those operated by counties, multi-county groups, and first and second-class cities.) Additionally, the Small Business and Household Pollution Prevention Act provides 80 percent grants to counties to develop and implement pollution prevention education programs for households and small businesses, even if conducted in the absence of a collection program. Municipalities should check with their state environmental agencies to identify grant programs that can be used for household hazardous waste programs.
18
To allay the costs of hazardous waste disposal, recycling programs can be established to reuse some of the chemicals. Austin, Texas, offers a hazardous waste recycling program that allows residents to select from new or slightly used chemicals that were dropped off by other residents (City of Austin, Texas, 2001). Instead of incinerating these products at great expense, the facility will give them to anyone who wants them on a first-come, first-served basis. Products may include paint, solvents, automotive fluids, pesticides, fertilizers, cleaning products, or other chemicals. In its first four months of operation, the public reuse center saved $3,207 through reduced disposal costs. There were 300 participants, and 14,562 pounds of hazardous waste were reused. References Arner, R.1996. Used Oil Reborn: Closing the Loop. Runoff Report 4(3): 1 2,4. NOAA and DEP. No date. Bright Ideas to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution in Your Watershed: Household Hazardous Waste. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, and Delaware Estuary Program. Chesapeake Bay Program and Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. 1993. Baybook: A Guide to Reducing Water Pollution at Home. Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, MD, and Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, Baltimore, MD. City of Austin, Texas. 2001. Household Hazardous Waste Facility. [www.ci.austin.tx.us/sws/hhw.htm]. Last updated March 1, 2001. Accessed April 5, 2001. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (Pennsylvania DEP). No date. Curbside Household Hazardous Waste Pickup. [www.dep.state.pa.us/See%26hear/interactive/curbside.htm]. Accessed April 5, 2001. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (Pennsylvania DEP). No date. Household/Small Business Hazardous Waste: A Manual for Sponsoring a Collection Event. [www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/wm/HHW/Documents/ TechMan.htm]. Accessed April 5, 2001. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (Pennsylvania DEP). 1999. Costs & Funding Options: HHW Grants. [www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/wm/HHW/Facts/grants.htm]. Last updated October 20, 1999. Accessed April 5, 2001. Shelby County, Tennessee. No date. Waste Disposal. [www.co.shelby.tn.us/county_gov/boards_commissions/ SCEIC/waste_disposal/index.htm]. Accessed April 5, 2001. University of Missouri. 1999. Household Hazardous Waste. University of Missouri, Office of Waste Management, Springfield, MO. [www.outreach.missouri.edu/owm/hhw.htm]. USEPA. 1999. Water Drop Patch Program EPA/840/B-99/001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
19
Pet Waste Management Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description When pet waste is not properly disposed of, it can wash into nearby waterbodies or can be carried by runoff into storm drains. Since storm drains do not connect to treatment facilities, but rather drain directly into lakes and streams, untreated animal feces can become a significant source of runoff pollution. As pet waste decays in a waterbody, it uses up oxygen, sometimes releasing ammonia. Low oxygen levels and ammonia combined with warm temperatures can be detrimental to the health of fish and other aquatic life. Pet waste also contains nutrients that promote weed and algae growth (eutrophication). Eutrophic water becomes cloudy and green, making it unattractive or even prohibitive for swimming and recreation. Pet waste also carries bacteria, viruses, and parasites that can pose risks to human health and threaten wildlife. Applicability Pet waste management is applicable to any municipality, since pet owners are a part of every community. Municipalities can do a variety of things to encourage pet owners to collect and properly dispose of their animal's waste. They can produce and distribute educational materials to residents to inform them about the effects of pet wastes on water quality and what they can do to reduce water pollution. Additionally, an ordinance can be enacted to provide a legal basis to enforce proper pet waste disposal with fines. Implementation The first step in a pet waste management program is to increase public awareness. Pet waste management programs strive to encourage proper waste disposal by passing local ordinances and launching public education campaigns to educate pet owners on the importance of cleaning up after their pets. Many communities implement pet waste management programs by posting signs in parks or other pet frequented areas, sending mailings, and making public service announcements. Many communities have "pooper-scooper" laws that govern pet waste cleanup. Some of these laws specifically require anyone who takes an animal off his or her property to carry a bag, shovel, or pooper-scooper. Any waste left by the animal must be cleaned up immediately (Hill and Johnson, 1994). Some of these laws also include fines that can offset some of the program costs.
20
Sign posting is one of the most common outreach strategies for managing pet wastes. Signs can be used to designate areas where dog walking is prohibited entirely, where waste must be fully recovered, or where dogs can roam freely. Many communities post neighborhood signs asking pet owners to "Curb Your Dog." The rationale behind the request is that dogs walked along the curb are more likely to defecate on the roadside, where the waste can be captured by street sweeping. However, waste deposited in the road is also more likely to be washed down storm drains, so this tactic is not considered nearly as effective as a pooper-scooper ordinance. In addition to postings, many communities have established dog parks. Some communities have also installed "pet waste stations" with waste receptacles as well as a supply of disposal waste collection bags, scoops, and shovels. In some communities, public works departments or public utilities have developed programs to control pet waste. More than 150 canines showed up at a Southern California pet store to put their paw print on a pledge to make sure their owners clean up their waste. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Environmental Programs Division developed a program to control pet waste. By profiling various groups of pet owners, the Division identified the best target for reducing coastal pollution. The program included a multimedia campaign to educate new and existing pet owners about the water quality impacts of pet waste. The program also distributed cleanup kits to owners and installed plastic bag dispensers in parks. The Division established partnerships with local pet stores and pet supply companies to promote the program (Lehner, 1999). One important issue communities must decide on is whether to encourage residents to dispose of pet waste with regular trash, bury it in their yards, or flush it down the toilet. The city of Columbus, Ohio, recommends that pet owners flush it, or bag it and place it in the trash (utilities.ci.columbus.oh.us/sewers_drains/stormwater1.htm). In Lake Orono, Minnesota, pet owners are encouraged to flush waste down the toilet (taking special care not to flush yard debris or cat litter), bury it 5 inches deep in their yard and away from vegetable gardens and waterways, dispose of it in the trash, or to install an underground pet waste digester (similar to a small septic tank). More information about the Lake Orono program can be found at www.elknet.com/loia/pet.htm. San Diego County, California, prefers that pet waste be flushed down the drain. Alternatives to flushing include placing pet waste in the trash or burying it at least 3 feet in the ground. (See www.co.san-diego.ca.us/deh/stormwater/residential.html.) Benefits The benefits of pet waste management include a cleaner neighborhood in both site and smell and improved water quality through a reduction in nutrient inputs to waterbodies. It is also a message that is targeted specifically at pet owners. Limitations Because pet waste management is focused toward individual pet owners, the program is dependent on the participation and cooperation of all owners. Many pet owners consider it a nuisance to consider the environmental and aesthetic benefits of pet waste management.
21
Effectiveness To be effective, pet waste management programs must be enforced. Neighborhood residents, community organizations, and even the municipality are responsible for ensuring that pet owners are picking up after their pets and properly disposing of the waste. For the program to be fully effective, every pet owner must participate. In the city of Oskosh, Wisconsin, dog owners are required to remove pet waste from any property other than the dog owner's. The penalty for failure to comply is $116.75 in fines and court fees (City of Oshkosh, 2001). In Arlington County, Virginia, the county has established standards for dog exercise areas, including where to site them, how to maintain them, and what the financial obligations of the county are. Costs The cost of a pet waste management campaign will vary depending on several factors, including the materials produced (signs, ads, clean-up stations). The cost of signs will depend on the material used; plastics can be just as durable as and possibly cheaper than metal. In Sausalito, California, the Remington Dog Park was established in 1991. Since then, more than $36,000 has been spent in park improvements. Most of the money has been raised by user donations (Dogpark.com, 2000). At the Mary Jane Roe Dog Park in the town of Clifton Park, New York, $700 was spent to install a 500-gallon sealed underground septic tank for pet waste. Each pet owner is charged $20 for a permit to use the dog park. Funds from the permit fees will be used to help offset the costs of the septic system (Kemper, 2000). In Poway, California, the city council raised $25,000 to pay for fencing, gates, signs, irrigation, modifications, and retired fire hydrants (City of Poway, no date).
22
References City of Oskosh, Wisconsin. 2001. Responsibilities of Pet Owners in the City of Oshkosh. [www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/Health/Pets.htm]. Last updated February 28, 2001. Accessed April 5, 2001. City of Poway, California. No date. Poway Dog Park Web Site History of Dog Park. [www.ci.poway.ca.us/dogpark/history.htm]. Accessed April 5, 2001. San Diego County, California. No date. Residential Best Management Practices. [www.co.sandiego.ca.us/deh/stormwater/residential.html]. Accessed April 5, 2001. Sausalito Dog Park. 2000. History of the Sausalito Dog Park. [www.dogparksausalito.com/history.htm]. Last updated February 24, 2000. Accessed April 5, 2001. Hill, J.A., and D. Johnson. 1994. Pet Waste and Water Quality. University of Wisconsin Extension Service. [clean-water.uwex.edu/pubs/sheets/lopet.pdf]. Kemper, J. 2000. Septic Systems for Dogs? Nonpoint Source News-Notes 63. Lehner, P.H., G.P. Aponte Clarke, D.M. Cameron, and A.G. Frank. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, New York, NY. University of Wisconsin-Extension. 1997. Pet waste. [www.elknet.com/loia/pet.htm]. Last updated June 21, 1997. Accessed April 5, 2001. Water Quality Consortium. 1998. Surface Water Quality: What's the Problem with Pet Waste? [www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/surfacewater/bmp/petwaste.htm]. Last updated November 18, 1998. Accessed April 5, 2001.
23
Trash Management Public Education, and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Trash and floating debris in waterways have become significant pollutants, especially in areas where a large volume of trash is generated in a concentrated area. Trash in waterbodies contributes to visual pollution and detracts from the aesthetic qualities of the landscape. It also poses a threat to wildlife and human health (e.g., choking hazards to wildlife and bacteria to humans). Additionally, trash and debris can clog the intake valves on boat engines, which results in expensive repairs. Applicability When developing control strategies for trash, municipalities should consider the following points:
Implement a control structure designed to target the most prevalent types of trash and identify the source or sources of the trash. Evaluate the costs for each control. Develop a budget that takes into consideration what services and facilities are already available and can be utilized at the lowest cost. Regular cleaning and maintenance are necessary to prevent the accumulating trash at control structures from being hazardous itself. Control strategies should not just transport trash to another waterbody, but should reduce the quantity of trash in the water as a whole.
Implementation Citizen awareness is key to a successful trash management program. Citizens should be informed about the environmental consequences of littering. Pictures are especially effective at describing the problem. To make the relationship between its young citizens and garbage collectors more personal, the public works department in Kenosha, Wisconsin, started a baseball card collection. Each card contains a full-color picture of a garbage collector, including his/her hobbies and interests, number of lifetime stops, and total pounds of garbage collected (Runoff Report, 1998). There are two main methods of trash control: source control and structural control. There are four main techniques for source control: community education, improved infrastructure, waste reduction, and cleanup campaigns. Community education, such as informing residents about their options for recycling and waste disposal, as well as the consequences of littering, can instill a sense of citizen responsibility. Flyers, door hangers, magnets, and bumper stickers are some of the ways to educate the public. These materials can be distributed through the mail, at public places (e.g., libraries, town halls), in schools, and at local businesses. 24
Improved infrastructure includes optimizing the location, number, and size of trash receptacles, recycling bins, and cigarette butt receptacles based on expected need. Communities that allow private trash disposal companies to serve the public should work with these companies to ensure that the community's trash management goals are reached. Waste reduction includes encouraging the purchase of products with less disposable packaging as well as encouraging manufacturers to reduce the amount of packaging they use. Again, some methods of distilling this information include flyers, magnets, and using the community's web page. Cleanup campaigns are an effective way to reduce trash. There have been many successful cleanup programs at beaches, along rivers, and in parks. By keeping track of what is being collected, the sources of the trash can be quantified and targeted for improved source reduction. Municipal projects such as street sweeping, receptacle servicing, and using cleanup crews along roadsides can also be effective in preventing trash from accumulating and entering waterways. Finally, specially designed boats are effective at removing floating trash and other debris from rivers, lakes, beachfronts, bays, and harbors. The second method of trash control, structural control, includes physical filtering structures and centrifugal separation. Physical filtering structures, such as trash racks, mesh nets, bar screens, and trash booms, concentrate diffuse, floating debris and trash and prevent it from traveling downstream. Centrifugal separation targets trash in storm water during and after heavy precipitation events and involves physical separation of solids and floatables from water in combined sewer outflows by increasing the settling time of trash and particles. In developing and implementing their trash management programs, municipalities need to consider short-term and long-term issues. One of the most important things to consider is where the trash will be deposited (e.g., landfill, incinerator). What are the capacity and life expectancy of that area? What will be used once capacity is met? Benefits The benefits of trash removal are vast. Better trash management increases the aesthetic quality of the landscape and decreases health and safety threats to both wildlife and humans. In addition, less litter from individuals can save the community money in terms of structural-runoff control maintenance. Effective recycling programs can reduce the quantity of waste being disposed of in landfills and allows for the reuse of raw materials. Limitations Without a well-rounded trash removal approach that includes both source and structural controls, noticeable reductions may not occur. It is important to implement several of the aforementioned techniques together to obtain a trash-free waterbody. Effectiveness It is important to clean and maintain the structural controls to keep them fully functional. In addition, ongoing source control efforts should be continuously implemented in order to achieve effective trash removal. Municipalities can measure the effectiveness of their trash management program by weighing the amount of trash cleaned out of structural runoff controls, collected at stream or roadside cleanup events, or collected from sidewalk trash bins. 25
Costs The costs for source control vary depending on the type of method. For example, the cost of a community education program or a plan to increase the number of trash receptacles can be very minimal. On the other hand, a structural control strategy can be quite costly. Physical filtering structures, including trash racks, bar screens, and silt traps, can range from $250,000 to $900,000. Centrifugal separation for municipal storm water management systems can cost as much as $3 million. References City of Santa Monica. 2000. CDS Treatment Unit for Pier Storm Drain. [pen.ci.santamonica.ca.us/engineering/projects/CDS/pier_cds_project.htm]. Last updated November 21, 2000. Accessed January 2, 2001. Ellicot International. 2001. Trash Skimmers Case Studies. [www.dredge.com/cs-trashindex.htm]. Accessed April 5, 2001. Patawalonga and Torrens Catchment Water Management Board. 1999. Trash Racks of the Catchment Areas [www.cwmb.sa.gov.au/trashracks/index.htm]. Accessed April 5, 2001. Terrene Institute. 1998a. Runoff Report 6(3):6. Terrene Institute. 1998b. A 90's approach to 50's stormwater design. Runoff Report 6(3):1 3. Terrene Institute. 1996. Treating urban runoff successfully. Runoff Report 4(4):1 2, 4 6.
26
Targeting public outreach/education

Education/Outreach for Commercial Activities Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description The key to a successful outreach campaign is to target a message to a specific audience. The target audience is the group to whom a storm water pollution message is to be addressed. Industries and businesses can be a very influential component of the watershed. Many commercial activities contribute to storm water pollution (such as vehicle washing, landscape fertilization, and improper hazardous waste disposal). Therefore, it is important to address commercial activities specifically in an outreach strategy. It is also important to recognize that in most cases incentives must be provided to encourage businesses to change their behavior. Applicability There are numerous ways to provide education and outreach for commercial activities. Materials designed for businesses can include posters, magnets, calendars, flyers, brochures, and best management practices (BMPs) fact sheets or handbooks. For example, if the target audience includes restaurants and auto maintenance industries, you might consider developing and distributing educational brochures and posters to these industries that outline BMPs that reduce urban runoff volume and pollutant concentration that result from their operations. Several storm water programs also offer rewards to businesses that participate in a "storm water business" program and meet specific criteria. Such commercial storm water pollution prevention programs have been very successful across the nation. Implementation Depending on time, financial, and resource constraints, a municipality might wish to target all or several types of commercial activities. Some common practices are applicable to most industries and can be used on a variety of outreach materials. At all businesses, workers should "know their site," notice where runoff from their property goes, and know where their drain inlets go. Good housekeeping practices are required to keep pollutants out of storm drains and are also a good idea if a property drains to the sanitary sewer or combined sewer. The business should avoid toxic materials to the extent possible, store liquids where they cannot be knocked over, and consider the best place to conduct specific activities. For example, it might be better to clean a fleet of company vehicles at a commercial car wash rather than washing vehicles on the company's property because dirt, grease, and detergents can be treated effectively at car washes. To help keep rain from washing away pollutants, companies should be advised to keep dumpsters and other containers securely closed; store containers under cover; and cover stockpiled materials such as gravel, wood chips, and building materials (for example, by using plastic sheeting). 27
Businesses should be asked to clean up their sites, but not by washing grit and grime into the storm drainage system. Instead they should pick up litter, sweep areas and dispose of sweepings in the garbage (unless they are hazardous and require special disposal), and use absorbent materials to absorb oils. Some commonly recommended BMPs for commercial activities include

Good storage practices Waste management Vehicle and equipment washing Spill prevention and cleanup Property maintenance Training and education for employees and customers Eliminating improper discharges to storm drains Trucking and shipping/receiving Redesigning parking and landscaped areas to include storm water management features (i.e. rain gardens, bioretention areas, collection areas for roof runoff, and shared parking)
As an example, if the targeted areas are parking lots and parking garages, one might develop a slogan such as "Clean Lots and Clean Waters." Under this slogan, a colorful booklet could be produced. This booklet might describe proper parking lot cleaning procedures, such as the following:

Promptly cleaning up vehicle leaks Using a rag or absorbent material to properly dispose of automotive fluids Regularly sweeping the parking lot and picking up litter Avoiding washing down the parking lot unless a mop for spot cleaning is used Disposing of the mop water to a sanitary sewer Rinsing the parking lot with water only (no soap) after first sweeping it up and cleaning up oil spots with an absorbent, or collecting the soapy rinse water and pumping it to the sanitary sewer
After the booklet has been developed, it can be distributed to local garages and parking lot authorities. The effectiveness of the outreach strategy should be evaluated using surveys or monitoring changes in water quality at the outlets of or downstream from targeted areas.
28
Automotive Service Centers and Garages. The solvents, oils, and paints used in automotive garages and service centers can become major storm water pollutants if handled improperly. Consequently, garages are typically targeted for storm water education campaigns. Outreach materials specifically tailored for the automotive repair industry can be created. The materials can describe how to develop the outreach message and select appropriate materials and provide information regarding distribution of a combination of materials such as posters, which can be hung in the garage, and flyers or brochures, which can be distributed to employees and kept in the shop's office or lobby. Titles should be eye-catching and meaningful to the audience, such as "Keep Your Shop in Tune . . . and Protect the Bay!" or "Is Water Quality Going Down the Drain in Your Garage?" The following are recommended topics with practices to control waste from auto shop activities:
Changing automotive fluids (brake fluid, transmission fluid, gear oil, radiator fluids, and air conditioner Freon or refrigerant). Working on engines, transmissions, and miscellaneous repairs. Preventing leaks and spills. Cleaning up spills. Identifying and controlling wastewater and discharges. Fueling vehicles. Removing and storing batteries. Cleaning parts. Metal grinding and finishing. Storing and disposing of waste. Selecting and controlling inventory. Outdoor parking and auto maintenance. Vehicle washing, engine cleaning, and automotive steam cleaning. Training and educating employees and customers. Pretreating water discharged to the sanitary sewer. Installing a roof over fueling areas or outdoor working areas (to keep storm water off these surfaces). Regrading or repaving outdoor areas. Recycling spent fluids on-site.
29
Home mechanics. In addition to targeting automotive service facilities, many storm water programs also provide outreach materials for automotive "do-it-yourselfers." Pamphlets, brochures, and flyers can be used to outline how to properly dispose of used motor oil and other automotive fluids. Contact information for local commercial recyclers of automotive fluids should be included. To target home mechanics specifically, materials can be placed in automotive supply outlets or mailed to members of a mechanics club or subscribers to home mechanic periodicals. Municipalities should provide incentives for businesses to participate in pollution prevention activities. Participants can be rewarded with technical assistance, promotional items, and public recognition. In Austin, Texas, "Clean Water Partners" receive banners, T-shirts, and mention in newspapers and newsletters. King County, Washington's "EnviroStars" are promoted through the Green Business Directory, a directory of environmentally friendly businesses distributed to the public. A municipality can choose to establish a better business program, which provides assistance, incentives, and recognition for businesses that use practices to effectively reduce storm water pollution. Some programs target all businesses in the community, whereas others focus on a specific industry, such as automotive shops, power washers, and carpet cleaners. Palo Alto's Clean Bay Business Program offers recognition and promotional advantages to vehicle service facilities that implement certain BMPs (NRDC, 1999). In Portland, Oregon, the metropolitan Portland public agencies, known as the Pollution Prevention Outreach (P2O) Team created the Eco-Logical Business Program to advise automotive shops on ways to manage wastes and reduce environmental impacts. To date, five automotive service operations have volunteered for this new program and subsequently met certification criteria. These criteria recognize shops that use management practices designed to limit waste creation and prevent releases to the environment through spills or improper disposal. In most cases, these practices go beyond the minimum to comply with environmental regulations. Some automotive shop pollution prevention and environmental protection practices include recycling or reusing automotive fluids and solvents, using less-toxic cleaners and degreasers, and using secondary containment structures to prevent spills. The program provides an incentive for conscientious businesses to go beyond basic compliance expectations and take extra steps to protect the environment. This sets a new standard for the industry and leads to improved environmental protection. The participating auto shops each received a certificate and window sticker during a news conference. Program coordinators hope that recognition as an environmentally friendly business will be a useful marketing tool for the shops, while attracting other businesses to join the program as well. Benefits One of the benefits of outreach programs for businesses, as with all outreach programs, is an increase in public awareness about water quality issues. Additionally, because many business practices use materials and chemicals that are harmful to the environment, it is important for municipalities to inform owners, operators, and employees about which practices should be avoided to maintain and improve water quality. Also, businesses that are more aware of environmental issues might be willing to partner with municipalities and sponsor programs and activities that reach a wider audience in the community. The businesses receive advertising in return for donations of materials, personnel, or use of their facilities. 30
Limitations Commercial outreach programs do have some limitations. There are many different types of commercial activities, and outreach programs might not be applicable to some of them. Before developing and implementing an outreach program, municipalities should prioritize business types that they think might contribute most to storm water pollution or that might be most receptive to outreach. Because the measures that the municipality proposes for businesses are voluntary, owners, operators, and employees must be convinced that changing their behavior is valuable and worth their efforts. Effectiveness Municipalities can gauge the effectiveness of their outreach program for commercial activities through surveys of employees. The survey can determine if outreach materials and programs have changed business policies or employee behavior. Also, if a municipality has an incentive program that encourages businesses to register to be listed as a better business, the registration process can be used to gather information about which pollution prevention practices are being used at each business. Additionally, the number of registrants can be used to gauge the effectiveness of the advertising campaign for the program. Cost The costs associated with developing an outreach campaign for commercial activities depend on the types and quantities of materials produced, the resources needed (for distribution, contacting businesses in person, etc.), and the general scope of the campaign. Photocopying or printing prices can vary widely, depending on the complexity of the brochure, pamphlet, or poster. Municipalities should consider financial constraints when developing outreach materials. Implementing a "Better Business" program will require dedicated labor, database management, and educational information.
31
References City of Portland. 1999. Pollution Prevention Program Helps Automotive Service Operations. [www.enviro.ci.portland.or.us/nr.htm]. NRDC. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. National Resources Defense Council. Washington, DC. Santa Clara Valley NPS Control Program. 1991. Keep Your Shop in Tune . . . and Protect the Bay! Poster. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, San Jose, CA. Santa Clara Valley NPS Control Program. No date. Best Management Practices for AutomotiveRelated Industries. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, San Jose, CA. Santa Clara Valley NPS Control Program. 1992. Best Management Practices for Industrial Storm Water Pollution Control. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, San Jose, CA. Seattle Public Utilities. 1999. Best Management Practices for Surface Water Quality--Property Maintenance. Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle, WA.[www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/surfacewater/bmp/default.htm].
32
Tailoring Outreach Programs to Minority and Disadvantaged Communities and Children Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Many communities are ethnically and culturally diverse, and a portion of the population speaks languages other than English. The messages contained in signs, brochures, advertisements, newsletters, and other outreach materials that are printed only in English are mostly lost on these groups. For example, in areas such as southern Florida and southern California, where a large proportion of the population consists of Spanishspeaking immigrants, it is important to reach out to nonEnglish speaking residents and inform them about storm water pollution issues and the importance of clean water, because their activities can generate a substantial amount of pollution. This type of expanded outreach program is not limited to these areas. Census 2000 figures show increasing minority populations in urban centers and suburbs such as Washington, DC (Fernandez, 2001; Cohn and Witt, 2001), and New York (Cohn, 2001), among others. Other groups that communities can target for outreach activities are disadvantaged persons who may not have the opportunity to learn about or participate in existing programs and activities. Municipal officials and representatives can design and implement special education programs in poorer neighborhoods to listen to and address the concerns of these residents and to offer suggestions about ways that these residents can improve their neighborhood and environment. Applicability Municipalities are typically aware of the locations of ethnic enclaves and low-income areas. However, historic distinctions between neighborhoods may not be accurate and are most likely changing. It is important for municipalities to survey residents about neighborhood demographics and determine if a specialized campaign is needed in a particular area. The survey can target areas that the municipality deems most likely to contain minority and disadvantaged residents. Municipalities can seek assistance from sociology departments at local universities to help with the survey effort or can hire a firm specializing in focus groups and polling to conduct the research. Once minority and disadvantaged groups have been identified, an analysis of the target group should be conducted. This analysis should determine the audience's perception of storm water issues so the municipality can tailor the outreach program to the appropriate knowledge base and address specific issues of concern. This tailoring will increase the likelihood that the groups are motivated and willing to participate in the program. For example, does the audience know what a watershed is or understand what causes polluted runoff? If not, those terms should be defined in the messages. 33
It is also useful for the municipality to find out how the target audience receives its information, in order to more effectively develop, format, and distribute environmental messages. Which newspapers, magazines, or newsletters do they read? To what organizations do they belong? Do they watch local news or cable television? Do they receive information in other forms such as community radio programs? Who are the opinion leaders, and how can they be reached? Implementation After gathering information on the target audience, a message should be crafted that will engage them and help achieve the objectives of the program. To be effective, messages should be understood by the target audience and appeal to them on their own terms. Tailoring Programs for Minorities. Storm water objectives are more likely to be attained if the largest audience possible is reached. However, to ensure that the message is understood, smaller target audiences might need to be identified. These smaller groups represent specific ages, demographics, and nationalities. If the target audience has a large proportion of minority groups, the outreach strategy should address each of these groups. Representatives from minority groups can help to develop the outreach strategy. They can provide critical insight to help ensure that the message comes across as it is intended. In bilingual areas, materials should be developed in both English and the local language. Furthermore, care should be taken to ensure that the translation is accurate and the meaning of the message is not lost or changed. A classic example of a marketing mishap is when General Motors introduced its Chevy Nova into Latin America; in Spanish "no va" translates into "it won't go," making the car very unattractive to buyers. Pepsi's "Come alive with the Pepsi generation" translated into Chinese came across as "Pepsi brings your ancestors back from the grave." The "language" of the message should not only be correct but also understandable. Scientific jargon should be avoided and terms associated with the initiative (e.g., storm water, nonpoint source pollution, and runoff) should be defined. Graphics should be used to convey the message, rather than text. If text must be used it should be kept brief, direct, and clear. If the reading level of the audience (especially children) is unknown, the message can be pretested with representatives of the target group to determine its level of appropriateness. Partnering with minority organizations can be the best way to reach a minority audience effectively. Temples, churches, minority civic organizations, and the like are in touch with minority communities and understand their perspectives and motivations. Not only can they provide general information about the target group, but they can also serve as an excellent medium through which to channel the message. Organization leaders can be contacted to inform them about the objectives of the program and why it is important to their members. Organizations can announce upcoming events at meetings or services, publish releases in newsletters and notices, and organize presentations. It is important to stress how storm water pollution prevention affects them in particular. The news media are an important and powerful means of communicating watershed messages to both targeted and broad audiences. When a campaign is initiated, minority-focused newspapers, magazines, and television and radio stations in the area should be contacted. The proper format-whether in English, another language, or both--should be provided. Public service announcements and headlines should be culturally appropriate.
34
Tailoring Programs for Disadvantaged Communities. The same principles for targeting specific audiences apply to disadvantaged communities. When creating a storm water pollution message, the message should be specific and tied to what the community values (such as clean drinking water or clean waters for fishing and recreation). The audience should know what their direct benefit will be from getting involved in the issue or modifying their behavior. For example, not letting the hose run water into the street when not in use can save them money on their water bill. Messages should be positive because positive messages tend to be more effective in changing people's habits than negative ones: "Collect your used motor oil" instead of "Don't dump your oil." Other benefits that could be listed include money savings, time savings, convenience, health improvements, and efficiency. The message should focus on making everything--the behavior change requested, the involvement needed, and the support required--user-friendly. Tailoring Programs for Children. There are many ways to target children with an outreach program. Perhaps the easiest way is through schools and day care centers. Child-targeted printed materials (posters, flyers, stickers, etc.) can be displayed in schools, libraries, and at playgrounds. Teachers might be willing to distribute storm water curriculum packets and to organize special events, such as a storm water pollution day or awareness month. Many watershed outreach programs hold water festivals that include everything from games and interactive booths to river/beach cleanups and essay contests. Many storm water pollution programs have partnered with schools to hold poster, logo, and slogan contests and have used the winners for their outreach materials. Participants can receive awards, such as certificates of participation, T-shirts, posters, and stickers. When creating outreach materials for children, the messages should be simple and understandable. Graphics such as photos and mascots can help. Mascots become familiar faces that can take on personalities, stories, and "lives" of their own. Child-friendly people or animals can be adapted into puppets, comics, posters, banners, displays, festivals, parades, calendars, contests, skits, student lessons, or activities. Materials that are interactive, such as workbooks, "laboratory" experiments, puzzles, and games are effective because children learn best by "doing" rather than "being told." Many storm water program web sites have added an interactive "kids' page" where children can learn about storm water pollution by solving puzzles, playing games, and performing experiments on the Internet. Getting children's organizations involved in specific, hands-on projects can be effective. Approach children's groups to help with stream cleanups, wetland plantings, and volunteer monitoring. Most storm water programs partner with youth groups during storm drain stenciling projects. Such activities can be incorporated into the group's curriculum. For example, by participating in a storm drain stenciling project, Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts can earn environmental badges.
35
Community Calendar Gets the Message Out. In an effort to reach every residence in the target area, including lower income and minority households, the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) of San Diego's Chollas Creek Watershed mailed its 1992 calendar to every business and home in the target watershed area. The calendar was in full color and fully bilingual (English and Spanish). The winning posters from a school poster art contest provided the art for each month. The calendar contained specific information on the different types of nonpoint source pollution and offered tips on how residents could reduce their contribution to water pollution in San Diego Bay. Because a large portion of its target audience was ethnically diverse, the EHC expanded its calendar to include dates of interest to these communities. Dates such as Kwanzaa, Boun Soang Heua, and the Chicano Moratorium were noted, in addition to more commonly recognized holidays. The EHC also included dates of activities from neighborhood churches, activity centers, and other community groups. The center of the calendar featured a pull-out of a watershed painting by a renowned local artist. The calendar was printed on recycled paper using soy-based inks. The Chollas Creek Watershed Protection Calendar was extraordinarily successful. Similar calendars have already been produced in two other states and Mexico. The calendar was expensive to produce, in terms of money and time, but it provided education on water pollution prevention over an entire year and represented a gift from the EHC (through their Chollas Creek Project) to the community. Effectiveness Targeting specific groups can be effective when cultural, language, and special needs of such groups are understood. Municipalities can gauge the effectiveness of the targeted outreach programs by monitoring participation in watershed cleanups and other environmental activities, surveying residents about changes in their behavior resulting from outreach efforts, or monitoring water quality and general environmental conditions (evidence of nonpoint source pollution such as trash or motor oil spills) in or downstream from ethnic enclaves or low-income areas. Benefits There are many benefits to targeting specific audiences, especially if they constitute a large proportion of the population. If the outreach program is tailored to a specific audience, the participants are more likely to feel that they are an important part of the effort. They can learn more specifically about the ways they might cause storm water pollution and how it affects their neighborhood environment and quality of life. They also learn what they can do to help curb storm water pollution, improve conditions in their neighborhood, and be aware of and prevent environmental injustices. Limitations Municipalities should understand cultural issues, language barriers, and specific needs in order to respond to questions with sensitivity and engage participants in environmental efforts. Research about community demographics is key to identifying where target audiences reside and how they receive information. The more knowledge the municipality has about the target audiences, the better they can use limited resources to effectively send their message. 36
Cost The cost of targeting specific groups depends on the particular outreach materials and programs that are developed for these groups. Public service announcements and other news releases are generally free of charge, but staff time for preparation can be substantial. Costs for outreach materials vary widely, but municipalities can choose a medium appropriate to the available resources. References Cohn, D. 2001, March 16. Immigration fueling big U.S. cities. The Washington Post, p. A1. Cohn, D. and A. Witt. 2001, March 20. Minorities fuel growth in Md. suburbs. The Washington Post, p. A1. Environmental Health Coalition. 1992. How to Create a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Campaign. Environmental Health Coalition, San Diego, CA. Fernandez, M. 2001, April 5. City underwent major racial shifts in '90s, census shows. The Washington Post, p. D3. The Council of State Governments. No date. Getting in Step: A Guide to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed. The Council of State Governments, Lexington, KY. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In Press. Understanding a Sense of Place: A Guide to Analyzing Community Culture and the Environment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
37
Classroom Education on Storm Water Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Classroom education is an integral part of any storm water pollution outreach program. Providing storm water education through schools exposes the message not only to students but to their parents as well. Many municipal storm water programs have partnered with educators and experts to develop storm water-related curricula for the classroom. Fortunately, these lessons need not be elaborate or expensive to be effective. Applicability It is important to emphasize that the role of a municipality is to support a school district's effort to educate students about storm water, not to dictate what programs and materials the school should use. Municipalities should work with school officials to identify their needs. For example, if the schools request storm water outreach materials, municipalities can provide educational aids that range from simple photocopied handouts, overheads, posters, and slide shows to more costly and elaborate endeavors such as working models and displays. The Daly City (California) Utilities gave a slide show and video presentation depicting the problem of marine entanglement to an eighth-grade classroom just before their 1998 beach cleanup. Afterward they had their largest volunteer turnout ever for a cleanup. Implementation Building a strong relationship with the school district is the most important step in getting storm water education into the schools. One of the first questions to ask is what storm water education program, if any, do the schools already implement, or want to see in their schools but lack the resources to do so. When developing an outreach message for children, choose the age ranges to target. Will the focus be on students in preschool, grammar school, middle school, and/or high school? Should the curricula be grade-level specific? Will the program involve a year-long study, a semester, a special topic or event, or a single presentation by an organization? What special equipment might be needed? For example, the municipality might purchase a small-scale watershed model that can be loaned to schools for demonstrations as part of a watershed education program. The answers to these questions and others will be determined by both the school district's needs and the municipal resources available.
38
If the school district requests that education materials and programs be developed by the municipality, municipal officials can get ideas for these materials from several resources. Many national and regional organizations can provide assistance and materials for storm water education. The national Center for Environmental Education (CEE) was established in 1990 to provide teachers with a single clearinghouse for K12 environmental education materials (CEE, no date). CEE has written a guidebook titled Blueprint for a Green School to tackle the environmental challenges found inside schools and on school playgrounds. CEE's outreach department works with schools nationwide. One of the most popular programs, Green School's Peer Partners in Environmental Education, organizes high school students to adopt an elementary school or class. A free copy of the on-line program is available through Earth Spirit at 310-582-8228. CEE's Internet page at www.cee-ane.org is another good source of information. Many additional classroom materials are available for use free of cost. Communities such as Colorado Springs, Colorado, have made copies of their educational materials available for downloading from the Internet at www.csu.org/water/watereducation/watereducation.html. The Colorado Springs educational series includes water-related artwork, creative writing, research conducted by students, Internet programs and games, a virtual tour of the Colorado Springs water system, and the "Keepers of the Water" classroom lesson series. Developed by local teachers, water experts, and education specialists, the study-based units explore the characteristics of the local water environment as it affects the harvesting, treatment, and delivery of drinking water and the collection, treatment, and return of wastewater. The interdisciplinary nature of these activities enables teachers to work in teams and help students explore a range of water issues (Colorado Springs Utilities, 1996). The city of Eugene's (Oregon) Storm Water Management Program offers a free 13-page booklet listing storm water videos, classroom presentations, demonstrations, and models available for checkout to Eugene teachers. Guest speakers also are available to give classroom presentations. The city of Los Angeles's Storm Water Program offers several classroom materials, including a Special Agent Task Book to supplement its EcoTours program targeting third and fourth graders, the Clean Water Patrol coloring book (which teaches children about their urban forest and how neighborhood behavior can affect the environment), and colorful vinyl stickers with clever storm water sayings, such as "You Otter Not Pollute." The University of Wisconsin offers educational materials titled "Educating Young People About Water." These materials can help the user develop a community-based, youth education program that targets youths, links key members of the community, and allows both groups to work together toward common water education goals. Various guides and other educational materials are available from the university. More information about these materials and ordering information can be found at www.uwex.edu/erc/ywc/index.html.
39
Other programs have created models or displays to be featured in several schools. Sacramento, California's Storm Water Management Program has designed a working storm water model display that demonstrates the many sources of storm water pollution. The exhibit features a model of a typical section of an urban community showing storm water and pollution draining into a creek. Real water flowing in the creek and periodic rainstorms on the model draw attention from both children and adults. Interactive buttons highlight different sources of storm water pollution occurring within the community. Brief explanations of storm water pollution accompany the model display and help to convey the important message that storm water flows directly, untreated, into area creeks and rivers. The model is available on a limited basis for loan to schools and other educational programs in the Sacramento area (City of Sacramento, 1999). San Diego's Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) has developed two excellent environmental curricula for the San Diego Regional Household Hazardous Materials Program (SDRHHMP). Pollution Solutions Start at Home is an interdisciplinary curriculum for middle and junior high schools. Household Toxics is a curriculum for fourth-through sixth-grade students about the safe use and disposal of household hazardous materials and safer alternatives to such products. EHC also produces a Watershed Protection Kit, which includes two learning activity packets, 10 storm drain stencils, and a carrying case ($50.00). These materials and others are available through the Environmental Health Coalition, 1717 Kettner, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92101, 619-235-0281. Seattle Public Utilities has recently turned its award-winning "Water You Doing" video into an educational CD-ROM for classrooms and libraries. The CD features the video, games, activities, and career profiles highlighting Seattle's and Puget Sound's water resources. The CD is available for use at the Environmental Information Center in the main Seattle Public Library and all 22 branches. It is being distributed to teachers within Seattle Public Utilities' service area at no cost. Outside Seattle, discs are available for a nominal fee to cover the cost of pressing and shipping. Copies can be obtained from Seattle Public Utilities by contacting Richard Gustav at Seattle Public Utilities, 710 Second Ave., 10th floor, Seattle, WA 98104, 206-684-7591. Home*A*Syst is a program designed to aid homeowners and renters in understanding environmental risks in and around their home. The program guides the public in developing action plans for making voluntary changes to prevent pollution. Additionally, Home*A*Syst helps individuals understand what they can do to help protect the environment, how they should take action, and where they can find the support necessary to act. To accomplish this, the program offers a guide entitled Home*A*Syst: An Environmental Risk-Assessment Guide for the Home, which provides in-depth information and comprehensive checklists to help users evaluate environmental risks. The guide is composed of eleven chapters that cover a variety of topics, including storm water. If children are made aware of this resource, they can encourage their parents to use the program and reduce environmental risks around the home. More information about Home*A*Syst can be found at www.uwex.edu/homeasyst.
40
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) offers a number of educational resources. Posters are available for teaching students in grades K 12, about wastewater, water quality, groundwater, and water use. The USGS also offers fact sheets, useful links, and an educational outreach program designed to stimulate interest in fresh water resources for students and educators in grades K 12. This information can be found at water.usgs.gov/education.html. Similar to USGS, EPA offers a number of educational resources for students and teachers, which are located specifically in their environmental education and student "centers." More information about these centers, as well as specific resources found within each, can be obtained at www.epa.gov/epahome/students.htm. The Green Teacher is another educational resource that is useful for educating students. The magazine, which is written by educators, is designed to help educators enhance environmental and global education across the curriculum for all grade levels. Each issue contains articles, ready-to-use activities, resource listings and reviews, and a number of other resources. More information about the magazine can be found at www.web.ca/~greentea. Other educational resources for K 12 educators are available from the Water Environment Federation (www.wef.org/WefStudents/index.htm), the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/bureau/education/education.htm), Project WET (www.montana.edu/wwwwet), and a number of other organizations and programs throughout the country. American Oceans Campaign offers storm water runoff education resources in many different formats, including ads, videos, brochures, fact sheets, curricula, and newsletters. American Oceans Campaign started collecting these resources in 1999 from government and nongovernmental organizations and private agencies. These resources can be found at www.americanoceans.org/runoff/epa.htm. The Colorado Water Protection Project has created the "Colorado Water Protection Kit" which is a useful booklet of storm water information. This kit contains information on polluted runoff, landscaping, yard and garden products, pet waste, household hazardous waste, motor oil and automotive products, boating and marinas, conservation, and septic systems. The Protection Kit can be found at www.ourwater.org. Effectiveness The effectiveness of storm water education in the classroom depends on many factors. The lessons and activities must be interesting and fun, and most importantly, they must be targeted to the correct age group(s). Benefits The benefits of teaching schoolchildren about storm water issues are plentiful. These children will learn about environmental issues early and will therefore become interested and perhaps involved at earlier ages. Schoolchildren often tell their parents what they learn in school. Therefore, teaching children about storm water is an effective way to pass environmental awareness to their parents and throughout the entire community.
41
Limitations One of the limitations of classroom education is being able to incorporate storm water issues into the school curricula. With so many subjects to teach, environmental issues might be viewed as less important. Another limitation is the cost of new materials. Cost Many classroom education materials are available free of charge by order or download from the Internet. Storm water agencies can generally supply information and materials. The cost of producing materials will vary with the scope of efforts. For example, producing classroom packets can cost as little as $100 $200, whereas the cost of permanent displays and models can be as high as $1,000 $5,000 or more. Make sure to get estimates from individual vendors before preparing the classroom educational materials budget. Work within attainable financial means. If applicable, contact corporations to sponsor the programs or to donate materials.
42
References American Oceans Campaign. No date. Stormwater Resources. [www.americanoceans.org/runoff/epa.htm]. Accessed April 9, 2001. Center for Environmental Education (CEE). No date. Center for Environmental Education of the Antioch New England Institute. [http://www.cee-ane.org]. Accessed June 19, 2001. City of Sacramento Storm Water Management Program. No date. Stormwater Model. [www.sacstormwater.org/fun/model.htm]. Accessed April 9, 2001. City of Sacramento Storm Water Management Program. No date. Attention Teachers. [www.sacstormwater.org/fun/teachers.htm]. Accessed January 2,2001. Colorado Springs Utilities. 2000. Welcome to Water Education. [www.csu.org/water/watereducation/watereducation.html]. Accessed April 9, 2001. Colorado Water Protection Project. 2000. Colorado Water Protection Kit. [www.ourwater.org]. Accessed April 9, 2001. EnviroScape. No date. Welcome to EnviroScape. [www.enviroscapes.com]. Accessed February 6, 2001. Green Teacher. Green Teacher: Education for Planet Earth. [www.web.ca/~greentea]. Accessed July 21, 2000. National Wildlife Federation. 2001. Schoolyard Habitats. [www.nwf.org/habitats/schoolyard]. Accessed February 6, 2001. Montana State University. 1999. Project WET: Water Education for Teachers. [www.montana.edu/wwwwet]. Last updated September 14, 1999. Accessed July 21, 2000. Seattle Public Utilities. 2000. Water You Doing? The CD. [www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/RESCONS/cd_home.htm]. Last updated July 3, 2000. Accessed April 9, 2001. University of Wisconsin. 2001. Educating Young People About Water. [www.uwex.edu/erc/ywc/index.html]. Last updated March 9, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001. University of Wisconsin. 2000. Home*A*Syst. [www.uwex.edu/homeasyst]. Accessed July 12, 2000. USEPA. 1998. EPA Kids: Students and Teachers. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. [www.epa.gov/epahome/students.htm]. Last updated November 3, 1998. Accessed July 21, 2000. USGS. 2001. Education Resources. United States Geological Survey. [water.usgs.gov/education.html]. Last updated April 3, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001. Water Environment Federation. 2000. WEF for Students. [www.wef.org/WefStudents/index.htm]. Accessed July 20, 2000. 43
References (Continued). WDNR. 2001. Resources for K-12 Educators. [www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/bureau/education/education.htm]. Last updated January 23, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001.
44
Storm Water Educational Materials Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Storm water education starts with a well-thought-out and well-developed outreach plan. The outreach plan should identify goals and objectives, classify the target audience, identify the message to be conveyed, and explain how the message will be distributed to the audience. Applicability The first step for a municipality will be to determine who the target audience is or whether there is more than one audience to target (see Attitude Survey fact sheet). If there is more than one audience to address, can they be reached simultaneously or should they be prioritized? This will depend on the type(s) of audiences to be reached and the message(s). Once the target audience(s) has/have been determined and the storm water message has been packaged, distribution can begin. Outreach materials (posters, flyers, magnets, etc.) will not help prevent storm water pollution if the target audience does not receive and read them. Common distribution mechanisms include direct mail, door-to-door distribution, telephone, targeted businesses, presentations, handouts at events, media outlets, and messages posted in public places. Deciding how to distribute materials involves a close look at the level of time, resources, and work required. For example, if posters with a storm water message are to be printed, several things need to be decided: Should the posters be mailed to a specific audience? Should mailing tubes be purchased? Are addresses available? Implementation Outreach and education can be implemented in several ways. It is not always necessary that the entire audience be reached at once. Therefore, one or more of the following approaches might be useful. Mail. The mail delivery system can be the best distribution vehicle if the target audience can be defined geographically or if a mailing list that encompasses the entire audience (e.g., landscapers, farmers, garages) is accessible. The U.S. Postal Service has established procedures for bulk mailings, and it is advisable to contact the post office early to discuss the pros and cons of this delivery approach. In addition, lightweight flyers and brochures can be added to general mailings, such as utility bills or notices about municipal services, without raising the cost of postage. Door-to-Door. Door-to-door canvassing is very effective, but it is resource-intensive if employees are required to deliver the items. If it is too difficult or expensive to send employees door-to-door, it might be possible to work with local scout troops, environmental groups, or other organizations who are willing to canvass or deliver the message. A recommended approach is to print door hangers with the message that can be distributed without disturbing the occupants. 45
Businesses, Organizations, and Public Places. Using selected businesses and organizations to deliver the message can increase the likelihood of reaching the target audience and save money on postage. For example, if a brochure or poster on oil recycling is printed, the brochure/poster could be displayed at auto parts supply outlets. Lawn and garden centers could display an alternative lawn care poster. Businesses will be more likely to distribute materials if there is an added benefit to them. "Green company" endorsements could be included on the posters. Septic tank pumpers could be asked to distribute refrigerator magnets containing information on proper septic tank care and include a space on the magnet for the customer to write down the pumper's name and phone number. Schools and local organizations with building space are good candidates for the display of materials, especially posters. Presentations. Presenting the message directly can be a very effective way to reach the target audience. The audience should be allowed the opportunity to ask questions, and any questions should be responded to immediately. Presentations can be given at events tailored to the audience, such as schools, retirement homes, local clubs, libraries, businesses, and associations. Conferences. Conferences can be an excellent way to distribute messages through presentations, promotional give-aways, and displays. However, a conference might not reach all of the intended audience, and those who attend might already be familiar with the message and its significance. Media. Messages that are recorded either in audio or video can be played on local radio or cable stations, particularly if they are required to make public services announcements. Sometimes the easiest way to distribute a message is to have someone else do it. If the target audience subscribes to an existing periodical, it might be more effective to include the message in that publication. It will certainly save time, instead of dealing with mailing lists, postage costs, or news media releases. It also increases the likelihood that the message will actually be read by members of the target audience since they are already familiar with the publication. Brochures and flyers can also be displayed in local libraries and other public buildings. Effectiveness The effectiveness of distributing storm water materials depends on many factors. These include the costs associated with designing, producing, and distributing materials. Other factors are the type of audience to receive the message and what the audience does with the materials. The quality of the materials also plays a role in the message's effectiveness. It is important that a brochure be carefully prepared to ensure that it is actually read. Another approach is to convey a message in a simple form, such as a magnet. A magnet posted on a refrigerator at home is likely to be more effective than a flyer that is wordy or complicated. Benefits Benefits to using storm water outreach material are that they can reach a large audience. If the slogans, graphics, and other aspects of the materials are catchy, the messages will be even more effective. Limitations Limitations to outreach materials are mainly associated with the time and cost of making and distributing the materials. Other barriers are the types of audiences to reach; for example, various age groups might need to be addressed separately. 46
Cost The cost of distributing storm water messages depends on the method used and what is to be distributed. The U.S. Postal Service bulk mail has specific requirements, but discounted unit costs. Going door-to-door can be labor-intensive and requires staff or volunteers and transportation. Using businesses to distribute the message can be very effective and requires virtually no distribution cost. Electronic presentations (e.g., in Microsoft PowerPoint) can be a less expensive way to present information if computers and projectors are available for use or loan. Presentations can be costly, depending on the materials. Flip charts and posters can cost $5.00 each or more. Producing 35-mm slides (from slide film or computer disc) costs approximately $4.00 per slide. References The Council of State Governments. No date. Getting in Step: A Guide to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed. The Council of State Governments, Lexington, KY.
47
Public outreach programs for new development

Low-Impact Development Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Using low-impact development (LID) approaches for new development can help to achieve storm water pollution reduction goals. Through LID approaches, storm water runoff can be controlled while development objectives are achieved. An important component of a municipal LID program is public outreach. The first step in achieving LID is to encourage developers to adopt such approaches. This is followed by the development and implementation of a program to ensure that design standards are met and that homeowners are adequately informed of their responsibilities. The latter should be the responsibility of the developer and homebuilder. This outreach takes the form of the developer's communicating maintenance instructions and pollution prevention measures to the property owners. The public outreach program informs property owners of their responsibilities to the environment. When successfully implemented, LID education and awareness programs accomplish the following:
Establish a marketing tool that allows developers to attract environmentally conscious buyers Create more landscaped areas, enhancing the aesthetics of developed areas Educate property owners on effective pollution prevention measures Promote the proper maintenance of best management practices Inform commercial property owners of potential cost savings from using LID approaches
Applicability Outreach for Residential Properties. LID public outreach programs accomplish the above goals by providing residential property owners with essential information to maintain a property in an environmentally friendly manner. For example, one of the critical aspects of these programs is teaching property owners to maintain previously installed pollution prevention and best management practices properly. The developer or local public agency should communicate to current or potential property owners the benefits of LID, as well as their individual maintenance responsibilities as property owners. For example, property owners should understand that effective management of an LID property includes maintaining vegetative buffers, removing trash and debris from outflow points, using fertilizers properly, sweeping paved areas, practicing water conservation, and using mowing practices that promote runoff infiltration. 48
Outreach for Commercial Properties. Municipalities should consider three objectives when developing an outreach program for commercial properties. First, they should educate developers and provide incentives to incorporate LID practices into their designs. Second, they should educate existing commercial property owners and provide incentives to retrofit their properties with LID practices, especially for areas adjacent to sensitive waterbodies. Finally, municipalities should provide guidance and other assistance to property owners who have already incorporated LID practices into their landscapes. Implementation Development of public outreach programs for LID properties should be tailored to a specific site and audience. The first step in developing a public outreach program is to identify the objectives of the program. For example, is the goal of the program to educate potential property owners about the maintenance requirements of best management practices, or simply to inform commercial property owners of the potential cost savings of LID? These goals should be considered when selecting outreach materials for distribution. The next step in the development of an outreach program is to identify the target audience. For residential, commercial, or industrial LID properties, the developer might need to communicate with diverse audiences, including potential buyers, new property owners, builders, construction site managers, homeowner associations, and current property owners. The message to each respective audience differs slightly. For example, developers often promote the environmental benefits of LID to potential buyers by emphasizing measures such as reforestation or landscaping practices conducted at a site. Potential buyers must also be informed of their responsibility to maintain measures that have already been implemented. When dealing with builders and site construction managers, the developer must inform all parties of appropriate phasing and construction practices necessary to properly implement management practices. Developers must also provide new property owners with a set of conditions to be met with the acquisition of the land. After the property is transferred to a new owner, the developer should assign someone to train the new property owners and monitor maintenance activities. When the goals and the specific audiences are identified, the development and transfer of information to the property owner can be achieved in several phases. Program Planning. In the program planning phase, the developer meets with county or state review agencies to determine which best management practices are applicable and to identify the maintenance requirements of a specific property. The developer should obtain and understand documentation of the construction and maintenance requirements of the best management practices and then pass this information on to the property owner. The product of the program planning phase is a set of informational materials that provide the property owner with general information on LID as well as specific property maintenance information.
49
Buyer Awareness. In the buyer awareness phase, the developer must make the potential property owner aware of the benefits and the responsibilities of owning a LID property. The developer should inform the potential buyer of the aesthetic and financial value of the management practices that have been implemented on the property. In addition, it should be emphasized that the responsibility of maintaining best management practices on the property falls on the potential property owner. In this phase, the potential owner should be provided with maintenance materials that outline the basic requirements for the best management practices (BMPs) located on the property. Settlement Documents. The sale of LID sites typically involves legal information and instruments to ensure that the property will be properly maintained. These legal approaches may include easements, covenants, homeowners' association requirements, or other instruments. The maintenance requirements for these documents can be developed from brochures, fact sheets, and sample documents from the county. The requirements and wording often must be approved by a review agency. When these documents have been compiled, the developer must allow the buyer to evaluate and then accept the terms associated with acquisition of the land. Inspection. During the construction phase, county inspectors should be on-site to ensure that BMPs and proper construction practices are followed. To avoid construction problems, the developer should communicate with the builder and site construction manager to make them aware of appropriate phasing and construction practices. Maintenance. The maintenance of the BMPs is ultimately the responsibility of the new property owner. After the initial property transfer, however, the developer should assign someone to ensure that the maintenance procedures and operations are being followed consistently. Throughout this process, the potential property owners and buyers should be provided with materials that allow them to understand the importance and the maintenance of LID properties. Brochures, manuals, and fact sheets on BMPs, pollution prevention, proper construction measures, car and lawn care, water conservation, and property management should be distributed during each phase of the process. Such outreach information is usually available from county or state environmental agencies. Other Programs. In 1999, the city of Chicago began its Urban Heat Island Reduction Initiative, aimed at reducing urban air temperature and pollution and beautifying the downtown area. As a secondary benefit, the practices used in this program also benefit storm water runoff. The city is using light-colored rooftops, creating rooftop gardens, planting trees in areas without existing trees, and replacing asphalt with porous pavement (USEPA, 2000). More examples of successful implementation of LID practices can be found at the Low Impact Development Center's web site at www.lowimpactdevelopment.org. Effectiveness Because LID is a relatively new concept, its effectiveness with respect to water quality improvement and water quantity reduction is largely untested. Many of the practices associated with LID, such as bioretention swales, dry wells, filter and buffer strips, and infiltration trenches, have been evaluated with respect to pollutant removal and hydrologic control, as shown in Tables 1 and 2. 50
Table 1. Reported pollutant removal efficiencies of LID practices (Prince George's County, Maryland, 2000).
Practice Bioretention Swales Dry Wells Infiltration Trenches Filter and Buffer Strips Infiltration Swales Wet Swales Rain Barrels Cisterns
a
TSSa 80-100 80-100 20-100
Total Pa 81 40-60 40-60 0-60 10-25 65 20 NA NA
Total Na 43 40-60 40-60 0-60 0-15 50 40 NA NA
Zinc 99
Lead 99
BODa 60-80 60-80 0-80 NA NA
Bacteria 60-80 60-80 Neg. NA NA
80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 20-100 20-100 20-50 80-90 40-70 NA NA 20-50 80-90 40-70 NA NA
Vegetated Swales 30-65 90 80 NA NA
TSS=total suspended solids; Total P=total phosphorus; Total N=total nitrogen; BOD=biological oxygen demand
Table 2. Hydrologic functions of LID practices (Prince George's County, Maryland, 2000).
Hydrologic Functionsa Interception Depression Storage Infiltration Groundwater Recharge Runoff Volume Peak Discharge Runoff Frequency Water Quality Base Flow Stream Quality
a
Bioretention Dry Filter and Grass Rain Infiltration Cisterns Swales Wells Buffer Strips Swales Barrels Trenches H H H H H M H H M H N N H H H L M H H H H H M M M L M H H H M H M M M M M H M M N N N N L M M L M N N N N N M M M L N L N M H H H M M H L H
H=high; M=medium; L=low; N=none
51
Benefits The benefits of LID are many. First, it addresses hydrologic changes caused by development at the site level, which reduces the downstream impact of increased imperviousness. Second, LID practices, when used in combination with each other and with traditional treatment practices such as regional retention ponds, reduce pollutant loading to receiving water bodies, as shown in Table 1. Third, many LID practices involve natural landscaping including the planting of trees, shrubs, and flower gardens--these elements enhance the aesthetics of the site and reduce mowing requirements. If the plants are wisely chosen from local species and locally grown stocks, watering and fertilizer requirements can be reduced because the plants are adapted to local climate conditions. Finally, careful regrading and well-sited depressional storage areas can improve overall site drainage, help prevent pooling and creation of mosquito-breeding habitat, and reduce both onsite and downstream flooding. Limitations LID can be applied at many different scales, from a simple bioretention swale at the low point of a home site to large-scale subdivision planning with narrow streets, conservative layouts, and multiple, integrated management practices. This flexibility allows watershed managers to be able to use LID at most new development sites. Some LID applications can be limited by existing development codes that dictate minimum street and sidewalk widths, pavement types, setbacks, and other design details. An excellent resource that deals with the issue of changing restrictive development rules is called Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community (CWP, 1998). Costs The costs for the municipality to encourage homebuilders and developers to implement LID are dependent on how municipalities want to market LID. LID approaches could be added to the locality's comprehensive plan or design standards. The updating of these documents would have some costs associated with them. Information brochures, flyers, and posters could be displayed in the local planning office and in other areas of government buildings. To promote LID to developers, information seminars and meetings could be held, which involve costs associated with paying employees to conduct such sessions. The costs associated with LID applications vary with the scope of the application. In some cases, costs for designing depressional storage and other LID elements can be incorporated in the general design costs. Additionally, depressional storage areas can be incorporated into the overall grading plan, yielding a neutral cost for these additional elements. Bioretention swales and other structural management practices cost more to install than their turf or pavement alternatives but cost-savings can be found over many years with reduced maintenance requirements relative to turf and pavement, as well as reduced costs of retaining and treating storm water.
52
References CWP. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Low Impact Development Center. 2000. Low Impact Development. [www.lowimpactdevelopment.org]. Last updated September 5, 2000. Accessed April 9, 2001. The Nature Conservancy. No date. The Darby Book: A Guide for Residents of the Darby Creek Watershed. The Nature Conservancy, Ohio Chapter. Prince George's County, Maryland, Department of Environmental Resources. 2000. Low-Impact Development Design Strategies, An Integrated Design Approach. Department of Environmental Resources and Planning Division, Prince George's County, MD. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Chicago Beats the Heat with Green Techniques. Nonpoint Source News-Notes 60 (March).
53
Pollution prevention programs for existing development

Educational Displays, Pamphlets, Booklets, and Utility Stuffers Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Printed materials are a common way to inform the public about storm water pollution. Some municipalities have a public relations department or a staff member that handles these types of outreach materials, whereas others contract with public relations firms and graphic designers to develop materials. Regardless of who actually produces the materials, municipalities should be creative when deciding which media to use and what types of messages are appropriate for those media. They also need to consider the following questions:
Who is the audience? (i.e., general public, developers, homeowners?) How does the audience get its information? (i.e., newspaper, television, trade magazines, utility bills?) What knowledge base does the audience have? Does the audience need to be convinced about the importance of storm water pollution control?
These and other questions can guide municipalities in choosing the appropriate media and designing a message with the appropriate tone and level of information. Some common printed materials include educational displays, pamphlets, booklets, and utility stuffers. Computer desktop publishing has made the production of many of these materials fun and easy. If money is tight, or there is limited access to a computer, attractive and effective materials using basic resources such as a photocopy machine, scissors, and glue can still be effective.
54
When designing the layout of a display, pamphlet, or flyer, the following issues should be considered:
Restraint in design, consistency in artwork and graphic types, and quality materials are important factors because the audience should be invited into the materials with appealing, user-friendly layouts. The text should be kept to a minimum but still be interesting for readers. Using various formats and an active voice can make the text more engaging. Graphics--photos, logos, or other artwork--are great for breaking up long blocks of text, allowing readers a visual break. Images of lakes, streams, rivers, wetlands, and other storm water features are "naturals" for enhancing any printed material. The emotional appeal they elicit can be tremendous.
Applicability Educational displays, pamphlets, booklets, and stuffers can be easily exhibited and distributed to a large population. They can be made using simple materials and graphics, or they can be made more elaborate. Furthermore, these displays can be made for any and all age levels, in any language, or for specific audiences. Implementation Educational Displays. Educational displays can be an effective way to convey information regarding a storm water pollution reduction campaign or program. These materials can be displayed at the following venues:

Conferences. Seminars. Libraries. Outdoor events. Schools. Other community events.
These places provide an excellent opportunity for sharing information, educating and involving citizens, promoting volunteerism, and building general awareness. Municipalities can elect to purchase a popup display and contract with an artist to design it, or they can design it in house. The displays should be visibly pleasing as well as informative. The overall design of the display should attract attention, draw the viewer in, and lead the eye throughout. Whenever possible, the display should be staffed to offer further explanation and answer questions.
55
Displays can be constructed from wood, cardboard, poster board, or other heavy material, but they are usually designed to be easily put together and dismantled, as well as being portable. Wooden displays (with metal hinges) have the advantage of longevity, but they can also be heavy. Commonly displays are made of foam board, which is relatively inexpensive and both lighter in weight and more durable than poster board. When composing any large-format display, the entire display space should be treated as if it were a page layout, a photograph, or a painting. The same basic elements of composition governing good design and flow apply. The following considerations should be made when designing an educational display:
A common mistake in preparing a display is the tendency to place many small items in a big space. If the project requires distributing a lot of information, a separate informative piece, such as an illustrated fact sheet, flyer, or brochure can be included to convey the details of the project. Whenever possible, it is better to "show" than "tell." A variety of photos, drawings, charts, and text should be included. Different fabrics or papers can be placed over the backdrop of the display to add texture. For example, if a display highlights a storm water stenciling project, a stream can be used as a backdrop and photos of stencil volunteers and a stenciled message can be included. Most importantly, the focus should be on the objective of the display, why it is being presented, what message it is intended to deliver and to which audience, and what it is trying to accomplish.
Pamphlets and Booklets. Pamphlets, booklets, and brochures are an effective way to present and explain a storm water message. Unlike many other communication vehicles, pamphlets and booklets can be distributed in many places without requiring someone to staff them. Racks of pamphlets can be set up at libraries, schools, offices, and fairs. They can be passed out at meetings and used in a direct mail campaign. Before creating a pamphlet or booklet, it is important to think through the purpose of the piece and its intended audience. It might be intended to solicit interest in a specific storm water event or activity, or to promote storm water education and positive behaviors. The purpose will significantly define the appearance and content. Flyers. In addition to a booklet or pamphlet, a one-page flyer can be produced to carry the basic message. A short, to-the-point flyer is essential as the primary education tool for programs with a small budget. Commonly, flyers list the basic do's and don'ts of water pollution and list the top 10 actions the public should take against storm water pollution. The flyer should contain the basic "bare bones" list of information the public needs to know. The flyer should be designed to be easily reproduced for newspapers and newsletters (black-and-white and reproducible by copy machine), a major venue for communicating with the public. The flyer can be designed as a selfmailer; as funds become available, it can be expanded into a poster, calendar, or booklet.
56
Utility Stuffers. As with pamphlets, booklets, and flyers, utility stuffers offer an inexpensive, convenient way to convey the message to a large audience. However, instead of being targeted at a specific audience, utility stuffers must be appropriate for the public. These inserts can be extremely effective if they are engaging, concise, and memorable. They are often used to impart brief, important messages, provide overviews of the problems and solutions, or implore simple actions. When designing the insert, explore options regarding paper and ink colors, type faces, and type sizes; the text should be kept brief, the letters fairly large, and the design attractive. Special care should be taken to ensure that the message is simple, concisely written, and tells the reader why this issue is important to them. Signs and Billboards. Striking graphics and brief but strong messages about storm water pollution can make a real impact on billboards along busy roadsides. These messages can be watershed-specific to remind citizens of the specific resource they are protecting. Additionally, signs with storm water pollution information can be posted on bridges, along roadsides, and at parks. For example, Michigan community installed a water monitoring gauge and interpretive display panel on a downtown pedestrian bridge (Grand Traverse Bay Watershed Initiative, no date). Storm water information could easily be added to this display. Signs intended for pedestrians can contain more information, but text should still be kept at a minimum to hold the audience's interest. Benefits Each of these types of material is versatile and can be tailored to many different types of audiences. A brochure can be written for the general public and later edited so that it reaches individuals within the storm water industry. These materials can be relatively inexpensive and can reach large groups of people, especially when displayed in public places (e.g., public libraries). Limitations Care must be taken to ensure that the message is easily understood by the targeted audience. Another limitation is the cost of designing, producing, copying, and displaying the materials. Costs Costs vary among printed outreach materials. Among other factors, the size, shape, detail, and amount of color on materials can vary widely. When preparing the budget, contact individual vendors for more accurate production cost figures. Staff time for planning, designing, and distributing the materials will also need to be budgeted.
57
References COSG. No date. Getting in Step--A Guide to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed. The Council of State Governments, Lexington, KY. Environmental Health Coalition. 1992. How to Create a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Campaign. Environmental Health Coalition, San Diego, CA. Grand Traverse Bay Watershed Initiative. Contact Christopher Wright, 1102 Cass Street, Suite B, Traverse City, MI 49684, or e-mail to gtbwi@traverse.com.
58
Using the Media Pubic Education, and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description The media can be strong allies to a storm water pollution prevention campaign in educating the public about storm water issues. Through the media, a program can educate targeted or mass audiences about problems and solutions, build support for remediation and retrofit projects, or generate awareness and interest in storm water management. Best of all, packaging a storm water message as a news story is virtually free! Surveys repeatedly show high interest among the public in environmental issues, and water quality--particularly as it relates to drinking water and recreation--rates very high. Reporters are always looking for informative articles, features, or columns to fill their pages or broadcasts. As with many public education activities, it is important to do some preliminary work to refine your message and target your audience to ensure that you deliver the most effective message. Applicability Delivering educational, promotional, or motivational messages through the news media is similar to distributing them through other channels. For best results, the message should be repeated periodically and linked to something the audience values. Coverage of watershed issues from several different angles can help to accomplish this. News is the lifeblood of the media, so the message must be packaged to attract coverage. Orienting the message to the workings of the media and the needs of reporters will help keep the message focused and effective. Implementation The following are some of the ways storm water news and educational materials can be communicated by the media. Newspapers and Magazines. Newspapers are powerful vehicles for delivering educational information, policy analyses, public notices, and other messages. Many displays at watershed seminars proudly post newspaper articles on the projects being presented in recognition of the importance and impact of newspaper coverage. Published news articles are almost always longer and more analytical than television stories, and they can be read by several people at their own leisure without the "hit or miss" nature of broadcasts. Graphics such as photos, charts, and tables can provide added perspective to published stories and can deliver complex information on trends or other data in an easily understood format. Public access to newspapers is usually excellent; no specialized equipment is needed. In addition, the vast need for new articles to fill pages of a daily newspaper means reporters may be particularly interested in covering storm water issues.
59
Newspapers can be accessed in several ways. Depending on the message or event, the appropriate format might be a news release, news advisory, query letter, letter to the editor, or (for urgent, timely information) a news conference. It is important to obtain information on deadlines. In some cases, it might be more strategic to place an ad in a weekend paper, if circulation is stronger on the weekends. Also there might be certain times of the year when fewer stories or ads are purchased, which would make any ad or story more prominent. Magazines. Magazines, like newspapers, allow for greater length and analysis than television and provide the additional benefit of targeting specific audiences (e.g., landscapers, automobile mechanics, farmers, or recreationists). It is also important to follow the news on a regular basis. If a magazine will be covering an article on storm water in an upcoming issue, an ad in that issue would be even more appropriate. However, unless a magazine is local, it is unlikely that an article relating to storm water will reach the correct audience. Radio. In spite of the popularity of video, radio remains a strong media contender due to its affordable production costs and creative possibilities. Further, commuters who drive to work spend much time in their vehicles. Radio is everywhere and nearly everyone hears it at some time or some place every day. Of course, those same universal qualities are what dilute its impact as well, since radio can become background noise. The message must be repeated often to reach listeners at various times. To saturate whole markets, the message should be distributed to many stations. Local radio stations often have feature programs, but they do not cover news in depth. Public stations may devote more time to news or educational programs, but might not reach the target audience. To make sure the targeted audience is reached through radio, match the message to the type of format of the station. Radio has format varieties ranging from musical selections of metal and rock to country and jazz, as well as talk formats . Although the extremely short nature of spot news coverage on radio does not lend itself well to deep analysis and lengthy information delivery, radio can play a valuable role in reinforcing other outreach efforts conducted among specific audiences. When preparing for a radio spot, it is important to get right to the central point of the project, because airtime is short. To minimize production costs, scripts should be prepared and sent in for live radio. Typed and double-spaced copy is required for community calendars and other public notice programs. The ad's release can be tied to a special day or event (such as Earth Day), and updating it with different angles later will improve its effectiveness. Scripts should be written for listening, and submissions should be supported with follow-up calls or letters, or even promotional items like posters.
60
Television. Television is the primary source of news for the majority of the population, and local reporters are generally interested in covering environmental stories that pertain to their area. Television news stories tend to focus on people and therefore must be engaging and compelling. Issues will attract television coverage if they

Involve local people or issues. Focus on unique or unusual attributes. Affect many people throughout a region. Involve controversy or strong emotions.
News Conferences. To heighten awareness of some breaking information or an event that is too important for a news release, a news conference might be appropriate. Two days before the conference, a media advisory should be sent to all news outlets in the area and should be followed up with a phone call to confirm attendance and answer any questions. Typically a news conference begins with distribution of a news release that contains the reason for the conference, informative quotes from people involved in the issue, and contact information. A moderator then makes a few welcoming/introductory remarks and introduces other speakers or makes a statement (which is often read). Remarks by all speakers should be carefully prepared. The floor is then opened for questions, which can usually be anticipated and prepared for beforehand. After the conference, a news release is sent to media members who did not attend. When preparing for a planned event (such as river cleanup or storm drain stenciling), a news advisory can be sent to local stations. Every advisory should include a description of the event, when and where it will take place, who will participate, and a phone number for someone who can be contacted for more information. The press advisory can be sent 1 or 2 weeks before the event occurs and should include the name of the organization, a contact name, and the reason for calling. If reporters do not show up at the event, a follow-up news release can be sent immediately afterward so the event can still be covered. Public Service Announcements. Public service announcements (PSAs) can be a very successful outreach approach if they are well broadcast. Newspapers will list PSAs for events or activities that are either free of charge or sponsored by nonprofit organizations. Radio stations will run PSAs that they think are of interest to their audiences. Information on an activity such as a watershed festival, storm drain stenciling, or river cleanup, or pollution hotline numbers, would make good PSAs. Although radio PSAs are free, they sometimes air late at night or very early in the morning (which might make it difficult to reach the target audience). Television PSAs can be highly effective if aired on selected stations at appropriate times for the audience. All PSA information should be submitted at least one month in advance. If a municipality has not prepared a PSA in the past, it is advisable to seek advice from another agency or to use a professional company to help in preparing PSAs.
61
Internet Message. Increasingly, the Internet is becoming a powerful means of communication. It provides worldwide access to hundreds of thousands of sites containing millions of documents, chat rooms for special interest groups, and incredible database/mapping features. Because the World Wide Web is used regularly and extensively by agency personnel, environmental group leaders, and the business community, it can be a valuable tool in conveying a storm water pollution message. However, average citizens still get the great bulk of their environmental messages from more traditional venues. Additionally, a Web-based message is geared toward a specific audience that is "connected" and perhaps already attuned to the cause and its objectives. If the municipality already has a web site, storm water information can be posted on it. Information should be placed on the page of the department that handles storm water and on any other relevant department's page. If there is enough interest, the department can develop an automated e-mail address list (list server), which is a very inexpensive means of disseminating information to interested parties. Some active storm water programs may find it useful to establish an e-mail list server to keep participants updated on meetings, policy discussions, and other matters. A list server is simply a distribution list recorded in an e-mail account, which allows a message to be sent to everyone on the list at once. Implementing this communication link is simple and allows stakeholders to keep informed of developments at their leisure. E-mail is the preferred communication medium among many citizens, business people, and agency officials, because it can be accessed at convenient times and provides a written record of the communication. There are opportunities to reach particular audiences (e.g., recreational fisherman, automobile mechanics, farmers) via the Internet through interest group Web sites. However, along with citizens of the watershed involved, national audiences may also reached through these Web sites. Explore these sites before deciding to use them in the outreach program. The Internet will likely become more important to local watershed outreach efforts in the future. San Diego County Successfully Partners with the Media. San Diego County's Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) used the media several times during its storm water pollution prevention program. PSAs were put in newspapers for EHC's collection event in the watershed, and a media kit on urban runoff was developed. In addition, the coalition held two news conferences. The first news conference was called to announce the release of the Chollas Creek Watershed Protection Calendar, which involved a competition for page designs. It was held aboard a cruise ship and featured the winning student artists and posters. After the conference, all participants were invited to remain aboard for a tour of San Diego Bay, which is the resource the Coalition is trying to protect. The event was covered by the leading local TV station. The second event was for the release of a media kit on urban runoff and was attended by a state senator and representatives of the Surfrider Foundation. Storm drains near the San Diego County Administration Building were stenciled. All major media covered the conference. EHC's media kit was funded by the city of San Diego. Neighborhood Association Newsletters. Many neighborhood and homeowner associations regularly publish newsletters. Adding information about storm water, especially how individuals can help, would target specific areas and would increase a sense of acting locally. Oftentimes, such associations are looking for new topics and speakers for club events.
62
Benefits There are obvious benefits to using the media to inform people of storm water events and issues. In some cases, such as in public service announcements, there is no cost involved. Using the media can help spread the message beyond the local area. To be the most successful outreach program possible, at least one staff member should become a media expert for future press releases, ads, and other projects. Costs Working with the media is essentially free, but not always. News releases and articles are free of charge. Newspaper, radio, and PSAs are also typically available at no cost although there may be a fee to run PSAs on certain television stations. Local stations should be contacted before submitting a PSA for cost estimates. Running an Internet message on an existing web site is costfree. If a new site is posted, there might be charges from the Internet host company. References Environmental Health Coalition. 1992. How to Create a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Campaign. Environmental Health Coalition, San Diego, CA. The Council of State Governments. No date. Getting in Step--A Guide to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed. The Council of State Governments, Lexington, KY. Kaiser, J. 1995. Culvert Action: How to interest your local media in polluted runoff issues. Lindsay Wildlife Museum, Walnut Creek, CA.
63
Promotional Giveaways Public Education, and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Once a storm water education and outreach program has been developed, it can be marketed through promotional giveaways. Promotional giveaways are small tokens with storm water education slogans and graphics. They are free items given to people to help them become aware of environmental issues. Applicability Promotional giveaways are an effective means of promoting storm water organizations, simple actions, and general awareness. A number of items, such as posters, calendars, frisbees, magnets, key chains, tote bags, coffee mugs, bumper stickers, and baseball caps, are appropriate promotional items. When choosing a giveaway item, it is important to consider the cost (items such as T-shirts and hats are relatively expensive) as well as the alternative message it might send. For example, a frisbee might conflict with a campaign to reduce plastic waste. Implementation When designing promotional items, a professional printer can be consulted to make sure the design can be reproduced effectively, inexpensively, and on a number of different materials. The design theme or logo should be carried throughout all printed materials and accessory items. Consideration should be given as to the types of products to use. For example, if using mugs, a strong, clear design should be selected and the mug should be dishwasher-safe. The cost of packaging, mailing, and distributing the items should be considered; advertising specialty companies can be consulted for ordering in quantity to reduce costs. Finally, plenty of time should be allowed for design, production, printing, and distribution of promotional items. The products should be publicized and a program can be developed to market and distribute them. Promotional items can be distributed through a number of venues, including watershed festivals, conferences, seminars, outdoor events, and schools. They can also accompany displays and act as rewards and incentives for participation in storm water pollution activities, such as storm drain stenciling projects. The following are some promotional items that can be used: Posters. Posters can be an excellent option for message delivery and can be displayed widely for months or even years. Text, photos, slogans--even graphs--can be presented effectively on posters. However, they are mostly used to build awareness ("Save the Bay") or deliver a simple message ("You Drink What You Dump"). Unfortunately, production and distribution can be costly. Mailing tubes and postage can cost as much as the poster itself. Folding and mailing in large envelopes causes creases that detract from the appearance. However, if the poster design is exceptionally good, a larger or fancier version can be sold, which will help to cover production costs. 64
When designing the poster, the focus should be on the objective, the target audience, and the message it is to convey. Large, bold graphics (photos, artwork, etc.) will attract attention and the graphic elements should immediately convey the poster's message. Color can greatly enhance a poster, but it also increases production costs. One or two-color posters can be sufficiently attractive if they're designed well. In general, a catchy slogan or theme should be used. A slogan, photo, or design contest is a good way to obtain original artwork, or local artists can be used to create the graphics. This approach gives the poster local credibility and it supports the arts in the community. The desired size should be economical and the poster should fit into a mailer tube. Using a standard poster size is best because it is cheaper to print and is easier to obtain a frame for the poster. Posters displayed in the community should be placed in protected and visible areas. They can be displayed in libraries, union halls, businesses, schools, recreation centers, community colleges, and any other place people gather. If the program is planning a special watershed event, the poster could promote the event. Businesses might be willing to display the poster for the event to encourage people to attend. Posters could also be given away at the event as prizes or mementos. Bumper Stickers. Bumper stickers are highly individualized traveling billboards. Since Americans spend so much time on the road, bumper stickers offer an excellent opportunity to expose a message. A bumper sticker message should be brief, positive, and focused on the objective (e.g. "Save Our Lake"). Composition is easy--just combine a catchy message with a piece of art and it is all set! Remember to use large, bold type and keep graphics simple and easily recognizable. Check popular sizes before finalizing the design and attach a mock-up to a bumper to ensure readability. Make sure the design can be seen from a distance and the color is attractive without hindering readability. T-Shirts and Caps. T-shirts and caps are popular items that offer high exposure to help spread the message. Simple patterns, such as a slogan and a logo or small icons work best. The watershed or region name should be included as well. Since dated materials are harder to sell after the fact, the design should be kept "timeless." Most people prefer 100-percent cotton shirts over blends and large and extra-large are the most popular sizes. Long-sleeved varieties are popular in cooler climates. When ordering the merchandise, quantities should be carefully estimated to avoid overstocks. Several suppliers should be contacted for quotes before choosing a manufacturer. Although they can be highly effective, T-shirts and hats can be relatively costly and rarely cover their production costs with sales. Production options include contracting a print shop, silkscreening T-shirts, and stenciling T-shirts in a garage. Calendars. Calendars can be colorful, year-long reminders to protect water quality and prevent pollution. The message on each page stays in front of the target audience for a month at a time, and everyone uses them. Other environmental or community messages can be integrated into the calendar for appeal to a wider audience. If students are the target audience, a calendar based on the school year might be preferable. Some groups custom-tailor their calendar and turn it into a log of activities for the watershed, lake, or stream. People can keep track of the year's observable water events, ice-outs and freeze-up, flood events, waterfowl migrations and nestings, mammal sightings, insect hatchings, and the like. If colorful, calendars can be expensive to produce. Moreover, they are also time-sensitive and cannot be used in future years (except for decoration). It is wise to plan for distribution to hit the market around November (when everyone is shopping for next year's calendar). 65
Other Items. Any number of items can be customized with a storm water pollution logo and message, including magnets, frisbees, stickers, and bags. When choosing which items to purchase, keep in mind the objectives to be accomplished. For example, magnets can be excellent for conveying storm water pollution hotlines. They can be kept handy on the refrigerator near a kitchen phone and are relatively inexpensive to produce. Key chains are also good for hotline numbers or other brief messages. Prices naturally go down with quantity, but the supply should be distributed within a reasonable amount of time. Effectiveness Most people will take anything that is free. The key to making promotion items effective is to make them something people can use and want. For example, key chains with a slogan can be used everyday. They are easily identifiable and might be seen by others. Benefits People appreciate promotional items, especially at voluntary activities. Not only do the freebies help promote an issue, but they also serve as a "thank you" to the volunteers. In addition, there is a lot of room for creativity and fun when making these items. Limitations The limitations of promotional items are the costs and time associated with making them. Also, there is no assurance that a free T-shirt will result in another volunteer or supporter of storm water issues. Cost The cost of promotional items will depend on what is being produced and how many. Generally, buying larger numbers of an item will reduce unit costs. However, it is not wise to buy so many items that it will be impossible to resell them or even give them all away. The objectives as well as the target audience should be considered when ordering. Some costs for various outreach materials are provided in Table 1, but these are only estimates. Individual vendors should be contacted when preparing the budget.
66
Table 1. Estimated costs for promotional items (Source: COSG, no date)

Item Magnets Canvas tote bags Stickers Frisbees Posters Pens Mugs Caps T-shirts Lapel pins Cost $0.23 each for a quantity of 1,000 $2.20 each for a quantity of 1,000 $0.07 each for a quantity of 1,000 $0.68 each for a quantity of 1,000 $2.50 each for a quantity of 5,000 $0.59 each for a quantity of 5,000 $1.00 each for a quantity of 1,000 $5.00 each for a quantity of 6,000 $2.50 each for a quantity of 1,000 $1.38 each for a quantity of 1,000 Description two-color, business card size one-color, two-sided one-color, 3-inch circle 8-inch 4-color, 11 inch X 17 inch folded ballpoint, one-color, capped one color on solid standard mug or less embroidery on cotton twill 500 large and 500 extra large, single color on white, silk screen
References Environmental Health Coalition. 1992. How to Create a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Campaign. Environmental Health Coalition, San Diego, CA. The Council of State Governments. No date. Getting in Step A Guide to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed. The Council of State Governments, Lexington, KY.
67
Pollution Prevention For Businesses Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Description Pollution prevention (P2) is the combination of activities that reduce or eliminate the amount of chemical contaminants at the source of production or prevent this waste from entering the environment or waste stream. P2 occurs when raw materials, water energy, and other resources are used more efficiently, when less harmful substances are substituted for hazardous ones, and when toxic substances are eliminated from the production process. P2 can be accomplished through such methods as source reduction, reuse/recycling, and energy recovery. Source reduction is the preferred method of P2 and allows for the most significant improvements in environmental protection by avoiding the generation of waste. Reuse/recycling and energy recovery also are effective means of P2. Applicability P2 plans take many forms but are applicable to almost every community and industry sector. Municipalities should educate business owners to plan and implement a P2 program. However, before implementing a P2 plan, it is important to evaluate the businesses in your community to determine the most efficient and effective plan. Attending or planning a P2 conference or becoming a member of a P2 organization with other communities can spur networking and information sharing. In addition, businesses in your community can frequently increase their publicity, recognition, and patronage through being a member of such P2 organizations. Implementation P2 in your community can be accomplished through methods such as source reduction, reuse/recycling, and energy recovery. While there is no one plan that fits all, many of these methods can be implemented anywhere.
68
Source Reduction.
Incorporating environmental considerations into the designing of products, buildings, and manufacturing systems enables them to be more resource efficient. Rethinking daily operations and maintenance activities can help industries eliminate wasteful management practices that increase costs and cause pollution. Controlling the amount of water used in cleaning or manufacturing can produce less wastewater. Re-engineering and redesigning a facility or certain operation can take advantage of newer, cleaner and more efficient process equipment. Buying the correct amount of raw material will decrease the amount of excess materials that are discarded (for example, paints that have a specified shelf life).
Reuse/Recycling.
Using alternative materials for cleaning, coating, lubrication, and other production processes can provide equivalent results while preventing costly hazardous waste generation, air emissions, and worker health risks. Using "green" products decreases the use of harmful or toxic chemicals (and are more energy efficient than other products). One company's waste may be another company's raw materials. Finding markets for waste can reduce solid waste, lessen consumption of virgin resources, increase income for sellers, and provide an economical resource supply for the buyers.
Energy Recovery.
Using energy, water, and other production inputs more efficiently keeps air and water clean, reduces emissions of greenhouse gases, cuts operating costs, and improves productivity.
In order to assist the businesses in your community in implementing these techniques, a local government can create and maintain a database of local government information on P2. In addition, a community can prepare and distribute a Pollution Prevention Week Planning Guide that will educate businesses in your community about these techniques. Benefits Adopting a P2 plan can benefit your community both environmentally and economically. P2's health and environmental benefits include cleaner air and water, fewer greenhouse gas emissions, less toxic waste to manage, less solid waste going to landfills, greater workplace safety, and better stewardship of natural resources. This can also lead to a reduction in workplace exposures to hazardous materials, which can affect workers' health and productivity.
69
P2's economic benefits include greater business efficiency, increased competitiveness, and reduced costs for regulatory monitoring and compliance. By preventing the generation of waste, P2 can also reduce or eliminate long term liabilities, clean-up, storage, and disposal costs. Finally, by preventing pollution there is a greater likelihood that a company will be in compliance with local, state, and federal statutes. Limitations It is important for a municipality to provide clear guidance to business owners for pollution prevention to be effective. Although a new pollution prevention program may require initial investments of time and money, by clearly outlining the benefits of a pollution plan, you encourage the businesses in your community to adopt such a plan. It might also be difficult to understand the importance of a P2 program. At first, the costs to start such a program could look high, but keep in mind that prevention can lead to financial gains. Effectiveness As previously stated, a P2 plan can benefit your community both economically and environmentally. P2 can reduce pollution discharges from businesses in your community and decrease the cost of their operations. For example, vehicle washing produces chemicals, dirt, and grease, which find their way untreated into waterways. However, a tour company in Seattle installed a collection system that recycles approximately 92 percent of water used for bus washing. The company has reduced wastewater discharges and, as a result, has cut its water bill by approximately $1,000/month during the peak season. In addition, a container company that installed a closed-loop water recycling system has reduced water consumption in its freight container washing operations by approximately two-thirds. (National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, 2000). Costs The costs for a municipality to implement or expand a P2 program vary. Costs to initiate a program may be significant due to education, training, and infrastructure investments. However, these costs vary with the type of business and with the extent to which the pollution plan is implemented. There are programs currently being implemented nationwide on a variety of scales. Santa Clara County, California, has implemented a Pollution Prevention Program aimed at providing technical assistance through workshops, periodic newsletters, and fact sheets, and by implementing a Green Business Program. This program uses three full-time employees (FTE) and has an annual budget of approximately $300,000. The City of Boulder, Colorado, has implemented Partners for a Clean Environment (PACE) that is a voluntary, non-regulatory program which offers free pollution prevention education, technical assistance, and recognition to Boulder County businesses. PACE staff identifies P2 outreach needs, compiles information, and motivates businesses to reduce emissions and waste voluntarily. PACE staff estimates that in 1999, participating businesses reduced air emissions by 25 tons/year, hazardous waste by approximately 3,900 gallons/year, wastewater discharges by over 35,000 gallons/year, and solid waste by over 630 tons/year. This P2 program uses approximately 1.5 FTEs and has an annual budget of $58,000.
70
References DiPeso, J. 1998. Firms finding out that preventing pollution pays off. [www.djc.com/special/enviro98/10043953.htm]. Last updated August 28, 1998. Accessed April 9, 2001. National Pollution Prevention Roundtable. No date. National Pollution Prevention Roundtable [www.p2.org]. Accessed April 9, 2001. Nover, M. 2000. Summary of Local Government P2 Funding Methods. Pollution Prevention Program, Portland, OR. Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center. 1999. What is P2? [www.pprc.org/pprc/about/whatisp2.html]. Accessed April 9, 2001. USEPA. 2000. About P2. [www.epa.gov/p2/aboutp2/index.htm]. Last updated November 15, 2000. Accessed April 9, 2001. USEPA. 2000. Businesses for the Bay. [www.chesapeakebay.net/info/b4bay.cfm]. Last updated January 23, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001.
71
Public Involvement/Participation
Regulatory Text You must, at a minimum, comply with state, tribal, and local public notice requirements when implementing a public involvement/participation program. Guidance EPA recommends that the public be included in developing, implementing, and reviewing your storm water management program, and that the public participation process should make efforts to reach out and engage all economic and ethnic groups. Opportunities for members of the public to participate in program development and implementation include serving as citizen representatives on a local storm water management panel, attending public hearings, working as citizen volunteers to educate other individuals about the program, assisting in program coordination with other pre-existing programs, or participating in volunteer monitoring efforts. (Citizens should obtain approval where necessary for lawful access to monitoring sites.) BMP Fact Sheets Activities/public participation Storm drain stenciling Stream cleanup and monitoring Volunteer monitoring Reforestation programs Wetland plantings Adopt-A-Stream programs Involvement/public opinion Watershed organization Stakeholder meetings Attitude surveys Community hotlines
Activities/public participation
Storm Drain Stenciling Public Involvement/Participation Description Storm drain stenciling involves labeling storm drain inlets with painted messages warning citizens not to dump pollutants into the drains. The stenciled messages are generally a simple phrase to remind passersby that the storm drains connect to local waterbodies and that dumping pollutes those waters. Some specify which waterbody the inlet drains to or name the particular river, lake, or bay. Commonly stenciled messages include: "No Dumping. Drains to Water Source," "Drains to River," and "You Dump it, You Drink it. No Waste Here." Pictures can also be used to convey the message, including a shrimp, common game fish, or a graphic depiction of the path from drain to waterbody. Communities with a large Spanishspeaking population might wish to develop stencils in both English and Spanish, or use a graphic alone. Applicability Municipalities can undertake stenciling projects throughout the entire community, especially in areas with sensitive waters or where trash, nutrients, or biological oxygen demand have been identified as high priority pollutants. However, regardless of the condition of the waterbody, the signs raise awareness about the connection between storm drains and receiving waters and they help deter littering, nutrient overenrichment, and other practices that contribute to nonpoint source pollution. Municipalities should identify a subset of drains to stencil because there might be hundreds of inlets; stenciling all of them would be prohibitively expensive and might actually diminish the effect of the message on the public. The drains should be carefully selected to send the message to the maximum number of citizens (for example, in areas of high pedestrian traffic) and to target drains leading to waterbodies where illegal dumping has been identified as a source of pollution.
Implementation Municipalities can implement storm drain stenciling programs in two ways. In some cases, cities and towns use their own public works staff to do the labeling. Some municipalities feel that having their own crews do the work produces better results and eliminates liability and safety concerns. More commonly, stenciling projects are conducted by volunteer groups in cooperation with a municipality. In such an arrangement, volunteer groups provide the labor and the municipality provides supplies, safety equipment, and a map and/or directions to the drains to be stenciled. The benefits of using volunteers are lower cost and increased public awareness of storm water pollutants and their path to waterbodies. A municipality can establish a program to comprehensively address storm drain stenciling and actively recruit volunteer groups to help, or the municipality can facilitate volunteer groups that take the initiative to undertake a stenciling project. Whether the municipality or a volunteer group initiates a stenciling project, the municipality should designate a person in charge of the storm drain stenciling program. Many municipalities will designate a person from the pubic works or water quality department to coordinate stenciling projects by volunteer groups. Because these programs depend heavily on volunteer labor, organizers and coordinators should be skilled in recruiting, training, managing, and recognizing volunteers. Coordination activities include providing

Stenciling kits containing all materials and tools needed to carry out a stenciling project A map of the storm drains to be stenciled Training for volunteers on safety procedures and on the technique for using stencils or affixing signs Safety equipment (traffic cones, safety vests, masks and/or goggles for spray paint, and gloves if glue is used) Incentives and rewards for volunteers (badges, T-shirts, certificates).
The coordinator might also wish to provide pollutant-tracking forms to collect data on serious instances of dumping. Participants in storm drain stenciling projects can be asked to note storm drains that are clogged with debris or show obvious signs of dumping. This enables city crews to target cleanup efforts. Volunteers should be instructed on what kinds of pollutants to look for and how to fill out data cards. Volunteers also should record the locations of all storm drains labeled during the project, so the city can keep track. Additionally, the participants should convene after the event to talk about what they have found. Their reactions and impressions can help organizers improve future stenciling projects.
If a municipality chooses to initiate a storm drain stenciling program and solicit the help of volunteer organizations, they can advertise through a variety of channels. Outreach strategies include

Distributing pamphlets and brochures to area service organizations Placing articles in local magazines Taking out newspaper ads Placing an environmental insert in the local newspaper Making presentations at community meetings Developing public service announcements for radio Creating a web site with background and contact information as well as photos and stories from past stenciling events (the references section contains a list of storm drain stenciling web sites from communities across the country) Using word-of-mouth communications about the program.
Newspapers can be notified to get advance coverage of a planned stenciling event. Newspapers might choose to cover the event itself as an environmental feature story to further public awareness. A news release issued for the day of the event can draw TV and/or newspaper coverage. Public service announcements made before the event also will help to reinforce the message. Additionally, some municipalities can have volunteers distribute door hangers in the targeted neighborhoods to notify residents that storm drain stenciling is taking place. The hangers explain the purpose of the project and offer tips on how citizens can reduce urban runoff in general. For any volunteer project to be successful, volunteers must feel they have done something worthwhile. Communities active in storm drain stenciling have developed a variety of ways to recognize volunteers, including
Providing each participant with a certificate of appreciation and/or letter of thanks signed by the mayor Distributing logo items such as T-shirts, hats, badges, plastic water bottles, or other items to participants before or after the event Holding a picnic or small party after the event with refreshments donated by a local business Providing coupons for free pizza, hamburgers, ice cream, or movies donated by local merchants Taking pictures of stenciling teams before, during, and after the event to create a pictorial record of volunteers' activity.
Since stenciling projects take place on city streets, volunteer safety is of utmost importance. The city might wish to designate lower-traffic residential areas as targets for volunteer stenciling and provide safety equipment and training. Most programs require that stenciling be done in teams, with at least one person designated to watch for traffic. Adult supervision is needed when volunteers are school children or members of youth groups. Most cities also require participating volunteers (or their parents) to sign a waiver of liability. An attorney for the municipality should be consulted to determine what liability exists and how to handle this issue. Materials Most communities use stencils and paint to label their storm drains. Some communities stencil directly onto the curb, street, or sidewalk, while others first paint a white background and then stencil over it. The most commonly used stencils are made of Mylar, a flexible plastic material that can be cleaned and reused many times. However, stencils can also be made from cardboard, aluminum, or other material. The reference section lists web sites where stencils can be purchased. Storm drain messages can be placed flat against the sidewalk surface just above the storm drain inlet, while others are placed on the curb facing the street or on the street itself, either just upstream of the storm drain or on the street in front of the drain. However, messages placed on the street might wear out sooner. Paint or ink can be sprayed on or applied by brush and roller. Spray paint is quickest and probably the easiest to apply neatly. Regions that do not meet federal air-quality standards should avoid using spray paints, since many contain air-polluting propellants. It is recommended to use "environmentally friendly" paint that contains no heavy metals and is low in volatile organic compounds. Alternatives to painted messages include permanent signs made of aluminum, ceramic, plastic, or other durable materials. These signs last longer than stenciled messages and need only glue to affix them to storm drain inlets. They might also be neater and easier to read from a distance. Tiles or plaques can be dislodged by pedestrian traffic if they are disturbed before the glue dries. Benefits Storm drain stenciling projects offer an excellent opportunity to educate the public about the link between the storm drain system and drinking water quality. In addition to the labeled storm drains, media coverage of the program or stenciling event can increase public awareness of storm water issues. Volunteer groups can provide additional benefits by picking up trash near the stenciled storm drains and by noting where maintenance is needed. Additionally, stenciling projects can provide a lead-in to volunteer monitoring projects and increase community participation in a variety of other storm water-related activities.
Limitations A storm drain stenciling program is generally effective, inexpensive, and easy to implement. However, larger communities can have many storm drain inlets, so volunteer coordinators need to be skilled at recruiting and organizing the efforts of volunteers to provide adequate coverage over large areas. Safety considerations might also limit stenciling programs in areas where traffic congestion is high. Other environmental considerations such as the use of propellants in spray paint in areas that do not meet air quality standards should be taken into account. Finally, stencils will require repainting after years of weather and traffic, and tiles and permanent signs might need replacement if they are improperly installed or subject to vandalism. Effectiveness By raising public awareness of urban runoff, storm drain stenciling programs should discourage practices that generate nonpoint source pollutants. As with any public education project, however, it is difficult to precisely measure the effect that storm drain stenciling programs have on human behavior. Nor is it easy to measure reductions in certain components of urban runoff, which by definition is diffuse in origin. Some municipalities attempt to assess the effectiveness of storm drain stenciling programs by periodically examining water samples from targeted storm drain outfalls (places where storm drains empty into a waterbody). If the storm drains leading to a particular outfall have been labeled, and if the levels of pollutants from that outfall decline after the stencils were put in place, one can assume the labeling has had some deterrent effect. This monitoring can be conducted by the same volunteer groups that stenciled the drains and can be incorporated into existing volunteer monitoring programs or can initiate the development of a new program. Cities also infer stenciling program success from increases in the volume of used motor oil delivered to used-oil recycling centers. Others measure success in terms of how many drains are stenciled and the number of requests received by volunteer groups to participate in the program. They can also take into consideration the number of cleanups conducted by the city as a result of reports made by volunteers. Costs Mylar stencils cost about 45 cents per linear inch and can be used for 25 to 500 stencilings, depending on whether paint is sprayed or applied with a brush or roller. Permanent signs are generally more costly: ceramic tiles cost $5 to $6 each and metal stencils can cost $100 or more.
References How To Develop a Storm Drain Stenciling Program and Conduct Projects: Center for Marine Conservation. 1998. Million Points of Blight. [http://www.cmcocean.org/cleanupbro/millionpoints.php3]. Last updated 1998. Accessed February 13, 2001. Center for Marine Conservation. No date. How to Conduct a Storm Drain Stenciling Project. [http://www.cmc-ocean.org/mdio/drain.php3]. Accessed February 13, 2001. East Dakota Water Development District. No date. Storm Drain Stenciling. [http://www.brookings.com/bswf/tp2.htm]. Accessed February 13, 2001. Hunter, R. 1995. Storm Drain Stenciling: The Street-River Connection. [http://www.epa.gov/volunteer/fall95/urbwat10.htm]. Last updated December 8, 1998. Accessed February 13, 2001. The Rivers Project, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. 1998. Gateway Area Storm Sewer Stenciling Project. [http://www.siue.edu/OSME/river/stencil.html]. Last updated November 9, 1998. Accessed February 14, 2001. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. No date. Storm Drain Stenciling: Preventing Water Pollution. [http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/exec/oppr/cc2000/storm_drain.html]. Accessed February 13, 2001. Purchase Stencils: Clean Ocean Action. 2000. Storm Drain Stenciling. [http://www.cleanoceanaction.org/Stenciling/StormDrains.html]. Last updated June 23, 2000. Accessed February 13, 2001. Earthwater Stencils, Ltd. 1997. Earthwater Stencils, Ltd. [http://www.earthwater-stencils.com]. Last updated 1997. Accessed February 14, 2001. Communities With Storm Drain Stenciling Web Sites: City of Berkley, California, Department of Public Works. No date. Storm Drain Stenciling. [http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/PW/Storm/stencil.html]. Accessed February 13, 2001. City of Honolulu, Hawaii. No date. Volunteer Activities. [http://www.cleanwaterhonolulu.com/drain.html]. Accessed February 14, 2001. City of Portland, Oregon, Environmental Services. No date. Storm Drain Stenciling. [http://www.enviro.ci.portland.or.us/sds.htm]. Accessed February 14, 2001. Clemson Extension Office. No date. Storm Drain Stenciling South Carolina "Paint The Drain" Campaign. [http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/waterquality/STENCIL.HTM]. Accessed February 14, 2001. Friends of the Mississippi River. 2000. Storm Drain Stenciling Program. [http://www.fmr.org/stencil.html]. Last updated 2000. Accessed February 14, 2001.
7
Stream Cleanup and Monitoring Public Involvement/Participation Description An effective way to promote storm water awareness is to host a stream cleanup. Many people are unaware that most storm drains discharge untreated waters directly into local waterbodies. A stream cleanup allows concerned citizens to become directly involved in water pollution prevention. Participants volunteer to walk (or paddle) the length of the stream or river, collecting trash and recording information about the quantity and types of garbage that has been removed. Stream cleanups also educate members of the community about the importance of stream water quality through media coverage and publicity efforts. Many programs have experts on hand at the event to discuss the stream's ecology and history. As a result, the river is cleaner, volunteers feel a sense of accomplishment, and the community at large is better informed. Applicability Stream cleanups are applicable to all waterbodies. Almost anyone can get involved in cleanup activities: schoolchildren, youth groups, neighborhood associations, local environmental groups, and individuals. Cleanups have tasks of varying levels of difficulty, so there is something for people of all ages and skills to do. Implementation Municipalities should consider designating an individual or groups of individuals to schedule and organize the cleanup projects, recruit volunteers, coordinate trash disposal with the local solid waste authority, and assign staff for supervision of the projects. Projects should be scheduled several months in advance to provide adequate time to organize volunteers and handle logistical issues. Permission to conduct cleanup projects on private property should be secured in advance. The first step for a municipally sponsored stream cleanup program is to identify cleanup sites. Data from monitoring activities, including volunteer monitoring, can identify particular stream reaches that are heavily impacted by trash, especially streams near commercial and residential areas that experience high vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Stream reaches can be prioritized based on the goals of the watershed program. Some communities might target high-visibility or easily accessible areas for maximum convenience and exposure, while others might target the most ecologically sensitive reaches for cleanup efforts.
Once candidate stream reaches have been identified, municipalities should determine the level of effort needed for each project with respect to the size and experience of the group and equipment and supervision needs. A survey should be conducted to identify particular spots where the cleanup effort should concentrate and especially dangerous spots that volunteers should avoid. Another task for the municipal stream cleanup coordinator is to advertise the program and let service groups know about cleanup project opportunities. Ads can be placed in newsletters, newspapers, and utility bill inserts or posted on the municipal web site. Also, public service announcements can be distributed to radio and television stations. The coordinator can solicit known service groups, environmental organizations, schools, and other groups likely to participate. Once volunteers are signed up for an event, information should be distributed to them, including meeting times, recommendations for clothing and footwear, inclement weather contingencies, and any other pertinent information. The Arlingtonians for a Clean Environment posted this information for their cleanup activities in the form of frequently asked questions at their web site (www.capaccess.org/nnp/arclen/streamtips.htm). When volunteers are being used for cleanup efforts, municipalities must address the issue of liability. An attorney should be consulted to determine how liability should be handled and draft a waiver for volunteers to sign before participating. Volunteer safety should be maximized by providing safety vests and an adequate number of staff members for supervision based on the type of volunteers used (i.e., many more staff would be needed to assist a school group compared to a group of adults). Volunteers should be provided with, or be encouraged to bring, durable gloves and to wear shoes with adequate tread. First aid kits should be kept nearby during the cleanup project. If cleanups are located along a roadside, the area should be clearly marked with signs, flags, and cones to alert passing motorists. The municipality should identify a disposal site for the collected garbage. The local solid waste authority can pick up the bagged garbage at the cleanup site or it can be taken to the disposal facility by volunteers or municipal employees. Recyclable materials should be separated from trash and taken to a local recycling center. When the cleanup effort is complete, volunteers should be recognized for their work. Participation certificates, T-shirts, cups, and other promotional items are always appreciated awards. Also, lunch can be provided through donations from local businesses. Effectiveness Stream cleanup events are an effective way to improve habitat, water quality, and aesthetics. To maintain water quality, cleanup efforts must be recurring; a one-time-only cleanup event might raise awareness in the community, but it will not keep trash out of the river. Seasonal or annual cleanup events will help make sure that trash and debris are kept out of the river as much as possible. Volunteer groups can be encouraged to establish Adopt-A-Stream programs to provide for repeated cleanups at a particular site or set of sites.
Cleanup events are also effective at increasing public awareness of pollutant sources and fates, especially when knowledgeable municipal staff are on hand to answer questions, describe the Additionally, all of the information collected at the cleanup sites, including how much of each type of trash was found, can be compiled and presented to the public to inform them about the significance of stream cleanup activities. A stream cleanup program's effectiveness can be expanded if volunteers report problems such as clogged outfalls, debris too large for volunteers to move, areas of excessive streambank erosion, and signs of illegal dumping. This information will help a municipality to better target their maintenance efforts. Benefits Cleanup efforts benefit both the waterbody and the community. These efforts help citizens feel more involved in their community and foster a sense of responsibility for the water resources in their community. In addition, the cleanup efforts improve aesthetics, habitat, and water quality. In addition to trash and debris removal, media coverage of the program or cleanup event can increase public awareness of storm water issues. Volunteer groups can provide additional benefits by taking note of areas where maintenance is needed. Additionally, cleanups can provide a lead-in to volunteer monitoring projects and increase community participation in a variety of other storm water-related activities. Limitations Organization at the municipal level is a limitation to cleanup efforts. Some municipalities do not have the resources to designate staff to oversee a cleanup program and to supervise cleanup activities. Municipalities constrained by financial and staffing considerations can seek partnerships with other community and environmental groups to develop a program that relieves the municipality of the burden of organization while providing the volunteer groups with the authority to access both public and private (with permission) lands and equipment for trash collection and hauling. Other limitations to an effective cleanup program are volunteer interest and commitment. In some cases municipalities must actively solicit community and environmental groups to participate in cleanup projects. The municipal staff in charge of organizing these events should be skilled in volunteer recruiting as well as in advertising the event to maximize participation and exposure via the media. Cost Stream and river cleanup activities are typically inexpensive since volunteer labor is used. The supplies required for these effortsdurable gloves, garbage bags, and clipboards for recording informationare generally easy to find, are not costly, and may be donated by local businesses, further reducing costs. Collection of the garbage may require some additional expense, but municipal equipment can be used to facilitate transport of the trash.
10
References Appalachian Mountain Club, New York-North Jersey Chapter, Canoe Committee. 1999. Leading River Cleanup Trips. [http://www.amc-ny.org/rec_actv/canoe/rivclean.html]. Last updated February 24, 1999. Accessed June 1, 2001. Delta Laboratories, Inc. 1999. Getting Started and Site Selection. Delta Laboratories, Inc. [http://www.adopt-a-stream.org/getting_started_informatio.html]. Delta Laboratories, Inc. 1999. The Activities in the High School Teacher's Guide. Delta Laboratories, Inc. [http://www.adopt-a-stream.org/31_activities.html]. Donahue, K. 2000. Stream Cleanup Tips and Information. Arlingtonians for a Clean Environment. [http://www.capaccess.org/nnp/arclen/streamtips.htm]. Last updated March 6, 2000. Accessed February 21, 2001. Little, M. 1999. Adopt-A-Stream in Rome-Floyd County. Environmental and Historic Planning for the City of Rome. [http://www.romegeorgia.com/adoptastream.html]. Water Action Volunteers. 1998. Storm Drain Stenciling and River Clean Up. [http://cleanwater.uwex.edu/wav/sds-rcu/sds-rcu.html]. Accessed January 2001.
11
Volunteer Monitoring Public Involvement/Participation Description Volunteer monitoring programs encourage citizens to learn about their water resources. These volunteer monitors

Build awareness of pollution problems Become trained in pollution prevention Help clean up problem sites Provide data for waters that might otherwise be unassessed Increase the amount of water quality information available to decision makers at all levels of government.
The volunteers often become educators themselves, informing inquisitive passersby, family, colleagues, and friends about storm water. Volunteers conduct a variety of activities, including
Analyzing water samples for dissolved oxygen, nutrients, pH, temperature, and many other water constituents Evaluating the health of stream habitats and aquatic biological communities Inventorying streamside conditions and land uses that may affect water quality Cataloging and collecting beach debris Restoring degraded habitats.
Citizen monitoring can provide important data and information during the development of a storm water program. These data help determine what management practices and strategies are most appropriate for a particular community or set of issues. State and local agencies can use volunteer data to delineate and characterize watersheds, screen for water quality problems, evaluate the success of best management practices, and measure baseline conditions and trends. Applicability Volunteer monitoring programs can be implemented in any community to augment agencyobtained data. Volunteer monitoring programs are organized and supported in many different ways. Projects might be entirely independent (initiated by volunteer groups) or associated with local, state, interstate, or federal agencies. Programs might also be associated with environmental organizations or with schools and universities. Financial support for these programs might come from government grants, partnerships with businesses, endowments, independent fund-raising efforts, corporate donations, membership dues, or a combination of these sources.
12
Implementation In general, volunteer monitoring programs work cooperatively with state and local agencies in developing and coordinating technical components. Whenever data are collected for use by state and local agencies, a quality assurance project plan is often developed to provide guidance for volunteer training, sample collection and analysis, and information recording and dissemination. Volunteer groups whose primary goal is education usually implement straightforward assessment methods and do not focus on quality assurance plans. Benefits Volunteer programs promote the stewardship of local waters. By educating volunteers and the community about the value of local waters, the kinds of pollution threatening them, and how individual and collective actions can help solve specific problems, volunteer monitoring programs
Establish a connection between watershed health and the citizens' individual and collective behaviors Build bridges among various agencies, businesses, and organizations Create a constituency for local waters that promotes personal and community stewardship and cooperation.
Establishing a Volunteer Monitoring Program. If a volunteer monitoring program is not available, a new program can be started. Starting a volunteer monitoring program is not a simple task. Things that will be needed are

Money for equipment and possibly for staff Appropriate meeting, training, and lab facilities A network of knowledgeable people (such as educators, extension agents, and local government representatives) who are interested in the project and willing to advise and assist with the efforts Connection to or sponsorship by potential data users who can help plan the project to meet their needs as well as those of the new program's Organizational skills to manage and maintain the project.
Most of all, time will be needed to make contacts in the community, design a monitoring plan, develop training sessions, recruit volunteers, revise the program as it matures, raise funds, analyze the data, and report back to the volunteers and the community.
13
Following are some of the lessons learned by other volunteer programs:
Start small. A pilot project that serves to test methods, training sessions, and organizational skills can keep volunteers from being overwhelmed and allows them to evaluate and refine the project before moving on to more ambitious efforts. Keep goals realistic. Most volunteer data are used to educate the community and to screen for potential problems. Although it is important to strive for data quality, it is also important to realize that for most projects a high degree of data quality assurance is not necessary. Planning pays off. Few things are more frustrating than collecting a year's worth of data and then finding that the volunteers have no idea how to analyze them, that the methods used are not considered valid, or that sites were sampled in the wrong locations. Make connections. The more people in the community and within local and state agencies who are aware of the program, the more friends and supporters the program could have. Potential data users should be included in all phases of the project's development. Develop volunteer leadership. Volunteer leaders within a project provide the vision for setting goals and the commitment to achieve them. They also enable a project to develop and grow without stagnating. Plenty of opportunities for volunteers to develop as leaders should be built into the program. Pamper volunteers. Volunteers give up their free time to come to meetings, attend training sessions, and trudge out to monitoring sites. Social opportunities should be provided, and volunteers should be rewarded for a job well done. Use the data. Findings can be reported to volunteers and to the community. Volunteers can present monitoring results at fairs and town meetings or can send findings to appropriate contacts in state and local government. Also, a newsletter or data report can be created to inform the public about what has been accomplished. Volunteers should coordinate with state and local officials to transfer data and analyses. Volunteer groups can present findings at town meetings and prepare reports or brochures to distribute to interested citizens.
Effectiveness There are two major hurdles to having an effective volunteer monitoring program: recruitment and quality assurance. Advertising volunteer opportunities and facilitating volunteer groups are key to a successful program. Quality assurance can be achieved by providing volunteers with extensive and detailed guidance as well as supervision to produce data of sufficient quality to use in watershed analyses.
14
Limitations Volunteer monitoring programs have several limitations. First, getting volunteers to commit is one of the major limitations to any volunteer effort. Initial limitations are obtaining equipment, finding a site or sites, and getting people to volunteer their time, effort, and expertise. Second, because volunteers have no formal water quality sampling training, the quality of the data is questionable even if a quality assurance program plan(QAPP) is followed. There is no guarantee that rigorous sampling protocols will be followed to the letter, especially when sterile procedures are required. Additionally, some data gathering, such as benthic macroinvertebrate sampling and identification, requires a good deal of skill. Extensive training and supervision can help allay these data quality issues, but this can be expensive. However, depending on how the data are used, strict procedures may not be necessary. For example, volunteer monitoring data can be used to target agency sampling by identifying sites with probable water quality problems. Cost Volunteer monitoring programs are funded through a variety of sources. In some cases, state and local water quality or natural resource agencies sponsor the volunteers and contribute staff, equipment, and services such as data analysis. Some programs receive funding from federal agencies such as the EPA, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service. In addition, many volunteer programs receive private support through foundations, universities and other research centers, or corporate sponsors. This support may include funding for a full- or part-time organizer, equipment, training workshops, or data analysis. Some agencies or organizations also offer support by allowing volunteer monitoring programs to use their facilities and equipment. In many programs, volunteers themselves also help pay for monitoring by purchasing their own equipment and hosting training sessions. References USEPA. 1997. EPA's Volunteer Monitoring Program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. [http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/vol.html]. Last updated March 28, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001. USEPA. 1998. Starting Out in Volunteer Monitoring. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. [http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/monitoring/volunteer/startmon.html]. Last updated March 28, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001. USEPA. 1997. What is Volunteer Monitoring? U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. [http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/monitoring/volunteer/epavm.html]. Last updated March 28, 2001. Accessed April 9, 2001.
15
Reforestation Programs Public Involvement/Participation Description Reforestation is essential to the restoration of many natural habitats. These forested buffers between land and water are an essential part of the ecosystem. In some parts of the country, however, they are disappearing at an alarming rate. Reforestation programs attempt to preserve and restore forested buffers and natural forests. In areas all over the country, volunteers, community groups, and state and local conservation groups have initiated tree planting efforts. In addition to buffer establishment and improvement with reforestation, municipalities can accomplish several tasks including park improvement, neighborhood and highway beautification, and provision of shade in parking and pedestrian areas. A municipality should determine what their priorities are and identify candidate sites for reforestation based on these priorities. With the variety of tasks involved in tree planting efforts, everyone can help out. While some people man wheelbarrows, haul the plants, or shovel ground, there are many less-strenuous ways that volunteers can assist in these efforts. For example, to maintain a steady supply of trees, some organizations establish small nurseries where volunteers can pot seedlings and care for them for about 2 years until they are ready to be transplanted to a natural setting. Other participants in a tree planting program might be responsible for contacting local businesses, residences, or nursery farms to seek financial or vegetative donations. Applicability Reforestation programs can be used throughout a community to reestablish forested cover on a cleared site, establish a forested buffer along stream corridors to filter pollutants and reduce flood hazards, provide shade and aesthetic benefits in neighborhoods and parks, and improve appearance and pedestrian comfort along roadsides and in parking lots. It is up to the municipality to choose candidate sites for reforestation programs, and these decisions can be based on residents' recommendations or on overall capital improvement goals of the community. Implementation Municipalities should determine who will be in charge of a reforestation program. The program can be run by the local environmental department if one exists, but this department needs to have the organizational and managerial capacity to handle such an undertaking. Additional staff may need to be hired to conduct this program. Another option is to solicit volunteer organizations to run the program. The municipality can provide support to these volunteer groups in the form of materials, equipment, staff supervision, and funds for additional expenditures.
16
Funding for a reforestation program can come from a variety of sources, both public and private. Federal grants are available through USDA (Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, Forestry Incentives Program, Resource Conservation and Development Program, Small Watershed Program, Watershed Surveys and Planning) and EPA 319(h) funding for nonpoint source demonstration projects, among others). More information about these and other federal grant programs can be found at USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service web site at www.nrcs.usda.gov/NRCSProg.html and EPA's Nonpoint Source Control Branch web site at www.epa.gov/owow/nps/funding.html. State funds also might be available for reforestation programs--municipalities should check with state environmental agencies to identify what grant and loan programs are available for this purpose. Additionally, municipalities can look to private sources of funding. Partnerships can be established with nurseries or with the organizations participating in the volunteer effort. Also, municipalities can solicit contributions from developers and businesses that want to be associated with this endeavor. Finally, citizens can donate money to have trees, groves, or parks named after them. Once the program and funding are established, the next step is to choose sites suitable for tree planting efforts. Areas of disturbance such as sparsely vegetated streambanks or areas on the periphery of a forest are often ideal for restoration efforts. When the site is selected, it is important to conduct a detailed feasibility study to ensure the success of the tree planting. Each site has unique soil and other environmental characteristics that must be considered when selecting tree species to be planted. To properly assess a site, it is wise to consult a local horticulturist or landscape architect for technical assistance. Park employees, rangers, local scientists, and experts at nurseries and garden stores can also provide advice concerning the types of native tree species that are appropriate under various conditions. Municipalities should develop a timetable for planting depending on program priorities, site conditions, and the availability of materials and labor. Once the site and tree species are selected and a schedule is set, the municipality should organize an outreach campaign to get the word out about the reforestation program to the public. This outreach campaign can advertise the reforestation program at town meetings or by holding meetings with individuals and groups, such as neighborhood coalitions, that might be interested in participating in a reforestation program. Additionally, if municipalities have a web site or newsletter, the program and volunteer opportunities can be advertised there. Once volunteers are found, the next step is to secure the materials and equipment needed for tree planting events. Trees for plantings can be donated, purchased commercially, or raised by the group, but note that raising them involves a significant time committment (up to 2 years). A committment is needed from the nursery that the plants will be delivered in a timely manner for the planting. The site might need to be prepared for planting. This preparation includes clearing any vines or other overgrowth from the planting area. Equipment and supplies also must be collected prior to the planting. For example, shovels, wheel barrels, gardening gloves, pruning cutters, and mulch should be gathered and transported to the site. This equipment can be supplied by the public works department or a local contractor.
17
With the materials collected and in place, tree planting can begin. Trees and shrubs take about a year to become established in a new environment, during which time substantial root growth occurs. To ensure that trees flourish in their new environment, consult with a horticultural specialist or other expert for detailed planting instructions and specifications. The plant specialist should also recommend maintenance of the newly planted trees, and inspections should be made to identify and repair vandalism if it occurs. Maintenance can be conducted by the municipality or volunteer groups, but a plan and schedule must be in place to ensure that maintenance occurs as scheduled. Effectiveness With the proper tools, types of plants, planting, and maintenance, reforestation can be very effective in reducing pollutants in and decreasing the volume of storm water. The nonprofit organization American Forests conducted a study in the Houston area to document urban forest covering a 3.2-million-acre area. They also analyzed 25 specific sites with aerial photography using CITYgreen software to map and measure tree cover and to calculate the benefits of Houston's trees. Study results show that trees provide significant benefits relative to storm water runoff, energy savings, and pollutant removal. The study found that Houston's tree cover reduces the need for storm water management by 2.4 billion cubic feet per peak storm event, saving $1.33 billion in one-time construction costs (ENN, 2001). Benefits Pollutants in urban and agricultural runoff, especially sediment that reduces the water clarity, nutrient pollution from fertilizers and manure, and toxics from weed and pest killers, can freely flow into valuable natural water resources without a vegetated buffer along stream corridors and lakeshores. Trees and forested areas reduce runoff through interception and by increasing surface storage and infiltration. The trees mitigate peak flows through storm water retention, provide habitat for wildlife, shade streams to help maintain appropriate water temperatures, and provide aesthetic benefits. Trees are also beneficial in urban areas. Not only are they aesthetically pleasing, but they also provide habitat for wildlife, capture rainfall, and reduce the urban heat index, which in turn reduces the need for air conditioning. Limitations Limitations to an effective reforestation program include the costs associated with buying and planting the trees and other vegetation, finding people to install and maintain the plants, and continuing the upkeep of the buffer areas. Weather patterns, such as hurricanes and other storms or droughts, can cause significant damage to reforested areas. These natural weather patterns are unavoidable, but if indigenous vegetation is used, the plants are more likely to survive. Cost Reforestation programs involve a variety of costs, especially staff time needed to organize the program, select sites, coordinate supplies, and recruit, organize, and supervise volunteers. Supplies and equipment might also be expensive, depending on the size of the reforestation effort. The cost to the municipality can be minimized by soliciting donations from businesses and private citizens and by obtaining grants and loans from public sources.
18
References Chesapeake Bay Foundation. 2000. Environmental Education: Restoration Projects. [http://www.cbf.org/education/restoration.htm]. Accessed January 2001. Environmental News Network (ENN). 2001, January 10. Calculating the Benefits of Houston's Urban Trees. [http://www.enn.com/extras/printer-friendly.asp?storyid= 3085&pr=1]. Accessed April 6, 2001. Temple University. 1999. The Volunteer. Vol. 2(1), Winter 1999. Temple University. [http://www.members.tripod.com/Wissrestoration/index.html]. Trees for Houston. 1999. Reforestation Program. Trees for Houston, Houston, TX. [http://www.neosoft.com/~trees/reforestation.html]. Trees for Houston. 1999. Trees for Houston's Neighborhood/Parkway Program. Trees for Houston, Houston, TX. [http://www.neosoft.com/~trees/parkways.html].
19
Wetland Plantings Public Involvement/Participation Description Wetlands are unique ecosystems that are home to a great diversity of terrestrial and aquatic plants and animals and are beneficial in many ways. They have the ability to improve water quality by filtering and accumulating pollutants, thereby protecting adjacent rivers, lakes, and streams. Wetlands also provide food, protection from predators, and other habitat factors for many of the nation's fish and wildlife species, including endangered and threatened species. Finally, wetlands have economic value associated with recreational, commercial, and subsistence use of fish and wildlife resources. Over time, many wetland, riparian, and lakeshore environments have become degraded by human-induced disturbances, such as the introduction of invasive, non-native plants. Such exotic vegetation can reduce habitat quality (e.g., loss of food supply), contribute to an unkempt, weedy appearance, and obscure the waterbody from view. These disturbances have not only affected the natural functions of these systems by causing increased erosion, a decline in natural wetland vegetation, and degraded habitats, but they have also reduced the aesthetic value of the environment. Wetlands and waterbodies are also disturbed by land development activities in adjacent areas and in upland areas within the watershed. These disturbances often result in sediment deposition, nutrient enrichment, and increased storm water flows into the wetlands. This causes a reduction in water clarity that ultimately limits the growth of wetland plant species and submerged aquatic vegetation, the smothering of streambeds, contamination of water quality, and alteration of natural hydrology. Applicability Municipalities can plant wetland species to both preserve existing wetlands and enhance degraded wetland plant communities. Wetland plantings however, are only one part of what a municipality might undertake when restoring, protecting, or creating a wetland. When preserving and enhancing degraded wetlands, it is often necessary to plant wetland species along shorelines, in upland habitats, and along the bottom of waterbodies. Each wetland can be divided into specific zones based on soil hydrology. Upland transitional zones are adjacent to normally wet or inundated wetland areas. These zones are extremely important to the health, function, and appearance of the wetland or waterbody. Wetland and open water zones range from having saturated soil below the ground surface (such as in a wet meadow) to being completely inundated with water (such as a shoreline or streambank). These areas can support wetland plant species ranging from sedges and shrubs that are intolerant of inundation to emergent species and submerged or floating plants.
20
Municipalities can also use wetlands mitigation banking when preserving degredated wetland communities. A wetland mitigation bank is a wetland area that has been restored, created, enhanced, or preserved, and is then set aside to compensate for future wetland conversion from development activities. A municipality can participate in wetland mitigation by undertaking such preservation activities under a formal agreement with a regulatory agency. In Pembroke Pines, Florida, 358 acres of degraded wetlands on city property were restored through the Florida Wetlandsbank. For more information on mitigation and conservation banking, including contact information for local bankers and regulators, contact the Terrene Institute at www.terrene.org. Implementation When beginning a wetland planting, it is important to keep in mind that any entity that alters a wetland must first get a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This requirement is specified under the Clean Water Act, Section 404. The first step in a wetland planting program is to determine the history of the site, including previous vegetation and typical conditions. Another important factor is the hydrology of a site. Hydrology defines such factors as average and maximum depth, duration of inundation, and degree of soil saturation. Hydrology establishes the soil and plant conditions that distinguish between different wetland types and streambank and shoreline environments. Municipalities should work with a reputable wetland firm to determine these conditions. Other factors that should be considered for wetland plantings are described below. Plant species selection. Selection of plants for wetland, streambank, and shore zones is closely tied to the hydrology of the site, particularly water depths and flood durations. Other factors such as shading, water clarity, and salinity should be taken into account as well. Planting in open water areas typically involves the use of tubers, plugs, and potted plants. Planting in nonponded wetland zones often involves both seeds and live plants. Project planners must be familiar with different types of plants that can be used, depending on the site's characteristics. Field tests can be useful to delineate planting zones on a site that contains a range of hydrologic regimes. It is important to use a diverse mix of wetland plants and not just one type of plant such as Phragmites (reed grass) or cattails. These and other aggressive species are very easy to establish but should not be planted. They will outcompete other valuable species and will eventually dominate less robust colonizers. As wetlands also exist along streams, it is important to establish riparian vegetation in these areas. Riparian vegetation stabilizes banks, provides large woody debris and detritus for aquatic habitat and food, and shades the stream, reducing water temperatures. Reestablishing riparian cover along streams can call for active reforestation of native species, removal of exotic species, or modification of mowing options to allow gradual succession. The types of vegetation planted should depend upon geographic location, climate, and soil conditions. Species that are native to the area are naturally better suited to its conditions. Riparian vegetation includes grasses, shrubs, and trees. While all of these types of vegetation help stabilize stream banks and filter storm water, their effectiveness varies. For example, deeply rooted plants might work better than certain grasses for transforming nitrogen because the roots can reach deeper flowing water.
21
Information on native plant species selection, how and when to plant, and other local factors is available from federal agencies, such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and from various state and local agencies. A local Cooperative Extension Service is another good source of information. Initial and long-term management and maintenance. Many wetlands become overgrown with non-native, invasive plant species following a disturbance. Noxious weeds can be controlled in a variety of ways. Controlled burning is a commonly used technique for wetlands, natural streambanks, and shorelines. Timing is important, since these areas burn well only at very specific times of the year. Furthermore, fires in wetland areas can be very intense, especially where cattails and giant reed grasses are present; therefore, special care should be exercised. A 2to 3-year rotation for prescribed burnings is appropriate. Invasive species can also be removed by physically extracting them from the site. This process is often difficult because many non-native species grow in dense patches with extensive root systems. For species that are particularly difficult to eliminate using prescribed burning or physical extraction approaches, chemical control of non-native species is sometimes warranted. Herbicide techniques are different from those used in upland sites, primarily because herbicides have to be licensed for use in or near waterbodies, wetlands, and other aquatic systems. Chemical means of weed reduction should be used only when necessary, and product labels should be read and closely followed. Only a licensed herbicide applicator should conduct this work. Effectiveness If hydrologic and soil conditions are conducive to plant growth, wetland plantings often respond very quickly. Extensive cover of native plants often can be achieved during the first growing season. Noxious weed control through the use of mowing or pruning is often necessary during the first several years. Some replanting might also be necessary. A stable, diverse, and aesthetic wetland/riparian landscape might take 3 to 5 years to achieve. It is important to understand that the success of wetland plants will not be immediate and that the effort does not end with the planting itself. Wetland plants should be routinely monitored following planting. If the plantings do not appear to establish themselves, it is important to reevaluate the site selection and conditions before replanting. With each revegetation effort, new information about suitable habitat and conditions will be gained from both successful and unsuccessful planting attempts.
22
Benefits Planting programs can be beneficial to wetlands in several ways. First, these plantings act as a "jump-start" for areas that are bare or significantly disturbed. Although revegetation might not completely cover a disturbed area, it is a means of establishing plant species that can then propagate. By planting indigenous aquatic species, the natural functions of wetlands can be restored, including storm water filtration, nutrient uptake, sediment removal, and peak flow attenuation. Another value of revegetation programs is educating the public about wetland plants and their value. By working on wetland planting projects, the public has a hands-on opportunity to improve wetlands and aquatic environments. Also, wetland planting projects help scientists learn more about which environments and growing conditions promote plant growth. Finally, reestablishment of wetland vegetation improves wildlife habitat for migrating waterfowl, reptiles, amphibians, and other aquatic species. For example, West Eugene, Oregon's, Stream Team and Parks Volunteer programs have resulted in the adoption of wetlands, stream segments, and parks by a number of agencies and organizations in the area (City of West Eugene, Oregon, 2001). Limitations The ability of the new plants to succeed depends on several factors, including the weather (drought or flood) and insect damage. Also, upstream or nearby development and land use changes may alter wetland conditions and result in altered salinity, hydrology, or other factors that can lead to die-off of recently planted vegetation. Maintenance is important to ensure that the plantings have successfully established themselves. Other problems associated with wetlands include the filling in of detention ponds that were originally built by developers. When this filling occurs, municipalities should determine whether or not they should convert the ponds into wetlands or return them to their original state. Cost Wetland planting programs are often sponsored by local or regional environmental agencies. Many organizations acquire financial support for replanting activities through fund-raising efforts and membership dues. Scientists and wetland experts are often willing to donate their time to conduct site visits and provide recommendations for the plant species selection process.
23
References Briggs, M.K. 1996. Our National Wetland Heritage: A Protection Guide. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ. Briggs, M.K. 1996. Riparian Ecosystem Recovery in Arid Lands: Strategies and References. University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. Chesapeake Bay Foundation. 1999. Planting Wild Celery. [http://www.cbf.org/notebook/cn_1999_05_25.htm]. City of West Eugene, Oregon. 2001. Wetland Plantings. [http://www.ci.eugene.or.us/wewetlands/get.htm]. Accessed April, 2001. The Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group. 1998. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices. [http://www.usda.gov/stream_restoration]. Accessed July 27, 2000. The Izaak Walton League.2000. American Wetlands Campaign. [http://www.iwla.org/SOS/awm/index.htm]. Accessed April, 2001. Kentula, B., G. Holland, and S. Sifneos. 1993. An Approach to Decision Making in Wetland Restoration and Creation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Terrene Institute. 2001. Terrene Institute [http://www.terrene.org]. Accessed April, 2001. USEPA. 1998. The "How To" of Natural Landscaping. Chapter 4 in A Source Book on Natural Landscaping for Public Officials. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. [http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/greenacres/toolkit/chap4.html]. USEPA. 1996. Protecting Natural Wetlands: A Guide to Stormwater Best Management Practices. EPA 843-B-96-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA, 1995. Ecological Restoration: A Tool to Manage Stream Quality. EPA 841-F-95-007 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USPS. 1999. Chesapeake Bay Watershed Grounds Management Plan. United States Postal Service, Washington, DC. World Wildlife Fund. 1992. Statewide Wetlands Strategies: A Guide to Protecting and Managing the Resource. Island Press. Washington, DC.
24
Adopt-A-Stream Programs Public Involvement/Participation Description Adopt-A-Stream programs are an excellent public outreach tool for municipalities to involve citizens of all ages and abilities. They are volunteer programs in which participants "adopt" a stream, creek, or river to study, clean up, monitor, protect, and restore. Through these activities, the adopting group or organization becomes the primary caretaker of that stretch of stream in the watershed. Applicability A municipality can tailor an Adopt-A-Stream program to allow participation from any group or organization within a watershed. Adoptions are as flexible and unique as the streams themselves. Adopting a stream is a great program for youth groups, including church groups, scouts, and school clubs, but it can also be a great activity for adult groups such as neighborhood associations, civic organizations, or businesses. Levels of involvement range from quarterly visual surveys and litter pick-ups to monthly testing to one-time habitat improvement projects. The objectives of the program are not only to remove litter, but also to improve the quality of the stream. Waste collected from stream banks and channels could spur local interest in maintaining and improving the water quality and aesthetics of all local waterbodies. Municipalities can sponsor many different activities through Adopt-A-Stream programs, such as:

Implementing stream cleanups Conducting streambank surveys Monitoring stream insects and gauging water quality Executing streambank enhancement projects, such as tree planting, to help control erosion and stabilize streambanks Implementing storm drain stenciling Conducting construction site surveys for proper storm water controls Promoting education about the watershed through stream walks, workshops, and other activities
25
Implementation Municipalities can begin an Adopt-A-Stream program by obtaining a watershed map and marking potential stream sites on it. Rough watershed maps can be obtained from EPA's Surf Your Watershed web site (USEPA, 2000) at http://www.epa.gov/surf, or more detailed maps can be ordered from the U.S. Geological Survey (2001) at http://mapping.usgs.gov. The watershed map can then be used to keep track of which stretches are adopted and by whom. Once the stream sites have been identified, a monitoring and reporting plan to evaluate the conditions on the stream should be developed. The next step is to prepare "how to" packets on each activity that can be distributed to interested organizations. Typical packets include
Instructions and information needed to conduct an activity such as stream monitoring or storm drain stenciling Topographic maps of the area (with the stream of interest designated) Data sheets for recording observations Equipment or lists of necessary equipment (such as bags, gloves, and monitoring devices) First-aid kits Comments on the stream's history Field guides Contact information A basic "do's and don'ts" list for what to do if hazardous materials like syringes are encountered Safety tips General hints for a successful cleanup Rewards for volunteers (such as stickers or certificates)
For example, a packet for conducting a stream cleanup might include trash bags and gloves, a map designating appropriate trash pickup sites along the stream and private land areas for which special permission might be required, and a list of contact information for trash collectors and recyclers. Most Adopt-A-Stream programs also require documentation to be completed by their participants. For example, almost all programs call for a registration form to be completed by the group. Items that can be included on the registration form include the group's name, a contact person's name and address, the stream's name and location, a description of the stream stretch with landmarks (e.g., "from High Bridge north to Route 58 overpass"), the length of the stream, and the anticipated number of participants.
26
Some programs also require forms to be completed for a specific event such as a stream cleanup. A cleanup report should provide a record of the length of the area cleaned, the number of participants, and the amount of litter collected (e.g., the number of bags, total weight, and counts of trash items by category). To save on mailings, a master copy of the cleanup report can be mailed to the participating organization, which can reproduce the report for its members before each cleanup. If the organization keeps the original form and topographic map, trends in litter volume or other stream parameters over time can be noted. Publicizing the Program and Its Activities. The media should be used whenever possible to spread the word about the Adopt-A-Stream program and the activities it sponsors. Advertisements can be placed in newspapers, public service announcements(PSAs) can be broadcast on TV and radio, and an Internet site can be developed with program information. Community groups and schools should be targeted in the outreach campaign through presentations and assemblies, stressing that the program is educational, philanthropic, and fun. To help advertise Adopt-A-Stream events, news releases can be sent to local newspapers and radio and television stations before an activity occurs. Contacting the media in advance of a cleanup, storm drain stenciling event, or educational stream walk allows the press to cover the activity as it happens. When the activity is completed, a second news release explaining what was accomplished can be sent to the media. Partnering with Schools. Many Adopt-A-Stream programs partner with schools to develop interdisciplinary classroom curricula and activities. Through the program, teachers and students adopt a waterway and perform chemical, physical, and biological testing to determine water quality and perform habitat restoration. Participating in such an interdisciplinary program gives classroom learning a real-life application, enhances students' problem-solving capabilities, and provides community recognition of the students' efforts. Teachers can select projects and activities that best match their students' capabilities and the materials and resources available. The national Adopt-A-Stream organization www.adopt-a-stream.org, as well as numerous agencies nationwide, can provide teacher's guides for developing a classroom Adopt-A-Stream program. Some schools find it valuable to enlist a cosponsor such as a community group or private organization to aid them in their efforts. Cosponsors vary in their involvement with the students. Some activities that cosponsors can undertake include meeting with students to demonstrate community support for their efforts, helping to select an appropriate waterway, providing special information about the waterway, accompanying students on field trips, helping to prepare news releases and articles about the program, providing funds (if necessary), and helping to prepare a written report that compiles all of the data from schools in the watershed. Students and community members can then use this report as a focal point around which to plan strategies for involvement and actions for the coming year.
27
Effectiveness The effectiveness of Adopt-A-Stream projects is exemplified by the Northwest Pennsylvania Chapter of Trout Unlimited's Adopt-A-Stream project located on Beaver Run in Erie County, Pennsylvania (NWPATU, no date). Beaver Run is a small meadow brown trout stream in southern Erie County, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Company designated Beaver Run as a class "A" wild trout water and stopped all stocking of hatchery trout. Over the years, some of the stream was subject to bank erosion caused by livestock grazing, resulting in siltation of pools and loss of habitat. Trout numbers had declined on the lower sections of the stream. Some members of NWPATU had fished the stream over the years and knew that the stream was in decline. The chapter moved to adopt the lower mile and, with the blessing of the landowners, started project planning. The project would not have been successful without assistance from the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Company, a cash grant from the National Trout Unlimited Organization, donations of equipment from chapter members, and the hard work of NWPATU and Gem City Fly Tiers members. The project's first phase was to build four wing deflectors, two mud sills, two bank cribbings, and two cattle crossings over a 2-year period. On August 17 and 18, 1996, and July 11 and 12, 1997, the chapter met for 4 days of hard work. The crew completed construction and installation all of the devices outlined in the plans. These restoration efforts would not have been completed without the efforts of the Adopt-A-Stream group. Another example of a successful program can be found in West Eugene, Oregon. West Eugene has a Stream Team program that provides citizens of all ages an opportunity to learn about the city's water resources and their role in protecting them. West Eugene offers hands-on projects that allow citizens the opportunity to improve water quality (City of West Eugene, 2001). See http://www.ci.eugene.or.us/wewetlands/default.htm for more information on the city's efforts to restore their water resources. Benefits The benefits a municipality can achieve by implementing an Adopt-A-Stream program are numerous. Participants of the program help make areas in their watershed more visually attractive and improve habitat for wildlife, thus saving and restoring natural resources. In addition, the hands-on activities and recognition and exposure that schools, private organizations, and the community get when participating in an Adopt-A-Stream program provide a tremendous sense of accomplishment. Limitations Commitment is probably the greatest limitation a municipality can face when implementating an Adopt-A-Stream program. Many people sign up for activities but quickly find they do not have time for follow-up activities. This is one reason youth groups are so well suited for these projects. By integrating a stream program into a curriculum or into a yearly scout project, the group's commitment is ensured. Other limitations may include funding availability, weather, equipment maintenance, and liability associated with the dangers of slippery rocks or steep slopes.
28
Cost The costs a municipality can incur when implementing an Adopt-A-Stream program would primarily result from the amount of time employees spend administering the program. Significant costs can also be associated with sponsoring an Adopt-A-Stream program. The costs imcurred by sponsors depend on the level of assistance the sponsoring agency contributes to participants in the program, such as providing activity packets, technical expertise, and database management. On the other hand, the cost of participating in an Adopt-A-Stream program is very low. Equipment for monitoring can be borrowed from universities and other research facilities, and activities such as stream cleanups might require only bags, gloves, clipboards, and pencils, which can be provided at low cost. Media coverage of program events is free.
29
References Anne Arundel County. 1999. Adopt A Stream. [http://www.saveourstreams.org/SOSaastream.htm]. City of Rome. 1999. Adopt-A-Stream. Rome, Floyd County, GA. [http://www.romegeorgia.com/adoptastream.html]. City of West Eugene. 2001. The City of Eugene's Stream Team is Learning and Action. [http://www.ci.eugene.or.us/pw/stream/stream.htm]. Last updated February 20, 2001. Accessed April 10, 2001. City of West Eugene. 2001. West Eugene Wetlands Program. [http://www.ci.eugene.or.us/wewetlands/default.htm]. Last updated January 25, 2001. Accessed April 10, 2001. Delta Laboratories. No date. Adopt-A-Stream. [http://www.adopt-a-stream.org]. Accessed April 10, 2001. Friends of the St. Joe River Association, Inc. No date. Volunteer Opportunities! [http://www.fotsjr.org/helpus.htm]. Accessed April 10, 2001. Kodak: Health, Safety, and Environment. 2001. Adopt-A-Stream. [http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/ environment/community/education/adopt.shtml]. Accessed January 2001. NWPATU. No date. NWPATU Beaver Run Adopt-A-Stream Project. Trout Unlimited, Northwest Pennsylvania Chapter, Erie, PA. [http://www.fisherie.com/nwpatu/project.html]. Saginaw Bay Watershed Council. No date. Adopt-A-Stream Program [brochure]. Saginaw Bay Watershed Council, University Center, MI. South Dakota Lakes and Streams Association. No date. South Dakota Adopt-A-Stream Manual. [http://www.brookings.com/bswf/tp1.htm]. Accessed April 10, 2001. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2001. National Mapping Information. http://mapping.usgs.gov. Last updated May 15, 2001. Accessed June 14, 2001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2000. Surf Your Watershed. http://www.epa.gov/surf. Last updated September 27, 2000. Accessed June 14, 2001.
30
Involvement/public opinion
Watershed Organization Public Involvement/Participation Description A watershed organization incorporates the ideas and resources of many different groups into a single organization. The groups can consist of local governments, citizens, nonprofit environmental groups, and local universities, among others. The purpose of a watershed organization is to restore, protect, and promote the natural resources of the watershed. To accomplish this, a watershed organization might set goals for and subsequently implement public education and storm water management programs, stream clean-up events, or restoration activities. Watersheds most likely encompass multiple jurisditions and involve multiple government participants. It is essential for all municipalities that fall within the watershed boundaries to participate in watershed organizations. If a watershed organization is still in the conceptual stage, it will behoove the municipality to help structure it in a way that will serve all interests in the watershed. A municipality cannot--and should not--control a watershed organization, but it can support it, nurture it, and help it achieve its goals. Applicability A watershed organization can exist for any watershed, large or small, but organizations for larger watersheds are more common. In all cases where a watershed organization exists, it is crucial for municipalities to be involved in the decisionmaking process so the municipality's goals are achieved. In places where no watershed organization exists, municipalities can initiate the creation of one by working with other stakeholders and interested parties. Implementation The creation of a watershed organization results from the cooperation and sharing of ideas of several stakeholder groups, including the municipality. However, a watershed organization must have an organized structure. A constitution and bylaws should be developed, membership and representation defined, and goals and objectives stated. Guidance is available to help municipalities and other interested parties start watershed organizations. Purdue University's Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC, no date) developed guidance for watershed organizations, which they term "watershed partnerships," through their Know Your Watershed program, located at www.ctic.purdue.edu/KYW.
31
The watershed organization might sponsor volunteer activities and annual events that involve the general public, school groups, and others in enjoyable, hands-on activities in their watershed. Activities that promote the watershed's quality help citizens learn and appreciate the value of conservation, pollution prevention, and cleanup. Watershed organizations typically sponsor such projects as

Field trips and tours Meetings and workshops Canoe trips Volunteer monitoring Cleanup and restoration days Educational programs for schools, civic groups, and other local organizations Media relations Opinion surveys Focus groups (CTIC, no date).
Different members of the watershed organization have different roles. CTIC (no date) recommends that local elected officials

Provide political leadership and credibility Make land use and resource management decisions Provide financial support for projects.
They also recommend that local government agencies

Provide financial and technical support Develop policies and make decisions that affect the watershed Provide logistical support and equipment Collect and analyze data.
Effectiveness Watershed groups are effective at improving water quality when they are well organized and active and have committed members. For example,in 1996 and 1997, several voluntary, nongovernmental partnerships were honored by CF Industries for their outstanding efforts to protect water quality (Terrene Institute, no date; 1996; 1997; 1998; 1999). The following organizations have received the award:
32
1996

Operation Green Stripe (St. Louis, MO) French Creek Watershed Advisory Group (Elizabethtown, NY) Boquet River Association (Scott River Sub-Basin/Klamath River Basin/Siskiyou County, CA) Cheney Watershed Program (South Hutchinson, KS)
1997

Snowbird Ski & Summer Resort (Snowbird, UT) Columbia-Pacific Resource Conservation and Development Council (Aberdeen, WA) Grand Traverse Bay Watershed Initiative (Traverse City, MI) Heron Lake Watershed Restoration Project (Lakefield, MN) Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program (Metairie, LA)
1998

Cargill Water Matters Program (Minneapolis, MN) French Creek Project (northwestern PA) Hillsdale Water Quality Project (Kansas City, MO) Indian Lake Watershed Project (west central OH) Marin Coastal Watershed Enhancement Project (Sonoma and Marin Counties, CA)
1999

Sun River Watershed Project (west central MT) Friends of the Rappahannock (VA) North Branch of the Chicago River Watershed Project (IL) Saginaw Bay Watershed Initiative Network (MI)
These programs were selected because they developed innovative, nonregulatory approaches to water quality improvement. More information about these organizations and the National Watershed Award can be found at www.terrene.org/cfaward.htm.
33
Benefits Watershed organizations can promote a sense of ownership of water resources and improve local awareness of storm water issues. Cleanup and restoration events can benefit wildlife habitat and water quality as well. By forming an organization, each stakeholder gets a voice in the decisionmaking process, which ensures that the final plan represents the consensus of all parties. According to CTIC, watershed organizations also

Make more efficient use of financial resources Create a spirit of sharing and cooperation Ensure fairness, which minimizes the potential for negative social and economic impacts Result in more creative and acceptable ways to protect natural resources.
Limitations It takes time and skill to establish partnerships and create an effective watershed organization. Municipalities can not accomplish this on their own--they must rely on other stakeholders to provide input and resources to manage the watershed effectively and with fairness. Motivation and enthusiasm are key to keeping stakeholder participation high. Another limitation for watershed organizations is funding for programs and activities. Organization members should work together to raise money and apply for grants to support these activities. Cost Costs for watershed organizations vary with the scope of activities planned for the watershed. Many state and local governments offer grants to watershed organizations. For example, as part of its nonpoint-source pollution control efforts, the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation supports, trains, and enhances networking among watershed coordinators by offering information exchange and grants to local projects. Virginia also permits the formation of watershed improvement districts with taxing powers. The Lake Barcroft Watershed Improvement District in Falls Church, Virginia, is an excellent example of a successful watershed organization that gets its funding from tax revenues. Federal grants are available through USDA and EPA to fund certain types of watershed activities. More information about these and other federal grant programs can be found at USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service web site at www.nrcs.usda.gov/NRCSProg.html and at EPA's Nonpoint Source Control Branch web site at www.epa.gov/owow/nps/funding.html. Additionally, watershed groups can hold fund-raising events, sell T-shirts with their logo and slogan, or hold raffles. The money generated by these activities can pay for activities, field equipment, and other necessities.
34
References CTIC. No date. Building Local Partnerships : A Guide for Watershed Partnerships. [http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/KYW/Brochures/BuildingLocal.html]. Accessed April 10, 2001. Lake Barcroft Watershed Improvement District. 1998. Watershed and Lake BMP's. Lake Barcroft Watershed Improvement District, Falls Church, VA. Russian River Watershed Council (RRWC). no date. RRWC Meeting January 29, 2000. [http://www.sonic.net/~eggitti/rrwc.htm]. Accessed January 2001. Terrene Institute. No date. CF Industries National Watershed Award. [http://www.terrene.org/cfaward.htm]. Accessed April 10, 2001. Terrene Institute. 1996. National Watershed Award winners named. Runoff Report 4(5):1, 4. Terrene Institute. 1997. Winners set pace for watershed protection nationwide. Runoff Report 5(5):16. Terrene Institute. 1998. National winners in the prevention game. Runoff Report 6(5):16. Terrene Institute. 1999. CF Industries National Watershed Awards. Runoff Report 7(4):16.
35
Stakeholder Meetings Public Involvement/Participation Description Public involvement and public participation naturally require the inclusion of stakeholders. Stakeholders are individuals or groups in the community that are most affected by a municipality's storm water program. They have a vested interest in the waterbody and storm water activities. Stakeholders might include citizens, local school groups, community leaders, local and state government representatives, and business owners in the watershed. Stakeholder meetings can be in the form of a local storm water management panel, a public meeting, or any type of interactive, information-sharing event. Applicability Each stakeholder has a vested interest in solving storm water management problems for the particular waterbody. Therefore, stakeholders should be informed of water quality issues in their community and solicited to contribute their ideas and concerns. One way to do this is through stakeholder meetings, where participants can hear what others have to say and can contribute their own ideas. In addition to inviting the stakeholders, representatives from several local newspapers, radio stations, and television news departments should be included. Journalists, broadcasters, and others who attend the meetings can let others know what happened, when the next meeting is, and how they can get involved. Implementation The first step for a municipality is to determine which citizens are most affected by the storm water program. Stakeholders will need to be identified by whether they live or work in the watershed or by their activities. Involving stakeholders in the storm water program can be an important first step in forming a watershed organization. To identify stakeholders, an attitude survey can be conducted that seeks to answer the following questions:
36
Is a certain segment most affected by the cost of implementing the storm water program? Will a segment of the community (perhaps Hispanic immigrants) have difficulty understanding what the whole program is all about? Will the municipality find support among environmentalists? Does a segment of the community object to government intrusion as demonstrated by the storm water regulations? Has the municipality established good working relationships with large industries in the community that also have storm water permits? Is the community already part of a strong watershed organization? (If a watershed organization exists, then this group can form the core of the audience for stakeholder outreach.)
Once stakeholders have been identified, the municipality must decide how to approach them. Flyers and media stories can be used to educate stakeholders and to prepare them for a public meeting. Municipalities might also choose to speak before homeowner, civic, and business groups or to contact a strong watershed organization, if one exists. After the stakeholders have been educated about the issues, a meeting can be held. The municipality should work with community groups to organize the meeting. If the meeting is to successfully involve stakeholders in the storm water program, the first meeting will set the tone for many others to follow. Rules for conducting the meeting must be agreed upon and can be addressed with the following questions:

Will the meeting be facilitated? Will decisions be made by consensus? What approach will the group take?
Once the meeting has been organized, an appropriate meeting place must be chosen. Then the word must be put out to the invited stakeholders through mail, Internet, word of mouth, flyers, and/or posters. Someone will need to be the designated leader of the meeting so that it will be organized. Since the audience will be diverse and at all levels of scientific knowledge, some of the best ways to disseminate information at stakeholder meetings is through graphics like photographs and charts. Storm water management uses a lot of technical terms, such as "watershed," "runoff," and "nonpoint source pollution." A glossary of commonly used terms might be displayed on a flip chart or as an overhead, or it could be provided on a handout given to participants before the meeting starts.
37
A question and answer period and a time for comments should be planned. It is often difficult to get people to speak in public, but it is a good way for them to express their opinions and concerns. Someone else might hold the same ideas or might not have thought of these new ideas. When questions are asked or comments are made, it is vital that the meeting leader listen carefully, not interrupt, and acknowledge the point(s) made. When giving information, the leader must be sure to be descriptive, nontechnical, and up-front. One of the most important things for the leader to remember is to be straightforward and to answer every question. If the leader is unsure of the answer, he or she can promise to look into it before the next meeting and come to that meeting with an answer. Some topics that might be addressed at a stakeholder meeting include the following:

Summary of previous meetings Announcements New tasks to be undertaken Selection of various leadership roles (if necessary), such as volunteer coordinator, minutes recorder, or graphic artist Creation of committees (if necessary)
A local storm water management panel might be chosen from the attendees. This panel could consist of representatives from the municipalities in the watershed as well as citizen and business representatives. The roles of the panel could include policy writing and meeting organization. After the meeting has ended, it is important for a municipality to be careful about relying on the media to inform the public of what happened at the meeting. The media may report only on disagreements or discussions that are more sensational than substantive. The media can also intimidate people from speaking for fear of being quoted and encourage others to dominate the discussion for the same reason.It can be useful for the meeting leader to prepare a news release that summarizes the results of the meeting and to distribute it to the local media within the next day or two. Effectiveness The effectiveness of a stakeholder meeting is a function of its overall organization. It is more likely that assignments will be accomplished if meetings are conducted in an orderly manner. Sometimes the issues might be controversial or might negatively affect some of the participants. These matters should be handled as professionally as possible so that no one leaves a meeting feeling disregarded. It should be made clear that not all issues will be solved and maybe not everyone will be satisfied, but together the stakeholders can come up with the best compromise. To be effective, stakeholder meetings must be attended. Finding an appropriate location for the meetings, such as a local school auditorium or a public library, is vital. The location must be easily accessible, able to accommodate the applicable number of participants, and equipped with the appropriate resources, such as outlets for projectors, speakers for microphones, and tables and chairs.
38
Most important is the time the meetings are held. If the stakeholders work during the day, it could be difficult for them to make a mid-morning or early-afternoon meeting. Typical commutes must also be considered. If the meetings are to be held in a suburban community and most people in that community work in the city and travel a considerable distance each way, adequate commuting time must be allowed. If the meeting is held during dinner hours, it would be appropriate to serve refreshments. The better the timing and location, the easier it is for people to attend. Benefits One of the greatest benefits of stakeholder meetings is the accumulation of ideas from people of all backgrounds and all interests. Some participants will be more knowledgeable than others, and they can share their expertise with the other stakeholders. In some cases, stakeholders might belong to other groups with overlapping concerns. In such cases, resources can be pulled together to achieve corresponding goals. Limitations Determining who to include and who to eliminate as potential attendees stakeholders could be a limitation. People who are not inherently affected by the storm water management activities should not be included because they could draw the group's attention away from the real issues. Other limitations include finding an appropriate location and time to meet, costs associated with planning and holding meetings, and keeping the stakeholders organized and focused enough to get items accomplished. Cost The costs associated with stakeholder meetings revolve around planning and conducting the meetings. The flyers, mailings, or other means of announcing the meeting incur costs for design, production, copying, and distribution (e.g., stamps and envelopes). There also might be rental fees for a meeting location. Producing and distributing minutes of meetings might involve additional costs. References Know Your Watershed. No date. Leading & Communicating: A Guide for Watershed Partnerships. Know Your Watershed, West Lafayette, IN. TVA. 1997. Water Works. Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN.
39
Attitude Surveys Public Involvement/Participation Description Surveys of how the public perceives storm water management can foster better planning and management programs. The results of these attitude surveys can enlighten both storm water managers and the public on what the sources of pollution are, the effects of storm water on the environment, and options for control. Public attitude surveys can bring to light what is important to the stakeholders. Program planners can use this information to determine how best to incorporate the public's needs and desires into the overall goals of any storm water management program. Applicability Attitudes toward storm water and the best management practices used to manage it can influence the effectiveness of control measures and clean-up efforts. Determining public perceptions, expectations, and desires is an important place to start. Attitude surveys of interested parties can enlighten storm water managers about the appropriate steps to take and the misconceptions to fix. Implementation The first step of an attitude survey is to determine who should be surveyed and how. People who could be surveyed include the residents of particular communities, local business owners and operators, schoolchildren, and other groups. Surveys should be tailored to the municipality's various population segments to account for demographic shifts by age, ethnicity, and income. This may require several types of surveys and languages to ascertain true attitudes. People could be surveyed by mailing each individual a paper survey to complete and return. They can also be interviewed at strategic locations throughout the community, e.g., at the public library or at several shopping centers. An electronic survey could be developed and placed on the Internet, or telephone surveys could be conducted. There are also many different statistical methods for surveying, and one type of method should be chosen. In some cases, one survey may not be sufficient. As cities change, surveys may need to be updated periodically.
40
Once the groups to survey and the best method to survey them have been determined, it should be decided what questions to ask. A municipality can determine what information it needs to know by addressing the following questions:

Have citizens complained about new restrictions caused by the storm water program? Do people even know what storm water means? Is the municipality about to raise sewer rates (as a result of the storm water regulations)?
The Upper Mississippi River Resource Book (MacWilliams Cosgrove Snider Smith Robinson, 1996) is a good resource for determining what types of questions to ask. It presents the results of several public attitude surveys on public perception of the Upper Mississippi River and its tributaries. Some of the issues covered by these surveys are listed below. Questions about these and other issues could be included in a storm water public survey.

Agricultural activities Forestry management Changes in a waterbody's hydrology Recreation Public needs Property rights Sources of pollution Present and past water quality Wetlands
Municipalities might need professional help in preparing and conducting surveys. Such help is available from local colleges and extension services. EPA also provides survey help in Understanding a Sense of Place: A Guide to Analyzing Community Culture and the Environment (USEPA, 2001), a resource which is pending publication in early 2001. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Division of Marine Resources conducted a series of surveys to help strategize its Outreach and Education Plan. Questionnaires were developed for a mail survey of randomly selected employees and for a telephone survey of Florida residents, licensed boaters, and licensed saltwater anglers. The results of these surveys helped the Division formulate its goals to educate and inform Florida residents about marine resources (Duda and Young, 1996).
41
After a predetermined date for the end of the survey, the results of the returned surveys should be compiled and analyzed. Once the results have been summarized, they can be used in instructional materials to educate citizens and business owners in the area or they can be used in a municipality's annual report to show change and improvement over the year. The local government, area environmental groups, and others might use the results to develop plans for future efforts to manage storm water more effectively. Effectiveness The effectiveness of any survey depends on several factors, including the length of the survey, the ability of the recipient to understand the questions, the time needed to complete it, the cost (if any) to return it, and public interest in the topic. The more straightforward the questions and the easier it is to answer them, the better the response will be. In other words, multiple questions should not be asked on the same issues, and the questions should be brief and to the point. If mailed surveys are used, placing return postage on them encourages people to return them. Benefits One of the benefits of conducting a public attitude survey is to find out what people really think about an issue. It also allows a person not normally involved in an issue, but a stakeholder nevertheless, to voice an opinion. Attitude surveys are also helpful in targeting public education, awareness, and information programs. By understanding what the public perceives and wants, a municipality can better implement storm water management into the community. Limitations The greatest limitation of any survey is its level of response. Response level encompasses the number of completed surveys returned, the number returned incomplete, and the number returned after the predetermined end date for responses. The validity of the responses, therefore, is also a limitation. Cost The costs associated with an attitude survey depend on its type. A survey mailed to every resident of a county, for example, would be more expensive than a survey sent to a randomly selected sample. Furthermore, if the surveys to be returned are pre-postage-paid, the cost is greater. A survey conducted on the Internet, perhaps on the municipality's home page, would cost little to nothing. Its statistical validity, however, would be questionable because it would be hard to control repeat respondents and responses by nonstakeholders.
42
References Duda, M.D., and K.C., Young. 1996. Outreach and Education Strategies for the Division of Marine Resources Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Responsive Management, Harrisonburg, VA. MacWilliams Cosgrove Snider Smith Robinson. 1996. Upper Mississippi River Resource Book: A Survey of Research on Public Attitudes Toward the Environment. Prepared for the McKnight Foundation by MacWilliams Cosgrove Snider Smith Robinson, Washington, DC. USEPA. Understanding a Sense of Place: A Guide to Analyzing Community Culture and the Environment. Yolo County Resource Conservation District. 2000. Yolo County RCD Online Questionnaire. [www.yolorcd.ca.gov/questionnaire/1997/quest_ol.html]. Accessed January 2001.
43
Community Hotlines Public Involvement/Participation Description Because regulators and authorities cannot monitor all waterbodies at once, they sometimes rely on the public to keep them informed of water polluters. Community hotlines provide a means for concerned citizens and agencies to contact the appropriate authority when they see water quality problems. A hotline can be a toll-free telephone number or an electronic form linked directly to a utility or government agency, such as the water quality control board. A typical call might report a leaking automobile, concrete wash-out dumped on the street, paint in a creek, or organic debris (including pet waste) in a drainage system or waterway. Applicability Generally, an investigation team promptly responds to a hotline call and, in most cases, visits the problem site. If a responsible party can be identified, the team informs the party of the problem, offers alternatives for future disposal, and instructs the party to resolve the problem. If the issue is not resolved by the responsible party (or the party cannot be identified), the proper authority takes action to remediate the situation and prevent future violations. Implementation A municipality must first determine whether they need a hotline and, if so, whether the hotline is needed immediately or in the near future. A city can identify their need for a hotline by addressing the following questions:
Does the city receive frequent phone calls for information about water bodies and stream pollution? Are there frequent complaints? Are there any anticipated construction or other projects in the city? Are there any new ordinances or regulations? Does the city currently use a "hit or miss approach," in which whoever picks up the phone deals with the situation?
Once a city has determined that they need a hotline, they should choose between a telephone or an e-mail hotline. A city might decide to do both, at least for a short period of time.
44
To establish a storm water pollution hotline, a party or agency responsible for maintaining the hotline and responding to incoming complaints must first be identified. The responsible party could be a division of local government, a water quality board, a public utility, or an environmental agency. If the city chooses to use its own staff, it should keep in mind that the staff will require training. The city could also contract with a professional hotline provider. Once the party has agreed to maintain the hotline, it will need to establish a telephone number (preferably toll-free and to be used solely to report pollution complaints) and/or Internet site to receive notification. All distributed materials should include pollution hotline numbers and information. Typically, hotlines are advertised on public education materials concerned with water quality, such as flyers, door hangers, and brochures. The hotline could also be publicized on "permanent" materials such as bumper stickers and refrigerator magnets, where the number can be retained and easily located. Hotline costs can be minimized by staying a step ahead of questions and by developing close liaison with city staff to anticipate information needs. Cost estimates can be obtained by comparing the costs of training city staff and using a professional hotline service. A cost comparison should also be made between a person and an e-mail presence for the hotline. Municipalities can obtain specific information about establishing and running a hotline by interviewing contractors who specialize in operating hotlines. Seattle, Washington, Hotline. The city of Seattle, Washington, provides an on-line "Surface Water Quality Complaint Form" to allow concerned citizens to file e-mail reports of pollutant discharges to the city's creeks, lakes, and storm system. The form includes spaces for information about the person making the complaint and the alleged violation. If worried about privacy, a reporter can submit the complaint by telephone. It is the policy of the city of Seattle to keep the identification of callers confidential, pursuant to the provisions of the Washington Public Information Act. Seattle Public Utilities surface water quality field investigators respond to water quality-related complaints within the city's limits. When the team responds to a complaint, they make every attempt to determine the responsible party and inform them of the environmental impact of their actions. The responsible party is required to stop the action that is polluting the surface water. Staff members provide information on cleanup, alternative disposal options, erosion control, and other best management practices (City of Seattle, 1999). Charlotte, North Carolina, Hotline. Over the past 6 years, the city of Charlotte, North Carolina's, local storm water hotline (336-RAIN) has received 20,000 phone calls concerning water quantity and quality problems. The hotline not only helps the city respond to flooding, spills, and dumping incidents, but also provides a rough indicator of the success of public education efforts. Hotline activity increases significantly after educational materials are mailed. Callers can also receive free educational materials through the hotline number. The city also advertises for the county's water quality hotline (Lehner, 1999).
45
Effectiveness A storm water hotline is effective when its number is easily remembered (i.e., has a catchy name) or is easily accessible. Most important, however, is the responsiveness of the hotline. If a citizen reports an illegal dumping but no action is taken by the appropriate authority, that citizen could lose faith in the hotline and might not call back with future information. Benefits A hotline can serve as a link between the citizens and the municipality's government. It can be an avenue for citizens to feel more involved in their community. It also can be a great way to catch illegal polluters or to stop accidental spills that might otherwise go unnoticed. Limitations There are several limitations to community hotlines. The first is the community's ability to pay for it. The second is the ability of the community to keep the hotline staffed. Finally, the hotline must be advertised in order for the effort to be successful. References Lehner, P.H., G.P. Aponte Clarke, D.M. Cameron, and A.G. Frank. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resource Defense Council, New York, NY. Seattle Public Utilities. 1999. Surface Water Quality: Community Involvement. [www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/surfacewater]. Last updated May 3, 2001. Accessed June 14, 2001.
46
Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination

Regulatory Text
You must develop, implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges (as defined at Sec. 122.26(b)(2)) into your small MS4.
(ii) You must:
Develop, if not already completed, a storm sewer system map, showing the location of all outfalls and the names and location of all waters of the United States that receive discharges from those outfalls; To the extent allowable under State, Tribal or local law, effectively prohibit, through ordinance, or other regulatory mechanism, non-storm water discharges into your storm sewer system and implement appropriate enforcement procedures and actions;
(C) Develop and implement a plan to detect and address non-storm water discharges, including illegal dumping, to your system; and (D) Inform public employees, businesses, and the general public of hazards associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste. (iii) You need address the following categories of non-storm water discharges or flows (i.e., illicit discharges) only if you identify them as significant contributors of pollutants to your small MS4: water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising ground waters, uncontaminated ground water infiltration (as defined at 40 CFR 35.2005(20)), uncontaminated pumped ground water, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water from crawl space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car washing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, dechlorinated swimming pool discharges, and street wash water (discharges or flows from fire fighting activities are excluded from the effective prohibition against non-storm water and need only be addressed where they are identified as significant sources of pollutants to waters of the United States). Guidance EPA recommends that the plan to detect and address illicit discharges include the following four components: procedures for locating priority areas likely to have illicit discharges; procedures for tracing the source of an illicit discharge; procedures for removing the source of the discharge; and procedures for program evaluation and assessment. EPA recommends visually screening outfalls during dry weather and conducting field tests of selected pollutants as part of the procedures for locating priority areas. Illicit discharge education actions may include storm drain stenciling; a program to promote, publicize, and facilitate public reporting of illicit connections or discharges; and distribution of outreach materials.
BMP Fact Sheets Failing septic systems Industrial/business connections Recreational sewage Sanitary sewer overflows Identifying illicit connections Wastewater connections to the storm drain system Illegal dumping Additional Fact Sheets Non-Storm Water Discharges
Failing Septic Systems Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description Septic systems provide a means of treating household waste in those areas that do not have access to public sewers or where sewering is not feasible. For example, more than 80 percent of the land developed in the state of Maryland in the last decade has been outside the sewer and water "envelope" (MOP, 1991). Currently, it is estimated that 25 percent of the population of the United States rely on onsite wastewater systems to treat and dispose of their household waste. Of that number, about 95 percent of the disposal systems are septic tank systems. The goal of this fact sheet is to prevent new septic systems from failing and to detect and correct existing systems that have been failing. A failing septic system is considered to be one that discharges effluent with pollutant concentrations exceeding established water quality standards. Failure rates for septic systems typically range between 1 and 5 percent each year (De Walle, 1981) but can be much higher in some regions (Schueler, 1999). Failure of on-site disposal systems can be due to a number of causes, including unsuitable soil conditions, improper design and installation, or inadequate maintenance practices. Improperly functioning septic systems are recognized as a significant contributor of pollutants (especially nitrogen) and microbiological pathogens; these systems discharge more than one trillion gallons of waste each year to subsurface and surface waters (NSFC, 1995). Identifying and eliminating failing septic systems will help control contamination of ground and surface water supplies from untreated wastewater discharges. Applicability Conventional septic systems are used throughout the United States and are the wastewater treatment method mostly commonly selected for those areas without public sewer systems and treatment plants. In areas without sewer systems, there are a number of factors that should be examined to determine if conventional septic systems are the right treatment choice. The first is the size of the lot where the system is installed. Conventional septic systems have a relatively large lot size requirement to allow for even effluent distribution across the drainfield. A second factor is the soil type within a region, which influences the ability of the soil to purify effluent and allow the effluent to percolate. Other conditions that can affect septic system applicability include separation distance from the water table and bedrock, topography, flooding frequency, density of development, and distance to streams or shorelines.
Siting and Design Considerations The best way to prevent septic system failure is to ensure that a new system is sited and sized properly and to employ appropriate treatment technology. Septic systems should be located to ensure a horizontal distance from surface waters and vertical separation from ground water. Setback requirements are determined by each state or region regarding the vertical and horizontal distances that soil absorption fields must be located from building foundations, property boundaries, water supply wells, and other surface waters. The distances between septic system components and man-made and natural water supplies will vary according to local site factors, such as soil percolation rate, grain size, and depth to water table. The most effective siting distances for efficient on-site wastewater disposal are determined by doing individual site assessments prior to installation. The proper sizing of a system is necessary to avoid hydraulic overloading. Overloading a system can cause the system to back up or can force waste through the septic tank before it receives adequate treatment (Perkins, 1989). Overloading can result in anaerobic conditions in the drainfield and might not give solids time to settle out before being pushed through the system. In some cases, modifications to septic systems may be necessary in order to ensure proper treatment of wastewater discharges. The size of the septic drainfield must be enlarged in cases where soil permeability is low or steep slopes are present, or where increases in daily sewage flow are expected. Limiting factors such as inadequate lot size, limited separation distances, and the presence of problem pollutants such as nitrogen may require the use of alternative on-site disposal systems, such as mound or recirculating sand filters. Selecting the right system to handle site-specific problems often decreases the likelihood of septic failure. Systems can be designed to control pollutants such as nitrogen and phosphorus (denitrification systems or aquaculture system) or as retrofits for conventional systems that were inadequately sited or sized (alternating bed system, mound system, pressure distribution [low-pressure pipe] system, sand filter system, or constructed wetlands). Proper siting and postconstruction inspection will work to prevent new systems from failing, but planning for existing systems is needed as well. A septic system management program of scheduled pumpouts and regular maintenance is the best way to reduce the possibility of failure for currently operating systems. A number of agencies have taken on the responsibility for managing septic systems. Table 1 provides some examples of programs and how they seek to control system failures.
Table 1: Examples of septic system management programs (Sources: CWP, 1995; USEPA, 1993)
Georgetown Divide Public Utilities (CA)
Approximately 10% of agency's resources are allocated to septic system management Provides comprehensive site evaluation and septic system design, and makes inspections during construction Conducts scheduled post-construction inspections Homeowners pay $12.50 per month for services
Stinson Beach County Water District (CA)
Monitors septic system operation to identify failures Detects contamination of ground water, streams, and sensitive aquatic systems from septic systems Homeowners pay $12.90 per month, plus cost of construction or repair
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (WA)
Member jurisdictions have established revolving loan funds to provide lowinterest loans for repair of failing septic systems
Chesterfield County (VA)
Private pumpers submit form to county, and county maintains database of tracking pumpout Every 5 years county sends residents notification for pumpout requirement County contracts to have pumpout performed if owner does not comply and can fine or back-charge to owner.
Programs which seek to address failing septic systems should considered, using field screening to pinpoint areas where more detailed on-site inspection surveys are warranted. There are several references available discussing field screening techniques for identifying sources of contamination (Lalor and Pitt, 1999; Center for Watershed Protection, 1999). Unfortunately, there is not as much information available dealing with specific techniques for identifying existing individual septic systems that might be failing.
Some of the most common indicators of failing septic systems are odors and visual observances like surface pooling and patches of very green grass, particularly in the off-season or in an isolated pocket Simple field tests can also provide insight into the location of illicit discharge. For example, excess ammonia is an indication of anaerobic conditions, and fecal coliform and excess chemicals from laundry detergents indicate inadequate or failing systems (Cox, personal communication, 2000). Two field screening techniques that have been used with success at identifying possible locations of failing septic systems are the brightener test and color infrared (CIR) aerial photography. The first involves the use of specific phosphorus-based elements found in many laundry products, often called brighteners, as an indicator of the presence of failing on-site wastewater systems. The second technique uses color infrared (CIR) aerial photography to characterize the performance of septic systems. This method has been found to be a quick and cost-effective method for assessing the potential impacts of failing systems and uses variations in vegetative growth or stress patterns over septic system field lines to identify those systems that may potentially be malfunctioning. Then a more detailed on-site visual and physical inspection will confirm whether the system has truly failed and the extent of the repairs needed. These inspections may be carried out by county health departments or other authorized personnel. Limitations Septic systems can have numerous impacts on the quality of ground and surface water supplies. Improperly located or failing systems can discharge inadequately treated sewage, which may pond on the ground and run off into surface waters. Inappropriate vertical distances from ground water can result in contamination of water supply wells. The wastewater and sewage that may be discharged from failing on-site systems will contain bacteria and viruses that present problems for the health of both humans and aquatic organisms. In addition, excess nitrogen and phosphorus can cause algal blooms that reduce the level of available oxygen in the water and prevent sunlight from reaching desirable submerged aquatic vegetation. There are also economic impacts associated with failing or overtaxed systems. Beach and shellfish bed closures affect tourism and the vitality of local businesses that rely on fishing and seafood. In addition, economic factors affect corrections of failing systems because their replacement might be limited by septic owners not having the funding to pay for new systems. Reliance on individual on-site inspection to detect failed systems is another major limitation. The individual on-site inspection is very labor-intensive and requires access to private property to pinpoint the exact location of the failing system. Property owners might be reluctant to provide this access, and an ordinance mandating inspection authority might be required. A number of communities have dealt with access issues by using an ordinance requiring inspection at time of property transfer to pinpoint systems requiring repairs. An example of this type of ordinance is available at the Center for Watershed Protection web site (http://www.cwp.org) in the illicit discharge category. Perhaps the biggest limitation to correcting failing septic systems is the lack of techniques for detecting individual failed systems. While visual inspections and dye testing can locate a malfunctioning system, they require access to private property and demand staff time. Dealing with failing septic systems requires a stronger emphasis on developing screening techniques for local governments to use to detect and correct improperly operating systems.
6
In many urbanized areas, replacement of septic systems is not possible due to site limitations. Municipalities should consider eliminating the discharge from septic systems to the MS4 sanitary sewers. Maintenance Considerations Periodic maintenance of on-site systems is necessary to ensure their proper functioning. Since many homeowners do not employ these routine maintenance practices, it may be necessary for agencies to establish programs to track pumpout and maintenance requirements. The programs in Table 1 include maintenance tracking as part of their plans. Effectiveness The effectiveness of septic systems at removing pollutants from wastewater depends on the type of system used and the conditions at the site. Even a properly operating septic system can release more than 10 pounds of nitrogen per person per year to the ground water (Matuszeski, 1997). Table 2 provides an overview of the average effectiveness for seven types of on-site systems for removing total suspended solids (TSS), biological oxygen demand (BOD), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP). Table 2 shows even properly operating conventional septic systems can have relatively low nutrient removal capability and can be a cause of eutrophication in lakes and coastal areas. Communities may elect to require new septic systems to use more advanced treatment technologies to address concerns regarding pollutant loads from improperly functioning systems. Table 2. Average effectiveness of on-site disposal systems (total system reductions) (Source: USEPA, 1993)
Disposal practice Conventional System Mound System Anaerobic Upflow Filter Intermittent Sand Filter Recirculating Sand Filter Water Separation System Constructed Wetlands TSS (%) BOD (%) TN (%) TP (%) 72 NA 44 92 90 60 80 45 NA 62 92 92 42 81 28 44 59 55 64 83 90 57 NA NA 80 80 30 NA Pathogens (Logs) 3.5 NA NA 3.2 2.9 3.0 4.0
Cost Considerations Once a septic system has been identified as failing, procedures must be in place to replace that system. The cost to replace a septic system typically ranges between $3,000 and $7,000 per unit (NSFC, 1999), but costs vary significantly depending on site conditions and geographic location. Various methods have been used to finance septic system replacement, including money from state revolving funds or from local utilities through user fees.
The costs associated with detecting and correcting septic system failures are subject to a number of factors, including availability of trained personnel, cost of materials, and the level of followup required to fix the system problems. The Mason County, Washington, Department of Health Services has conducted on-site sewage inspections for a number of years and has found that dye tests, while reasonably affordable, were too costly to conduct on a regular basis. The estimated cost for each dye test survey conducted was $290 dollars, and the cost for each visual inspection was $95 (Glasoe and Tompkins, 1996). Most of the causes of system failure were found to be relatively easy and inexpensive to repair, and the cost to oversee the repairs was estimated to be $285. There are also significant cost differences between the various technologies available for on-site wastewater treatment. Table 3 provides both capital and maintenance costs for seven different on-site disposal systems. The installation cost for alternative systems may be higher due to variables such as requirements for additional system equipment and the cost of permit approval for the system. Differences in maintenance costs may be due to factors such as increased demand for replacement of treatment media and the lack of available personnel with training in maintenance of alternative systems. Table 3. Cost of on-site disposal systems (Source: USEPA, 1993)
Disposal Practice Conventional System Mound System Anaerobic Upflow Filter Intermittent Sand Filter Recirculating Sand Filter Water Separation System Constructed Wetlands Capital Cost ($/House) 4,500 8,300 5,550 5,400 3,900 8,000 710 300 25 180 NA 275 Maintenance ($/Year)
References Center for Watershed Protection. 1999. Resources for Detecting Bacterial Sources. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(1). De Walle, F.B. 1981. Failure Analysis of Large Septic Tank Systems. Journal of Environmental Engineering. American Society of Civil Engineers. Glasoe, S. and M. Tompkins. 1996. Sanitary Surveys in Mason County. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Puget Sound Notes Number 39, June 1996. Lalor, M. and R. Pitt. 1999. Use of Tracers to Identify Sources of Contamination in Dry Weather Flow. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(1), April, 1999. Maryland Office of Planning. 1991. Maryland's Land: 19731990, A Changing Resource. Maryland Office of Planning, Baltimore, MD National Small Flows Clearinghouse (NSFC). Summer 1995. Pipeline. Vol. 6, No. 3. Perkins, Richard. 1989. Onsite Wastewater Disposal. Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI. Sagona, Frank. 1986 Monitoring and Planning for Onsite Wastewater Disposal Along TVA Reservoirs. Lake and Reservoir Management: Volume II, 1986. North American Lake Management Society, Madison, WI. Sagona, Frank. 1988. Color Infrared Aerial Surveys of Septic Systems in the Tennessee Valley Region. Tennessee Valley Authority, Water Quality Branch, Chattanooga, TN. Texas A&M University. 1995. Texas A&M Researchers Receive Grant to Study Performance of Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment. [http://twri.tamu.edu/twripubs/Insights/v4n1/article-1.html]. Accessed January 2001. Texas Water Resource Institute. 1997. Brazos River Authority Uses "Bright" Idea to Search for Failing On-Site Wastewater Systems. Texas Water Resources Institute, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
Industrial/Business Connections Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description This management practice involves the identification and elimination of illegal or inappropriate connections of industrial and business wastewater sources to the storm drain system. Illicit connection detection and elimination programs attempt to prevent contamination of ground and surface water supplies by regulation, inspection, and removal of these connections. Any industrial discharge not composed entirely of storm water that is conveyed to the storm drainage system or a water body is considered to be an illicit discharge. These discharges may contain a variety of pollutants that can affect both public safety and the aquatic environment. Many of these discharges are a result of connections to the storm drain that are unknown to the business owner and may not be evident in architectural plans. The large amount of storm and sanitary sewer pipes in a community creates a complex and often confusing system of utilities, so it is not unusual for improper connections to occur. For example, nearly 10 percent of all businesses in Wayne County, Michigan, had illicit connections, with an average of 2.6 found at each detected business (Johnson, 1998). A 1986 study found a 38-percent rate of illicit connections for businesses in Washtenaw County, Michigan, mostly in automobile-related and manufacturing businesses (Schmidt and Spencer, 1986). Applicability Illicit industrial connections can arise in a number of ways, including cross connections with sanitary sewers and floor drains improperly attached to storm drainage pipes. These connections may be accidental or planned, and may occur in new developments as well as in existing developments. For new businesses, preventative practices such as thorough inspection and verification during the entire construction phase can avoid the need for more extensive detection techniques and disconnection. For existing industries, improper connections are located by using field screening procedures, source testing protocols, and visual inspection. Design Considerations Discharges from industry and business may come from a variety of sources including process wastewater, wash waters, and sanitary wastewater. The following methods are often used for identifying improper industrial discharges to the storm drain system:
Field Testing of Dry Weather Discharges. Storm drain outfalls are monitored to identify those areas where discharges are occurring that exceed water quality standards. This monitoring includes both visual inspection and chemical analysis to aid in identifying potential discharge sources.
10
Visual Inspection. A physical examination of piping connections or analysis by closed circuit camera is used to identify possible illicit connection sites. Piping Schematic Review. Architectural plans and plumbing details are examined for potential sites where improper connections have occurred. Smoke Testing. Smoke testing is used to locate connections by injecting a non-toxic vapor (smoke) into the system and following its path of travel. Dye Testing. Colored dye is added to the drain water in suspect piping. Dyed water appearing in the storm drain system indicates an illegal connection, possibly between the sanitary sewer system and the storm drain.
Facilities that receive NPDES storm water permits are usually required to include documentation that the storm water collection system has been tested or evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges. To ensure that only storm water is being discharged into the storm drain system from an industry, communities may wish to institute a program that includes the following:
Locating of industrial discharges to the municipal storm sewer system or local waters using storm drain monitoring, visual observation, and pipeline schematics Locating and evaluating the on-site industrial storm sewer system using field screening techniques, dye tests, smoke tests, and closed circuit television
Developing plans to eliminate improper connections and exploring alternative disposal options for discharges that cannot be sent to the storm sewer system, such as using the sanitary sewer system or collecting and disposing of discharges off-site at an approved disposal facility
Documenting the testing and eliminating of industrial/business illicit connections, including recording the location of the connection, the date of testing, and the method used to remove the connection Establishing a citizen complaint hotline to report incidences of illicit discharges
A program for the field screening of dry weather flows at storm drain outfalls can aid in identifying possible locations of industrial illicit connections. These field screening programs monitor for certain chemical and visual tracers that indicate potential sources of non-ground water illegal discharges. The use of these tracers provides a method for prioritizing sections of the storm drain system that require more intensive analysis to accurately pinpoint the specific sources contributing contaminated discharges. The reference section at the end of this fact sheet provides two excellent resources on the methodology for investigating inappropriate discharges and for selecting tracers to identify sources of contamination in dry weather flows.
11
Limitations There are a number of factors affecting the ability of detection and elimination programs to remove illicit industry and business connections to the storm drainage system. The first is cost. Illegal connection location techniques are often labor intensive and can require a large commitment of staff to carry out detection tests. If a community hotline is used, staff will be necessary to record complaints. Training will be required for performing field screening tests, and a variety of equipment is necessary for performing the various detection tests. Resource sharing between several departments may help offset equipment costs. Another limitation to industrial illicit connection control is the issue of access to private property for inspection purposes. An ordinance that ensures "right of entry" is vital in locating potential sources of illegal industrial discharges. Several cities have enacted sewer use ordinances that include language for permitting the entrance of municipal staff onto commercial and industrial sites for detection purposes. An example of a sewer use ordinance for the city of St. Louis, Missouri, is available for review at the Center for Watershed Protection web page at http://www.cwp.org. Despite the difficulty identifying these connections due to budget and staff restraints, it is important to understand that these connections are illegal and should be identified and reported regardless of cost. Jurisdictions can offset some of these costs by encouraging the reporting of illicit discharges by public and municipal employees, thereby saving expense on inspectors and directing resources more efficiently. Effectiveness Industrial storm water discharges due to improper connections to the storm sewer system can have considerable impacts on storm water and receiving waters. These discharges may contain heavy metals, oil and grease, nutrients, or raw sewage that pose serious environmental risks. Bacteria from the presence of untreated human waste may contaminate drinking water supplies and lead to outbreaks of disease. Toxic pollutants and heavy metals can destroy habitat and affect aquatic organisms, impacting economic and public health. The detection and correction of illicit discharges can result in significant reductions of these contaminants, improving water quality and meeting effluent requirements. Illicit connection programs often do not concentrate solely on businesses and industries, so effectiveness data on actual pollutant removal are difficult to locate. However, there are data that demonstrate the effectiveness of illicit connection correction programs at improving water quality. Two examples show how illicit connection elimination can reduce pollutant levels and remove fecal coliform from streams. The first is the Huron River Pollution Abatement Project, in Washtenaw County, Michigan. This program was active from 1987 to 1992 and dye tested over 3,800 facilities. Improper connections to the storm sewer were found in 450 facilities, of which 328 were verified as being removed. As a result, fecal coliform levels in the Huron River dropped approximately 75 percent between 1987 and 1990. The City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, along with several state agencies, has also sought to control the impacts of illicit discharges. Through inspection of possible illicit discharges, dry weather field screening, repairs to storm sewer and sanitary sewer lines, and community involvement, the city was able to demonstrate an improvement in water quality from pre-program levels.
12
The city compared the average event mean concentration of selected parameters from preprogram levels to results after 4 years of implementation (19941998) to show how much reductions had occurred. The results are listed in Table 1. Table 1. Water quality improvements 19941998 in Tulsa, Oklahoma (Source: NRDC, 1999)
Parameter Copper Zinc BODa CODa TPa TKNa TSSa
a
Average EMC after program Pre-program average Percent implementation (mg/l) EMC (mg/l) reduction 0.013 0.097 7.7 66.5 0.270 1.354 117.5 0.030 0.215 9.4 70.2 0.325 1.660 135 56 55 18 5 17 18 13
BOD=biological oxygen demand; COD=chemical oxygen demand; TP=total phosphorus; TKN=total Kjeldhal nitrogen; TSS=total suspended solids
Cost Considerations The cost for instituting an illicit connection detection and elimination program will vary greatly based on the intensity of the effort. Identification of illicit connections using visual inspections of dry weather flows has an estimated cost of $1,250 to $1,750 per square mile (Claytor and Brown, 1996). Many programs offset some of their cost by encouraging the reporting of illicit discharges by public and municipal employees, thereby saving expense on inspectors and directing resources more efficiently. Programs have also saved money by using student interns to locate and map dry weather flows from outfalls, or contracting with academic institutions to perform outfall monitoring. Some programs have used funds available from "environmental fees" or special assessment districts to fund their illicit connection elimination programs. The Huron River Pollution Abatement Project used annual assessments of the city of Ann Arbor, Michigan, and a per parcel basis for the rest of the district to fund the costs of illicit connection removal efforts. The project provided Washtenaw County with a total of $1.7 million over the life of the program to finance their efforts. Fort Worth, Texas, charges an "environmental fee" to local residents and businesses to fund storm water-related efforts, including illicit connection detection. Approximately $2.5 million dollars a year is raised through these fees.
13
References Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Industrial/Commercial Best Management Practice Handbook. Stormwater Quality Task Force, Sacramento, CA. Claytor, R., and W. Brown. 1996. Environmental Indicators to Assess Storm Water Control Programs and Practices. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Johnson, B. 1998. The impact of on-site sewage systems and illicit connections in the Rouge River Basin. Unpublished manuscript. Rouge River Program Office. Camp Dresser & McKee,. Detroit, MI. Lalor, M., and R. Pitt. 1999. Use of Tracers to Identify Sources of Contamination in Dry Weather Flow. Watershed Protection Techniques Volume 3, Number 1, April 1999. Natural Resources Defense Council. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc, New York, New York. Petro-Marine Company, Inc. No date. Petro-Marine Company, Inc: Drain Hat Insert. http://www.petromarinecompany.com/petro-marine/drainhat1.html. Accessed January 2001. Pitt, R., M. Lalor, D. Barbe, D.D. Adrian, and R. Field. 1993. Investigation of Inappropriate Pollutant Entries Into Storm Drainage Systems: A users guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. Resource Planning Associates. 1989. Water Quality Best Management Practices Manual for Commercial and Industrial Businesses in the City of Seattle. City of Seattle Office for LongRange Planning, Seattle, WA. Schmidt, S., and D. Spencer. 1986. Magnitude of improper waste discharges in an urban system. Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation 58 (7): 744 758. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance, Washington, DC.
14
Recreational Sewage Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description Recreational sewage management measures seek to regulate wastewater generated from outdoor activities such as boating or camping by providing alternative methods to waste disposal in place of illegal overboard discharge. Under federal law, it is illegal to discharge marine sewage from boats in navigable U.S. waters, including coastal waters up to 3 miles offshore. The law also specifies that there be "no discharge" by boats operated in lakes and reservoirs or in rivers not capable of interstate navigation. Boats with installed toilets must have an operable Coast Guard approved marine sanitation device (MSD) that either holds sewage for pumpout ashore or for discharge in the ocean beyond the 3-mile limit, or that treats the sewage to Federal standards prior to discharge. The proper disposal of recreational waste is necessary to avoid the impacts that these activities and their associated developments (i.e., marinas and campgrounds) can have on aquatic environments. Marina and recreational boat sewage can have substantial impact on water quality by introducing bacteria, nutrients, and hazardous chemicals into waterways. It has been reported that a single overboard discharge of human waste can be detected in up to a 1-square-mile area of shallow enclosed water (FL DEP, no date). These human wastes can include Streptococci, fecal coliform, and other bacteria which contribute to incidences of human disease, shellfish bed closures, alerts on eating fish, and algal blooms. Boats can be a significant source of fecal coliform bacteria in areas with high boating densities and low hydrologic flushing, and fecal coliform levels become elevated near boats during periods of high occupancy and usage (USEPA, 1993). Holding tanks on boats also concentrate pollutants and use increased levels of oxygen during decomposition. Table 1 shows a comparison of the biological oxygen demand required to break down sewage held by MSD's versus untreated and treated municipal sewage (FL DEP, no date). Table 1. BOD concentrations according to sewage type Sewage Boat Sewage Raw Municipal Sewage Treated Municipal Sewage BOD concentration 1,7003,500 mg/l 110400 mg/l 5100 mg/l
Implementing proper disposal practices and providing services for removal of recreational wastes can alleviate the effects that this source of pollutants has on water quality.
15
Applicability Best management practices dealing with recreational sewage sources are most often applied in coastal areas and freshwater bodies of water where boating activity occurs. Physical factors involving the siting of marinas can affect the release of sewage to surface water due to flushing times and circulation patterns. In addition, the use of inadequate marine sanitation devices on boats can cause unintended sewage discharges. Climatic factors such as rainfall and wind also influence the circulation and flushing times for marinas. The proper siting of marina basins and adequate planning for the disposal of boater sewage are important considerations in addressing this form of illicit discharge. The same basic techniques regarding siting and pumpout provision are applicable for sewage generated at campgrounds. Implementation Several management practices can reduce the discharge of sewage from vessels at marinas. These practices range from installation of pumpout systems to public education to inspection of marine sanitation devices. The use of the following practices is encouraged to help reduce the incidence of improper discharges from vessels:
Pumpout Installation and OperationPumpout stations are an efficient method to control sanitary discharges from boating activities. Pumpout facilities collect waste from on-board MSDs, which are recommended for vessels over 25 feet. EPA Region 1 determined that, in general, one pumpout facility per 300 600 boats with holding tanks (type III MSDs) should be sufficient to meet the demand for pumpout services in most harbor areas (USEPA, 1991b). EPA Region 4 suggested one facility for every 200 to 250 boats with holding tanks (USEPA, 1985a). The State of Michigan has instituted a nodischarge policy and mandates one pumpout facility for every 100 boats with holding tanks (USEPA, 1993). There are three types of pumpout stations: a fixed collection system, a mobile/portable system, or a slipside system. All three types of systems provide for the removal of sanitary waste by connecting a flexible hose to the wastewater fitting in the hull of the boat, and pumping or vacuuming the wastewater to an onshore holding tank, sanitary sewer system, or an approved disposal facility. However, there are differences in the cost, location, and use of each of the three collection system types. Fixed systems include one or more centrally located sewage pumpout stations. These stations are often located at the end of a pier, typically near fueling docks, so that fueling and pumpout operations are easily accessible. Portable/mobile collection systems are similar to fixed-point systems, but are capable of being moved around a marina to provide pumpout services in various locations. This collection system is connected to the deck fitting on the vessel, and wastewater is pumped from the vessel's holding tank to the pumping unit's storage tank. The contents of the storage tank are then discharged into a municipal sewage system or a holding tank for removal by a septic tank pumpout service. Another form of portable pumpout is the radio-dispatched pumpout boat. The pumpout boat goes to a vessel in response to a radio-transmitted request, and eliminates the inconvenience of lines, docking, and maneuvering vessels in high-traffic areas. (USEPA, 1993). Slipside or remote systems provide direct hookup and continuous wastewater collection at a slip. EPA recommends that slipside pumpout should be provided to live-aboard vessels
16
(USEPA, 1993). Marina slips designed to serve transient boating populations can be served by either fixed or mobile pumpout systems. According to a 1989 American Red Cross Boating Survey, there were approximately 19 million recreational boats in the United States (USCG, 1991). About 95 percent of these boats were less than 26 feet in length. On-board marine sanitation devices are not regularly used on vessels less than 26 feet long. These boats often use only small portable (removable) toilets, requiring planning for sewage disposal for these smaller vessels. A satisfactory disposal facility for this type of device could be a dump station, possibly located at the end of a pier. Given the large percentage of smaller boats, facilities for the dumping of portable toilet waste should be provided at marinas that service significant numbers of these boats (USEPA, 1993). The operation of pumpout facilities should be tied to times when customers are most likely to use the service. Having services available on weekend mornings and evenings when demand is high will encourage pumpout use. Fees for pumpout use should also be kept at reasonable rates to encourage use. A willingness to-pay-survey conducted by the EPA found that boaters would accept a fee of between $3 and $7 dollars for pumpout service (RI Sea Grant, 1992). Some marinas offer free pumpout service, and build the cost into slip fees or environmental surcharges. Routine inspection of pumpout facilities is also necessary to ensure that the equipment is functioning properly.
No-discharge area designationsNo-discharge areas are zones where it is illegal to discharge sanitary waste from vessels, whether it is treated or untreated. Once a specific area has adequate pumpout facilities, states can apply for this designation. The only type of marine sanitation device that can be legally used in these areas are Type III MSDs (holding tanks). The benefit of the no-discharge areas is that they can significantly reduce the amount of bacterial contamination from illegal discharges of vessel waste. In Rhode Island, water quality studies indicate that levels of fecal coliform have declined during the boating season since the establishment of a no-discharge designation (RI Sea Grant, 1992). EducationPumpout facilities are of little use if boaters do not use the service. Many boaters are unaware of state and federal regulations requiring the use of marine sanitation devices, or of the location of pumpout services. Like most forms of educational outreach, the use of pamphlets, newsletters, bill inserts, and meetings are often used to inform users of available pumpout services. Offering free inspections of customer MSDs through the Coast Guard Auxiliary Boating Safety Program is another way to control illegal wastewater discharges. Sources can be identified through a number of methodspublic complaints, visual screening, water sampling from manholes, outfalls during dry weather, and use of infrared and thermal photograph (USEPA, 2000a). EnforcementIn some states, laws have been passed granting local harbormasters the authority to enforce MSD requirements and fine violators. Ensuring that local and state laws are passed granting enforcement authority will allow for the inspection and identification of MSDs that are not operating properly.
17
One method that has been used to enforce illegal discharge controls is by placing dye tablets in holding tanks to discourage illegal disposal. This practice was employed in Avalon Harbor, California, to identify fecal coliform bacteria sources. Upon a vessel entering the harbor, a harbor patrol officer boards and places dye tablets in all sanitary devices. The devices are then flushed to ensure that the holding tanks do not leak. During the first 3 years of implementation, this practice detected 135 violations of the nodischarge policy and was extremely successful at reducing pollution levels (USEPA, 1993). One tablet in approximately 60 gallons of water will give a visible dye concentration of one part per million. The cost of the tablets is approximately $30 per 200 tablets (Forestry Suppliers, 1992, as cited in USEPA, 1993).
SignageSigns marking pumpout station locations and hours of operation should be placed in prominent places where marina tenants tend to gather. If the pumpout station serves an entire harbor, then signs should be placed in neighboring marinas and mooring areas to direct boaters to the station. Self-service pumpout stations need to include a sign that provides operating guidance. Pumpout signs may be available through either state or federal programs, and marina owners should be encouraged to place these signs near each pumpout station.
Limitations The management practices for controlling recreational sewage are limited mostly by a lack of pumpout facilities and the need for boater education programs that stress techniques to prevent wastewater discharges. These two factors have been called the most important in successfully preventing sewage discharge (USEPA, 1991b). The cost of pumpout facilities has also been cited as a limitation, but this may be due to a lack of awareness about federal and state grant programs to aid in pumpout station installation. Maintenance Considerations In general, marina pumpouts are fairly inexpensive to operate and maintain. Maintenance considerations can include scheduling of inspection and replacement of pumpout equipment, cleaning of hoses and pumpout connections, and hiring of a service to remove sewage that is not discharged into the sanitary sewer. Effectiveness Limited data are available on the effectiveness of management practices to reduce water quality impacts from illegal wastewater discharges in marinas. The water quality effects of improper sewage discharges include elevated fecal coliform bacteria levels and reduced oxygen levels in the water. A single weekend boater flushing untreated sewage into our waters produces the same amount of bacterial pollution as 10,000 people whose sewage passes through a treatment plant (CA DBW). Marine sanitation devices can also introduce harmful chemicals into the aquatic environment. These chemicals are used to disinfect and deodorize the waste, and they include formaldehyde, paraformaldehyde, quaternary ammonium chloride, and zinc sulfate. Some of these chemicals are known carcinogens and have adverse impacts on aquatic organisms.
18
Cost Considerations Costs associated with pumpouts vary according to the size of the marina and the type of pumpout system. Table 2 presents EPA cost information for three marina sizes and two types of pumpout systems (USEPA, 1993). The average cost for pumpout installation has been estimated to be $5,323 (RI Sea Grant, 1992). Portable pumpout facilities are believed to be the most logistically feasible, convenient, accessible, and economically affordable way to ensure proper disposal of boat sewage (Natchez, 1991). Depending on the type of pumpout system installed, maintenance costs can range between $36 and $200 per slip per year. Table 2 contains operation and maintenance figures for three types of sewage pumpout collection system. As the table shows, operation and maintenance is more expensive for marina-wide and portable systems than for slipside systems. This extra expense is balanced by the lower capital cost for system installation for both marina-wide and portable systems. Table 2. Annual per slip pumpout costs for three collection systems (Source: USEPA 1985 as cited in USEPA, 1993) Factor Marina-Wide Small Marina (200 slips) Capital Cost 15a O&M Cost 110 Total Cost (slip/year) 125 Medium Marina(500 slips) Capital Cost 17 O&M Cost 90 Total Cost (slip/year) 107 Large Marina(2,000 slips) Capital Cost 16 O&M Cost 80 Total Cost (slip/year) 96
a b
Portable/Mobile System 15b 200 215 10 160 170 10 140 150
Slipside System 102a 50 152 101 40 141 113 36 149
Based on 12% interest, 15 years amortization 12% interest, 15 years on piping, 12% interest, 15 years on portable units
Case studies of best management practices for nonpoint-source pollution related to boating were performed by the University of Rhode Island Sea Grant. The three case studies in Table 3 examined various public education techniques for their cost, educational value, and cost effectiveness. While these public education case studies did not focus exclusively on boat sewage practices, the results can be used as an indicator of expected cost and performance for recreational sewage BMPs.
19
Table 3. A review of three BMP case studies for marinas (Source: RI Sea Grant, 1992)
BMP Cost Educational Value Cost Effectiveness Low unless attendance is tied to a more popular marina event
Ranked last among customer Low cost ($16 per facility) but choices for receiving information Conducting requires considerable Low turnout Workshops Only 31% of attendees have used investment of time BMP's $52.80 per marina for distribution through display Distributing rack ($45 for rack and $7.80 Literature for copies) $45.36 if done through monthly mailing Posting Signs $105
Ranked as the second most popular way of receiving information High if monthly mailing 75% reported reading fact sheets and 91% of these readers indicated method is used that they began using practices learned Ranked first as the most popular way of receiving information Very cost effective since signs can be used for several years.
Federal aid is available to states for the construction, renovation, operation, and maintenance of pumpout and dump stations to improve water quality. The Clean Vessel Act Grant Program also provides funds for educational programs about disposing of human waste in an environmentally safe manner. The federal share of any project cannot exceed 75 percent of the total cost, and marina operators agree to the following conditions:
Pumpout facilities will be operated, maintained, and accessible to all recreation vessels for the full period of their useful life The national pumpout symbol shall be installed and must be clearly visible to boaters. An informational sign shall be installed at pumpout stations and will specify fees, restrictions, hours of operation, operating instructions, and a contact name and telephone number to call if the facility is inoperable.
The maximum user fee that can be charged for pumpout use is $5 unless a written proposal for a higher fee is submitted. For further information about the Clean Vessel grants program, consult http://fa.r9.fws.gov/cva/cva.html.
20
References Florida Department of Environmental Protection. No Date. Clean Vessel Program: Frequently asked questions by boaters. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Law Enforcement, Tallahassee, FL. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 1990. A Guidebook for Marina Owners and Operators On the Installation and Operation of Sewage Pumpout Stations. MD DNR, Boating Administration, Annapolis, MD. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 1998. Maryland Clean Marina Guidebook. MD DNR, Waterway Resources Division, Annapolis, MD. Natchez, D.S. 1991. Are Marinas Really Polluting? International Marina Institute, Wickford, RI. Ohrel, R., R. Gonzalez, and G. Robbins. 1995. Don't Miss the Boat: Managing Marinas for Water Quality Protection. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Oregon State Marine Board. No date. Boat WasteWhat You Can Do. [http://www.boatoregon.com/Clean/BoatWaste.html]. Accessed January 2001. Rhode Island Sea Grant. 1992. Environmental Guide for Marinas: Fact Sheets available on-line. University of Rhode Island Bay Campus, Narragansett, RI. [http://seagrant.gso.uri.edu/riseagrant]. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
21
Sanitary Sewer Overflows Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description This fact sheet deals with detecting and correcting sanitary sewer overflows in a community. Sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) involve the release of raw sewage from a separate sanitary sewer system prior to reaching a treatment facility. The raw sewage from these overflows contains bacteria and nutrients that affect both human and environmental health. These overflows occur when the flow into the system exceeds the design capacity of the conveyance system, resulting in discharges into basements, streets, and streams. A common SSO is overflowing sewage manholes that send untreated sewage into a stream. While SSOs can occasionally occur in any system due to factors such as flooding or temporary blockages, chronic overflows are an indicator of a deteriorating system or a system where development has exceeded capacity. Estimates are that about 140 overflows occur per one 1,000 miles of sanitary sewer lines each year (AMSA, 1994). An Association of Metropolitan Sewage Agencies survey also found that 15 to 35 percent of all sewer lines were over capacity and could potentially overflow during a storm. Applicability Sanitary sewer overflows occur in urbanized areas where a separate sanitary sewer system has been created to move wastewater from households and businesses to treatment plants. The detection and elimination of SSOs is most important because sanitary sewer collection systems represent a significant investment for urban municipalities. Depending on the their size, the cost of a sanitary sewer system can be in the billions of dollars. Therefore, programs are required not only to identify and eliminate overflows as they occur, but to include preventative maintenance planning. There are a number of factors that contribute to sanitary sewer systems being more prone to failure and possible overflows. An important factor is the age of the pipe system. If the sewer system is older, deterioration of the main and lateral pipes can create sags in the lines, cracks, holes, and protruding laterals. This deterioration can be due to the type of material used for the pipe system or failure of the material used to seal pipe joints. Another contributor to sanitary system failure is poor siting or installation techniques. Some sewer lines may be placed in a way that makes them very dependent on the support of the surrounding earth. When movement in the earth surrounding these lines occurs, cracks or misaligned and open pipe joints are the result. Another factor may be the inadequate size of the existing sewer pipe. New sewer hook-ups, underground water infiltration/inflow, and inputs from roof and/or yard drain connections can cause a system to be overloaded due to the inability of undersized sewer pipe to handle increases in wet weather discharges.
22
Other factors, both man-made and natural, may also contribute to SSOs. Roots can create stoppages, as well as damaging the structural integrity of the sewer line. Grease from both residential and commercial sources can clog sewer lines. Ground water influences and temperature fluctuations may also contribute to sanitary sewer system failure. Equipment failure and power outages that affect pumping stations and sewage treatment plant operations also contribute to overflows. Design Considerations Programs designed to control sanitary sewer overflows need to establish policies for designing, screening and maintaining the sanitary sewer system. Many overflows are the result of inadequate operation and maintenance, improper design and construction, or poor planning that has resulted in new development exceeding the system capacity of an area. Sanitary sewer overflows can often be reduced or eliminated by a number of practices, including the following:

Sewer system cleaning and maintenance Reducing infiltration and inflow through rehabilitation and repair of broken or leaking sewer lines Enlarging or upgrading the capacity of sewer lines, pump stations, or sewage treatment plants Constructing wet weather storage and treatment facilities to treat excess flows Addressing SSOs during sewer system master planning and facilities planning
A number of key elements should be included in programs seeking to control SSOs. Guidance on structuring and organizing operation, maintenance, and remediation of sanitary sewer collection systems suggests that the following measures be incorporated by sewer authorities (USEPA, 1998):

Identification and tracking of sanitary sewer discharges Identification of the causes of any overflow through monitoring and field screening
Many of the same monitoring techniques used to identify other illicit connection sources are also used in sewer system evaluation surveys. These include the following: Physical inspection. This involves examining the physical condition of manholes and other sewer structures to determine their structural integrity and to identify possible sources of infiltration/inflow. Flow monitoring/flow isolation. Rainfall gauges are installed to monitor subbasins with overflow problems by collecting and analyzing flow data during normal and storm-related weather events. Smoke testing. Smoke testing is used to locate defects in sewer mains and laterals that contribute infiltration/inflow to the sewer system. Smoke testing involves injecting a non-toxic vapor (smoke) into the manholes and following its path of travel in the mains and laterals.
23
Dye water flooding. Colored dye is added to the storm drain water. Dyed water appearing in the sanitary sewer system indicates an existing connection between the sewer and storm drain system. Closed-circuit television inspection. This is a useful tool in locating specific sources of infiltration as well as in determining the structural condition of the sewer system. This information is necessary for the design of sewer replacement and rehabilitation projects. Sewer maintenance records. The review of records helps identify areas with frequent maintenance problems and can indicate potential locations of system failure.
Implementation of both short-and long-term remediation actions and modification of operation and maintenance measures to mitigate the impacts of overflows as quickly as possible and prevent reoccurrence Public notification of overflow events and impacts Provision of adequate maintenance, both preventative and routine, and updating procedures as problems arise Ensuring that maintenance facilities, equipment, and inventory are adequate Implementation and enforcement of sewer use ordinances or other legal documents that prohibit new connections from inflow sources, guarantee testing and inspection of all portions of the collection system that handle discharge (including new collector sewers and service laterals which may be owned by another entity), and regulate the discharge of toxics and pollutants that may endanger public safety or the physical integrity of the system or cause the municipality to violate water quality limitations Development and tracking of system performance indicators, including hydraulic performance, during wet weather flows.
There are a number of excellent resources in the reference section that explain in greater detail the monitoring techniques and reporting requirements for sewer collection systems and the operation and maintenance procedures for correcting system problems. Limitations As with most illicit connection detection, identifying exact causes of sanitary sewer overflow can be time consuming and difficult. The biggest obstacle to identification and correction of sanitary sewer overflows is often the issue of public access to private property. In some areas, significant inflow to the system may be present from improper connections from private sources. In order to correct these connections, an ordinance to ensure the authority for inspection may be necessary. An example of a sewer use ordinance for the city of St. Louis, Missouri, is available for review at the Center for Watershed Protection web page at http://www.cwp.org. Some municipalities have taken the opposite approach and instituted programs that provide homeowners with cash incentives or financial assistance to correct improper connections.
24
The cost of equipment and staff time for SSO correction may also present a burden for some municipalities. Included in those costs would be inspection equipment, replacement of undersized sewer lines, and upgrading of treatment plants or pumping stations. These system repairs and the materials required could be expensive, and homeowners may be reluctant to pay for a service that they see as having no benefit to them. Maintenance A schedule of regular maintenance of the sanitary sewer collection system is a good way to avoid more expensive repairs due to system failure. Preventative maintenance through scheduled inspections and routine cleaning of the sewer system can identify and help eliminate many of the causes of SSOs. Effectiveness The elimination of SSO sources can have a significant impact on water quality. Blockages, breaks, and infiltration and inflow in municipal sewer systems create overflows that represent a significant risk to humans and the environment. Because SSOs involve the discharge of raw sewage, there are a number of microorganisms present that can affect the health of the urban population. This untreated sewage enters streams or other water bodies and affects the aquatic habitat and organisms present. Raw sewage often contains pollutants and toxics that impact the aquatic environment by limiting dissolved oxygen levels and promoting algal blooms. Cost Considerations Sanitary sewer collection systems are a valuable part of a municipality's infrastructure. EPA estimates that our nation's sewers are worth more than $1 trillion (USEPA, 1996). The collection system of a single large municipality is worth billions of dollars, and that of a smaller city could cost many millions. Reducing or eliminating SSOs can be expensive, but the cost must be weighed against the value of the collection system and the costs of replacing this asset if it is allowed to deteriorate. Ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation add value by maintaining the system's capacity and extending its life. The costs of correcting SSOs can vary widely by community size and sewer system type. Costs will often be highest and ratepayers will pay more in communities that have not put together regular preventive maintenance or remediation programs to deal with system failures. Table 1 gives examples of the cost associated with sanitary sewer remediation to both homeowners and the agency responsible for management of the sanitary sewer collection system.
25
Table 1. Three case studies of SSO costs.

Location Cost to Agency or Municipality From 1990 to 1994, SSO-related basement backups totaled 2,690, with an average cleanup cost of $700 each Upgrades at pumping stations and sewage Washington Suburban treatment plants: $38 million Sanitary Commission, Maryland Collection system improvements: $22 million Sewer reconstruction: $6 million (annual) Maintenance program: $10 million (annual) Lynn, Massachusetts $2.6 million $10 per household per year $40 per household per year $50 per household per year Cost to Homeowner
Louisville/Jefferson County, Kentucky
Long-term budget plan for corrective actions totaled $14.6 million
SSOs also have significant economic impacts. Shellfish bed closures and bans on fish consumption create economic hardships for associated industries. Water body closures can affect tourism and property values. Basement cleanups due to sewage backup must be done at homeowner and municipal expense.
26
References Arbour, Rick and Kerri, Ken. 1998. Collection Systems: Methods for Evaluating and Improving Performance. Sacramento Foundation, California State University, Sacramento, CA. City of Berkeley Web Page. 1999. City of Berkeley public works at [http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us]. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. 1993. Guidelines on Performing Infiltration/Inflow Analyses and Sewer System Evaluation Survey. Massachusetts DEP, Boston, MA. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. 1989. Guidelines on Performing Operation & Maintenance on Collection Systems. Massachusetts DEP, Boston, MA. USEPA. 2000. Wet Weather. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management. [http://www.epa.gov/owm/wet.htm]. Last updated May 1, 2000. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1998. Key Components of Operational, Maintenance and Remediation Programs for Municipal Sanitary Sewer Collection SystemsDraft. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1996. National Conference on Sanitary Sewer Overflows. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1996. Sanitary Sewer OverflowsWhat are They and How Can We Reduce Them? U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management, Washington, DC.
27
Identifying Illicit Connections Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description Illicit connections are defined as "illegal and/or improper connections to storm drainage systems and receiving waters" (CWP, 1998). A discharge of industrial wastewater to a storm sewer is "illicit" because it would ordinarily require a permit under the Clean Water Act. Many building owners or operators are not aware that improper connections exist in their facilities. Identifying and removing illicit connections is a measure for reducing storm water pollution. In extreme cases of illicit dumping, legal action is necessary. From 1987 to 1998, Wayne County, Michigan, investigated 3,851 businesses and industries for illicit connections to the county's storm sewer system. Of those investigated, about 8 percent had illicit connections, and where one illicit connection was found, there was an average of 2.4 improper connects at that business. To prioritize the investigation, the county relied on Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes of the businesses. The prioritization system was found to be successful in locating illicit discharges (Johnson and Tuomari, no date; Tuomari, no date). The City of Hialeah, Florida, uses its storm water management plan to emphasize illicit discharge detection and removal as part of its overall monitoring activities. There are at least 252 outfalls in the city, 72 of which drain into city rights-of-way. After considering the costs associated with removing illicit discharges, the city chose a proactive field screening program approach to remove these discharges (City of Hialeah, 1999). Applicability Identifying illicit and improper connections are necessary for all sewer systems, especially in areas where pollutants with unknown sources have been detected in receiving waters. The level and types of industrial activities and the surrounding land uses and ordinances will affect the methods used to identify illicit connections. Implementation Some practices used to discover and prevent illicit connections are
Instituting building and plumbing codes to prevent connections of potentially hazardous pollutants to storm drains. Organizing structures to be inspected by building age, with older buildings identified as priorities. Buildings whose processes have the potential to affect water quality also should be given priority.
28
Mapping each area to be surveyed and indicating the route of the sewer system and the locations of storm drains on the map. This enables planners to estimate the likely locations of illicit connections. A Geographic Information System (GIS) is an appropriate tool for identifying illicit discharges. The location of illicit discharges can be maintained by a geo-coded address. The attributes for illicit discharges are SIC code, owner/occupant information, inspection schedule, inspection dates, and comments (Huey, 2000).
To help municipalities detect illicit connections to storm sewers, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) used GIS to develop a 1/4-mile grid cell overlay for the entire 16-county NCTCOG region. The initial report suggested that illicit connections were not as prevalent in the North Central Texas area, and sewage material was observed in about 10 percent of the sites (NCTCOG, 2000). The City of Greensboro, North Carolina, is using GIS technology as part of its storm water management program. This GIS system is used to in conjunction with the program's monitoring aspect to identify illicit connections. More information on this program can be found at www.ci.greensboro.nc.us/stormwater/dynamic%5Fwatershed%5F management%5Fpro.htm (Bryant et al., 1999 and City of Greensboro, 2000).

Survey individual buildings to discover where connections to storm drains exist. Inspect sewer lines with television equipment to visually identify all physical connections. Compare the results of the field tests and the video inspection with the known connections on the map. Suspicious areas should be further investigated. Institute mandatory inspections for new developments or remodeling to identify illicit connections to the storm sewer system. Remove and test sediment from the catch basins or equivalent structures. Inspect connections in question to determine whether they should be connected to the storm drain system or to the sanitary sewer. Use methods of identification such as dye testing, visual inspection, smoke testing, or flow monitoring, as described below.
o
Dye Testing. Flushing fluorometric dye into suspicious downspouts can be useful to identify illicit connections. Once the dye has been introduced into the storm system via the connection in question, the water in the collection system is monitored to determine whether an illicit connection is present. Visual Inspection. Remotely guiding television cameras through sewer lines is another way to identify physical connections.
29
Smoke Testing. Smoke testing is another method used to discover illicit connections. Zinc chloride smoke is injected into the sewer line and emerges via vents on connected buildings or through cracks or leaks in the sewer line. Monitoring and recording where the smoke emerges, crews can identify all connections, legal and illegal, to the sewer system. Mechanisms on drains should prevent the smoke from entering buildings; however, in some instances, this will occur. It is important to notify the public that the smoke is non-toxic, though it should be avoided as it can cause irritation of the nose and throat for some people. Flow Monitoring. Monitoring increases in storm sewer flows during dry periods can also lead investigators to sources of infiltration due to improper connections. Infrared, Aerial, and Thermal Photography. Researchers are experimenting with the use of aerial, infrared, and thermal photography to locate dischargers by studying the temperature of the stream water in areas where algae might be concentrated and in soils. It also examines land surface moisture and vegetative growth. This technique assumes that a failing OSDS, for example, would have more moisture in the surface soil, the area would be warmer, and the vegetation would grow faster than in the surrounding area (Johnson and Tuomari, no date).
On November 17 and 30, 1999, the Arkansas Department of Health used infrared technology to identify illicit discharges from septic systems into Lake Conway, Arkansas. Lake Conway, located in Faulkner County, Arkansas, is a man-made lake used mostly for recreational fishing. Approximately 90 percent of the residents within 1 mile of the lakefront have onsite wastewater treatment systems. Of the 2,500 to 3,500 residents who living within 300 feet of the shoreline, only 250 are connected to the public sewer system. Most of these systems are more than 30 years old and were installed before state regulations. The inspector used a state policy helicopter that was equipped with a Forward Looking Infrared imaging system, video equipment, and a global positioning system. The results of this two-day survey indicated that there are approximately 380 malfunctioning and improperly constructed septic systems within 300 feet of the lakefront (Eddie, 2000). Facility owners should be required to correct the problem by eliminating the discharge and connecting to the sanitary sewer system Some agencies use a priority system for identifying illicit discharges. According to the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (1987, cited in Tuomari, no date), a priority scheme for detecting illicit discharges from businesses should be as follows: 1. Automobile-related businesses/facilities and heavy manufacturing 2. Printers, dry cleaners/laundries, photo processors, utilities, paint stores, water conditioners, chemical laboratories, construction companies, and medium light manufacturing 3. Institutional facilities, private service agencies, retail establishments, and schools
30
Limitations There are several limitations to programs to detect illicit connections. First, a local ordinance is necessary to provide investigators with access to private property in order to perform field tests (Ferguson et al. 1997). Second, rain fall can hamper efforts to monitor flows and visual inspections. In addition, smoke testing and dye testing may become more difficult, depending on the severity of the storm event. Smoke testing has roughly the same efficiency as door-to-door investigation, and both smoke and dye testing are more accurate than visual inspection. Despite the difficulty in identifying these connections due to budget and staff restraints, it is important to understand that these connections are illegal and should be identified and reported regardless of cost. Jurisdictions can offset some of these costs by encouraging the reporting of illicit discharges by employees, thereby saving expense on inspectors and directing resources more efficiently. Maintenance Considerations Identifying illicit discharges requires teams of at least two people (volunteers can be used), plus administrative personnel, depending on the complexity of the storm sewer system. To help identify illicit discharges, the City of Raleigh, North Carolina, has illicit discharge regulations and dry weather screening for illicit discharges and connections. By taking baseline samples throughout the city, pollution control efforts can be better established for future identification of illicit discharges. This inventory, combined with the city's mapping effort, will be added to the city's GIS to allow for improved tracking of illicit discharges and spills (City of Raleigh, 1998). Effectiveness An illicit discharge detection program can be an effective method to reduce the quantity of industrial or commercial pollutants that enter the storm drain system. For example, the Department of Environmental Protection in Montgomery County, Maryland, has an illicit discharge detection and elimination program called "Pipe Detectives," which uses volunteer monitoring and community hotlines to identify suspicious discharges (MCDEP, 1997). When discharges are reported, DEP consults maps of the surrounding areas and targets those areas for additional monitoring to narrow the search for the illicit connection. In one instance, a "milky white" discharge was reported in an area with many small businesses and large apartment buildings. Businesses were sent informational letters advising them of the illegal discharge and requesting their assistance in identifying it by allowing DEP to survey the properties. Through this cooperative effort, three illicit connections were detected and removed, including a sink that was used to wash paintbrushes (the source of the milky white discharge). The City of Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) in an independent agency whose functions include master planning, design and construction, maintenance, floodplain management, and management of the South Platte River. The master planning aspect includes major drainageway master planning, outfall systems planning, preparation of drainage criteria manuals for local governments and the district, support of special projects, and wetland projects. The City of Denver has a Storm Drainage Master Plan, which identified $100 million in necessary drainage improvements. The district uses pollutants and education materials to limit illicit discharges to storm drains (City of Indianapolis and Marion County, 2000).
31
As part of the Rogue River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, Michigan, offers training for illicit discharge elimination. Four training courses are offered: Overview, Basic Investigations, Advanced Investigations, and Prevention of ConstructionRelated Illicit Discharges. More information on these training opportunities can be found at http://www.wcdoe.org/rougeriver/techtop/index.html. EPA's Surf Your Watershed (http://www.epa.gov/surf) can help citizens and business/industry owners identify into which watershed their storm drains flow. The Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC), a non-profit data and technology information transfer center, has created Know Your Watershed (www.ctic.purdue.edu/KYW). This web site allows individuals to learn their watershed address by entering their city, county, or river name, or their ZIP code. Cost Considerations The cost of smoke testing, dye testing, visual inspection, and flow monitoring can be significant and time-consuming. Site-specific factors, such as the level of impervious area, the density and ages of buildings, and type of land use will determine the level of investigation necessary. Case studies in Michigan have estimated the cost of two field staff and required support at $182,000 to $187,000 annually (Ferguson et al., 1997). Wayne County's budget for illicit detection investigations was $735,151 from 1996 to 1997 and $599,041 for 1997 through 1998 (Johnson and Tuomari, no date). Many programs offset some of their cost by encouraging the reporting of illicit discharges by employees, thereby saving expense on inspectors and directing resources more efficiently. Programs have also saved money by using student interns to locate and map dry weather flows from outfalls, or by contracting with academic institutions to perform outfall monitoring. Some programs have used funds available from "environmental fees" or special assessment districts to fund their illicit connection elimination programs. The Huron River Pollution Abatement Project used annual assessments of the city of Ann Arbor and a per parcel basis for the rest of the district to fund the costs of illicit connection removal efforts. The project provided Washtenaw County with a total of $1.7 million over the life of the program to finance their efforts. Fort Worth, Texas, charges an "environmental fee" to local residents and businesses to fund storm water-related efforts, including illicit connection detection. Approximately $2.5 million dollars a year is raised through these fees.
32
References Bryant, S.D., V.S. Shastri Annambhotla, and K.A. Carper. 1999. Development of a Dynamic Urban Stormwater and Watershed Management System to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century. In 1999 American Water Works Association Water Resources Conference. City of Greensboro. 2000. Dynamic Watershed Management Project. [http://www.ci.greensboro.nc.us/stormwater/dynamic%5Fwatershed% 5Fmanagement%5Fpro.htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. City of Raleigh. 1998. Neuse River Brochure. City of Raleigh Public Affairs, Raleigh, North Carolina. [http://www.raleigh-nc.org/pubaffairs/neusebroc.htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. Cox, J. 2000. Personal communication on EPA's NPS Listserver, July 14, 2000. CWP. 1998. Rapid Watershed Planning Handbook. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Drain Patrol. No date. Services. [http://www.drainpatrol.com/pages/services.html]. Accessed January 2001. Eddie, N. 2000. Arkansas Sanitarian Uses Infrared Technology to Track Down Sewage. Small Flows Quarterly 1(2): 22-24. National Small Flows Clearinghouse, Morgantown, West Virginia. Ferguson, T., R. Gignac, M. Stoffan, A. Ibrahim, and H. Aldrich. 1997. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project. Wayne County, MI. Johnson, B., and D. Tuomari. No date. Did You Know . . . The Impact of On-Site Sewage Systems and Illicit Discharges on the Rouge River. Camp Dresser & McKee and Wayne County Department of Environment, Wayne, Michigan. Louisville/Jefferson County Municipal Sewer District. 1999. Countywide Inflow and Infiltration Elimination Program. Louisville, KY. [http://www.msdlouky.org/programs/ii.htm]. MCDEP. 1997. Montgomery County NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Annual Report. MS-MO-95-006. Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection, Water Quality Advisory Group, Rockville, MD. North Central Texas Council of Governments. 2000. Overview of the Regional Storm Water Management Strategy for the Dallas/Fort Wroth Metroplex. North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington, Texas. [http://www.nctcog.dst.tx.us/envir/wq/inetstw.html]. Accessed July 14, 2000. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1992. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. WEF and ASAE. 1998. Urban Runoff Quality Management. WEF Manual of Practice No. 23 and ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87. Water Environment Federation, Technical Practice Committee, Water Quality and Ecology Subcommittee, Alexandria, VA; and American Society of Civil Engineers, Urban Water Resources Research Council, Reston, VA.
33
Wastewater Connections to the Storm Drain System Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description An illicit discharge is considered to be a discharge composed of non-storm water that enters the storm drain system through an unwarranted connection. Storm sewer systems are sometimes employed as an inexpensive or convenient alternative to proper disposal of wastewater to treatment plants. These illegal wastewater discharges can occur as illicit connections from commercial or business establishments or illegal dumping into storm drain inlets. Illicit connection detection and elimination programs seek to prevent contamination of ground and surface water supplies by regulation, inspection, and removal of these illegal sources of wastewater discharge. Pollutants that may be found in these untreated wastewater discharges include raw sewage, heavy metals, oil and grease, solids, detergents, chlorine, potassium, ammonia and nutrients. These pollutants can have implications for both human health and the aquatic environment. Bacterial contamination from raw sewage can spread disease and close waters to fishing and swimming, and heavy metals are known to be toxic to aquatic organisms. Excessive nutrient loads can lead to eutrophication in lakes, reducing oxygen levels, and affecting aquatic species. An example of an illicit wastewater connection is a cross-connect of a shop drain to the storm sewer. This type of improper connection often occurs in automobile-related facilities (garage/repair, tire stores, service stations, muffler/transmission shops, car washes, and auto dealerships). The Wayne County, Michigan, illicit connection investigation program found that the majority of illicit connections in nonresidential facilities were drains connected to storm sewers (Johnson, 1998). Many times the connection of the shop drain to the storm drain system is unknown to the business owner, and may not be evident in architectural plans. Shop drains that may potentially be connected to the storm sewer include floor drains, wash sinks, sump pumps and solvent sinks. Applicability Illicit connection programs tend to concentrate their efforts on areas where nonresidential facilities are located. The USEPA has estimated that approximately 60 percent of the businesses known to use or store petroleum products were improperly connected to the storm sewers systems (USEPA, 1991, as referenced by the Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project). These improper connections often happen during new construction activities. Inadequate mapping of the internal plumbing connections for a building can lead to wastewater being discharged incorrectly to storm drains. Sewer maps may also be incorrect, leading to cross connections between the sanitary sewer lines and the storm sewer system.
34
Thorough inspection and verification by monitoring during the entire construction phase can prevent the illegal connection of wastewater sources during new construction. For existing facilities, the location of improper connections will require the use of field screening procedures, source testing protocols, and visual inspection. Design Considerations Programs that address illicit connections, including wastewater connections, typically use a combination of monitoring, inspection, and public outreach to achieve the goal of eliminating improper discharges to the storm drainage system. With many communities facing limited budgets and resources, it is important that investment in an illicit detection program have the greatest return possible. Field monitoring is an essential component of an illicit detection program and is very valuable for creation of a cost-effective program. Monitoring drains that have dry weather flows will allow program mangers to focus their illicit detection investigations on those outfalls that do not meet water quality standards. Once an outfall is identified as having a high priority through visual inspection, there are a few ways to find the source of the problem. Using closed circuit television testing may reveal a connection that is discharging suspicious material. Spot testing at storm drain manholes upstream of the outfall may aid in isolating an area where the problem discharge is coming from. Infrared and thermal photography have also been used to identify suspect discharges. Once an area is identified as requiring further investigation, a letter should be sent to facility owners or operators in that area to that alert them that their facility has been selected for an illicit connection inspection. An inspection appointment is made, and field crew determines the location of storm and sanitary sewer manholes and the locations of all plumbing fixtures in the facility. Using either a trace dye or smoke test, the facility is monitored for any illicit connection. If the dye is seen in the storm sewers or smoke is seen in the facility, an inspection team identifies the likely source of the illicit connection. If a plumbing fixture is found to be connected to the storm sewer, or discharging to either surface water or the ground, the facility is informed of the violation. The facility is given a time frame in which to respond to the violation. Following this period, the fixtures are retested. If the connection has not been corrected, further disciplinary action may be taken if the business or property owner has not provided a description of the corrective actions that were taken. The general housekeeping practices of a facility should also be examined during an inspection. Issues such as proper storage of hazardous materials and where wastewater from cleaning equipment is emptied should be reviewed with facility operators. This check will help eliminate potential sources of pollutants entering the storm sewers system. An inspection program of existing septic systems to identify failing systems will also prevent wastewater discharges to storm drains or receiving waters. Requiring inspection of on-site wastewater systems at the time of property transfer and developing a database that tracks septic system pumpouts can help this effort. This process could be done in cooperation with the local health department.
35
Limitations A number of limitations might occur during the establishment and operation of an illicit connection program. One is the time and effort it takes to inspect each individual site if program managers plan to inspect all the facilities within their community. Many times illicit connection programs are just one aspect of a public works' or environmental department's mission, so the ability to monitor and inspect nonresidential facilities may be limited by staff availability. In some instances, agencies primarily use citizen complaints to identify potential sources of illicit connections due to staff requirements. Citizens can play an important role in monitoring and inspecting the system to save the municipality money. Louisville and Jefferson counties in Kentucky employ students in the summer to conduct dry weather sampling and system inspections. Monterey, California, has trained citizen volunteers to help with outfall sampling (NRDC, 1999). Another limitation is the issue of public access to private property. Inspectors responsible for illicit discharge detection and elimination must have access to private property to identify and remove the connections that are the source of illegal non-storm water discharges. An ordinance guaranteeing "right of entry" to private property is critical to allowing inspectors to identify and take corrective actions on individual sources of illicit discharges. A final limitation is the intermittent nature of illicit discharges. Because wastewater discharges from illicit connections do not necessarily happen on a consistent basis, it is difficult to identify areas where these connections exist unless constant monitoring occurs. Maintenance Considerations Two-person teams should be capable of performing field investigations and inspections. The number of teams required in a program will be based on the size of the community, the number of nonresidential facilities to be inspected, and the number of storm drain outfalls to be monitored. Effectiveness The effectiveness of illicit discharge programs at removing pollutants from storm water has not received extensive study at this time. Some program managers have estimated the amount of pollutants they believe to have been removed by their programs (see the fact sheet on Industrial Connections, as well as below), but percentage estimates for individual pollutant removal effectiveness are currently difficult to locate. Table 1 from the Wayne County Illicit Connection Control Program shows the estimated reduction in pounds of pollutants due to illicit connection elimination for the years 1991 1994.
36
Table 1. Estimated pounds of pollutants removed by illicit connection control program, 1991 1994 (Source: Wayne County Dept. of Public Health Illicit Connection Investigation Program Quarterly Report) Pollutant Ammonia Chlorine Potassium Total Phosphorus Biological Oxygen Demand Chemical Oxygen Demand Flow, Storm Water to Sanitary System Surfactants as MBAs? Suspended Solids Total Solids Volatile Solids Pounds Removed 165 54 34 148 2,010 5,800 850,000 (gallons/year) 2,554 2,010 6,790 2,800
Illicit connection elimination programs have been identified by the USEPA as an important tool in protecting urban water quality. EPA's Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) recognized the importance of addressing pollutants from inappropriate entries to the urban storm drain system (Lalor and Pitt, 1999). A recent example from the state of Virginia further illustrates the need for such programs. In 1998, sanitary sewer lines from nine condos inside a large housing complex were found to have been inadvertently connected to a roof drain that drained to storm sewer pipes. This cross-connection into the storm drainage system went undetected by authorities (despite periodic odor complaints by local residents) for more than 27 years. While this problem has been fixed, more than 6 million gallons of raw sewage were estimated to have been discharged into the Four Mile Run stream over the course of that 27 years (NVRC, 2001). Examples such as these demonstrate the need for illicit connection elimination programs. By preventing wastewater discharges to the storm drain system, these programs reduce pollutant loads and protect water quality and the aquatic environment from the effects of these non-storm water discharges. Cost Considerations The costs of illicit connection detection and elimination programs vary with the intensity of effort and the amount of staff dedicated to the program. Wayne County, Michigan, has an average annual cost of $187,000 for their program. This budget pays for a full-time, two-person field crew and one part-time field crew and allows them to perform 325 to 350 site inspections annually. Some programs have offset the cost of field monitoring by using volunteers to adopt outfalls and monitor stream quality. Citizen hotlines broaden the involvement of the public in illicit discharge surveillance. These measures help identify areas where inspection crews can focus their efforts.
37
Another way to save staff time and money is by establishing a certification program. This program could identify properties that have checked their buildings and found no illicit connections. If inspectors know what buildings have been evaluated, time could be saved when tracking down contamination. References Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Municipal Best Management Practice Handbook. Stormwater Quality Task Force, Sacramento, CA. Ferguson, T., R. Gignac, M. Stoffan, A. Ibrahim, and J. Aldrich. 1997. Cost Estimating Guidelines: Best management Practices and Engineered Controls. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, MI. Johnson, B. 1998. The Impact of On-Site Sewage Systems and Illicit Connections in the Rouge River Basin. Unpublished manuscript. Rouge River Program Office. Camp Dresser & McKee, Detroit, MI. Lalor, M. and R. Pitt. 1999. Use of Tracers to Identify Sources of Contamination in Dry Weather Flow. Watershed Protection Techniques, Volume 3, Number 1, April 1999. Northen Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC). 2001. Welcome to NVRC'S Four Mile Run Program. [http://www.novaregion.org/4MileRun/4mr.htm]. Last updated April 19, 2001. Accessed June 4, 2001. NRDC. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. National Resource Defense Council, Washington, DC. Pitt, R., M. Lalor, D. Barbe, D.D. Adrian, and R. Field. 1993. Investigation of Inappropriate Pollutant Entries Into Storm Drainage Systems: A Users Guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project. 1999. Illicit Connections Control Program. Wayne County, MI. Available at [http://www.wcdoe.org/rougeriver].
38
Illegal Dumping Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Description Illegal dumping is disposal of waste in an unpermitted area, such as a back area of a yard, a stream bank, or some other off-road area. Illegal dumping can also be the pouring of liquid wastes or disposing of trash down storm drains. It is often called "open dumping," "fly dumping," and "midnight dumping" because materials are often dumped in open areas, from vehicles along roadsides, and late at night. Illegally dumped wastes are primarily nonhazardous materials that are dumped to avoid paying disposal fees or expending the time and effort required for proper disposal (USEPA Region 5, 1998). Applicability Illegally dumping wastes down storm drains and creating illegal dumps can impair water quality. Runoff from dumpsites containing chemicals can contaminate wells and surface water used as sources of drinking water. Substances disposed of directly into storm drains can also lead to water quality impairment. In systems that flow directly to water bodies, those illegally disposed-of substances are introduced untreated to the natural environment. For example, the state of Oklahoma has 2,446 illegal dumps, which will cost $3,922,000 to clean up. As part of its pollution prevention efforts, the Oklahoma State University's Cooperative Extension Service has developed a series of posters and other displays to promote awareness of the problems that result from illegal dumping. Implementation Municipalities and organizations all over the United States have implemented programs to stop the illegal dumping of trash and used materials. The most important method of implementing such programs is public education. To ensure their effectiveness, some programs allow for citizen reporting of illegal dumpers, who can then be fined, sentenced to jail, or be required to perform community service. Some clues can help citizens identify illegal dumpers (Fairfax County, 2000):

Illegal dumping often occurs late at night and before dawn. There is often no company name on the construction vehicles or equipment. The construction activity occurs on a site with no company advertising sign. There is no construction entrance adjacent to the roadway (an area of large stone and gravel placed to keep mud off streets).
39
In 1993 the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) initiated a public outreach program called Our WaterTake It Personally. The campaign includes storm water stenciling that reads "Don't DumpProtect Our Water." In 1993 NCTCOG won the Keep Texas Beautiful President's Award for its efforts to address illegal dumping. Tarrant County, Texas, has initiated an aggressive public reporting program to stop illegal dumping. Work with public and private entities to develop a manual, Storm Water Quality Best Management Practices for Industrial ActivitiesNorth Central Texas, has also been successful (NCTCOG, 2000a, 2000b). The Dallas County Illegal Dumping Hotline (1-888-335-DUMP) is a 24-hour hotline for citizens to report illegal dumping in Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Erath, Hood, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rockwell, Somervell, Tarrant, and Wise counties. Citizens are asked to leave as much information as possiblecity and county of the incident, specific street location, license plate number and description of vehicle, personal description of violator, type of waste dumped, caller's name and telephone number, date of violation. As an incentive to report illegal dumping, a $50 reward is given to reporting individuals if their information leads to an arrest (the City Web, 1998). Earthwater Stencils, Inc., supports storm water pollution prevention by providing materials such as posters, stencils, and brochures to community-based storm drain stenciling and related programs in local watersheds. Their web site (www.earthwater-stencils.com) offers information on how and where to stencil and how to obtain stenciling materials. Clean Ocean Action, a nonprofit organization that focuses on the New Jersey/New York coast, has designated 2 weeks of the year as "Storm Drain Stencil Week." They offer free storm drain stenciling kits to teachers and also have available a variety of lesson plans and activities about storm drains. Effectiveness Illegal dumping regulations must be enforced. In Chicago, Illinois, penalties for dumping without a permit can include fines up to $2,000, 6 months in jail, and up to 200 hours of community service. Violators are liable for up to three times the cost of cleaning up a site, and city contracts can be terminated. Vehicles are subject to seizure and impoundment, with the owner of record liable for a $500 fine in addition to towing and storage fees. Finally, owners or occupants of any unimproved parcel of real estate must remove any abandoned or derelict motor vehicle, garbage, debris, refuse, litter, or miscellaneous waste. Violations can result in fines of $200 to $1,000 per day. These regulations are promulgated under Ordinances 7-28-440 and 7-28450, Municipal Code, City of Chicago (USEPA Region 5, 1998). Hawaii has instituted a similar program. In 1998 Governor Cayetano enacted a law that imposes fines and jail time on individuals or groups that operate or use illegal dumps. Open dumps throughout the state have been found to lead to groundwater and surface water pollution, as well as odor problems and fires of hazardous materials. The sites are often at least 5 acres and are not visible from public roads because they are on private property or behind closed gates (HDOH, 1998).
40
Local police department or other public entities can play a major role in catching illegal dumpers. The Central Oklahoma Trash Cop Program, which consists of environmental officers hired to catch and prosecute litterers and illegal dumpers in four counties, was begun with $160,000 obtained through fundraising efforts by a local community group, Oklahoma City Beautiful. The program will be sustained by fines collected from offenders (USEPA Region 5, 1998). Reliance on public reporting is an important factor in the effectiveness of anti-illegal dumping programs. Municipalities can develop citizen reporting hotlines or web site forms. Program administrators must ensure that these reports are followed up and that the reporter receives a notice of the results. Otherwise, the incentive for reporting could be lost. San Diego County (California) has a toll-free telephone number and a web site reporting form (www.co.san-diego.ca.us/cnty/cntydepts/landuse/env_health/stormwater/ sw_report_dumping.html) for reporting illegal dumping. Citizens are encouraged to report anyone seen dumping anything onto street surfaces or into the storm drains in the county. In some cases, citizens have been rewarded for helping clean up illegal dumpsites. PhilaPride, a nonprofit group in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, promotes neighborhood participation in cleanup and enforcement activities. The program is funded primarily by corporations that have had dumping problems on their properties, such as the Conrail Corporation, which contributes up to $25,000 each year (USEPA Region 5, 1998). A community group in Detroit, Michigan, uses a county grant to pay residents to bring illegally dumped tires to drop-off locations. A local waste hauler donates services to transport the tires to a tire shredder, which shreds them at no charge. A local bank donates money to cover disposal costs (USEPA Region 5, 1998). Design Considerations Illegal dumping programs might also include monitoring of roads that have often been used for trash disposal. Other methods are as simple as public education, such as storm drain stenciling (See Storm Drain Stenciling fact sheet). Both programs depend on citizen reporting of illegal dumpers. Storm drain stenciling is an effective method of raising public awareness of the impacts of storm water runoff on water quality. Stenciling neighborhood storm drains reminds car owners not to dump their motor oil down the drain. It helps all neighbors realize that throwing their trash down the storm drain could have negative effects on their local river. Storm drain stenciling programs can be started by any local group, such as the Boy Scouts, a school class, or a neighborhood association. It is an activity that is quick, easy, and fun. Limitations Determining which storm drains to stencil is a vital step. Groups must ensure they have the proper authority's permission to paint storm drains. In terms of reporting illegal dumpers, citizens must be assured that their efforts to contact reporting agencies will result in action by authorities. The city of Jacksonville, Florida, has a citizen complaint form on its web page at www.coj.net/pub/resd/airwater/CCFORM.HTM.
41
Some of the categories of complaints are "discharge of pollutants to storm drains, ditches, rivers or creeks," "overflowing manholes or pump stations," "uncontrolled erosion from land clearing activities," and "pumping of muddy water into creeks, storm drains, or ditches." City staff have established a goal of contacting complaint submitters within 24 hours (City of Jacksonville, 2000). Maintenance Municipalities should set goals for reducing the number of illegal dumping acts. The city of Sacramento, California, has set a goal of stenciling 45,000 storm drains throughout the city. Citizen participation and reporting are important steps in maintaining an anti-illegal dumping program. Furthermore, proper enforcement must be implemented to discourage others from performing these illegal acts. Cost Considerations Costs for implementing illegal dumping programs vary. Storm drain stenciling by volunteers is inexpensive because there are only small costs for the stencils and paints. Cash incentives like the $50 reward offered in Dallas County are likely to be minimal costs, because the rewards would not be granted until after a conviction. Actual monitoring by local police or another authority can be more expensive and would require funding in the locality's budget. References @Home WebSpace, Neuskool. 2000. Photography. [members.home.net/neuskool/photo/index.html]. Accessed January 2001. Bryant, S.D., V.S. Shastri Annambhotla, and K.A. Carper. 1999. Development of a Dynamic Urban Stormwater and Watershed Management System to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century. In Proceedings of 1999 American Water Works Association Water Resources Conference. City of Hialeah. 1999. Stormwater Management Program. City of Hialeah, FL. [www.ci.hialeah.fl.us/streets/storm/plans/management/default.htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. City of Hialeah. 2000. City of Hialeah Stormwater Utility Stormwater Structure Field Screening/Inspection Checklist. City of Hialeah, Florida. [www.ci.hialeah.fl.us/streets/storm/plans/management/checklist.htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. City of Greensboro. 2000. Dynamic Watershed Management Project. [www.ci.greensboro.nc.us/stormwater/dynamic%5Fwatershed%5F management%5Fpro. htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. City of Indianapolis and Marion County. No date. Peer City Review--Denver, Colorado. City of Indianapolis and Marion County, Indiana. [www.indygov.org/dcam/plans/stormplan/ peer_city/denver.htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. City of Jacksonville. 2000. Water Quality. [www.coj.net/pub/resd/airwater/Watrqual.htm]. Accessed July 18, 2000.
42
References (Continued). City of Raleigh. 1998. Neuse River Brochure. City of Raleigh Public Affairs, Raleigh, NC. [www.raleigh-nc.org/pubaffairs/neusebroc.htm]. Accessed July 14, 2000. The City Web. 1998. HELP Stop Illegal Dumping in Dallas County! [www.thecityweb.com/themap/Fort%20Worth/City%20Info-Fort%20Worth/ %231090392]. Accessed July 14, 2000. Clean Ocean Action. 2000. Storm Drain Stencil Week. [www.cleanoceanaction.org/Stenciling/StencilWeek.html#SDSW]. Accessed July 18, 2000. County of San Diego. No date. Facility Inspection and Enforcement Program. County of San Diego, San Diego, CA. [www.co.san-diego.ca.us/deh/stormwater/facinsp.html]. Accessed July 14, 2000. Fairfax County. 2000. Reporting Land Development Related Environmental Concerns. Fairfax County, VA. [www.co.fairfax.va.us/dpwes/publications/urbanfor.htm]. Accessed September 19, 2000. Last updated June 2000. Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). 1998. New Law Targets Illegal Dumps, Dumping. Hawaii Department of Health, Honolulu, HI. [http://kumu.icsd.hawaii.gov/doh/about/press/1998/p8_dump.htm]. Accessed June 1, 2001. Johnson, B., and D. Tuomari. No date. Did You Know...The Impact of On-Site Sewage Systems and Illicit Discharges on the Rouge River. Camp Dresser & McKee and Wayne County Department of Environment, Wayne, Michigan. North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). 2000a. Storm Water Management in North Central Texas. North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington, TX. [www.dfwstormwater.com/illicit.html]. Accessed July 14, 2000. North Central Texas Council of Governments. 2000b. Overview of the Regional Storm Water Management Strategy for the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington, Texas. [www.nctcog.dst.tx.us/envir/wq/inetstw.html]. Accessed June 4, 2001. Oklahoma State University's Cooperative Extension Service (CES). 2000. Displays Available. [www.agecon.okstate.edu/waste/displays.htm]. Accessed June 1, 2001. Wayne County. 2000. The Rouge River Project. Wayne County, MI. [www.wcdoe.org/rougeriver]. Accessed July 14, 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2000. Storm Water Phase II Final Rule. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Minimum Control Measure. EPA 833-F-00-007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 (USEPA Region 5). 1998. Illegal Dumping Prevention Guidebook. EPA-B-97-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, IL.
43
Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control

Regulatory Text
You must develop, implement, and enforce a program to reduce pollutants in any storm water runoff to your small MS4 from construction activities that result in a land disturbance of greater than or equal to one acre. Reduction of storm water discharges from construction activity disturbing less than one acre must be included in your program if that construction activity is part of a larger common plan of development or sale that would disturb one acre or more. If the NPDES permitting authority waives requirements for storm water discharges associated with small construction activity in accordance with Sec. 122.26(b)(15)(i), you are not required to develop, implement, and/or enforce a program to reduce pollutant discharges from such sites. Your program must include the development and implementation of, at a minimum:
(A) An ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to require erosion and sediment controls, as well as sanctions to ensure compliance, to the extent allowable under State, Tribal, or local law; (B) Requirements for construction site operators to implement appropriate erosion and sediment control (ESC) best management practices; (C) Requirements for construction site operators to control waste such as discarded building materials, concrete truck washout, chemicals, litter, and sanitary waste at the construction site that may cause adverse impacts to water quality; (D) Procedures for site plan review which incorporate consideration of potential water quality impacts; (E) Procedures for receipt and consideration of information submitted by the public, and (F) Procedures for site inspection and enforcement of control measures. Guidance Examples of sanctions to ensure compliance include nonmonetary penalties, fines, bonding requirements, and/or permit denials for non-compliance. EPA recommends that procedures for site plan review include the review of individual pre-construction site plans to ensure consistency with local (ESC) requirements. Procedures for site inspections and enforcement of control measures could include steps to identify priority sites for inspection and enforcement based on the nature of the construction activity, topography, and the characteristics of soils and receiving water quality. You are encouraged to provide appropriate educational and training measures for construction site operators. You may wish to require a storm water pollution prevention plan for construction sites within your jurisdiction that discharge into your system. See Sec. 122.44(s) (NPDES permitting authorities' option to incorporate qualifying State, Tribal and local erosion and sediment control
programs into NPDES permits for storm water discharges from construction sites). Also see Sec. 122.35(b) (The NPDES permitting authority may recognize that another government entity, including the permitting authority, may be responsible for implementing one or more of the minimum measures on your behalf). BMP Fact Sheets Runoff Control Minimize clearing Land grading Permanent diversions Preserving natural vegetation Construction entrances Stabilize drainage ways Check dams Filter berms Grass-lined channels Riprap Erosion Control Stabilize exposed soils Chemical stabilization Mulching Permanent seeding Sodding Soil roughening Protect steep slopes Geotextiles Gradient terraces Soil retention Temporary slope drain
Protect waterways Temporary stream crossings Vegetated buffer Phase construction Construction sequencing Dust control Sediment Control Install perimeter controls Temporary diversion dikes Wind fences and sand fences Brush barrier Silt fence Install sediment trapping devices Sediment basins and rock dams Sediment filters and sediment chambers Sediment trap Inlet protection Storm drain inlet protection Good Housekeeping Other wastes General construction site waste management Spill prevention and control plan Vehicle maintenance and washing areas Education and awareness Contractor certification and inspector training Construction reviewer BMP inspection and maintenance
Model ordinances Additional Fact Sheets Turf Reinforcement Mats Vegetative Covers Dust Control
Runoff Control
Minimize clearing
Land Grading Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Land grading involves reshaping the ground surface to planned grades as determined by an engineering survey, evaluation, and layout. Land grading provides more suitable topography for buildings, facilities, and other land uses and helps to control surface runoff, soil erosion, and sedimentation during and after construction. Applicability Land grading is applicable to sites with uneven or steep topography or easily erodible soils, because it stabilizes slopes and decreases runoff velocity. Grading activities should maintain existing drainage patterns as much as possible. Siting and Design Considerations Before grading activities begin, decisions must be made regarding the steepness of cut-and-fill slopes and how the slopes will be

Protected from runoff Stabilized Maintained.
A grading plan should be prepared that establishes which areas of the site will be graded, how drainage patterns will be directed, and how runoff velocities will affect receiving waters. The grading plan also includes information regarding when earthwork will start and stop, establishes the degree and length of finished slopes, and dictates where and how excess material will be disposed of (or where borrow materials will be obtained if needed). Berms, diversions, and other storm water practices that require excavation and filling also should be incorporated into the grading plan. A low-impact development BMP that can be incorporated into a grading plan is site fingerprinting, which involves clearing and grading only those areas necessary for building activities and equipment traffic. Maintaining undisturbed temporary or permanent buffer zones in the grading operation provides a low-cost sediment control measure that will help reduce runoff and off-site sedimentation. The lowest elevation of the site should remain undisturbed to provide a protected storm water outlet before storm drains or other construction outlets are installed. 5
Limitations Improper grading practices that disrupt natural storm water patterns might lead to poor drainage, high runoff velocities, and increased peak flows during storm events. Clearing and grading of the entire site without vegetated buffers promotes off-site transport of sediments and other pollutants. The grading plan must be designed with erosion and sediment control and storm water management goals in mind; grading crews must be carefully supervised to ensure that the plan is implemented as intended. Maintenance Considerations All graded areas and supporting erosion and sediment control practices should be periodically checked, especially after heavy rainfalls. All sediment should be removed from diversions or other storm water conveyances promptly. If washouts or breaks occur, they should be repaired immediately. Prompt maintenance of small-scale eroded areas is essential to prevent these areas from becoming significant gullies. Effectiveness Land grading is an effective means of reducing steep slopes and stabilizing highly erodible soils when properly implemented with storm water management and erosion and sediment control practices. Land grading is not effective when drainage patterns are altered or when vegetated areas on the perimeter of the site are destroyed. Cost Considerations Land grading is practiced at virtually all construction sites. Additional site planning to incorporate storm water and erosion and sediment controls in the grading plan can require several hours of planning by a certified engineer or landscape architect. Extra time might be required to excavate diversions and construct berms, and fill materials might be needed to build up low-lying areas or fill depressions. References State of Delaware. No date. Delaware Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook for Development. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Division of Water Conservation. State of North Carolina. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission and North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
Permanent Diversions Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Diversions can be constructed by creating channels across slopes with supporting earthen ridges on the bottom sides of the slopes. The ridges reduce slope length, collect storm water runoff, and deflect the runoff to acceptable outlets that convey it without erosion.
Applicability Diversions are used in areas where runoff from areas of higher elevation poses a threat of property damage or erosion. Diversions can also be used to promote the growth of vegetation in areas of lower elevations. Finally, diversions protect upland slopes that are being damaged by surface and/or shallow subsurface flow by reducing slope length, which minimizes soil loss. Siting and Design Considerations Ridge. A cross section of the earthen ridge must have side slopes no steeper than 2:1; a width at the design water elevation of at least 4 feet; a minimum freeboard of 0.3 feet; and a 10-percent settlement factor included in the design. Outlet. Four acceptable outlets for the conveyance of runoff and their construction specifications include: 1. Storm water conveyance channel. A permanent designed waterway, containing appropriate vegetation, that is appropriately shaped and sized to carry storm water runoff away from developing areas without any damage from erosion. The following are general specifications that are required for channel construction:
o
All obstructions and unsuitable material, such as trees, roots, brush, and stumps, and any excess soil should be removed from the channel area and disposed of properly. The channel must meet grade and cross-section specifications, and any fill that is used must be compacted to ensure equal settlement. Parabolic and triangular-shaped, grass-lined channels should not have a top width of more than 30 feet.
Trapezoidal, grass-lined channels may not have a bottom width of more than 15 feet unless there are multiple or divided waterways, they have a riprap center, or other methods of controlling the meandering of low flows are provided. If grass-lined channels have a base flow, a stone center or subsurface drain or another method for managing the base flow must be provided. All channels must have outlets that are protected from erosion.
2. Level spreader. A device used to prevent erosion and to improve infiltration by spreading storm water runoff evenly over the ground as shallow flow instead of through channels. It usually involves a depression in the soil surface that disperses flow onto a flatter area across a slight slope and then releases the flow onto level vegetated areas. This reduces flow speed and increases infiltration. Construction specifications for level spreaders include:
o
Level spreaders should be constructed on natural soils and not on fill material or easily erodible soils. There should be a level entrance to the spreader to ensure the flow can be evenly distributed. Heavy equipment and traffic should not be allowed on the level spreader, as they can cause compaction of soil and disturbance of the slope grade. The spreader should be regraded if ponding or erosion channels develop. Dense vegetation should be sustained and damaged areas reseeded when necessary.
o o
3. Outlet protection. This involves placing structurally lined aprons or other appropriate energy-dissipating devices at the outlets of pipes to reduce the velocity of storm water flows and thereby prevent scouring at storm water outlets, protect the outlet structure, and minimize potential for erosion downstream. Construction specifications for outlet protection practices require the following:
o o
No bends occur in the horizontal alignment. There is no slope along the length of the apron, and the invert elevations must be equal at the receiving channel and the apron's downstream end. No overfall at the end of the apron is allowed. If a pipe discharges into a well-defined channel, the channel's side slopes may not be steeper than 2:1. The apron is lined with riprap, grouted riprap, concrete, or gabion baskets, with all riprap conforming to standards and specifications, and the median-sized stone for riprap is specified in the plan Filter cloth, conforming to standards and specifications, must be placed between riprap and the underlying soil to prevent any soil movement through the riprap.
o o
All grout for grouted riprap must be one part Portland cement for every 3 parts sand, mixed thoroughly with water. Once stones are in place, the spaces between them are to be filled with grout to a minimum depth of 6 inches, with the deeper portions choked with fine material. All concrete aprons must be installed as specified in the plan. The end of the paved channel in a paved channel outlet must be smoothly joined with the receiving channel section, with no overfall at the end of the paved section.
o o
4. Paved flume. A permanent paved channel that is constructed on a slope through which storm water runoff can be diverted down the face of the slope without causing erosion problems on or below the slope. Paved flumes are not recommended unless very high flows with excessive erosive power are expected, because increased runoff velocity might magnify erosion at the flume's outfall. Outfall protection must be provided to prevent damage from high-velocity flows. The paved flume also prevents infiltration of surface runoff, exacerbating offsite runoff problems. Where possible, vegetated channels should be used-additional stabilization can be provided with rip-rap, gabions, or turf reinforcement mats. Construction specifications for paved flumes require that:
o
The subgrade must be constructed to required elevations, with all soft portions and unsuitable material removed and replaced with suitable material, must be thoroughly compacted and smoothed to a uniform surface, and must be moist when the concrete is poured. The slope of the structure may be no more than 1.5:1. Curtain walls must be attached to the beginning and end of any paved flumes that are not adjoined to another structure, and the curtain walls should be the same width as the flume channel, at least 6 inches thick, and extend at least 18 inches into the soil under the channel. Anchor lugs must be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center, continuous with the channel lining for the length of the flume; they must be the same width as the bottom of the flume channel, at least 6 inches thick, and extend at least 1 foot into the soil under the channel. There should be at least a 4-inch thickness of class A-3 concrete with welded wire fabric in the center of the flume channel for reinforcement. Traverse joints should be provided at approximately 20-foot intervals or when there are more than 45 minutes between consecutive concrete placements in order to control cracks. Expansion joints should be provided approximately every 90 feet. Outlets of the paved flumes should be protected from erosion through the use of an energy-dissipating device with outlet protection, as described previously.
o o
o o
Stabilization. Immediately after the ridge and channel are constructed, they must be seeded and mulched along with any disturbed areas that drain into the diversion. Sediment-trapping measures must remain in place in case the upslope area is not stabilized, to prevent soil from moving into the diversion. All obstructions and unsuitable material, such as trees, brush, and stumps, must be removed from the channel area and disposed of so the diversion may function properly. The channel must meet grade and cross-section specifications, and any fill that is used must be free from excessive organic debris, rocks, or other unsuitable material and must be compacted to ensure equal settlement. Disturbed areas should be permanently stabilized according to applicable local standards and specifications. Limitations The area around the channel that is disturbed by its construction must be stabilized so that it is not subject to similar erosion as the steep slope the channel is built to protect. Maintenance Considerations Diversions should be inspected after every rainfall and a minimum of once every 2 weeks before final stabilization. Channels should be cleared of sediment, repairs made when necessary, and seeded areas reseeded if a vegetative cover is not established. References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. Second Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, VA.
10
Preserving Natural Vegetation Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description The principal advantage of preserving natural vegetation is the protection of desirable trees, vines, bushes, and grasses from damage during project development. Vegetation provides erosion control, storm water detention, biofiltration, and aesthetic values to a site during and after construction activities. Other benefits from preserving natural areas are because natural vegetation
Can process higher quantities of storm water runoff than newly seeded areas Does not require time to establish Has a higher filtering capacity than newly planted vegetation because aboveground and root structures are typically denser Reduces storm water runoff by intercepting rainfall, promoting infiltration, and lowering the water table through transpiration Provides buffers and screens against noise and visual disturbance Provides a fully developed habitat for wildlife Usually requires less maintenance (e.g., irrigation, fertilizer) than planting new vegetation Enhances aesthetics.
Applicability Preservation of natural vegetation is applicable to all construction sites where vegetation exists in the predevelopment condition. Areas where preserving vegetation can be particularly beneficial are floodplains, wetlands, stream banks, steep slopes, and other areas where erosion controls would be difficult to establish, install, or maintain. Only land needed for building activities and vehicle traffic needs to be cleared. Siting and Design Considerations Vegetation should be marked for preservation before clearing activities begin. A site map should be prepared with the locations of trees and boundaries of environmentally sensitive areas and buffer zones to be preserved. The location of roads, buildings, and other structures can be planned to avoid these areas. Preservation requires careful site management to minimize the impact of construction activities on existing vegetation. Large trees located near construction zones should be protected
11
because damage during construction activities may result in reduced vigor or death after construction has ceased. The boundaries around contiguous natural areas and tree drip lines should be extended and marked to protect the root zone from damage. Although direct contact by equipment is an obvious means of damage to trees and other vegetation, compaction, filling, or excavation of land too close to the vegetation also can cause severe damage. When selecting trees for preservation, the following factors should be considered:
Tree vigor. Preserving healthy trees that will be less susceptible to damage, disease, and insects. Indicators of poor vigor include dead tips of branches, stunted leaf growth, sparse foliage, and pale foliage color. Hollow, rotten, split, cracked, or leaning trees also have less chance of survival. Tree age. Older trees are more aesthetically pleasing as long as they are healthy. Tree species. Species well-suited to present and future site conditions should be chosen. Preserving a mixture of evergreens and hardwoods can help to conserve energy when evergreens are preserved on the northern side of the site to protect against cold winter winds and deciduous trees are preserved on the southern side to provide shade in the summer and sunshine in the winter. Wildlife benefits. Trees that are preferred by wildlife for food, cover, and nesting should be chosen.
Other considerations include following natural contours and maintaining preconstruction drainage patterns. Alteration of hydrology might result in dieoff of preserved vegetation because their environmental requirements are no longer met. The following are basic considerations for preservation of natural vegetation:

Boards should not be nailed to trees during building operations. Tree roots inside the tree drip line should not be cut. Barriers should be used to prevent the approach of equipment within protected areas. Equipment, construction materials, topsoil, and fill dirt should not be placed within the limit of preserved areas. If a tree or shrub that is marked for preservation is damaged, it should be removed and replaced with a tree of the same or similar species with a 2-inch or larger caliper width from balled and burlaped nursery stock when construction activity is complete. During final site cleanup, barriers around preserved areas and trees should be removed.
Limitations Preservation of vegetation is limited by the extent of existing vegetation in preconstruction conditions. It requires planning to preserve and maintain the existing vegetation. It is also limited by the size of the site relative to the size of structures to be built. High land prices might prohibit preservation of natural areas. Additionally, equipment must have enough room to maneuver; in some 12
cases preserved vegetation might block equipment traffic and may constrict the area available for construction activities. Finally, improper grading of a site might result in changes in environmental conditions that result in vegetation dieoff. Consideration should be given to the hydrology of natural or preserved areas when planning the site. Maintenance Considerations Even if precautions are taken, some damage to protected areas may occur. In such cases, damaged vegetation should be repaired or replaced immediately to maintain the integrity of the natural system. Continued maintenance is needed to ensure that protected areas are not adversely impacted by new structures. Newly planted vegetation should be planned to enhance the existing vegetation. Effectiveness Natural vegetation (existing trees, vines, brushes, and grasses) can provide water quality benefits by intercepting rainfall, filtering storm water runoff, and preventing off-site transport of sediments and other pollutants. Cost Considerations A potential cost associated with preservation of natural vegetation is increased labor that might be required to maneuver around trees or protected areas. References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
13
Construction Entrances Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description The purpose of stabilizing entrances to a construction site is to minimize the amount of sediment leaving the area as mud and sediment attached to motorized vehicles. Installing a pad of gravel over filter cloth where construction traffic leaves a site can help stabilize a construction entrance. As a vehicle drives over the gravel pad, mud and sediment are removed from the vehicle's wheels and offsite transport of soil is reduced. The gravel pad also reduces erosion and rutting on the soil beneath the stabilization structure. The filter fabric separates the gravel from the soil below, preventing the gravel from being ground into the soil. The fabric also reduces the amount of rutting caused by vehicle tires by spreading the vehicle's weight over a larger soil area than just the tire width. In addition to removal of sediment by simple friction of vehicle tires on the gravel pad, a vehicle washing station can be established at the site entrance. Wash stations, if used on a routine basis, remove a substantial amount of sediment from vehicles before they leave the site. Diverting runoff from vehicle washing stations into a sediment trap helps ensure that sediment removed from vehicles is kept on-site and disposed of properly. Applicability Typically, stabilized construction entrances are installed at locations where construction traffic leaves or enters an existing paved road. However, the applicability of site entrance stabilization should be extended to any roadway or entrance where vehicles will access or leave the site. From a public relations point of view, stabilizing construction site entrances can be a worthwhile exercise. If the site entrance is the most publicly noticeable part of a construction site, stabilized entrances can improve the appearance to passersby and improve public perception of the construction project. Siting and Design Considerations All entrances to a site should be stabilized before construction and further disturbance of the site area begins. The stabilized site entrances should be long and wide enough so that the largest construction vehicle that will enter the site will fit in the entrance with room to spare. If many vehicles are expected to use an entrance in any one day, the site entrance should be wide enough for the passage of two vehicles at the same time with room on either side of each vehicle. If a site entrance leads to a paved road, the end of the entrance should be "flared" (made wider as in the shape of a funnel) so that long vehicles do not leave the stabilized area when turning onto or off of the paved roadway. If a construction site entrance crosses a stream, swale, or other depression, a bridge or culvert should be
14
provided to prevent erosion from unprotected banks. Stone and gravel used to stabilize the construction site entrance should be large enough so that they are not carried off site with vehicle traffic. In addition, sharp-edged stone should be avoided to reduce the possibility of puncturing vehicle tires. Stone or gravel should be installed at a depth of at least 6 inches for the entire length and width of the stabilized construction entrance. Limitations Although stabilizing a construction entrance is a good way to help reduce the amount of sediment leaving a site, some soil may still be deposited from vehicle tires onto paved surfaces. To further reduce the chance of these sediments polluting storm water runoff, sweeping of the paved area adjacent to the stabilized site entrance is recommended. For sites using wash stations, a reliable water source to wash vehicles before leaving the site might not be initially available. In this case, water may have to be trucked to the site at additional cost. Maintenance Considerations Stabilization of site entrances should be maintained until the remainder of the construction site has been fully stabilized. Stone and gravel might need to be periodically added to each stabilized construction site entrance to keep the entrance effective. Soil that is tracked offsite should be swept up immediately for proper disposal. For sites with wash racks at each site entrance, sediment traps will have to be constructed and maintained for the life of the project. Maintenance will entail the periodic removal of sediment from the traps to ensure their continued effectiveness. Effectiveness Stabilizing construction entrances to prevent sediment transport off-site is effective only if all entrances to the site are stabilized and maintained. Also, stabilization of construction site entrances may not be very effective unless a wash rack is installed and routinely used (Corish, 1995). This can be problematic for sites with multiple entrances and high vehicle traffic. Cost Considerations Without a wash rack, construction site entrance stabilization costs range from $1,000 to $4,000. On average, the initial construction cost is around $2,000 per entrance. Including maintenance costs for a 2-year period, the average total annual cost is approximately $1,500. If a wash rack is included in the construction site entrance stabilization, the initial construction costs range from $1,000 to $5,000, with an average initial cost of $3,000 per entrance. The total cost, including maintenance for an estimated 2-year life span, is approximately $2,200 per year (USEPA, 1993).
15
References Corish, K. 1995. Clearing and Grading Strategies for Urban Watersheds. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
16
Stabilize drainage ways
Check Dams Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Check dams are small, temporary dams constructed across a swale or channel. Check dams can be constructed using gravel, rock, sandbags, logs, or straw bales and are used to slow the velocity of concentrated flow in a channel. By reducing the velocity of the water flowing through a swale or channel, check dams reduce the erosion in the swale or channel. As a secondary function, check dams can also be used to catch sediment from the channel itself or from the contributing drainage area as storm water runoff flows through the structure. However, the use of check dams in a channel should not be a substitute for the use of other sediment-trapping and erosion control measures. As with most other temporary structures, check dams are most effective when used in combination with other storm water and erosion and sediment control measures. Applicability Check dams should be used in swales or channels that will be used for a short period of time where it is not practical to line the channel or implement other flow control practices (USEPA, 1993). In addition, check dams are appropriate where temporary seeding has been recently implemented but has not had time to take root and fully develop. Check dams are usually used in small open channels with a contributing drainage area of 2 to 10 acres. For a given swale or channel, multiple check dams, spaced at appropriate intervals, can increase overall effectiveness. If dams are used in a series, they should be spaced such that the base of the upstream dam is at the same elevation as the top of the next downstream dam (VDCR, 1995). Siting and Design Considerations Check dams can be constructed from a number of different materials. Most commonly, they are made of rock, logs, sandbags, or straw bales. When using rock or stone, the material diameter should be 2 to 15 inches. Logs should have a diameter of 6 to 8 inches. Regardless of the material used, careful construction of a check dam is necessary to ensure its effectiveness. Dams should be installed with careful placement of the construction material. Mere dumping of the dam material into a channel is not appropriate and will reduce overall effectiveness. All check dams should have a maximum height of 3 feet. The center of the dam should be at least 6 inches lower than the edges. This design creates a weir effect that helps to channel flows away from 17
the banks and prevent further erosion. Additional stability can be achieved by implanting the dam material approximately 6 inches into the sides and bottom of the channel (VDCR, 1995). When installing more than one check dam in a channel, outlet stabilization measures should be installed below the final dam in the series. Because this area is likely to be vulnerable to further erosion, riprap, geotextile lining, or some other stabilization measure is highly recommended. Limitations Check dams should not be used in live, flowing streams unless approved by an appropriate regulatory agency (USEPA, 1992; VDCR, 1995). Because the primary function of check dams is to slow runoff in a channel, they should not be used as a stand-alone substitute for other sedimenttrapping devices. Also, leaves have been shown to be a significant problem by clogging check dams in the fall. Therefore, they might necessitate increased inspection and maintenance. Maintenance Considerations Check dams should be inspected after each storm event to ensure continued effectiveness. During inspection, large debris, trash, and leaves should be removed. The center of a check dam should always be lower than its edges. If erosion or heavy flows cause the edges of a dam to fall to a height equal to or below the height of the center, repairs should be made immediately. Accumulated sediment should be removed from the upstream side of a check dam when the sediment has reached a height of approximately one-half the original height of the dam (measured at the center). In addition, all accumulated sediment should also be removed prior to removing a check dam. Removal of a check dam should be completed only after the contributing drainage area has been completely stabilized. Permanent vegetation should replace areas from which gravel, stone, logs, or other material have been removed. If the check dam is constructed of rock or gravel, maintenance crews should be sure to clear all small rock and gravel pieces from vegetated areas before attempting to mow the grass between check dams. Failure to remove stones and gravel can result in serious injury from flying debris. Effectiveness Field experience has shown that rock check dams are more effective than silt fences or straw bales to stabilize wet-weather ditches (VDCR, 1995). For long channels, check dams are most effective when used in a series, creating multiple barriers to sediment-laden runoff. Cost Considerations The cost of check dams varies based on the material used for construction and the width of the channel to be dammed. In general, it is estimated that check dams constructed of rock cost about $100 per dam (USEPA, 1992). Other materials, such as logs and sandbags, may be less expensive, but they might require higher maintenance costs.
18
References USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. VDCR. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. Second Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, VA. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1992. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Technical manual. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
19
Filter Berms Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description A gravel or stone filter berm is a temporary ridge made up of loose gravel, stone, or crushed rock that slows, filters, and diverts flow from an open traffic area and acts as an efficient form of sediment control. A specific type of filter berm is the continuous berm, a geosynthetic fabric that encapsulates sand, rock, or soil. Applicability Gravel or stone filter berms are most suitable in areas where vehicular traffic needs to be rerouted because roads are under construction, or in traffic areas within a construction site. Siting and Design Considerations The following construction guidelines should be considered when building the berm:

Well-graded gravel or crushed rock should be used to build the berm. Berms should be spaced according to the steepness of the slope, with berms spaced closer together as the slope increases. Sediment that builds up should be removed and disposed of and the filter material should be replaced. Regular inspection should indicate the frequency of sediment removal needed.
Limitations Berms are intended to be used only in gently sloping areas. They do not last very long, and they require maintenance due to clogging from mud and soil on vehicle tires. Maintenance Considerations The berm should be inspected after every rainfall to ensure that sediment has not built up and that no damage has been done by vehicles. It is important that repairs be performed at the first sign of deterioration to ensure that the berm is functioning properly. Effectiveness The effectiveness of a rock filter berm depends upon rock size, slope, soil, and rainfall amount. The continuous berm is not staked into the ground and no trenching is required. Effectiveness has been rated at up to 95 percent for sediment removal, but is highly dependent on local conditions including hydrologic, hydraulic, topographic, and sediment characteristics.
20
Cost Considerations Construction materials for filter berms (mainly gravel) are relatively low cost, but installation and regular cleaning and maintenance can result in substantial labor costs. These maintenance costs are lower in areas of less traffic, gentler slopes, and low rainfall. References Fifield, S.J. 1997. Field Manual for Effective Sediment and Erosion Control Methods. Hydrodynamics, Inc., Parker, CO. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
21
Grass-Lined Channels Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Grass-lined channels convey storm water runoff through a stable conduit. Vegetation lining the channel reduces the flow velocity of concentrated runoff. Grassed channels usually are not designed to control peak runoff loads by themselves and are often used in combination with other BMPs, such as subsurface drains and riprap stabilization. Where moderately steep slopes require drainage, grassed channels can include excavated depressions or check dams to enhance runoff storage, decrease flow rates, and enhance pollutant removal. Peak discharges can be reduced through temporary detention in the channel. Pollutants can be removed from storm water by filtration through vegetation, by deposition, or in some cases by infiltration of soluble nutrients into the soil. The degree of pollutant removal in a channel depends on the residence time of water in the channel and the amount of contact with vegetation and the soil surface. As a result, removal efficiency is highly dependent on local conditions. Applicability Grassed channels should be used in areas where erosion-resistant conveyances are needed, including areas with highly erodible soils and moderately steep slopes (although less than 5 percent). They should only be installed where space is available for a relatively large cross section. Grassed channels have a limited ability to control runoff from large storms and should not be used in areas where flow rates exceed 5 feet per second. Siting and Design Considerations Grass-lined channels should be sited in accordance with the natural drainage system and should not cross ridges. The channel design should not have sharp curves or significant changes in slope. The channel should not receive direct sedimentation from disturbed areas and should be sited only on the perimeter of a construction site to convey relatively clean storm water runoff. Channels should be separated from disturbed areas by a vegetated buffer or other BMP to reduce sediment loads. Basic design recommendations for grassed channels include the following:
Construction and vegetation of the channel should occur before grading and paving activities begin. Design velocities should be less than 5 feet per second.
22
Geotextiles can be used to stabilize vegetation until it is fully established. Covering the bare soil with sod, mulches with netting, or geotextiles can provide reinforced storm water conveyance immediately. Triangular-shaped channels are used with low velocities and small quantities of runoff; parabolic grass channels are used for larger flows and where space is available; trapezoidal channels are used with large flows of low velocity (low slope). Outlet stabilization structures should be installed if the runoff volume or velocity has the potential to exceed the capacity of the receiving area. Channels should be designed to convey runoff from a 10-year storm without erosion. The sides of the channel should be sloped less than 2:1, and triangular-shaped channels along roads should be sloped 2:1 or less for safety. All trees, brushes, stumps, and other debris should be removed during construction.
Effectiveness Grass-lined channels can effectively transport storm water from construction areas if they are designed for expected flow rates and velocities and if they do not receive sediment directly from disturbed areas. Limitations Grassed channels, if improperly installed, can alter the natural flow of surface water and have adverse impacts on downstream waters. Additionally, if the design capacity is exceeded by a large storm event, the vegetation might not be sufficient to prevent erosion and the channel might be destroyed. Clogging with sediment and debris reduces the effectiveness of grass-lined channels for storm water conveyance. Maintenance Considerations Maintenance requirements for grass channels are relatively minimal. During the vegetation establishment period, the channels should be inspected after every rainfall. Other maintenance activities that should be carried out after vegetation is established are mowing, litter removal, and spot vegetation repair. The most important objective in the maintenance of grassed channels is the maintaining of a dense and vigorous growth of turf. Periodic cleaning of vegetation and soil buildup in curb cuts is required so that water flow into the channel is unobstructed. During the growing season, channel grass should be cut no shorter than the level of design flow. Cost Considerations Costs of grassed channels range according to depth, with a 1.5-foot-deep, 10-foot-wide grassed channel estimated between $6,395 and $17,075 per trench, while a 3.0-foot-deep, 21-foot-wide grassed channel is estimated at $12,909 to $33,404 per trench (SWRPC, 1991). Grassed channels can be left in place permanently after the construction site is stabilized to contribute to long-term storm water management. The channels, in combination with other practices that detain, filter, and
23
infiltrate runoff, can substantially reduce the size of permanent detention facilities such as storm water ponds and wetlands, thereby reducing the overall cost of storm water management. References FHWA. 1995. Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. FHWA-SLP-94-005. Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, VA. MPCA. 1998. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Division of Water Quality, St. Paul, MN. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. SWRPC. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical Report No. 31. Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI.
24
Riprap Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Riprap is a permanent, erosion-resistant layer made of stones. It is intended to protect soil from erosion in areas of concentrated runoff. Riprap may also be used to stabilize slopes that are unstable because of seepage problems. Applicability Riprap can be used to stabilize cut-and-fill slopes; channel side slopes and bottoms; inlets and outlets for culverts, bridges, slope drains, grade stabilization structures, and storm drains; and streambanks and grades. Siting and Design Considerations Riprap may be unstable on very steep slopes, especially when rounded rock is used. For slopes steeper than 2:1, consider using materials other than riprap for erosion protection. If riprap is being planned for the bottom of a permanently flowing channel, the bottom can be modified to enhance fish habitat. This can be done by constructing riffles and pools which simulate natural conditions. These riffles promote aeration and the pools provide deep waters for habitats. The following are some design recommendations for riprap installation, (Smolen et al., 1988):

Gradation. A well-graded mixture of rock sizes should be used instead of one uniform size. Quality of stone. Riprap must be durable so that freeze/thaw cycles do not decompose it in a short time; most igneous stones such as granite have suitable durability. Riprap depth. The thickness of riprap layers should be at least 2 times the maximum stone diameter. Filter material. Filter material is usually required between riprap and the underlying soil surface to prevent soil from moving through the riprap; a filter cloth material or a layer of gravel is usually used for the filter. Leaching Protection. Leaching can be controlled by installing a riprap gradation small enough to act as a filter against the channel base material, or a protective filter can be installed between the riprap and the base material. Riprap Limits. The riprap should extend for the maximum flow depth, or to a point where vegetation will be satisfactory to control erosion.
25
Curves. Riprap should extend to five times the bottom width upstream and downstream of the beginning and ending of the curve as well as the entire curved section. Riprap Size. The size of riprap to be installed depends on site-specific conditions.
Limitations Riprap is limited by steepness of slope, because slopes greater than 2:1 have potential riprap loss due to erosion and sliding. When working within flowing streams, measures should be taken to prevent excessive turbidity and erosion during construction. Bypassing base flows or temporarily blocking base flows are two possible methods. Effectiveness When properly designed and installed, riprap can prevent virtually all erosion from the protected area. Maintenance Considerations Riprap should be inspected annually and after major storms. If riprap has been damaged, repairs should be made promptly to prevent a progressive failure. If repairs are needed repeatedly at one location, the site should be evaluated to determine if the original design conditions have changed. Channel obstructions such as trees and sediment bars can change flow patterns and cause erosive forces that may damage riprap. Control of weed and brush growth may be needed in some locations. Cost Considerations The cost of riprap varies depending on location and the type of material selected. A cost of $35 to $50 per square yard of nongrouted riprap has been reported, while grouted riprap ranges from $45 to $60 per square yard (1993 dollars; Mayo et al., 1993). Alternatives to riprap channel lining include grass, sod, and concrete, which cost $3, $7, $8, $12, and $25 to $30 per square yard, respectively (1993 dollars, Mayo et al., 1993). References FHWA. 1995. Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. FHWA-SLP-94-005. Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, VA. Mayo, L., D. Lehman, L. Olinger, B. Donavan, and P. Mangarella. 1993. Urban BMP Cost and Effectiveness Summary Data for 6217(g) Guidance: Erosion and Sediment Control During Construction. Woodward-Clyde Consultants. MPCA. 1998. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Division of Water Quality, St. Paul, MN. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. SWRPC. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical Report No. 31. Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI.
26
Erosion Control
Stabilize exposed soils
Chemical Stabilization Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Chemical stabilizers, also known as soil binders or soil palliatives, provide temporary soil stabilization. Materials made of vinyl, asphalt, or rubber are sprayed onto the surface of exposed soils to hold the soil in place and protect against erosion from runoff and wind. Chemicals used for stabilization are easily applied to the surface of the soil, can be effective in stabilizing areas where vegetative practices cannot be established, and provide immediate protection. Applicability Chemical stabilization can be used in areas where other methods of stabilization such as temporary seeding or permanent vegetation are not effective because of environmental constraints. They can also be used in combination with vegetative or perimeter practices to enhance erosion and sediment control. Siting and Design Considerations The application rates and procedures recommended by the manufacturer of a chemical stabilization product should be followed as closely as possible to prevent the products from forming ponds and to avoid creating impervious areas where storm water cannot infiltrate. Limitations Chemical stabilization can create impervious surfaces where water cannot infiltrate and which might increase storm water runoff. Overuse of chemical stabilizers might adversely affect water quality, although the chemicals' impacts on wildlife are still unknown. Additionally, chemical stabilization is usually more expensive than vegetative practices. Maintenance Considerations Chemically stabilized areas should be regularly inspected for signs of erosion. Stabilizers should be reapplied if necessary.
27
Effectiveness Effectiveness of polymer stabilization methods ranges from 70 percent to 90 percent, although effectiveness of a particular polymer depends on soil type, application method, and individual chemical characteristics of the polymer (Aicardo, 1996). Cost Considerations Polyacrylamide, one of the more common soil palliatives, costs between $4 and $35 per pound; a pound can stabilize approximately 1 acre of land. References Aicardo, R. 1996. Screening of Polymers to Determine Their Potential Use in Erosion Control on Construction Sites. In Proceedings from Conference held at College of Southern Idaho: Managing Irrigation-Induced Erosion and Infiltration with Polyacrylamide, May 68, 1996, Twin Falls, ID. University of Idaho Miscellaneous Publication No. 101-96. Terra Firma Industries. 1999. Soil Master WR. [www.terra-firma-ind.com/smaster.htm]. Last updated December 10, 1999. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
28
Mulching Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Mulching is a temporary erosion control practice in which materials such as grass, hay, wood chips, wood fibers, straw, or gravel are placed on exposed or recently planted soil surfaces. Mulching is highly recommended as a stabilization method and is most effective when used in conjunction with vegetation establishment. In addition to stabilizing soils, mulching can reduce storm water runoff velocity. When used in combination with seeding or planting, mulching can aid plant growth by holding seeds, fertilizers, and topsoil in place, preventing birds from eating seeds, retaining moisture, and insulating plant roots against extreme temperatures. Mulch mattings are materials such as jute or other wood fibers that are formed into sheets and are more stable than loose mulch. Jute and other wood fibers, plastic, paper, or cotton can be used individually or combined into mats to hold mulch to the ground. Netting can be used to stabilize soils while plants are growing, although netting does not retain moisture or insulate against extreme temperatures. Mulch binders consist of asphalt or synthetic materials that are sometimes used instead of netting to bind loose mulches. Applicability Mulching is often used in areas where temporary seeding cannot be used because of environmental constraints. Mulching can provide immediate, effective, and inexpensive erosion control. On steep slopes and critical areas such as waterways, mulch matting is used with netting or anchoring to hold it in place. Mulches can be used on seeded and planted areas where slopes are steeper than 2:1 or where sensitive seedlings require insulation from extreme temperatures or moisture retention. Siting and Design Considerations When possible, organic mulches should be used for erosion control and plant material establishment. Suggested materials include loose straw, netting, wood cellulose, or agricultural silage. All materials should be free of seed, and loose hay or straw should be anchored by applying tackifier, stapling netting over the top, or crimping with a mulch crimping tool. Materials that are heavy enough to stay in place (for example, gravel or bark or wood chips on flat slopes) do not need anchoring. Other examples include hydraulic mulch products with 100-percent post-consumer paper content, yard trimming composts, and wood mulch from recycled stumps and tree parts. Inorganic mulches such as pea gravel or crushed granite can be used in unvegetated areas. Mulches may or may not require a binder, netting, or tacking. Effective use of netting and matting material requires firm, continuous contact between the materials and the soil. If there is no contact, 29
the material will not hold the soil and erosion will occur underneath the material. Grading is not necessary before mulching. There must be adequate coverage to prevent erosion, washout, and poor plant establishment. If an appropriate tacking agent is not applied, or is applied in insufficient amounts, mulch is lost to wind and runoff. The channel grade and liner must be appropriate for the amount of runoff, or there will be resulting erosion of the channel bottom. Also, hydromulch should be applied in spring, summer, or fall to prevent deterioration of mulch before plants can become established. Table 1 presents guidelines for installing mulches. Table 1. Typical mulching materials and application rates
Material Organic Mulches Straw Wood fiber or wood cellulose Wood chips Bark Nets and Mats Jute net Excelsior (wood fiber) mat Fiberglass roving Cover area Heavy, uniform; woven of single jute yarn. Used with organic mulch. Withstands water flow. 12 tons 1 ton 56 tons 35 yd3 Dry, unchopped, unweathered; avoid weeds. Spread by hand or machine; must be tacked or tied down. Use with hydroseeder; may be used to tack straw. Do not use in hot, dry weather. Air dry. Add fertilizer Apply with blower, chip handler, or by hand. Not N, 12 lb/ton. for fine turf areas. Air dry, shredded, or hammermilled, or chips Apply with mulch blower, chip handler, or by hand. Do not use asphalt tack. Rate per Acre Requirements Notes
Cover area Continuous fibers of drawn glass bound together with a nontoxic agent. Apply with compressed air ejector. Tack with emulsified asphalt at a rate of 2535 gal./1000 ft.2
1 ton
Limitations Mulching, matting, and netting might delay seed germination because the cover changes soil surface temperatures. The mulches themselves are subject to erosion and may be washed away in a large storm. Maintenance is necessary to ensure that mulches provide effective erosion control. Maintenance Considerations Mulches must be anchored to resist wind displacement. Netting should be removed when protection is no longer needed and disposed of in a landfill or composted. Mulched areas should be inspected frequently to identify areas where mulch has loosened or been removed, especially after rainstorms. Such areas should be reseeded (if necessary) and the mulch cover replaced immediately. Mulch 30
binders should be applied at rates recommended by the manufacturer. If washout, breakage, or erosion occurs, surfaces should be repaired, reseeded, and remulched, and new netting should be installed. Inspections should be continued until vegetation is firmly established. Effectiveness Mulching effectiveness varies according to the type of mulch used. Soil loss reduction for different mulches ranges from 53 to 99.8 percent. Water velocity reductions range from 24 to 78 percent. Table 2 shows soil loss and water velocity reductions for different mulch treatments. Table 2. Measured reductions in soil loss for different mulch treatments (Source: Harding, 1990, as cited in USEPA, 1993)
Mulch Characteristics 100% wheat straw/top net 100% wheat straw/two nets 70% wheat straw/30% coconut fiber 70% wheat straw/30% coconut fiber 100% coconut fiber Nylon monofilament/two nets Nylon monofilament/rigid/bonded Vinyl monofilament/flexible/bonded Curled wood fibers/top net Curled wood fibers/two nets Antiwash netting(jute) Interwoven paper and thread Uncrimped wheat straw, 2,242 kg/ha Uncrimped wheat straw, 4,484 kg/ha Soil Loss Reduction (%) 97.5 98.6 98.7 99.5 98.4 99.8 53.0 89.6 90.4 93.5 91.8 93.0 84.0 89.3 Water Velocity Reduction (% relative to bare soil) 73 56 71 78 77 74 24 32 47 59 59 53 45 59
In addition, a study by Hetzog et al. (1998) concluded that mulching provides a high rate of sediment and nutrient pollution prevention. In addition, this study also found that seeding or mulching added value to a site in the eyes of the developers, real estate agents, and homebuyers that more than offset the cost of seeding or mulching.
31
Cost Considerations Costs of seed and mulch average $1,500 per acre and range from $800 to $3,500 per acre (USEPA, 1993). References Harding, M.V. 1990. Erosion Control Effectiveness: Comparative Studies of Alternative Mulching Techniques. Environmental Restoration, pp. 149156, as cited in USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Hetzog et al., 1998. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
32
Permanent Seeding Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Permanent seeding is used to control runoff and erosion on disturbed areas by establishing perennial vegetative cover from seed. It is used to reduce erosion, to decrease sediment yields from disturbed areas, and to provide permanent stabilization. This practice is economical, adaptable to different site conditions, and allows selection of the most appropriate plant materials. Applicability Permanent seeding is well-suited in areas where permanent, long-lived vegetative cover is the most practical or most effective method of stabilizing the soil. Permanent seeding can be used on roughly graded areas that will not be regraded for at least a year. Vegetation controls erosion by protecting bare soil surfaces from displacement by raindrop impacts and by reducing the velocity and quantity of overland flow. The advantages of seeding over other means of establishing plants include lower initial costs and labor inputs. Siting and Design Considerations Areas to be stabilized with permanent vegetation must be seeded or planted 1 to 4 months after the final grade is achieved unless temporary stabilization measures are in place. Successful plant establishment can be maximized with proper planning; consideration of soil characteristics; selection of plant materials that are suitable for the site; adequate seedbed preparation, liming, and fertilization; timely planting; and regular maintenance. Climate, soils, and topography are major factors that dictate the suitability of plants for a particular site. The soil on a disturbed site might require amendments to provide sufficient nutrients for seed germination and seedling growth. The surface soil must be loose enough for water infiltration and root penetration. Soil pH should be between 6.0 and 6.5 and can be increased with liming if soils are too acidic. Seeds can be protected with mulch to retain moisture, regulate soil temperatures, and prevent erosion during seedling establishment. Depending on the amount of use permanently seeded areas receive, they can be considered high- or low-maintenance areas. High-maintenance areas are mowed frequently, limed and fertilized regularly, and either (1) receive intense use (e.g., athletic fields) or (2) require maintenance to an aesthetic standard (e.g., home lawns). Grasses used for high-maintenance areas are long-lived perennials that form a tight sod and are fine-leaved. High-maintenance vegetative cover is used for homes, industrial parks, schools, churches, and recreational areas. Low-maintenance areas are mowed infrequently or not at all and do not receive lime or fertilizer on a regular basis. Plants must be able to persist with minimal maintenance over long periods of time. 33
Grass and legume mixtures are favored for these sites because legumes fix nitrogen from the atmosphere. Sites suitable for low-maintenance vegetation include steep slopes, stream or channel banks, some commercial properties, and "utility" turf areas such as road banks. Limitations The effectiveness of permanent seeding can be limited because of the high erosion potential during establishment, the need to reseed areas that fail to establish, limited seeding times depending on the season, and the need for stable soil temperature and soil moisture content during germination and early growth. Permanent seeding does not immediately stabilize soilstemporary erosion and sediment control measures should be in place to prevent off-site transport of pollutants from disturbed areas. Maintenance Considerations Grasses should emerge within 428 days and legumes 528 days after seeding, with legumes following grasses. A successful stand should exhibit the following:

Vigorous dark green or bluish green seedlings, not yellow Uniform density, with nurse plants, legumes, and grasses well intermixed Green leavesperennials should remain green throughout the summer, at least at the plant bases.
Seeded areas should be inspected for failure, and necessary repairs and reseeding should be made as soon as possible. If a stand has inadequate cover, the choice of plant materials and quantities of lime and fertilizer should be reevaluated. Depending on the condition of the stand, areas can be repaired by overseeding or reseeding after complete seedbed preparation. If timing is bad, rye grain or German millet can be overseeded to thicken the stand until a suitable time for seeding perennials. Consider seeding temporary, annual species if the season is not appropriate for permanent seeding. If vegetation fails to grow, soil should be tested to determine if low pH or nutrient imbalances are responsible. On a typical disturbed site, full plant establishment usually requires refertilization in the second growing season. Soil tests can be used to determine if more fertilizer needs to be added. Do not fertilize cool season grasses in late May through July. Grass that looks yellow may be nitrogen deficient. Do not use nitrogen fertilizer if the stand contains more than 20 percent legumes. Effectiveness Perennial vegetative cover from seeding has been shown to remove between 50 and 100 percent of total suspended solids from storm water runoff, with an average removal of 90 percent (USEPA, 1993). Cost Considerations Seeding costs range from $200 to $1,000 per acre and average $400 per acre. Maintenance costs range from 15 to 25 percent of initial costs and average 20 percent (USEPA, 1993).
34
References FHWA. 1995. Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. FHWA-SLP-94-005. Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, VA. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. Terra Firma Industries. 2000. Hydroseeding. [www.terra-firma-ind.com/hydroseeding.htm]. Last updated May 31, 2000. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
35
Sodding Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Sodding is a permanent erosion control practice that involves laying a continuous cover of grass sod on exposed soils. In addition to stabilizing soils, sodding can reduce the velocity of storm water runoff. Sodding can provide immediate vegetative cover for critical areas and stabilize areas that cannot be vegetated by seed. It also can stabilize channels or swales that convey concentrated flows and can reduce flow velocities. Applicability Sodding is appropriate for any graded or cleared area that might erode, requiring immediate vegetative cover. Locations particularly well-suited to sod stabilization are:
Residential or commercial lawns and golf courses where prompt use and aesthetics are important Steeply-sloped areas Waterways and channels carrying intermittent flow Areas around drop inlets that require stabilization.
Siting and Design Considerations Sodding eliminates the need for seeding and mulching and produces more reliable results with less maintenance. Sod can be laid during times of the year when seeded grasses are likely to fail. The sod must be watered frequently within the first few weeks of installation. The type of sod selected should be composed of plants adapted to site conditions. Sod composition should reflect environmental conditions as well as the function of the area where the sod will be laid. The sod should be of known genetic origin and be free of noxious weeds, diseases, and insects. The sod should be machine cut at a uniform soil thickness of 15 to 25 mm at the time of establishment (this does not include top growth or thatch). Soil preparation and additions of lime and fertilizer may be needed; soils should be tested to determine if amendments are needed. Sod should be laid in strips perpendicular to the direction of waterflow and staggered in a brick-like pattern. The corners and middle of each strip should be stapled firmly. Jute or plastic netting may be pegged over the sod for further protection against washout during establishment. Areas to be sodded should be cleared of trash, debris, roots, branches, stones and clods larger than 2 inches in diameter. Sod should be harvested, delivered, and installed within a period of 36 hours. Sod not transplanted within this period should be inspected and approved prior to its installation.
36
Limitations Compared to seed, sod is more expensive and more difficult to obtain, transport, and store. Care must be taken to prepare the soil and provide adequate moisture before, during, and after installation to ensure successful establishment. If sod is laid on poorly prepared soil or unsuitable surface, the grass will die quickly because it is unable to root. Sod that is not adequately irrigated after installation may cause root dieback because grass does not root rapidly and is subject to drying out. Maintenance Considerations Watering is very important to maintain adequate moisture in the root zone and to prevent dormancy, especially within the first few weeks of installation, until it is fully rooted. Mowing should not result in the removal of more than one-third of the shoot. Grass height should be maintained between 2 and 3 inches. After the first growing season, sod might require additional fertilization or liming. Permanent, fine turf areas require yearly maintenance fertilization. Warm-season grass should be fertilized in late spring to early summer, and cool-season grass, in late winter and again in early fall. Effectiveness Sod has been shown to remove up to 99 percent of total suspended solids in runoff. It is therefore a highly effective management practice for erosion and sediment control, but its trapping efficiency is highly variable depending on hydrologic, hydraulic, vegetation, and sediment characteristics. Cost Considerations Average construction costs of sod average $0.20 per square foot and range from $0.10 to $1.10 per square foot; maintenance costs are approximately 5 percent of installation costs (USEPA, 1993). References FHWA. 1995. Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. FHWA-SLP-94-005. Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, VA. Landscape USA. No date. Installing Sod for an Instant Lawn. [www.landscapeusa.com/tips/turf.htm]. Accessed January 2001. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
37
Soil Roughening Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Soil roughening is a temporary erosion control practice often used in conjunction with grading. Soil roughening involves increasing the relief of a bare soil surface with horizontal grooves, stair-stepping (running parallel to the contour of the land), or tracking using construction equipment. Slopes that are not fine graded and that are left in a roughened condition can also reduce erosion. Soil roughening reduces runoff velocity, increases infiltration, reduces erosion, traps sediment, and prepares the soil for seeding and planting by giving seed an opportunity to take hold and grow. Applicability Soil roughening is appropriate for all slopes. Soil roughening works well on slopes greater than 3:1, on piles of excavated soil, and in areas with highly erodible soils. This technique is especially appropriate for soils that are frequently mowed or disturbed because roughening is relatively easy to accomplish. To slow erosion, roughening should be done as soon as possible after the vegetation has been removed form the slope. Roughening can be used with both seeding and planting and temporary mulching to stabilize an area. For steeper slopes and slopes that will be left roughened for longer periods of time, a combination of surface roughening and vegetation is appropriate. Roughening should be performed immediately after grading activities have ceased (temporarily or permanently) in an area. Siting and Design Considerations Rough slope surfaces are preferred because they aid the establishment of vegetation, improve infiltration, and decrease runoff velocity. Graded areas with smooth, hard surfaces might seem appropriate, but such surfaces may increase erosion potential. A rough soil surface allows surface ponding that protects lime, fertilizer, and seed. Grooves in the soil are cooler and provide more favorable moisture conditions than hard, smooth surfaces. These conditions promote seed germination and vegetative growth. It is important to avoid excessive compacting of the soil surface, especially when tracking, because soil compaction inhibits vegetation growth and causes higher runoff velocity. Therefore, it is best to limit roughening with tracked machinery to sandy soils that do not compact easily and to avoid tracking on heavy clay soils, particularly when wet. Roughened areas should be seeded as quickly as possible. Proper dust control procedures also should be followed when soil roughening.
38
There are different methods for achieving a roughened soil surface on a slope. The selection of an appropriate method depends on the type of slope and the available equipment. Roughening methods include stair-step grading, grooving, and tracking. Factors to consider when choosing a method are slope steepness, mowing requirements, whether the slope is formed by cutting or filling, and available equipment. The following methods can be used for surface roughening Cut slope roughening for areas that will not be mowed. Stair-step grades or groove-cut slopes should be used for gradients steeper than 3:1. Stair-step grading should be used on any erodible material that is soft enough to be ripped with a bulldozer. Slopes consisting of soft rock with some subsoil are particularly suited to stair-step grading. The vertical cut distance should be less than the horizontal distance, and the horizontal portion of the step should be slightly sloped toward the vertical wall. Individual vertical cuts should not be made more than 2 feet deep in soft materials or more than 3 feet deep in rocky materials. Grooving. This technique uses machinery to create a series of ridges and depressions that run across the slope along the contour. Grooves should be made using any appropriate implement that can be safely operated on the slope, such as disks, tillers, spring harrows, or the teeth on a front-end loader bucket. The grooves should be made more than 3 inches deep and less than 15 inches apart. Fill slope roughening for areas that will not be mowed. Fill slopes with a gradient steeper than 3:1 should be placed in lifts less than 9 inches, and each lift should be properly compacted. The face of the slope should consist of loose, uncompacted fill 4 to 6 inches deep. Grooving should be used as described above to roughen the face of the slopes, if necessary. The final slope face should not be bladed or scraped. Cuts, fills, and graded areas that will be mowed. Mowed slopes should be made no steeper than 3:1. These areas should be roughened with shallow grooves less than 10 inches apart and more than 1 inch deep using normal tilling, disking, or harrowing equipment (a cultipacker-seeder can also be used). Excessive roughness is undesirable where mowing is planned. Roughening with tracked machinery. Roughening with tracked machinery should be limited to sandy soils to avoid undue compaction of the soil surface. Tracked machinery should be operated perpendicular to the slope to leave horizontal depressions in the soil. Tracking is generally not as effective as other roughening methods. Limitations Soil roughening is not appropriate for rocky slopes. Soil compaction might occur when roughening with tracked machinery. Soil roughening is of limited effectiveness in anything more than a gentle or shallow depth rain. If roughening is washed away in a heavy storm, the surface will have to be reroughened and new seed laid. Maintenance Considerations Areas need to be inspected after storms, since roughening might need to be repeated. Regular inspection of roughened slopes will indicate where additional erosion and sediment control measures are needed. If rills (small watercourses that have steep sides and are usually only a few inches deep) appear, they should be filled, graded again, and reseeded immediately. Proper dust control methods should be used. 39
Effectiveness Soil roughening provides moderate erosion protection for bare soils while vegetative cover is being established. It is inexpensive and simple for short-term erosion control when used with other erosion and sediment controls. Cost Considerations Soil roughening is inexpensive with respect to cost of materials but requires the use of heavy equipment. References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
40
Protect steep slopes
Geotextiles Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Geotextiles are porous fabrics also known as filter fabrics, road rugs, synthetic fabrics, construction fabrics, or simply fabrics. Geotextiles are manufactured by weaving or bonding fibers made from synthetic materials such as polypropylene, polyester, polyethylene, nylon, polyvinyl chloride, glass, and various mixtures of these materials. As a synthetic construction material, geotextiles are used for a variety of purposes such as separators, reinforcement, filtration and drainage, and erosion control (USEPA, 1992). Some geotextiles are made of biodegradable materials such as mulch matting and netting. Mulch mattings are jute or other wood fibers that have been formed into sheets and are more stable than normal mulch. Netting is typically made from jute, wood fiber, plastic, paper, or cotton and can be used to hold the mulching and matting to the ground. Netting can also be used alone to stabilize soils while the plants are growing; however, it does not retain moisture or temperature well. Mulch binders (either asphalt or synthetic) are sometimes used instead of netting to hold loose mulches together. Geotextiles can aid in plant growth by holding seeds, fertilizers, and topsoil in place. Fabrics are relatively inexpensive for certain applications. A wide variety of geotextiles exist to match the specific needs of the site. Applicability Geotextiles can be used alone for erosion control. Geotextiles can be used as matting, which is used to stabilize the flow of channels or swales or to protect seedlings on recently planted slopes until they become established. Matting may be used on tidal or stream banks, where moving water is likely to wash out new plantings. They can also be used to protect exposed soils immediately and temporarily, such as when active piles of soil are left overnight. Geotextiles are also used as separators; for example, as a separator between riprap and soil. This "sandwiching" prevents the soil from being eroded from beneath the riprap and maintains the riprap's base. Siting and Design Considerations There are many types of geotextiles available. Therefore, the selected fabric should match its purpose. State or local requirements, design procedures, and any other applicable requirements should be considered. Effective netting and matting require firm, continuous contact between the
41
materials and the soil. If there is no contact, the material will not hold the soil, and erosion will occur underneath the material. Limitations Geotextiles (primarily synthetic types) have the potential disadvantage of being sensitive to light and must be protected prior to installation. Some geotextiles might promote increased runoff and might blow away if not firmly anchored. Depending on the type of material used, geotextiles might need to be disposed of in a landfill, making them less desirable than vegetative stabilization. If the fabric is not properly selected, designed, or installed, the effectiveness may be reduced drastically. Maintenance Considerations Regular inspections should be made to determine if cracks, tears, or breaches have formed in the fabric; if so, it should be repaired or replaced immediately. It is necessary to maintain contact between the ground and the geotextile at all times. Trapped sediment should be removed after each storm event. Effectiveness Geotextiles' effectiveness depends upon the strength of the fabric and proper installation. For example, when protecting a cut slope with a geotextile, it is important to properly anchor the fabric. This will ensure that it will not be undermined by a storm event. Cost Considerations Costs for geotextiles range from $0.50 to $10.00 per square yard, depending on the type chosen (SWRCP, 1991). References Rolanka International. 2000. Bio-D Mesh. [http://www.rolanka.com/biodmesh_2.shtml]. Accessed June 1, 2001. SWRPC. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical Report No. 31. Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
42
Gradient Terraces Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Gradient terraces are made of either earthen embankments or ridge and channel systems that are properly spaced and are constructed with an adequate grade. They reduce damage from erosion by collecting and redistributing surface runoff to stable outlets at slower speeds and by increasing the distance of overland runoff flow. They also surpass smooth slopes in holding moisture and help to minimize sediment loading of surface runoff. Applicability Gradient terraces are most suitable for use in areas with an existing or expected water erosion problem and no vegetation, and they are only effective when there are suitable runoff outlets provided. They are usually limited to use on long, steep slopes with a water erosion problem, or where it is anticipated that water erosion will be a problem. They should not be constructed on slopes containing rocky or sandy soil. Siting and Design Considerations Gradient terraces should be designed with adequate and appropriate outlets and should be installed according to a well-developed plan after conduction of an engineering survey and layout. Acceptable outlets include grassed waterways, vegetated areas, or tile outlets. Any outlet that is used should be able to redirect surface runoff away from the terraces and toward an area that is not susceptible to erosion or other damage. General specifications require that:

Whenever possible, vegetative cover should be used in the outlet. At the junction of the terrace and the outlet, the terrace's water surface design elevation should be no lower than the outlet's water surface design elevation when both are performing at design flow. During construction of the terrace system, dust control procedures should be followed. Proper vegetation/stabilization practices should be followed while constructing these features.
43
Limitations Gradient terraces are not appropriate for use on sandy, steep, or shallow soils. If too much water permeates the soil in a terrace system, sloughing could occur, and cut and fill costs could increase substantially. Maintenance Considerations Regular inspections of the terraces should occur after any major storms and at least once a year to ensure that the terraces are structurally sound and have not been subject to erosion. References Boaze, P., and B. Wiggins. Building a Major Highway in Mountainous East Tennessee: Environmental Impacts. Land and Water. July/August 2000: 20-23. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
44
Soil Retention Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Soil retention measures are structures or practices that are used to hold soil in place or to keep it contained within a site boundary. They may include grading or reshaping the ground to lessen steep slopes or shoring excavated areas with wood, concrete, or steel structures. Some soil-retaining measures are used for erosion control, while others are used for protection of workers during construction projects such as excavations. Applicability Grading to reduce steep slopes can be implemented at any construction site by assessing site conditions before breaking ground and reducing steep slopes where possible. Reinforced soil-retaining structures should be used when sites have very steep slopes or loose, highly erodible soils that cause other methods, such as chemical or vegetative stabilization or regrading, to be ineffective. The preconstruction drainage pattern should be maintained to the extent possible. Siting and Design Considerations Some examples of reinforced soil retaining structures include:
Skeleton sheeting. An inexpensive soil bracing system that requires soil to be cohesive and consists of construction grade lumber being used to support the excavated face of a slope Continuous sheeting. Involves using a material that covers the entire slope continuously, with struts and boards placed along the slope to support the slope face - steel, concrete, or wood should be used as the materials Permanent retaining walls. Walls of concrete masonry or wood (railroad ties) that are left in place after construction is complete in order to provide continued support of the slope
The proper design of reinforced soil-retaining structures is crucial for erosion control and safety. To ensure safety of the retaining structure, it should be designed by a qualified engineer who understands all of the design considerations, such as the nature of the soil, location of the ground water table, and the expected loads. Care should be taken to ensure that hydraulic pressure does not build up behind the retaining structure and cause failure.
45
Limitations To be effective, soil-retention structures must be designed to handle expected loads. However, heavy rains or mass wasting may damage or destroy these structures and result in sediment inputs to waterbodies. They must be properly installed and maintained to avoid failure. Maintenance Considerations Soil-stabilization structures should be inspected periodically, particularly after rainstorms, to check for erosion, damage, or other signs of deterioration. Any damage to the actual slope or ditch, such as washouts or breakage, should be repaired prior to any reinstallation of the materials for the soilstabilization structure. Effectiveness Soil-retention structures, if properly designed and installed, can effectively prevent erosion and mass wasting in areas with steep slopes and erodible soils. Their potential for failure depends on their design, installation, maintenance, and the likelihood of catastrophic events such as heavy rains, earthquakes, and landslides. Cost Considerations Slope reduction can be accomplished during site development and might not incur any additional costs. Soil stabilization structures can be expensive because they require a professional engineer to develop a design (estimated to be 25 to 30 percent of construction costs [Ferguson et al., 1997]). Depending on the size of the proposed structure and the relief of the surrounding area, excavation and installation costs might be high. Capital costs include mobilization, grading, grooving, tracking and compacting fill, and installing the structures. Labor costs for regular inspection and repairs are also a consideration. References Fergusen, T., R. Gignac, M. Stoffan, A. Ibrahim, and J. Aldrich. 1997. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project: Cost Estimating Guidelines Best Management Practices and Engineered Controls. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, MI. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. Second Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, VA.
46
Temporary Slope Drain Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description A temporary slope drain is a flexible conduit extending the length of a disturbed slope and serving as a temporary outlet for a diversion. Temporary slope drains, also called pipe slope drains, convey runoff without causing erosion on or at the bottom of the slope. This practice is a temporary measure used during grading operations until permanent drainage structures are installed and until slopes are permanently stabilized. They are typically used for less than 2 years. Applicability Temporary slope drains can be used on most disturbed slopes to eliminate gully erosion problems resulting from concentrated flows discharged at a diversion outlet. Siting and Design Considerations Recently graded slopes that do not have permanent drainage measures installed should have a temporary slope drain and a temporary diversion installed. A temporary slope drain used in conjunction with a diversion conveys storm water flows and reduces erosion until permanent drainage structures are installed. The following are design recommendations for temporary slope drains:
The drain should consist of heavy-duty material manufactured for the purpose and have grommets for anchoring at a spacing of 10 feet or less. Minimum slope drain diameters should be observed for varying drainage areas. The entrance to the pipe should consist of a standard flared section of corrugated metal; the corrugated metal pipe should have watertight joints at the ends; the rest of the pipe is typically corrugated plastic or flexible tubing, although for flatter, shorter slopes, a polyethylene-lined channel is sometimes used. The height of the diversion at the pipe should be the diameter of the pipe plus 0.5 foot. The outlet should be located at a reinforced or erosion-resistant location.
47
Limitations The area drained by a temporary slope drain should not exceed 5 acres. Physical obstructions substantially reduce the effectiveness of the drain. Other concerns are failures from overtopping because of inadequate pipe inlet capacity, and reduced diversion channel capacity and ridge height. Maintenance Considerations The slope drain should be inspected after each rainfall to determine if capacity was exceeded or if blockages occurred. Repairs should be made promptly. Construction equipment and vehicular traffic must be rerouted around slope drains. References FHWA. 1995. Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. FHWA-SLP-94-005. Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, VA. MPCA. 1998. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Division of Water Quality, St. Paul, MN. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. 1999. Urban Storm Drainage: Criteria Manual. Denver, CO.
48
Protect waterways
Temporary Stream Crossings Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description A temporary steam crossing is a structure erected to provide a safe and stable way for construction vehicle traffic to cross a running watercourse. The primary purpose of such a structure is to provide streambank stabilization, reduce the risk of damaging the streambed or channel, and reduce the risk of sediment loading from construction traffic. A temporary stream crossing may be a bridge, a culvert, or a ford.
Applicability Temporary stream crossings are applicable wherever heavy construction equipment must be moved from one side of a stream channel to the other, or where lighter construction vehicles will cross the stream a number of times during the construction period. In either case, an appropriate method for ensuring the stability of the streambanks and preventing large-scale erosion is necessary. A bridge or culvert is the best choice for most temporary stream crossings. If properly designed, each can support heavy loads and materials used to construct most bridges, and culverts can be salvaged after they are removed. Fords are appropriate in steep areas subject to flash flooding, where normal flow is shallow or intermittent across a wide channel. Fords should be used only where stream crossings are expected to be infrequent. Siting and Design Considerations Because of the potential for stream degradation, flooding, and safety hazards, stream crossings should be avoided on a construction site whenever possible. Consideration should be given to alternative routes to accessing a site before arrangements are made to erect a temporary stream crossing. If it is determined that a stream crossing is necessary, an area where the potential for
49
erosion is low should be selected. If possible, the stream crossing structure should be selected during a dry period to reduce sediment transport into the stream. If needed, over-stream bridges are generally the preferred temporary stream crossing structure. The expected load and frequency of the stream crossing, however, will govern the selection of a bridge as the correct choice for a temporary stream crossing. Bridges usually cause minimal disturbance to a stream's banks and cause the least obstruction to stream flow and fish migration. They should be constructed only under the supervision and approval of a qualified engineer. As general guidelines for constructing temporary bridges, clearing and excavation of the stream shores and bed should be kept to a minimum. Sufficient clearance should be provided for floating objects to pass under the bridge. Abutments should be parallel to the stream and on stable banks. If the stream is less than 8 feet wide at the point a crossing is needed, no additional in-stream supports should be used. If the crossing is to extend across a channel wider than 8 feet (as measured from top of bank to top of bank), the bridge should be designed with one in-water support for each 8 feet of stream width. A temporary bridge should be anchored by steel cable or chain on one side only to a stable structure on shore. Examples of anchoring structures include large-diameter trees, large boulders, and steel anchors. By anchoring the bridge on one side only, there is a decreased risk of downstream blockage or flow diversion if a bridge is washed out. When constructing a culvert, filter cloth should be used to cover the streambed and streambanks to reduce settlement and improve the stability of the culvert structure. The filter cloth should extend a minimum of 6 inches and a maximum of 1 foot beyond the end of the culvert and bedding material. The culvert piping should not exceed 40 feet in length and should be of sufficient diameter to allow for complete passage of flow during peak flow periods. The culvert pipes should be covered with a minimum of 1 foot of aggregate. If multiple culverts are used, at least 1 foot of aggregate should separate the pipes. Fords should be constructed of stabilizing material such as large rocks. Limitations Bridges can be considered the greatest safety hazard of all temporary stream crossing structures if not properly designed and constructed. Bridges might also prove to be more costly in terms of repair costs and lost construction time if they are washed out or collapse (Smolen et al., 1988). The construction and removal of culverts are usually very disturbing to the surrounding area, and erosion and downstream movement of soils is often great. Culverts can also create obstructions to flow in a stream and inhibit fish migration. Depending on their size, culverts can be blocked by large debris in a stream and are therefore vulnerable to frequent washout. If given a choice between building a bridge or a culvert as a temporary stream crossing, a bridge is preferred because of the relative minimal disturbance to streambanks and the opportunity for unimpeded flow through the channel. The approaches to fords often have high erosion potential. In addition, excavation of the streambed and approach to lay riprap or other stabilization material causes major stream disturbance. Mud and
50
other debris are transported directly into the stream unless the crossing is used only during periods of low flow. Maintenance Considerations Temporary stream crossings should be inspected at least once a week and after all significant rainfall events. If any structural damage is reported to a bridge or culvert, construction traffic should stop use of the structure until appropriate repairs are made. Evidence of streambank erosion should be repaired immediately. Fords should be inspected closely after major storm events to ensure that stabilization materials remain in place. If the material has moved downstream during periods of peak flow, the lost material should be replaced immediately. Effectiveness Both temporary bridges and culverts provide an adequate path for construction traffic crossing a stream or watercourse. Cost Considerations Generally speaking, temporary bridges are more expensive to design and construct than culverts. Bridges are also associated with higher maintenance and repair costs should they fail. Additional costs may accrue to the site team in terms of lost construction time if a temporary structure is washed out or otherwise fails. References British Columbia Ministry of Forests. No date. Forest Practices Code Stream Crossing for Fish Streams Guidebook. [www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/legsregs/fpc/fpcguide/stream/figure19.htm]. Accessed January 2001. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. VDCR. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. Second Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, VA.
51
Vegetated Buffer Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Vegetated buffers are areas of either natural or established vegetation that are maintained to protect the water quality of neighboring areas. Buffer zones reduce the velocity of storm water runoff, provide an area for the runoff to permeate the soil, contribute to ground water recharge, and act as filters to catch sediment. The reduction in velocity also helps to prevent soil erosion. Applicability Vegetated buffers can be used in any area that is able to support vegetation but they are most effective and beneficial on floodplains, near wetlands, along streambanks, and on steep, unstable slopes. They are also effective in separating land use areas that are not compatible and in protecting wetlands or waterbodies by displacing activities that might be potential sources of nonpoint source pollution. Siting and Design Considerations To establish an effective vegetative buffer, the following guidelines should be followed:

Soils should not be compacted. Slopes should be less than 5 percent. Buffer widths should be determined after careful consideration of slope, vegetation, soils, depth to impermeable layers, runoff sediment characteristics, type and quantity of storm water pollutants, and annual rainfall. Buffer widths should increase as slope increases. Zones of vegetation (native vegetation in particular), including grasses, deciduous and evergreen shrubs, and understory and overstory trees, should be intermixed. In areas where flows are concentrated and velocities are high, buffer zones should be combined with other structural or nonstructural BMPs as a pretreatment.
52
Limitations Vegetated buffers require plant growth before they can be effective, and land on which to plant the vegetation must be available. If the cost of the land is very high, buffer zones might not be costeffective. Although vegetated buffers help to protect water quality, they usually do not effectively counteract concentrated storm water flows to neighboring or downstream wetlands. Maintenance Considerations Keeping vegetation healthy in vegetated buffers requires routine maintenance, which (depending on species, soil types, and climatic conditions) can include weed and pest control, mowing, fertilizing, liming, irrigating, and pruning. Inspection and maintenance are most important when buffer areas are first installed. Once established, vegetated buffers do not require much maintenance beyond the routine procedures listed earlier and periodic inspections of the areas, especially after any heavy rainfall and at least once a year. Inspections should focus on encroachment, gully erosion, density of vegetation, evidence of concentrated flows through the areas, and any damage from foot or vehicular traffic. If there is more than 6 inches of sediment in one place, it should be removed. Effectiveness Several researchers have measured greater than 90 percent reductions in sediment and nitrate concentrations. Buffer/filter strips do a reasonably good job of removing phosphorus attached to sediment, but are relatively ineffective in removing dissolved phosphorus (Gilliam, 1994). References Gilliam, J.W. 1994. Reparian Wetlands and Water Quality. Journal of Environmental Quality. 23:896-900. As cited in Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. 1998. Guidebook of Best Management Practices for Michigan Watersheds. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Surface Water Quality Division, Lansing, MI. Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. 2000. Awareness and Communication Project Reports, Appendix E: Photographs. [http://www.gov.ns.ca/nsaf/home.htm]. Last updated January 1997. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1996. Protecting Natural Wetlands: A Guide to Stormwater Best Management Practices. EPA 843-B-96-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
53
Phase construction
Construction Sequencing Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Construction sequencing requires creating and following a work schedule that balances the timing of land disturbance activities and the installation of measures to control erosion and sedimentation, in order to reduce on-site erosion and off-site sedimentation. Applicability Construction sequencing can be used to plan earthwork and erosion and sediment control (ESC) activities at sites where land disturbances might affect water quality in a receiving waterbody. Siting and Design Considerations Construction sequencing schedules should, at a minimum, include the following:

The ESC practices that are to be installed Principal development activities Which measures should be installed before other activities are started Compatibility with the general contract construction schedule
Table 1 summarizes other important scheduling considerations in addition to those listed above. Limitations Weather and other unpredictable variables may affect construction sequence schedules. However, the proposed schedule and a protocol for making changes due to unforeseen problems should be plainly stated in the ESC plan.
54
Table 1. Scheduling considerations for construction activities. Construction Activity Construction accessentrance to site, construction routes, areas designated for equipment parking Schedule Consideration This is the first land-disturbing activity. As soon as construction begins, stabilize any bare areas with gravel and temporary vegetation.
After construction site is accessed, principal basins Sediment traps and barriersbasin traps, should be installed, with the addition of more traps and sediment fences, outlet protection barriers as needed during grading. Runoff controldiversions, perimeter dikes, water bars, outlet protection Key practices should be installed after the installation of principal sediment traps and before land grading. Additional runoff control measures may be installed during grading.
If necessary, stabilize stream banks as soon as possible, Runoff conveyance systemstabilize and install principal runoff conveyance system with stream banks, storm drains, channels, inlet runoff control measures. The remainder of the systems and outlet protection, slope drains may be installed after grading. Implement major clearing and grading after installation Land clearing and gradingsite of principal sediment and key runoff-control measures, preparation (cutting, filling, and grading, and install additional control measures as grading sediment traps, barriers, diversions, drains, continues. Clear borrow and disposal areas as needed, surface roughening) and mark trees and buffer areas for preservation. Surface stabilizationtemporary and permanent seeding, mulching, sodding, riprap Temporary or permanent stabilizing measures should be applied immediately to any disturbed areas where work has been either completed or delayed.
Building constructionbuildings, utilities, During construction, install any erosion and paving sedimentation control measures that are needed. Landscaping and final stabilization topsoiling, trees and shrubs, permanent seeding, mulching, sodding, riprap This is the last construction phase. Stabilize all open areas, including borrow and spoil areas, and remove and stabilize all temporary control measures.
Maintenance Considerations The construction sequence should be followed throughout the project and the written plan should be modified before any changes in construction activities are executed. The plan can be updated if a site inspection indicates the need for additional erosion and sediment control.
55
Effectiveness Construction sequencing can be an effective tool for erosion and sediment control because it ensures that management practices are installed where necessary and when appropriate. The plan must be followed and updated if needed to maximize the effectiveness of ESC under changing conditions. Cost Considerations Construction sequencing is a low-cost BMP because it requires a limited amount of a contractor's time to provide a written plan for the coordination of construction activities and management practices. Additional time might be needed to update the sequencing plan if the current plan is not providing sufficient ESC. References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC.
56
Dust Control Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Dust control measures are practices that help reduce surface and air movement of dust from disturbed soil surfaces. Construction sites are good candidates for dust control measures because land disturbance from clearing and excavation generates a large amount of soil disturbance and open space for wind to pick up dust particles. To illustrate this point, limited research at construction sites has established an average dust emission rate of 1.2 tons/acre/month for active construction (WA Dept. of Ecology, 1992). These airborne particles pose a dual threat to the environment and human health. First, dust can be carried off-site, thereby increasing soil loss from the construction area and increasing the likelihood of sedimentation and water pollution. Second, blowing dust particles can contribute to respiratory health problems and create an inhospitable working environment. Applicability Dust control measures are applicable to any construction site where dust is created and there is the potential for air and water pollution from dust traveling across the landscape or through the air. Dust control measures are particularly important in arid or semiarid regions, where soil can become extremely dry and vulnerable to transport by high winds. Also, dust control measures should be implemented on all construction sites where there will be major soil disturbances or heavy construction activity, such as clearing, excavation, demolition, or excessive vehicle traffic. Earthmoving activities are the major source of dust from construction sites, but traffic and general disturbances can also be major contributors (WA Dept. of Ecology, 1992). The particular dust control measures that are implemented at a site will depend on the topography and land cover of a given site, as well as the soil characteristics and expected rainfall at the site. Siting and Design Considerations When designing a dust control plan for a site, the amount of soil exposed will dictate the quantity of dust generation and transport. Therefore, construction sequencing and disturbing only small areas at a time can greatly reduce problematic dust from a site. If land must be disturbed, additional temporary stabilization measures should be considered prior to disturbance. A number of methods can be used to control dust from a site. The following is a brief list of some control measures and their design criteria. Not all control measures will be applicable to a given site. The owner, operator, and contractors responsible for dust control at a site will have to determine which practices accommodate their needs based on specific site and weather conditions.
57
Sprinkling/Irrigation. Sprinkling the ground surface with water until it is moist is an effective dust control method for haul roads and other traffic routes (Smolen et al., 1988). This practice can be applied to almost any site. Vegetative Cover. In areas not expected to handle vehicle traffic, vegetative stabilization of disturbed soil is often desirable. Vegetative cover provides coverage to surface soils and slows wind velocity at the ground surface, thus reducing the potential for dust to become airborne. Mulch. Mulching can be a quick and effective means of dust control for a recently disturbed area (Smolen et al., 1988). Wind Breaks. Wind breaks are barriers (either natural or constructed) that reduce wind velocity through a site and therefore reduce the possibility of suspended particles. Wind breaks can be trees or shrubs left in place during site clearing or constructed barriers such as a wind fence, snow fence, tarp curtain, hay bale, crate wall, or sediment wall (USEPA, 1992). Tillage. Deep tillage in large open areas brings soil clods to the surface where they rest on top of dust, preventing it from becoming airborne. Stone. Stone may be an effective dust deterrent for construction roads and entrances or as a mulch in areas where vegetation cannot be established. Spray-on Chemical Soil Treatments (palliatives). Examples of chemical adhesives include anionic asphalt emulsion, latex emulsion, resin-water emulsions, and calcium chloride. Chemical palliatives should be used only on mineral soils. When considering chemical application to suppress dust, consideration should be taken as to whether the chemical is biodegradable or water-soluble and what effect its application could have on the surrounding environment, including waterbodies and wildlife.
Table 1 shows application rates for some common spray-on adhesives, as recommended by Smolen et al. (1988). Table 1. Application rates for spray-on adhesives (Source: Smolen et al., 1988)
Spray-on Adhesive Anionic Asphalt Emulsion Latex Emulsion Resin in Water Water Dilution Type of Nozzle Application (gal/ac) 7:1 12.5:1 4:1 Coarse Spray Fine Spray Fine Spray 1,200 235 300
Limitations In areas where evaporation rates are high, water application to exposed soils may require near constant attention. If water is applied in excess, irrigation may create unwanted excess runoff from the site and possibly create conditions where vehicles could track mud onto public roads. Chemical
58
applications should be used sparingly and only on mineral soils (not muck soils) because their misuse can create additional surface water pollution from runoff or contaminate ground water. Chemical applications might also present a health risk if excessive amounts are used. Maintenance Considerations Because dust controls are dependent on specific site and weather conditions, inspection and maintenance are unique for each site. Generally, however, dust control measures involving application of either water or chemicals require more monitoring than structural or vegetative controls to remain effective. If structural controls are used, they should be inspected for deterioration on a regular basis to ensure that they are still achieving their intended purpose. Effectiveness

Sprinkling/Irrigation. Not available. Vegetative Cover. Not available. Mulch. Can reduce wind erosion by up to 80 percent. Wind Breaks/Barriers. For each foot of vertical height, an 8-to 10-foot deposition zone develops on the leeward side of the barrier. The permeability of the barrier will change its effectiveness at capturing windborne sediment. Tillage. Roughening the soil can reduce soil losses by approximately 80 percent in some situations. Stone. The sizes of the stone can affect the amount of erosion to take place. In areas of high wind, small stones are not as effective as 20 cm stones. Spray-on Chemical Soil Treatments (palliatives). Effectiveness of polymer stabilization methods range from 70 percent to 90 percent, according to limited research.
Cost Considerations Chemical dust control measures can vary widely in cost, depending on specific needs of the site and level of dust control desired. One manufacturer of a chloride product estimated a cost of $1,089 per acre for application to road surfaces, but cautioned that cost estimates without a specific site evaluation are rather inaccurate.
59
References Dust Pro, Inc. No date. Erosion Control. [www.dustpro.com/erosion.html]. Accessed January 2001. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1992. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
60
Sediment Control
Install perimeter controls
Temporary Diversion Dikes, Earth Dikes, and Interceptor Dikes Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Earthen perimeter controls usually consist of a dike or a combination dike and channel constructed along the perimeter of a disturbed site. Simply defined, an earthen perimeter control is a ridge of compacted soil, often accompanied by a ditch or swale with a vegetated lining, located at the top or base of a sloping disturbed area. Depending on their location and the topography of the landscape, earthen perimeter controls can achieve one of two main goals. Located on the upslope side of a site, earthen perimeter controls help to prevent surface runoff from entering a disturbed construction site. An earthen structure located upslope can improve working conditions on a construction site by preventing an increase in the total amount of sheet flow runoff traveling across the disturbed area and thereby lessen erosion on the site. Alternatively, earthen perimeter control structures can be located on the downslope side of a site to divert sediment-laden runoff created onsite to onsite sediment trapping devices, preventing soil loss from the disturbed area. These control practices can be referred to by a number of terms, including temporary diversion dikes, earth dikes, or interceptor dikes. Generally speaking, however, all earthen perimeter controls are constructed in a similar fashion with a similar objectiveto control the velocity and/or route of sediment-laden storm water runoff. Applicability Temporary diversion dikes are applicable where it is desirable to divert flows away from disturbed areas such as cut or fill slopes and to divert runoff to a stabilized outlet (EPA, 1992). The dikes can be erected at the top of a sloping area or in the middle of a slope to divert storm water runoff around a disturbed construction site. In this way, earth dikes can be used to reduce the length of the slope across which runoff will travel, thereby reducing the erosion potential of the flow. If placed at the bottom of a sloping disturbed area, diversion dikes can divert flow to a sediment trapping device. Temporary diversion dikes are usually appropriate for drainage basins smaller than 5 acres, but with
61
modifications they can be capable of servicing areas as large as 10 acres. With regular maintenance, earthen diversion dikes have a useful life span of approximately 18 months. To prevent storm water runoff from entering a site, earthen perimeter controls can be used to divert runoff from areas upslope around the disturbed construction site. This is accomplished by constructing a continuous, compacted earthen mound along the upslope perimeter of the site. As an additional control measure, a shallow ditch can accompany the earthen mound. Siting and Design Considerations The siting of earthen perimeter controls depends on the topography of the area surrounding a specific construction site and on whether the goal is to prevent sediment-laden runoff from entering the site or to keep storm water runoff from leaving the site. When determining the appropriate size and design of earthen perimeter controls, the shape of the surrounding landscape and drainage patterns should be considered. Also, the amount of runoff to be diverted, the velocity of runoff in the diversion, and the erodibility of soils on the slope and within the diversion channel or swale are essential design considerations (WSDE, 1992). Diversion dikes should be constructed and fully stabilized prior to commencement of major land disturbance. This will maximize the effectiveness of the diversion measure as an erosion and sediment control device. The top of earthen perimeter controls designed as temporary flow diversion measures should be at least 2 feet wide. Bottom width at ground level is typically 6 feet. The minimum height for earthen dikes should be 18 inches, with side slopes no steeper than 2:1. For points where vehicles will cross the dike, the slope should be no steeper than 3:1 and the mound should be constructed of gravel rather than soil. This will prolong the life of the dike and increase effectiveness at the point of vehicle crossing. If a channel is excavated along the dike, its shape can be parabolic, trapezoidal, or V-shaped. Prior to excavation or mound building, all trees, brush, stumps and other objects in the path of the diversion structure should be removed and the base of the dike should be tilled before laying the fill. The maximum design flow velocity should range from 1.5 to 5.0 feet per second, depending on the vegetative cover and soil texture. Most earthen perimeter structures are designed for short-term, temporary use. If the expected life span of the diversion structure is greater than 15 days, it is strongly recommended that both the earthen dike and the accompanying ditch be seeded with vegetation immediately after construction. This will increase the stability of the perimeter control and can decrease the need for frequent repairs and maintenance. Limitations Earth dikes are an effective means of diverting sediment-laden storm water runoff around a disturbed area. However, the concentrated runoff in the channel or ditch has increased erosion potential. To alleviate this erosion capability, diversion dikes must be directed to sediment trapping devices, where erosion sediment can settle out of the runoff before being discharged to surface waters. Examples of appropriate sediment trapping devices that might be used in conjunction with
62
temporary diversion structures include a sediment basin, a sediment chamber/filter, or any other structure designed to allow sediment to be collected for proper disposal. If a diversion dike crosses a vehicle roadway or entrance, its effectiveness can be reduced. Wherever possible, diversion dikes should be designed to avoid crossing vehicle pathways. Maintenance Considerations Earthen diversion dikes should be inspected after each rainfall to ensure continued effectiveness. The dike should be maintained at the original height, and any decrease in height due to settling or erosion should be repaired immediately. To remain effective, earth dikes must be compacted at all times. Regardless of rainfall frequency, dikes should be inspected at least once every 2 weeks for evidence of erosion or deterioration. Effectiveness When properly placed and maintained, earth dikes used as temporary diversions are effective for controlling the velocity and direction of storm water runoff. Used by themselves, they do not have any pollutant removal capability. Diversion dikes must be used in combination with an appropriate sediment trapping device at the outfall of the diversion channel. Cost Considerations The cost of constructing an earthen dike can be broken down into two components: (1) site preparation, including excavation, placement and compacting of fill, and grading, and (2) site development, including topsoiling and seeding for vegetative cover. The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (1991) estimated the total cost of site preparation to be $46.33 to $124.81 for a 100-foot dike with 1.5-foot-deep, 3:1 side slopes. The cost of site development was estimated at $115.52 to $375.44. The total cost was between $162 and $500. References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyall, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. Second Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, VA. Walker, J., G. Jennings, and J. Arnold, J. 1996. Water Quality and Waste Management, Erosion and Sediment Control in North Carolina. North Carolina Cooperative Extension. [http://www.abe.msstate.edu/csd-tc/nrcs/north-caro/130.html ]. Accessed on 03/09/00. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1992. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Technical Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
63
Wind Fences and Sand Fences Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description A Sand fences are barriers of small, evenly spaced wooden slats or fabric erected to reduce wind velocity and to trap blowing sand. They can be used effectively as perimeter controls around open construction sites to reduce the off-site movement of fine sediments transported by wind. They also prevent off-site damage to roads, streams, and adjacent properties. The spaces between fence slats allow wind and sediment to pass through but reduces the wind velocity, which causes sediment deposition along the fence. Applicability Wind fences are applicable to areas with a preponderance of loose, fine-textured soils that can be transported off-site by high winds. They are especially advantageous for construction sites with large areas of cleared land or in arid regions where blowing sand and dust are especially problematic. Shorefront development sites also benefit from using wind fences because they promote the formation of frontal dunes. Siting and Design Considerations Effective trapping of sediment and reduction of wind velocity occurs only when the fence is erected perpendicular to the prevailing wind. Although wind fences have been shown effective up to 22.5 degrees from perpendicular, they should be erected as close to perpendicular to the movement of wind as possible (Smolen et al., 1988). Multiple fences can be erected to increase sediment-trapping efficiency, depending on the degree of protection desired. Linear rows of fence 2 to 4 feet high and spaced 20 to 40 feet apart can be installed. When used on shoreline beaches, wind fences should be installed well away from the incoming tide. Limitations A wind fence does not control sediment carried in storm water runoff. Wind fences should be installed in conjunction with other sediment and erosion control measures that capture sediment from runoff. Maintenance Considerations Wind fences require periodic inspection to ensure that there are no breaks or gaps. Repairs should be made immediately. Sand and sediment should be cleaned from the fence area periodically to prevent their mobilization by storm water runoff.
64
Effectiveness Wind fences are very effective for promoting dune formation along shoreline areas, but are not adequate as a primary dust control or sediment-trapping measure for perimeters of construction sites. They should be used only in conjunction with other erosion and sediment control practices. Cost Considerations Wind and sand fences are relatively inexpensive to purchase, install, and maintain because they are small, easy to transport, lightweight, and constructed of low-cost materials. References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC.
65
Brush Barrier Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Brush barriers are perimeter sediment control structures used to prevent soil in storm water runoff from leaving a construction site. Brush barriers are constructed of material such as small tree branches, root mats, stone, or other debris left over from site clearing and grubbing. In some configurations, brush barriers are covered with a filter cloth to stabilize the structure and improve barrier efficiency. Applicability Brush barriers are applicable to sites where there is enough material from clearing and grubbing to form a sufficient mound of debris along the perimeter of an area. The drainage area for brush barriers must be no greater than 0.25 acre per 100 feet of barrier length. In addition, the drainage slope leading down to a brush barrier must be no greater than 2:1 and no longer than 100 feet. Brush barriers have limited usefulness because they are constructed of materials that decompose. Siting and Design Considerations A brush barrier can be constructed using only cleared material from a site, but it is recommended that the mound be covered with a filter fabric barrier to hold the material in place and increase sediment barrier efficiency. Whether a filter fabric cover is used or not, the barrier mound should be at least 3 feet high and 5 feet wide at its base. Material with a diameter larger than 6 inches should not be used, as this material may be too bulky and create void spaces where sediment and runoff will flow through the barrier. The edge of the filter fabric cover should be buried in a trench 4 inches deep and 6 inches wide on the drainage side of the barrier. This is done to secure the fabric and create a barrier to sediment while allowing storm water to pass through the water-permeable filter fabric. The filter fabric should be extended just over the peak of the brush mound and secured on the down-slope edge of the fabric by fastening it to twine or small-diameter rope that is staked securely. Limitations Brush barriers are an effective storm water runoff control only when the contributing flow has a slow velocity. Brush barriers are therefore not appropriate for high-velocity flow areas. A large amount of material is needed to construct a useful brush barrier. For sites with little material from clearing, alternative perimeter controls such as a fabric silt fence may be more appropriate. Although brush barriers provide temporary storage for large amounts of cleared material from a site, this material 66
will ultimately have to be removed from the site after construction activities have ceased and the area reaches final stabilization. Maintenance Considerations Brush barriers should be inspected after each significant rainfall event to ensure continued effectiveness. If channels form through void spaces in the barrier, the barrier should be reconstructed to eliminate the channels. Accumulated sediment should be removed from the uphill side of the barrier when sediment height reaches between 1/3 and 1/2 the height of the barrier. When the entire site has reached final stabilization, the brush barrier should be removed and disposed of properly. Effectiveness Brush barriers can be effective at reducing off-site sediment transport, and their effectiveness is greatly increased with the use of a fabric cover on the up-slope side of the brush barrier. Cost Considerations Creating brush barriers can range in cost from $390 to $620, depending upon the equipment used, vegetation type (heavy or light), fuel price, personnel, amount of filter fabric needed (if used), and the number of hours to perform the task. A common filter fabric, geotextile, can range in cost from $0.50 to $10.00/square yard, depending upon the type of geotextile used. References Casados, A., and Leyba, P. Forest Engineers, Santa Fe National Forest, personal communication, February 7, 2000. Straw Wattles. 2000. Photos: Mine1. [http://www.strawwattles.com/photos/mine1.jpg]. Accessed January 2001. VDCR. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. Second Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation.
67
Silt Fence Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Silt fences are used as temporary perimeter controls around sites where there will be soil disturbance due to construction activities. They consist of a length of filter fabric stretched between anchoring posts spaced at regular intervals along the site perimeter. The filter fabric should be entrenched in the ground between the support posts. When installed correctly and inspected frequently, silt fences can be an effective barrier to sediment leaving the site in storm water runoff. Applicability Silt fences are generally applicable to construction sites with relatively small drainage areas. They are appropriate in areas where runoff will be occurring as low-level shallow flow, not exceeding 0.5 cfs. The drainage area for silt fences generally should not exceed 0.25 acre per 100-foot fence length. Slope length above the fence should not exceed 100 feet (NAHB, 1995). Siting and Design Considerations Material for silt fences should be a pervious sheet of synthetic fabric such as polypropylene, nylon, polyester, or polyethylene yarn, chosen based on minimum synthetic fabric requirements, as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Minimum requirements for silt fence construction (Sources: USEPA, 1992; VDCR, 1995)
Physical Property Filtering Efficiency Requirements 7585% (minimum): highly dependent on local conditions
Tensile Strength at 20% (maximum) Standard Strength: 30 lbs/linear inch (minimum) Elongation Extra Strength: 50 lbs/linear inch (minimum) Ultraviolet Radiation Slurry Flow Rate 90% (minimum) 0.3 gal/ft2/min (minimum)
68
If a standard strength fabric is used, it can be reinforced with wire mesh behind the filter fabric. This can increase the effective life of the fence. In any case, the maximum life expectancy for synthetic fabric silt fences is approximately 6 months, depending on the amount of rainfall and runoff for a given area. Burlap fences have a much shorter useful life span, usually only up to 2 months. Stakes used to anchor the filter fabric should be either wooden or metal. Wooden stakes should be at least 5 feet long and have a minimum diameter of 2 inches if a hardwood such as oak is used. Softer woods such as pine should be at least 4 inches in diameter. When using metal post in place of wooden stakes, they should have a minimum weight of 1.00 to 1.33 lb/linear foot. If metal posts are used, attachment points are needed for fastening the filter fabric using wire ties. A silt fence should be erected in a continuous fashion from a single roll of fabric to eliminate unwanted gaps in the fence. If a continuous roll of fabric is not available, the fabric should overlap from both directions only at stakes or posts with a minimum overlap of 6 inches. A trench should be excavated to bury the bottom of the fabric fence at least 6 inches below the ground surface. This will help prevent gaps from forming near the ground surface that would render the fencing useless as a sediment barrier. The height of the fence posts should be between 16 and 34 inches above the original ground surface. If standard strength fabric is used in combination with wire mesh, the posts should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart. If extra-strength fabric is used without wire mesh reinforcement, the support posts should be spaced no more than 6 feet apart (VDCR, 1995). The fence should be designed to withstand the runoff from a 10-year peak storm event, and once installed should remain in place until all areas up-slope have been permanently stabilized by vegetation or other means. Limitations Silt fences should not be installed along areas where rocks or other hard surfaces will prevent uniform anchoring of fence posts and entrenching of the filter fabric. This will greatly reduce the effectiveness of silt fencing and can create runoff channels leading off site. Silt fences are not suitable for areas where large amounts of concentrated runoff are likely. In addition, open areas where wind velocity is high may present a maintenance challenge, as high winds may accelerate deterioration of the filter fabric. Silt fences should not be installed across streams, ditches, or waterways (Smolen et al., 1988). When the pores of the fence fabric become clogged with sediment, pools of water are likely to form on the uphill side of fence. Siting and design of the silt fence should account for this and care should be taken to avoid unnecessary diversion of storm water from these pools that might cause further erosion damage. Maintenance Considerations Silt fences should be inspected regularly and frequently as well as after each rainfall event to ensure that they are intact and that there are no gaps at the fence-ground interface or tears along the length of the fence. If gaps or tears are found, they should be repaired or the fabric should be replaced immediately. Accumulated sediments should be removed from the fence base when the sediment reaches one-third to one-half the height of the fence. Sediment removal should occur more 69
frequently if accumulated sediment is creating noticeable strain on the fabric and there is the possibility of the fence failing from a sudden storm event. When the silt fence is removed, the accumulated sediment also should be removed. Effectiveness USEPA (1993) reports the following effectiveness ranges for silt fences constructed of filter fabric that are properly installed and well maintained: average total suspended solids removal of 70 percent, sand removal of 80 to 90 percent, silt-loam removal of 50 to 80 percent, and silt-clay-loam removal of 0 to 20 percent. Removal rates are highly dependent on local conditions and installation. Cost Considerations Installation costs for silt fences are approximately $6.00 per linear foot (USEPA, 1992). SWRPC estimates unit costs between $2.30 and $4.50 per linear foot (SWRPC, 1991). References NAHB. 1995. Guide for Builders and Developers. National Association of Homebuilders, Washington, DC. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. SWRPC. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical report no. 31. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. VDCR. 1995. Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Field Manual. 2nd Edition. Virginia Department of Conservation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, VA.
70
Install sediment trapping devices

Sediment Basins and Rock Dams Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Sediment basins and rock dams are two ways to capture sediment from storm water runoff before it leaves a construction site. Both structures allow a shallow pool to form in an excavated or natural depression where sediment from storm water runoff can settle. Basin dewatering is achieved either through a single riser and drainage hole leading to a suitable outlet on the downstream side of the embankment or through the gravel of the rock dam. In both cases, water is released at a substantially slower rate than would be possible without the control structure. A sediment basin can be constructed by excavation or by erecting an earthen embankment across a low area or drainage swale. The basin can be either a temporary (up to 3 years) structure or a permanent storm water control measure. Sediment basins can be designed to drain completely during dry periods, or they can be constructed so that a shallow, permanent pool of water remains between storm events. However, depending on the size of the basin constructed, the basin may be considered a wet pond and subject to additional regulation. Rock dams are similar in design to sediment basins with earthen embankments. These damming structures are constructed of rock and gravel and release water from the settling pool gradually through the spaces between the rock aggregate. Applicability Sediment basins are usually used for drainage areas of 5 to 100 acres. They can be temporary or permanent structures. Generally, sediment basins designed to be used for up to 3 years are described as temporary, while those designed for longer service are said to be permanent. Temporary sediment basins can be converted into permanent storm water runoff management ponds, but they must meet all regulatory requirements for wet ponds. Sediment basins are applicable in drainage areas where it is anticipated that other erosion controls, such as sediment traps, will not be sufficient to prevent off-site transport of sediment. Choosing to construct a sediment basin with either an earthen embankment or a stone/rock dam will depend on the materials available, location of the basin, and desired capacity for storm water runoff and settling of sediments.
71
Rock dams are suitable where earthen embankments would be difficult to construct or where riprap is readily available. Rock structures are also desirable where the top of the dam structure is to be used as an overflow outlet. These riprap dams are best for drainage areas of less than 50 acres. Earthen damming structures are appropriate where failure of the dam will not result in substantial damage or loss of property or life. If properly constructed, sediment basins with earthen dams can handle storm water runoff from drainage basins as large as 100 acres. Siting and Design Considerations The potential sites for sediment basins should be investigated during the initial site evaluation. Basins should be constructed before any grading takes place within the drainage area. For structures that will be permanent, the design of the basin should be completed by a qualified professional engineer experienced in the design of dams. Sediment basins with rock dams should be limited to a drainage area of 50 acres. Rock dam height should be limited to 8 feet with a minimum top width of 5 feet. Side slopes for rock dams should be no steeper than 2:1 on the basin side of the structure and 3:1 on the outlet side. The basin side of the rock dam should be covered with fine gravel from top to bottom for a minimum of 1 foot. This will slow the drainage rate from the pool that forms and allow time for sediments to settle. The detention time should be at least 8 hours. Sediment basins with earthen embankments should be outfitted with a dewatering pipe and riser set just above the sediment removal cutoff level. The riser pipe should be located at the deepest point of the basin and extend no farther than 1 foot below the level of the earthen dam. A water-permeable cover should be placed over the primary dewatering riser pipe to prevent trash and debris from entering and clogging the spillway. To provide an additional path for water to enter the primary spillway, secondary dewatering holes can be drilled near the base of the riser pipe, provided the holes are protected with gravel to prevent sediment from entering the spillway piping. To ensure adequate drainage, the following equation can be used to approximate the total area of dewatering holes for a particular basin (Smolen et al., 1988): Ao = (As x (2h) / (T x Cd x 20,428) where Ao = total surface area of dewatering holes, ft2; As = surface area of the basin, ft2; h = head of water above the hole, ft; Cd = coefficient of contraction for an orifice, approximately 0.6; and T = detention time or time needed to dewater the basin, hours. In all cases, such structures should be designed by an appropriate professional based on local hydrologic, hydraulic, topographic, and sediment conditions.
72
Limitations Neither a sediment basin with an earthen embankment nor a rock dam should be used in areas of continuously running water (live streams). The use of sediment basins is not intended for areas where failure of the earthen or rock dam will result in loss of life, or damage to homes or other buildings. In addition, sediment basins should not be used in areas where failure will prevent the use of public roads or utilities. Maintenance Considerations Routine inspection and maintenance of sediment basins is essential to their continued effectiveness. Basins should be inspected after each storm event to ensure proper drainage from the collection pool to determine the need for structural repairs. Erosion from the earthen embankment or stones moved from rock dams should be replaced immediately. Sediment basins must be located in an area that is easily accessible to maintenance crews for removal of accumulated sediment. Sediment should be removed from the basin when its storage capacity has reached approximately 50 percent. Trash and debris from around dewatering devices should be removed promptly after rainfall events. Effectiveness The effectiveness of a sediment basin depends primarily on the sediment particle size and the ratio of basin surface area to inflow rate (Smolen et al., 1988). Basins with a large surface area-to-volume ratio will be most effective. Studies have shown that the following equation relating surface area and peak inflow rate gives a trapping efficiency greater than 75 percent for most sediment in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont regions of the Southeastern United States (Barfield and Clar, in Smolen et al., 1988): A = 0.01q where A is the basin surface area in acres and q is the peak inflow rate in cubic feet per second. USEPA (1993) estimates an average total suspended solids (TSS) removal rate for all sediment basins from 55 percent to 100 percent, with an average effectiveness of 70 percent. Cost Considerations If constructing a sediment basin with less than 50,000 ft3 of storage space, the cost of installing the basin ranges from $0.20 to $1.30 per cubic foot of storage (about $1,100 per acre of drainage). The average cost for basins with less than 50,000 ft3 of storage is approximately $0.60 per cubic foot of storage (USEPA, 1993). If constructing a sediment basin with more than 50,000 ft3 of storage space, the cost range of installing the basin ranges from $0.10 to $0.40 per cubic foot of storage (about $550 per acre of drainage). The average cost for basins with greater than 50,000 ft3 of storage is approximately $0.30 per cubic foot of storage (USEPA, 1993).
73
References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
74
Sediment Filters and Sediment Chambers Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Sediment filters are a class of sediment-trapping devices typically used to remove pollutants, primarily particulates, from storm water runoff. Generally speaking, sediment filters have four basic components: (1) inflow regulation, (2) pretreatment, (3) filter bed, and (4) outflow mechanism. Sediment chambers are merely one component of a sediment filter system. Inflow regulation refers to the diversion of storm water runoff into the sediment-trapping device. After runoff enters the filter system, it enters a pretreatment sedimentation chamber. This chamber, used as a preliminary settling area for large debris and sediments, usually consists of nothing more than a wet detention basin. As water reaches a predetermined level, it flows over a weir into a filter bed of some filter medium. The filter medium is typically sand, but it can consist of sand, soil, gravel, peat, compost, or a combination of these materials. The purpose of the filter bed is to remove smaller sediments and other pollutants from the storm water as it percolates through the filter medium. Finally, treated flow exits the sediment filter system via an outflow mechanism to return to the storm water conveyance system.
Sediment filter systems can be confined or unconfined, on-line or off-line, and aboveground or belowground. Confined sediment filters are constructed with the filter medium contained in a structure, often a concrete vault. Unconfined sediment filters are constructed without encasing the filter medium in a confining structure. As one example, sand might be placed on the banks of a permanent wet pond detention system to create an unconfined filter. On-line systems are designed to retain storm water in its original stream channel or storm drain system. Off-line systems are designed to divert storm water.
75
Applicability Sediment filters may be a good alternative for smaller construction sites where the use of a wet pond is being considered as a sediment-trapping device. Their applicability is wide ranging, and they can be used in urban areas with large amounts of highly impervious area. Because confined sand filters are man-made soil systems, they can be applied to most development sites and have few constraining factors (MWCOG, 1992). However, for all sediment filter systems, the drainage area to be serviced should be no more than 10 acres. The type of filter system chosen depends on the amount of land available and the desired location within the site. Examples of sediment filter systems include the "Delaware" sand filter and the "Austin" sand filter. The Austin sand filter, so named because it first came into widespread use in Austin, Texas, is a surface filter system that can be used in areas with space restrictions. If space is at a premium, an underground filter may be the most appropriate choice. For effective storm water sediment control at the perimeter of a site, the Delaware sand filter might be a good choice. This configuration consists of two parallel, trench-like chambers installed at a site's perimeter. The first trench (sediment chamber) provides pretreatment sediment settling before the runoff spills into the second trench (filter medium). Siting and Design Considerations Available space is likely to be the most important siting and design consideration when choosing an appropriate sediment-filtering system. As mentioned previously, the decision as to which configuration is implemented on a particular site is dependent on the amount of space on a site. Another important consideration when deciding to install sediment-filtering systems is the amount of available head. Head refers to the vertical distance available between the inflow of the filter system and the outflow point. Because most filtering systems depend on gravity as the driving force to move water through the system, if a certain amount of head is not available, the system will not be effective and might cause more harm than good. For surface and underground sand filters, a minimum head of 5 feet is suggested (Claytor and Schueler, 1996). Perimeter sand filters such as the two-chambered Delaware sand filter should have a minimum available head of 2 to 3 feet (Claytor and Schueler, 1996). The depth of filter media will vary depending on media type, but for sand filters it is recommended that the sand (0.04-inch diameter or smaller) be at least 18 inches deep, with a minimum of 4 to 6 inches of gravel for the bed of the filter. Throughout the life of a sediment filter system, there will be a need for frequent access to assess continued effectiveness and perform routine maintenance and emergency repairs. Because most maintenance of sediment filters requires manual rather than mechanical removal of sediments and debris, filter systems should be located to allow easy access. Limitations Sediment filters are usually limited to the removal of pollutants from storm water runoff. They must be used in combination with other storm water management practices to provide flood protection. Sediment filters should not be used on fill sites or near steep slopes (Livingston, 1997). In addition, sediment filters are likely to lose effectiveness in cold regions because of freezing conditions.
76
Maintenance Considerations Maintenance of storm water sediment filters can be relatively high compared to other sedimenttrapping devices. Routine maintenance includes raking the filter medium and removal of surface sediment and trash. These maintenance chores will likely need to be accomplished by manual labor rather than mechanical means. Depending on the medium used in the structure, the filter material may have to be changed or replaced up to several times a year. This will depend, among other things, on rainfall intensity and the expected sediment load. Sediment filters of all media types should be inspected monthly and after each significant rainfall event to ensure proper filtration. Trash and debris removal should be removed during inspections. Sediment should be removed from filter inlets and sediment chambers when 75 percent of the storage volume has been filled. Because filter media have the potential for high loadings of metals and petroleum hydrocarbons, the filter medium should be periodically analyzed to prevent it from reaching levels that would classify it as a hazardous waste. This is especially true on sites where solvents or other potentially hazardous chemicals will be used. Spill prevention measures should be implemented as necessary. The top 3 to 4 inches of the filter medium should be replaced on an annual basis, or more frequently if drawdown does not occur within 36 hours of a storm event. Effectiveness Treatment effectiveness will depend on a number of factors, including treatment volume; whether the filter is on-line or off-line, confined or unconfined; and the type of land use in the contributing drainage area. MWCOG (1992) state that sand filter removal rates are "high" for sediment and trace metals and "moderate" for nutrients, BOD, and fecal coliform. Removal rates can be increased slightly by using a peat/sand mixture as the filter medium due to the adsorptive properties of peat (MWCOG, 1992). Estimated pollutant removal capabilities for various storm water sediment filter systems is shown in Table 1. Table 1. Pollutant removal efficiencies for sand filters.
Source Filter System TSSa (%) TPa (%) TNa (%) Surface Sand Filter Perimeter Sand Filter Livingston, 1997
a
Other Pollutants Bacteria: 4080% Metals: 35-90% Hydrocarbons: 80%
Claytor and Schueler, 1996
85
55
35
80 6085
65 3075
45
Sand Filter (general)
3060 Metals: 3080%
TSS=total suspended solids; TP=total phosphorus; TN=total nitrogen
77
Cost Considerations MWCOG (1992) estimates cost of construction for sand filters to be between $3.00 and $10.00 per cubic foot of runoff treated. Annual costs are estimated to be approximately 5 percent of construction costs. References Claytor, R., and T. Schueler. 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Center for Watershed Protection, Silver Spring, MD. Livingston. 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Watershed Management Institute, Ingleside, MD. MWCOG. 1992. A Current Assessment of Urban Best Management Practices: Techniques for Reducing Non-Point Source Pollution in the Coastal Zone. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Department of Environmental Programs, Washington, DC.
78
Sediment Trap Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Sediment traps are small impoundments that allow sediment to settle out of runoff water. They are usually installed in a drainageway or other point of discharge from a disturbed area. Temporary diversions can be used to direct runoff to the sediment trap (USEPA, 1993). Sediment traps are used to detain sediments in storm water runoff and trap the sediment to protect receiving streams, lakes, drainage systems, and the surrounding area. Sediment traps are formed by excavating an area or by placing an earthen embankment across a low area or drainage swale. An outlet or spillway is often constructed using large stones or aggregate to slow the release of runoff (USEPA, 1992). Applicability Sediment traps are generally temporary control measures to slow concentrated runoff velocity and catch sediment, and they can be used with other temporary storm water control measures. They are commonly used at the outlets of storm water diversion structures, channels, slope drains, construction site entrance wash racks, or any other runoff conveyance that discharges waters containing erosion sediment and debris. Sediment traps can also be used as part of a storm water drop intake protection system when the inlet is located below a disturbed area and will receive runoff with large amounts of sediment. Siting and Design Considerations Sediment traps can simplify the storm water control plan design process by trapping sediment at specific spots at a construction site (USEPA, 1992). Therefore, they should be installed as early in the construction process as possible. Natural drainage patterns should be noted, and sites where runoff from potential erosion can be directed into the traps should be selected. Sediment traps should not be located in areas where their failure due to storm water runoff excess can lead to further erosive damage of the landscape. Alternative diversion pathways should be designed to accommodate these potential overflows. A sediment trap should be designed to maximize surface area for infiltration and sediment settling. This will increase the effectiveness of the trap and decrease the likelihood of backup during and after periods of high runoff intensity. Although site conditions will dictate specific design criteria, the approximate storage capacity of each trap should be at least 1,800 ft3 per acre of total drainage area
79
(Smolen et al., 1988). The volume of a natural sedimentation trap can be approximated by the following equation (Smolen et al., 1988): Volume (ft3) = 0.4 x surface area (ft2) x maximum pool depth (ft) Care should be taken in the siting and design phase to situate sediment traps for easy access by maintenance crews. This will allow for proper inspection and maintenance on a periodic basis. When excavating an area for sediment trap implementation, side slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 and embankment height should not exceed 5 feet from the original ground surface. All embankments should be machine compacted to ensure stability. To reduce flow rate from the trap, the outlet should be lined with well-graded stone. The spillway weir for each temporary sediment trap should be at least 4 feet long for a 1-acre drainage area and increase by 2 feet for each additional drainage acre added, up to a maximum drainage area of 5 acres. Limitations Sediment traps should not be used for drainage areas greater than 5 acres (USEPA, 1993). The effective life span of these temporary structures is usually limited to 24 months (Smolen et al., 1988). Although sediment traps allow for settling of eroded soils, because of their short detention periods for storm water they typically do not remove fine particles such as silts and clays. Maintenance Considerations The primary maintenance consideration for temporary sediment traps is the removal of accumulated sediment from the basin. This must be done periodically to ensure the continued effectiveness of the sediment trap. Sediments should be removed when the basin reaches approximately 50 percent sediment capacity. A sediment trap should be inspected after each rainfall event to ensure that the trap is draining properly. Inspectors should also check the structure for damage from erosion. The depth of the spillway should be checked and maintained at a minimum of 1.5 feet below the low point of the trap embankment. Effectiveness Sediment trapping efficiency is a function of surface area, inflow rate, and the sediment properties (Smolen et al., 1988). Those traps that provide pools with large length-to-width ratios have a greater chance of success. Sediment traps have a useful life of approximately 18 to 24 months (USEPA, 1993), although ultimately effectiveness depends on the amount and intensity of rainfall and erosion, and proper maintenance. USEPA (1993) estimates an average total suspended solids removal rate of 60 percent. An efficiency rate of 75 percent can be obtained for most Coastal Plain and Piedmont soils by using the following equation (Barfield and Clar, in Smolen et al., 1988): Surface area at design flow (acres) = (0.01) peak inflow rate (cfs) Cost Considerations The cost of installing temporary sediment traps ranges from $0.20 to $2.00 per cubic foot of storage (about $1,100 per acre of drainage). The average cost is approximately $0.60 per cubic foot of storage (USEPA, 1993). 80
References Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
81
Inlet protection
Storm Drain Inlet Protection Construction Site Storm Water Control Description Storm drain inlet protection measures are controls that help prevent soil and debris from site erosion from entering storm drain drop inlets. Typically, these measures are temporary controls that are implemented prior to large-scale disturbance of the surrounding site. These controls are advantageous because their implementation allows storm drains to be used during even the early stages of construction activities. The early use of storm drains during project development significantly reduces the occurrence of future erosion problems (Smolen et al., 1988). Three temporary control measures to protect storm drain drop inlets are

Excavation around the perimeter of the drop inlet Fabric barriers around inlet entrances Block and gravel protection.
Excavation around a storm drain inlet creates a settling pool to remove sediments. Weep holes protected by gravel are used to drain the shallow pool of water that accumulates around the inlet. A fabric barrier made of porous material erected around an inlet can create an effective shield to erosion sediment while allowing water flow into the storm drain. This type of barrier can slow runoff velocity while catching soil and other debris at the drain inlet. Block and gravel inlet protection uses standard concrete blocks and gravel to form a barrier to sediments while permitting water runoff through select blocks laid sideways. In addition to the materials listed above, limited temporary storm water drop inlet protection can also be achieved with the use of straw bales or sandbags to create barriers to sediment. For permanent storm drain drop inlet protection after the surrounding area has been stabilized, sod can be installed as a barrier to slow storm water entry to storm drain inlets and capture erosion sediments. This final inlet protection measure can be used as an aesthetically pleasing way to slow storm water velocity near drop inlet entrances and to remove sediments and other pollutants from runoff. Applicability All temporary controls should have a drainage area no greater than 1 acre per inlet. It is also important for temporary controls to be constructed prior to disturbance of the surrounding landscape. Excavated drop inlet protection and block and gravel inlet protection are applicable to areas of high flow where overflow is anticipated into the storm drain. Fabric barriers are recommended for
82
smaller, relatively flat drainage areas (slopes less than 5 percent leading to the storm drain). Temporary drop inlet control measures are often used in combination with each other and other storm water control techniques. Siting and Design Considerations With the exception of sod drop inlet protection, these controls should be installed before any soil disturbance in the drainage area. Excavation around drop inlets should be dug a minimum of 1 foot deep (2 feet maximum) with a minimum excavated volume of 35 yd3 per acre disturbed. Side slopes leading to the inlet should be no steeper than 2:1. The shape of the excavated area should be designed such that the dimensions fit the area from which storm water is anticipated to drain. For example, the longest side of an excavated area should be along the side of the inlet expected to drain the largest area. Fabric inlet protection should be staked close to the inlet to prevent overflow on unprotected soils. Stakes should be used with a minimum length of 3 feet, spaced no more than 3 feet apart. A frame should be constructed for fabric support during overflow periods and should be buried at least 1 foot below the soil surface and rise to a height no greater than 1.5 feet above ground. The top of the frame and fabric should be below the down-slope ground elevation to prevent runoff bypassing the inlet. Block and gravel inlet barrier height should be 1 foot minimum (2 feet maximum), and mortar should not be used. The bottom row of blocks should be laid at least 2 inches below the soil surface flush against the drain for stability. One block in the bottom row should be placed on each side of the inlet on its side to allow drainage. Wire mesh (1/2 inch) should be placed over all block openings to prevent gravel from entering the inlet, and gravel (3/4 to 1/2 inch in diameter) should be placed outside the block structure at a slope no greater than 2:1. Sod inlet protection should not be considered until the entire surrounding drainage area is stabilized. The sod should be laid so that it extends at least 4 feet from the inlet in each direction to form a continuous mat the around inlet, laying sod strips perpendicular to the direction of flows. The sod strips should be staggered such that strip ends are not aligned, and the slope of the sodded area should not be steeper than 4:1 approaching the drop inlet. Limitations Storm water drop inlet protection measures should not be used as stand-alone sediment control measures. To increase inlet protection effectiveness, these practices should be used in combination with other measures, such as small impoundments or sediment traps (USEPA, 1992). Temporary storm drain inlet protection is not intended for use in drainage areas larger than 1 acre. Generally, storm water inlet protection measures are practical for relatively low-sediment, low-volume flows. Frequent maintenance of storm drain control structures is necessary to prevent clogging. If sediment and other debris clog the water intake, drop intake control measures can actually cause erosion in unprotected areas. Maintenance Considerations All temporary control measures must be checked after each storm event. To maintain the sediment capacity of the shallow settling pools created from these techniques, accumulated sediment should be removed from the area around the drop inlet (excavated area, around fabric barrier, or around block structure) when the sediment capacity is reduced by approximately 50 percent. Additional debris should be removed from the shallow pools on a periodic basis. Weep holes in excavated areas 83
around inlets can become clogged and prevent water from draining out of shallow pools that form. Should this happen, unclogging the water intake may be difficult and costly. Effectiveness Excavated drop inlet protection may be used to improve the effectiveness and reliability of other sediment traps and barriers, such as fabric or block and gravel inlet protection. However, as a whole, the effectiveness of inlet protection is low for erosion and sediment control, long-term pollutant removal, and low for habitat and stream protection. Cost Considerations The cost of implementing storm drain drop inlet protection measures will vary depending on the control measure chosen. Generally, initial installation costs range from $50 to $150 per inlet, with an average cost of $100 (USEPA, 1993). Maintenance costs can be high (up to 100 percent of the initial construction cost annually) due to frequent inspection and repair needs. The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission has estimated that the cost of installation of inlet protection devices ranges from $106 to $154 per inlet (SEWRPC, 1991). References SEWRPC. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical report no. 31. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC. USEPA. 1992. Stormwater Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
84
Good Housekeeping
Other wastes
General Construction Site Waste Management Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Building materials and other construction site wastes must be properly managed and disposed of to reduce the risk of pollution from materials such as surplus or refuse building materials or hazardous wastes. Practices such as trash disposal, recycling, proper material handling, and spill prevention and cleanup measures can reduce the potential for storm water runoff to mobilize construction site wastes and contaminate surface or ground water. Applicability The proper management and disposal of wastes should be practiced at any construction site to reduce storm water runoff. Waste management practices can be used to properly locate refuse piles, to cover materials that may be displaced by rainfall or storm water runoff, and to prevent spills and leaks from hazardous materials that were improperly stored. Siting and Design Considerations The following steps should be taken to ensure proper storage and disposal of construction site wastes:
Designate a waste collection area onsite that does not receive a substantial amount of runoff from upland areas and does not drain directly to a waterbody. Ensure that containers have lids so they can be covered before periods of rain, and keep containers in a covered area whenever possible. Schedule waste collection to prevent the containers from overfilling. Clean up spills immediately. For hazardous materials, follow cleanup instructions on the package. Use an absorbent material such as sawdust or kitty litter to contain the spill. During the demolition phase of construction, provide extra containers and schedule more frequent pickups. Collect, remove, and dispose of all construction site wastes at authorized disposal areas. A local environmental agency can be contacted to identify these disposal sites.
85
The following steps should be taken to ensure the proper disposal of hazardous materials:

Local waste management authorities should be consulted about the requirements for disposing of hazardous materials. A hazardous waste container should be emptied and cleaned before it is disposed of to prevent leaks. The original product label should never be removed from the container as it contains important safety information. Follow the manufacturer's recommended method of disposal, which should be printed on the label. If excess products need to be disposed of, they should never be mixed during disposal unless specifically recommended by the manufacturer.
State or local solid waste regulatory agencies or private firms should be consulted to ensure the proper disposal of contaminated soils that have been exposed to and still contain hazardous substances. Some landfills might accept contaminated soils, but they require laboratory tests first. Paint and dirt are often removed from surfaces by sandblasting. Sandblasting grits are the byproducts of this procedure and consist of the sand used and the paint and dirt particles that are removed from the surface. These materials are considered hazardous if they are removed from older structures because they are more likely to contain lead-, cadmium-, or chrome-based paints. To ensure proper disposal of sandblasting grits, a licensed waste management or transport and disposal firm should be contracted. The following practices should be used to reduce risks associated with pesticides or to reduce the amount of pesticides that come in contact with storm water:

Follow all federal, state, and local regulations that apply to the use, handling, or disposal of pesticides. Do not handle the materials any more than necessary. Store pesticides in a dry, covered area. Construct curbs or dikes to contain pesticides in case of spillage. Follow the recommended application rates and methods. Have equipment and absorbent materials available in areas where pesticides are stored and used in order to contain and clean up any spills that occur.
The following management practices should be followed to reduce the contamination risk associated with petroleum products:

Store petroleum products and fuel for vehicles in covered areas with dikes in place to contain any spills. Immediately contain and clean up any spills with absorbent materials. Have equipment available in fuel storage areas and in vehicles to contain and clean up any spills that occur.
86
Phosphorous- and nitrogen-containing fertilizers are used on construction sites to provide nutrients necessary for plant growth, and phosphorous- and nitrogen-containing detergents are found in wash water from vehicle cleaning areas. Excesses of these nutrients can be a major source of water pollution. Management practices to reduce risks of nutrient pollution include the following:

Apply fertilizers at the minimum rate and to the minimum area needed. Work the fertilizer deeply into the soil to reduce exposure of nutrients to storm water runoff. Apply fertilizer at lower application rates with a higher application frequency. Limit hydroseeding, which is the simultaneous application of lime and fertilizers. Ensure that erosion and sediment controls are in place to prevent fertilizers and sediments from being transported off-site. Use detergents only as recommended, and limit their use onsite. Wash water containing detergents should not be dumped into the storm drain systemit should be directed to a sanitary sewer or be otherwise contained so that it can be treated at a wastewater treatment plant.
Limitations An effective waste management system requires training and signage to promote awareness of the hazards of improper storage, handling, and disposal of wastes. The only way to be sure that waste management practices are being followed is to be aware of worker habits and to inspect storage areas regularly. Extra management time may be required to ensure that all workers are following the proper procedures. Maintenance Considerations Containers or equipment that may malfunction and cause leaks or spills should be identified through regular inspection of storage and use areas. Equipment and containers should be inspected regularly for leaks, corrosion, support or foundation failure, or any other signs of deterioration and should be tested for soundness. Any found to be defective should be repaired or replaced immediately. Effectiveness Waste management practices are effective only when they are regularly practiced at a construction site. Guidelines for proper handling, storage, and disposal of construction site wastes should be posted in storage and use areas, and workers should be trained in these practices to ensure that everyone is knowledgeable enough to participate. Cost Considerations The costs associated with construction site waste management are mainly attributed to purchasing and posting signs, increased management time for oversight, additional labor required for special handling of wastes, transportation costs for waste hauling, and fees charged by disposal facilities to take the wastes.
87
References California Regional Water Quality Control Board. No date. Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual. San Francisco Bay Region. USEPA. 1996. Protecting Natural Wetlands: A Guide to Stormwater Best Management Practices. EPA 843-B-96-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
88
Spill Prevention and Control Plan Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Spill prevention and control plans should clearly state measures to stop the source of a spill, contain the spill, clean up the spill, dispose of contaminated materials, and train personnel to prevent and control future spills. Applicability Spill prevention and control plans are applicable to construction sites where hazardous wastes are stored or used. Hazardous wastes include pesticides, paints, cleaners, petroleum products, fertilizers, and solvents. Siting and Design Considerations Identify potential spill or source areas, such as loading and unloading, storage, and processing areas, places where dust or particulate matter is generated, and areas designated for waste disposal. Also, spill potential should be evaluated for stationary facilities, including manufacturing areas, warehouses, service stations, parking lots, and access roads. Define material handling procedures and storage requirements, and take actions to reduce spill potential and impacts on storm water quality. This can be achieved by
Recycling, reclaiming, or reusing process materials and thereby reducing the amount of process materials that are brought into the facility Installing leak detection devices, overflow controls, and diversion berms Disconnecting any drains from processing areas that lead to the storm sewer Performing preventative maintenance on storm tanks, valves, pumps, pipes, and other equipment Using material transfer procedures or filling procedures for tanks and other equipment that minimize spills Substituting less or non-toxic materials for toxic materials.
Provide documentation of spill response equipment and procedures to be used, ensuring that procedures are clear and concise. Give step-by-step instructions for the response to spills at a particular facility. This spill response plan can be presented as a procedural handbook or a sign. The spill response plan should
89
Identify individuals responsible for implementing the plan Define safety measures to be taken with each kind of waste Specify how to notify appropriate authorities, such as police and fire departments, hospitals, or publicly owned treatment works for assistance State procedures for containing, diverting, isolating, and cleaning up the spill Describe spill response equipment to be used, including safety and cleanup equipment.
Limitations A spill prevention and control plan must be well planned and clearly defined so that the likelihood of accidental spills can be reduced and any spills that do occur can be dealt with quickly and effectively. Training might be necessary to ensure that all workers are knowledgeable enough to follow procedures. Equipment and materials for cleanup must be readily accessible and clearly marked for workers to be able to follow procedures. Maintenance Considerations Update the spill prevention and control plan to accommodate any changes in the site or procedures. Regularly inspect areas where spills might occur to ensure that procedures are posted and cleanup equipment is readily available. Effectiveness A spill prevention and control plan can be highly effective at reducing the risk of surface and ground water contamination. However, the plan's effectiveness is enhanced by worker training, availability of materials and equipment for cleanup, and extra time spent by management to ensure that procedures are followed. Cost Considerations Spill prevention and control plans are inexpensive to implement. However, extra time is needed to properly handle and dispose of spills, which results in increased labor costs. References Spill911. No date. Spill Containment: Oil and Sediment Curbguard. [www.spill911.com/acb1/showdetl.cfm?&DID=61&Product_ID =982&CATID=5]. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
90
Vehicle Maintenance and Washing Areas Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Maintenance and washing of vehicles should be conducted using environmentally responsible practices to prevent direct, untreated discharges of nutrient-enriched wastewater or hazardous wastes to surface or ground waters. This involves designating covered, paved areas for maintenance and washing, eliminating improper connections from these areas to the storm drain system, developing a spill prevention and cleanup plan for shop areas, maintaining vehicles and other equipment that may leak hazardous chemicals, covering fuel drums and other materials that are stored outdoors, and properly handling and disposing of automotive wastes and wash water. Applicability Environmentally friendly vehicle maintenance and washing practices are applicable for every construction site to prevent contamination of surface and ground water from wash water and fuel, coolant, or antifreeze spills or leaks. Siting and Design Considerations Construction vehicles should be inspected for leaks daily and repaired immediately. All used products, including oil, antifreeze, solvents, and other automotive-related chemicals, should be disposed of as directed by the manufacturer. These products are hazardous wastes that require special handling and disposal. Used oil, antifreeze, and some solvents can be recycled at a designated facility, but other chemicals must be disposed of at a hazardous waste disposal site. A local environmental agency can help to identify such facilities. Special paved areas should be designated for a vehicle repair area and a separate vehicle washing area in which runoff and wastewater from these areas is directed to the sanitary sewer system or other treatment facility as industrial process waste. Vehicle washing facilities should use highpressure water spray without any detergents as water can remove most dirt adequately. If detergents must be used, phosphate- or organic-based cleansers should be avoided to reduce nutrient enrichment and biological oxygen demand in wastewater. Only biodegradable products should be usedthey should not contain halogenated solvents. If possible, blowers or vacuums should be used instead of water to remove dry materials from vehicles. Washing areas must be clearly marked and workers should be informed that all washing must occur in this area. No other activities, such as vehicle repairs, should be conducted in the wash area. If vehicles or equipment are heavily greased
91
or soiled, the area should be bermed and covered to prevent contamination of runoff from these pollutants. Limitations Limitations for vehicle maintenance areas include the cost of waste disposal (a fee may be charged by a hazardous waste disposal facility), the cost of providing an enclosed maintenance area with proper connections to an industrial sanitary sewer, and extra labor required to follow proper storage, handling, and disposal procedures. Vehicle wash areas might require permits, depending on the volume of wastewater produced and the type of detergents used, and it might be expensive to designate an area for vehicle washing with proper connections to the industrial waste handling system. Maintenance Considerations Vehicle maintenance areas produce a substantial amount of hazardous waste that requires regular disposal. Spills must be cleaned up and cleanup materials disposed of immediately. Equipment and storage containers should be inspected regularly to identify leaks or signs of deterioration. Maintenance of vehicle wash areas is minimal and involves maintenance of berms and drainage to the sanitary sewer system. Effectiveness The techniques mentioned above are very effective at reducing discharges of untreated automotive wastes and wash water to receiving waters. Their effectiveness is highly dependent on the training and level of commitment of personnel to follow procedures. Cost Considerations Costs associated with vehicle maintenance and wash areas include building enclosed structures, establishing connections to the sanitary sewer system, grading wash areas to drain only to sanitary sewers, and increased labor associated with special handling of hazardous wastes. References NJDEPE. 1992. Ground Water Protection Practices for Motor Vehicle Services. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Trenton, NJ. Santa Clara Valley NPS Control Program. Best Management Practices for Industrial Storm Water Pollution Control. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, San Jose, CA. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. September 1992. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. September 1992.
92
Education and awareness

Contractor Certification and Inspector Training Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description In many municipalities, erosion and sediment control (ESC) plans are required under ordinances enacted to protect water resources. These plans describe how a contractor or developer will reduce soil erosion and contain and treat runoff that is carrying eroded sediments. Plans typically include descriptions and locations of soil stabilization practices, perimeter controls, and runoff treatment facilities that will be installed and maintained before and during construction activities. In addition to special area considerations, the full ESC plan review inventory should include (Smolen et al., 1988):

Topographic and vicinity maps Site development plan Construction schedule ESC plan drawings Detailed drawings and specifications for practices Design calculations Vegetation plan.
One of the most important factors determining whether or not erosion and sediment controls will be properly installed and maintained on a construction site is the knowledge and experience of the contractor. Many communities require certification for key on-site employees who are responsible for implementing the ESC plan. Several states have contractor certification programs. The State of Delaware requires that at least one person on any construction project be formally certified. The Delaware program requires certification for any foreman or superintendent who is in charge of onsite clearing and landdisturbing activities for sediment and runoff control associated with a construction project. Responsible personnel are required to obtain certification by completing a training program sponsored or approved by the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). All applicants seeking approval of a sediment and runoff plan must certify that all personnel involved in the construction project will have a certificate of attendance at a Department-
93
sponsored or approved training course before initiation of any land-disturbing activity (DNREC, no date). A description of this certification requirement can be found at the DNREC web site at http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/newpages/ssregs14.htm. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection offers a Voluntary Contractor Certification Program (VCCP) that is a nonregulatory, incentive-driven program to broaden the use of effective erosion control techniques. The VCCP is open to any contractor who is involved with soildisturbance activities, including filling, excavating, landscaping, and other types of earthworks. For initial certification, the program requires attendance at two 6-hour training courses and the successful completion of a construction site evaluation. To maintain certification, a minimum of one 4-hour continuing education course within every 2-year period is required thereafter. Local soil and water conservation district personnel will complete construction site evaluations during the construction season. Certifications are valid until December 31 of the second year after issuance. Certification will entitle the holder to advertise services as a "DEP Certified Contractor" (MDEP, 1999). More information about this program can be found on the MDEP web site at http://janus.state.me.us/dep/blwq/training/ip-vccp.htm. Municipalities often do not have the funding and staffing resources to support a construction site inspection program. Municipalities can implement a private inspector program in which individuals can receive stormwater management and ESC training to become certified inspectors to reduce the burden on the governing agency. These private inspectors can be hired directly by the contractor when the governing agency anticipates that a larger, more complicated site will require substantial agency resources. Contractor certification programs are supplements to a municipal inspection and enforcement program. Such programs will not work if the contractors and inspectors are not held accountable, even without certification. Because there is a potential for contractors and private inspectors to abuse their certification, states such as Delaware require spot checks by county enforcement agents. Applicability Contractor certification programs are applicable for municipalities that require erosion and sediment control plans for construction sites. Training and certification will help to ensure that the plans are properly implemented and that best management practices are properly installed and maintained. Inspector training programs are appropriate for municipalities with limited funding and resources for ESC program implementation. The inspectors will lighten the financial and staffing burden of governing agencies to ensure compliance on construction sites. Implementation Contractor certification can be accomplished through municipally sponsored training courses, or more informally, municipalities can hold mandatory pre-construction or pre-wintering meetings and conduct regular and final inspection visits to transfer information to contractors (Brown and Caraco, 1997). Information that should be covered in training courses and meetings includes the importance of ESC for water quality protection; developing and implementing ESC plans; the importance of proper installation, regular inspection, and diligent maintenance of ESC practices; and recordkeeping for inspections and maintenance activities. To implement an inspector training program, the governing agency would need to establish a certification course with periodic recertification, review
94
reports submitted by private inspectors, conduct spot checks for accuracy, and institute fines or other penalties for noncompliance. Effectiveness Although the effectiveness of training and certification programs has not been discretely measured, there has been a large response to Delaware's inspector certification program. Within 6 years of implementing the program, 340 people had been certified (CWP, 1997). Benefits Contractors are the individuals ultimately responsible for the proper installation and maintenance of ESC practices on construction sites. A contractor certification program will help to improve compliance with ESC programs and foster better relationships between contractors and regulators. Inspector training programs can help to enforce compliance by limiting the burden of inspection for local regulatory agencies. By freeing up staff and other resources, more frequent and thorough inspections can be made. Limitations Contractor certification and inspector training programs require a substantial amount of effort on the part of the municipality or regulatory agency. They need to develop curricula for training courses, dedicate staff to teach courses, and maintain a report review and site inspection staff to ensure that both contractors and inspectors are fulfilling their obligations and complying with the ESC program. Cost Considerations Costs for contractor certification and inspector training can vary widely depending on the type of training and certification programs that are implemented. However, cost savings can be seen in a decreased need for remedial action because contractors have more ESC experience. Additionally, there will a reduced need for site visits by agency staff because private inspectors can handle the especially time-consuming projects.
95
References Brown, W.E., and D.S. Caraco. 1997. Muddy Water In, Muddy Water Out? A Critique of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(3):393403. Center for Watershed Protection. 1997. Technical Note No. 85. Delaware Program Improves Construction Site Inspection: A Private Inspector Multiplies Compliance Workforce. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(3):440442. DNREC. No date. Section 13 Contractor Certification Program. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Dover, DE. [www.dnrec.state.de.us/newpages/ssregs14.htm]. Accessed March 9, 2000. MDEP. 1999. Maine Department of Environmental Protection Issue Profile: Voluntary Contractor Certification Program. Maine Department of the Environment, Bureau of Land and Water Quality, Portland, ME. [http://janus.state.me.us/dep/blwq/training/ip-vccp.htm]. Last updated August 1999. Accessed June 1, 2001. Smolen, M.D., D.W. Miller, L.C. Wyatt, J. Lichthardt, and A.L. Lanier. 1988. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section, Raleigh, NC.
96
Construction Reviewer Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description According to some state's regulations, the construction reviewer should be able to perform routine inspections of construction sites. According to the state of Delaware, the following guidelines should be followed by the construction reviewer:
Perform a construction review of active construction sites at least once a week. Within five calendar days, inform the person engaged in the land-disturbing activity, and the contractor, by a written construction review report of any violations of the approved plan or inadequacies of the plan. Inform the plan approval agency, if the approved plan is inadequate, within five working days. In addition, send the appropriate construction review agency copies of all construction review reports. Refer the project through the delegated inspection agency to the proper department for appropriate enforcement action if the person engaged in the land-disturbing activity fails to address the items contained in the written construction review report. Give verbal notice to the proper department.
Applicability Construction reviewer training is considered an extremely important aspect of erosion and sediment control and stormwater enforcement. Construction reviewer training allows for third-party inspections of construction permits and BMP implementation. Third-party inspections free up state personnel from the time-consuming efforts to inspect each construction site. However, construction site reviewer training is still in its infant stages and is not yet a nationwide program. Limitations Several states do not have enough enforcement officers to inspect a large number of construction sites. The regulatory agency that oversees permits relies heavily on notifications by the public for permit noncompliance at construction sites. Because of some state's dependence on public involvement, numerous construction sites are not inspected.
97
Effectiveness If the permit is reviewed by a regulatory agency or third party and the site is inspected on a regular basis, then it is assumed that the contractor certification is a success. For construction reviewers, the state of Delaware has produced a program that has proven both beneficial in protecting the environment and cost effective. The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control's (DNREC) Sediment and Storm Water Program illustrates how an aggressive inspection program depending on privately employed inspectors can limit the water quality impacts of construction. The result is a win-win situation in which the environment is protected, developers have less downtime, DNREC's workload is more reasonable, and local jobs are created. To obtain the mandated construction inspection, developers can hire one of the hundreds of private inspectors licensed under the state's Certified Construction Reviewer (CCR) program, first implemented in 1992. In New Castle County, Delaware, a Phase I permitted county, the CCR program has been a successful component of the overall storm water management program. The county is enjoying economic growth and related commercial and residential development. Approximately 400 construction sites per year in Delaware require development and implementation of a detailed Sediment and Storm Water Plan. Limited to only three county government inspectors, the county has used the CCR program to leverage greater inspection coverage and increase compliance with federal, state, and local construction requirements. Of the 400 construction starts, more than 75 percent are being inspected by CCRs for at least a portion of the site development. The CCRs inspect active sites weekly and submit a report to the developer/contractor and to the county. County staff time once spent inspecting construction sites can now be spent overseeing the private CCR inspection process. Through the CCR program, New Castle County has saved approximately $100,000 annually, while the rate of compliance with Delaware's Sediment and Storm Water Program requirements has increased. Cost Considerations Inspector training costs vary from state to state. References DNREC. 1999. Delaware Sediment and Stormwater Program. [http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/newpages/stormregs.htm]. Accessed June 1, 2001. University of Connecticut, Cooperative Extension Service. 2000. [http://nemo.uconn.edu/res&ap/images/71205103web.jpg]. Last updated December 5, 2000. Accessed June 1, 2001.
98
BMP Inspection and Maintenance Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description To maintain the effectiveness of construction site storm water control best management practices (BMPs), regular inspection of control measures is essential. Generally, inspection and maintenance of BMPs can be categorized into two groups--expected routine maintenance and nonroutine (repair) maintenance. Routine maintenance refers to checks performed on a regular basis to keep the BMP in good working order and aesthetically pleasing. In addition, routine inspection and maintenance is an efficient way to prevent potential nuisance situations (odors, mosquitoes, weeds, etc.), reduce the need for repair maintenance, and reduce the chance of polluting storm water runoff by finding and correcting problems before the next rain. Routine inspection should occur for all storm water and erosion and sediment control (ESC) measures implemented at a site. These measures may include, but are not limited to, grass-covered areas, seeded areas, mulched areas, areas stabilized with geotextiles or sod, silt fences, earth dikes, brush barriers, vegetated swales, sediment traps, sediment basins, subsurface drains, pipe slope drains, level spreaders, storm drain drop inlet protection measures, gabions, rain barrels, and road and site entrance stabilization measures. Nonroutine maintenance refers to any activity that is not performed on a regular basis. This type of maintenance could include major repairs after a violent storm or extended rainfall, or replacement and redesign of existing control structures. In addition to maintaining the effectiveness of storm water BMPs and reducing the incidence of pests, proper inspection and maintenance is essential to avoid the health and safety threats inherent in BMP neglect (Skupien, 1995). The failure of structural storm water BMPs can lead to downstream flooding, causing property damage, injury, and even death. Applicability All storm water BMPs should be inspected for continued effectiveness and structural integrity on a regular basis for the life of the construction project. Generally, all BMPs should be checked after each storm event in addition to the regularly scheduled inspections. Scheduled inspections vary between BMPs. Structural BMPs like storm drain drop inlet protection might require more frequent inspection than other BMPs to ensure proper operation. Inspection and maintenance of BMPs should continue until all construction activities have ended and all areas of a site have been permanently stabilized. During each inspection, the inspector should document whether the BMP is performing correctly, any damage to the BMP since the last inspection, and what should be done to repair the BMP if damage has occurred. Siting and Design Considerations In the case of vegetative or other infiltration BMPs, inspection of storm water management practices following a storm event should occur after the expected drawdown period for a given BMP. This approach allows the inspector to see whether detention and infiltration devices are draining correctly. Inspection checklists should be developed for use by BMP inspectors. The checklists might include 99
each BMP's minimum performance expectations, design criteria, structural specifications, date of implementation, and expected life span. In addition, the maintenance requirements for each BMP should be listed on the inspection checklist. This checklist will aid the inspector in determining whether a BMP's maintenance schedule is adequate or needs revision. Also, a checklist will help the inspector determine renovation or repair needs. Limitations Routine maintenance materials such as shovels, lawn mowers, and fertilizer can be obtained on short notice with little effort. Unfortunately, not all materials that might be needed for emergency structural repairs are obtained with such ease. Thought should be given to stockpiling essential materials in case immediate repairs must be made to safeguard against property loss and to protect human health. Maintenance Considerations When considering a maintenance schedule for BMPs to control storm water runoff from construction activities, care should be taken to factor in increased erosion and sedimentation rates for construction sites. Clearing, grading, or otherwise altering the landscape at a construction site can increase the erosion rate by as much as 1,000 times the preconstruction rate for a given site (USEPA, 1992). Depending on the relative amount of disturbed area at a site, routine maintenance might have to occur on a more frequent basis. It is important that routine maintenance and nonroutine repair of storm water and erosion control BMPs be done according to schedule or as soon as a problem is discovered. Because many BMPs are rendered ineffective for storm water runoff control if not installed and maintained properly, it is essential that maintenance schedules are maintained and repairs are performed promptly. In fact, in some cases BMP neglect can have detrimental effects on the landscape and increase the potential for erosion. However, "routine" maintenance such as mowing grass should be flexible enough to accommodate varying need based on weather conditions. For example, more harm than good might be caused by mowing during a drought or immediately after a storm event. Effectiveness The effectiveness of BMP inspection is a function of the familiarity of the inspector with each particular BMP's location, design specifications, maintenance procedures, and performance expectations. Documentation should be kept regarding the dates of inspection, findings, and maintenance and repairs that result from the findings of an inspector. Such records are helpful in maintaining an efficient inspection and maintenance schedule and provide evidence of ongoing inspection and maintenance. Because maintenance work for storm water BMPs (mowing, removal of sediment, etc.) is usually not technically complicated, workers can be drawn from a large labor pool. As structural BMPs increase in their sophistication, however, more specialized maintenance training might be needed to sustain BMP effectiveness.
100
Cost Considerations Mowing of vegetated and grassed areas may be the costliest routine maintenance consideration (WEF, 1998). Management practices using relatively weak materials (such as filter fabric and wooden posts) may mean more frequent replacement and therefore increased costs. The use of more sturdy materials (such as metal posts) where applicable may increase the life of certain BMPs and reduce replacement cost. However, the disposal requirements of all materials should be investigated before BMP implementation to ensure proper handling after the BMP has become ineffective or when it needs to be disposed of after the site has reached final stabilization. References Skupien, J. 1995. Postconstruction Responsibilities for Effective Performance of Best Management Practices. In National Conference on Urban Runoff Management: Enhancing Urban Watershed Management at the Local, County, and State Levels. Seminar Publication. EPA 625-R-95-003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1999. Fact Sheet 2.6: Storm Water Phase II Proposed Rule, Construction Site Runoff Control Minimum Control Measure. EPA 833-F-99-008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Water Environment Federation. 1998. Urban Runoff Quality Management. WEF Manual of Practice No. 23, ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87. Water Environment Federation and American Society of Civil Engineers, Alexandria, VA.
101
Model Ordinances Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Description Erosion and sedimentation from construction sites can lead to reduced water quality and other environmental degradation. Municipalities can enact erosion and sediment control (ESC) ordinances for construction sites. These local regulations are intended to safeguard the public, protect property, and prevent damage to the environment. Applicability Ordinances promote the public welfare by guiding, regulating, and controlling the design, construction, use, and maintenance of any development or other activity that disturbs or breaks the topsoil or results in the movement of earth on land. ESC ordinances consist of permit application and review, and they can require an erosion and sediment control plan. A number of communities have dealt with construction sites by using an ordinance requiring permits, review and approval, ESC plans, design requirements, inspections, and enforcement. A model ordinance is available on EPA's web site at www.epa.gov/nps/ordinance/mol2.htm. Siting and Design Considerations Ordinances can set design requirements for grading, erosion control practices, sediment control practices, and waterway crossings. They can set limits for clearing and grading, and they can require action within a certain time frame. For example, soil stabilization might be required to be completed within 5 days of clearing or inactivity in construction. The following are ways to ensure compliance:
Nonmonetary penalties. Some municipalities require violators to perform restoration work or implement a BMP rather than pay a fine. Fines. ESC ordinances can set penalties for violations of a permit. For example, a maximum fine might be set for various types of violations. In all cases, the permittee would be fined upon conviction of the violation. Sample text for violations and penalties can be found in a model ordinance on EPA's web site at www.epa.gov/nps/ordinance/mol2.htm. Stop work orders. A stop work order or a permit revocation might be issued when a permit is violated or when development is implemented in a manner found to adversely affect the health, welfare, or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or at development sites, or when there is a risk of injury to persons or property. Bonding requirements. Bonding requirements are allowances that are set aside specifically to repair damage to temporary construction site erosion and sediment controls (e.g., silt fences) caused by severe storm flows, high winds, or fallen trees. Funds can be used only if documented inspections that show erosion and sediment controls are installed and maintained
102
as required. This allowance helps to ensure 100-percent compliance by contractors (Deering, 1999). Limitations Site inspections are required for an adequate ESC process. An adequate staff of inspectors must be available to review permit applications and proposed ESC plans. Site inspections must be conducted on each construction site. The number of site visits will depend on available staff. Timing for site visits might be based on

Start of construction Installation of ESC measures Completion of site clearing Completion of rough grading Completion of final grading Close of the construction season Completion of final landscaping.
Maintenance Considerations Keeping up-to-date with construction projects is a major part of enforcement maintenance. Some municipalities rely on information submitted by the public. The city of Jacksonville, Florida, has a citizen complaint form on its web page at http://www.coj.net/pub/resd/airwater/CCFORM.HTM. Some of the categories of complaints are "Discharge of pollutants to storm drains, ditches, rivers, or creeks," "Overflowing manholes or pump stations," "Uncontrolled erosion from land clearing activities," and "Pumping of muddy water into creeks, storm drains, or ditches." City staff have established a goal of contacting complaint submitters within 24 hours (City of Jacksonville, 2000). In the Fresno-Clovis metropolitan area of California, storm water inspections on construction sites are generally sparked by complaints, proximity to the San Joaquin River, and direct discharges to the river or other receiving waterbodies (FMFCD). Procedures for Site Plan Review Existing staff should spend as much time as allowed in the field at the construction sites. This allows them a better idea of how controls are being implemented (if at all) and whether another approach should be taken. It is also recommended that existing staff spend as much as 10 percent of their time assigned to contractor training or public outreach (Brown and Caraco, 1997). One firm, Stormwater Services Group, can train construction contractor staff to perform site inspections or can perform one site visit per week and prepare the required weekly written report. Their services start at $75 per week (Stormwater Services Group, 2000). The Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) surveyed 80 ESC programs in 1997. Responses to the survey showed that each ESC inspector was responsible for an average of 150 sites annually,
103
indicating a lack of inspectors needed. The state of Delaware created a program that requires developers to hire a private inspector under any of three circumstances (CWP, 1997):

All sites with more than 50 acres of disturbed area Any site, as determined by the state's resource agency Sites under construction that present significant management problems.
The state set requirements for private inspectors, such as certification, submission of weekly reports to the contractors, and other qualifications. To prevent bias on the part of inspectors (i.e., not reporting violations because they were hired by the contractors), the state set two provisions-spot checks are conducted by the local ESC agency, and the inspector must be supervised by a Professional Engineer (P.E.). Any discrepancy can lead to an inspector or P.E. losing his license (CWP, 1997). Brown and Caraco (1997) list 10 elements reviewers should look for in an effective plan:

Minimize needless clearing and grading Protect waterways and stabilize drainage ways Phase construction to limit soil exposure Stabilize exposed soils immediately Protect steep slopes and cuts Install perimeter controls to filter sediments Employ advanced sediment settling controls Certify contractors on ESC plan implementation Adjust ESC plan at construction site Assess ESC practices after storms.
Effectiveness Ordinances are only as effective as the degree to which they are enforced. Cost Considerations Municipalities that enact erosion and sediment control ordinances must budget for the drafting and enforcement of the regulation.
104
References Brown, W.E., and D.S. Caraco. 1997. Muddy Water In, Muddy Water Out? Watershed Protection Techniques 2(3): 393-403. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Delaware Program Improves Construction Site Inspection: A Private Inspector Multiplies Compliance Workforce. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(3): 440-442. Deering, J.W. 1999. Moving the Earth for Environmental and Financial Success. John W. Deering, Inc., Bethel, CT. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD). No date. Has Your Project Been Inspected Lately??? Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Fresno, CA. Hewitt, R.S. 1998. San Diego County Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control & Storm Water Detention/Retention. Prepared for the San Diego County Association of Resource Conservation Districts by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Riverside, CA. City of Jacksonville. 2000. Water Quality. [http://www.coj.net/pub/resd/airwater/Watrqual.htm]. Accessed July 18, 2000. Stormwater Services Group, LLC. 2000. Erosion and Control Site Inspections. [www.stormwatergroup.com]. Accessed July 18, 2000. Terrene Institute, Inc. 1985. Local Ordinances: A User's Guide. Prepared by Terrene Institute in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1999. Model Ordinances Language. Model Ordinances to Protect Local Resources: Erosion & Sediment Control. [www.epa.gov/nps/ordinance/mol2.htm]. Accessed July 10, 2000.
105
Post-Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment

Regulatory Text
You must develop, implement, and enforce a program to address storm water runoff from new development and redevelopment projects that disturb greater than or equal to one acre, including projects less than one acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, that discharge into your small MS4. Your program must ensure that controls are in place that would prevent or minimize water quality impacts. You must:
o
Develop and implement strategies which include a combination of structural and/or non-structural best management practices (BMPs) appropriate for your community; Use an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to address post-construction runoff from new development and redevelopment projects to the extent allowable under State, Tribal or local law; Ensure adequate long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs.
Guidance If water quality impacts are considered from the beginning stages of a project, new development and potentially redevelopment provide more opportunities for water quality protection. EPA recommends that the BMPs chosen: be appropriate for the local community; minimize water quality impacts; and attempt to maintain pre-development runoff conditions. In choosing appropriate BMPs, EPA encourages you to participate in locally-based watershed planning efforts which attempt to involve a diverse group of stakeholders including interested citizens. When developing a program that is consistent with this measure's intent, EPA recommends that you adopt a planning process that identifies the municipality's program goals (e.g., minimize water quality impacts resulting from post-construction runoff from new development and redevelopment), implementation strategies (e.g., adopt a combination of structural and/or nonstructural BMPs), operation and maintenance policies and procedures, and enforcement procedures. In developing your program, you should consider assessing existing ordinances, policies, programs and studies that address storm water runoff quality. In addition to assessing these existing documents and programs, you should provide opportunities to the public to participate in the development of the program. Non-structural BMPs are preventative actions that involve management and source controls such as: policies and ordinances that provide requirements and standards to direct growth to identified areas, protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas, maintain and/or increase open space (including a dedicated funding source for open space acquisition), provide buffers along sensitive water bodies, minimize impervious surfaces, and minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation; policies or ordinances that encourage infill development in higher density urban areas, and areas with existing infrastructure; education programs for developers and the public about project designs that minimize water quality impacts; and measures such as minimization of percent impervious area
National Menu for BMP Practices
Post-Construction Storm Water Management
after development and minimization of directly connected impervious areas. Structural BMPs include: storage practices such as wet ponds and extended-detention outlet structures; filtration practices such as grassed swales, sand filters and filter strips; and infiltration practices such as infiltration basins and infiltration trenches. EPA recommends that you ensure the appropriate implementation of the structural BMPs by considering some or all of the following: preconstruction review of BMP designs; inspections during construction to verify BMPs are built as designed; post-construction inspection and maintenance of BMPs; and penalty provisions for the noncompliance with design, construction or operation and maintenance. Storm water technologies are constantly being improved, and EPA recommends that your requirements be responsive to these changes, developments or improvements in control technologies. BMP Fact Sheets Structural BMPs Ponds Dry extended detention ponds Wet ponds Infiltration practices Infiltration basin Infiltration trench Porous pavement Filtration practices Bioretention Sand and organic filters Vegetative practices Storm water wetland Grassed swales Grassed filter strip Runoff pretreatment practices Catch basin In-line storage Manufactured products for storm water inlets
Nonstructural BMPs Experimental practices Alum injection On-lot Treatment On-Lot treatment Better site design Buffer zones Open space design Urban forestry Conservation easements Infrastructure planning Narrower residential streets Eliminating curbs and gutters Green parking Alternative turnarounds Alternative pavers BMP inspection and maintenance Ordinances for postconstruction runoff Zoning Additional Fact Sheets Bioretention Hydrodynamic Separators Infiltration Drainfields Infiltration Trench Modular Treatment System Porous Pavement Sand Filters Storm Water Wetlands
3
Vegetative Swales Water Quality Inlets Wet Detention Ponds
Structural BMPs
Ponds
Dry Extended Detention Pond Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Dry extended detention ponds (a.k.a. dry ponds, extended detention basins, detention ponds, extended detention ponds) are basins whose outlets have been designed to detain the storm water runoff from a water quality design storm for some minimum time (e.g., 24 hours) to allow particles and associated pollutants to settle. Unlike wet ponds, these facilities do not have a large permanent pool. However, they are often designed with small pools at the inlet and outlet of the basin. They can also be used to provide flood control by including additional flood detention storage. Applicability Dry extended detention ponds are among the most widely applicable storm water management practices. Although they have limited applicability in highly urbanized settings, they have few other restrictions. Regional Applicability Dry extended detention ponds can be applied in all regions of the United States. Some minor design modifications might be needed, however, in cold or arid climates or in regions with karst (i.e. limestone) topography. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface is present. It is difficult to use dry extended detention ponds in the ultra-urban environment because of the land area each pond consumes. They can, however, be used in an ultra-urban environment if a relatively large area is available downstream of the pond. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. Dry extended
5
detention ponds can accept runoff from storm water hot spots, but they need significant separation from ground water if they will be used for this purpose. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Dry extended detention ponds are very useful storm water retrofits, and they have two primary applications as a retrofit design. In many communities in the past, detention basins have been designed for flood control. It is possible to modify these facilities to incorporate features that encourage water quality control and/or channel protection. It is also possible to construct new dry ponds in open areas of a watershed to capture existing drainage. Cold Water (Trout) Streams A study in Prince George's County, Maryland, found that storm water management practices can increase stream temperatures (Galli, 1990). Overall, dry extended detention ponds increased temperature by about 5F. In cold water streams, dry ponds should be designed to detain storm water for a relatively short time (i.e., less than 12 hours) to minimize the amount of warming that occurs in the practice. Siting and Design Considerations Siting Considerations Although dry extended detention ponds can be applied rather broadly, designers need to ensure that they are feasible at the site in question. This section provides basic guidelines for siting dry extended detention ponds. Drainage Area In general, dry extended detention ponds should be used on sites with a minimum area of 10 acres. On smaller sites, it can be challenging to provide channel or water quality control because the orifice diameter at the outlet needed to control relatively small storms becomes very small and thus prone to clogging. In addition, it is generally more cost-effective to control larger drainage areas due to the economies of scale (see Cost Considerations). Slope Dry extended detention basins can be used on sites with slopes up to about 15 percent. The local slope needs to be relatively flat, however, to maintain reasonably flat side slopes in the practice. There is no minimum slope requirement, but there does need to be enough elevation drop from the pond inlet to the pond outlet to ensure that flow can move through the system. Soils / Topography Extended detention basins can be used with almost all soils and geology, with minor design adjustments for regions of karst topography or in rapidly percolating soils such as sand. In these areas, extended detention ponds should be designed with an impermeable liner to prevent ground water contamination or sinkhole formation.
6
Ground Water Except for the case of hot spot runoff, the only consideration regarding ground water is that the base of the extended detention facility should not intersect the ground water table. A permanently wet bottom may become a mosquito breeding ground. Research in Southwest Florida (Santana et al., 1994) demonstrated that intermittently flooded systems, such as dry extended detention ponds, produce more mosquitoes than other pond systems, particularly when the facilities remained wet for more than 3 days following heavy rainfall. Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. Some features, however, should be incorporated into most dry extended detention pond designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment incorporates design features that help to settle out coarse sediment particles. By removing these particles from runoff before they reach the large permanent pool, the maintenance burden of the pond is reduced. In ponds, pretreatment is achieved with a sediment forebay, which is a small pool (typically about 10 percent of the volume of water to be treated for pollutant removal). Treatment Treatment design features help enhance the ability of a storm water management practice to remove pollutants. Designing dry ponds with a high length-to-width ratio (i.e., at least 1.5:1) and incorporating other design features to maximize the flow path effectively increases the detention time in the system by eliminating the potential of flow to short-circuit the pond. Designing ponds with relatively flat side slopes can also help to lengthen the effective flow path. Finally, the pond should be sized to detain the volume of runoff to be treated for between 12 and 48 hours. Conveyance Conveyance of storm water runoff into and through a storm water management practice is a critical component of any such practice. Storm water should be conveyed to and from practices safely in a manner that minimizes erosion potential. The outfall of pond systems should always be stabilized to prevent scour. To convey low flows through the system, designers should provide a pilot channel. A pilot channel is a surface channel that should be used to convey low flows through the pond. In addition, an emergency spillway should be provided to safely convey large flood events. To help mitigate warming at the outlet channel, designers should provide shade around the channel at the pond outlet. Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities needed to maintain the function of storm water practices, some design features can be incorporated to ease the maintenance burden of each practice. In dry extended detention ponds, a "micropool" at the outlet can prevent resuspension of sediment and outlet clogging. A good design includes maintenance access to the forebay and micropool.
7
Another design feature that can reduce maintenance needs is a non-clogging outlet. Typical examples include a reverse-slope pipe or a weir outlet with a trash rack. A reverse slope pipe draws from below the permanent pool extending in a reverse angle up to the riser and determines the water elevation of the micropool. Because these outlets draw water from below the level of the permanent pool, they are less likely to be clogged by floating debris. Landscaping Designers should maintain a vegetated buffer around the pond and should select plants within the extended detention zone (i.e., the portion of the pond up to the elevation where storm water is detained) that can withstand both wet and dry periods. The side slopes of dry ponds should be relatively flat to reduce safety risks. Design Variations Dry Detention Ponds Dry detention ponds are similar in design to extended detention ponds, except that they do not incorporate features to improve water quality. In particular, these practices do not detain storm water from small-flow events. Therefore, detention ponds provide almost no pollutant removal. However, dry ponds can help to meet flood control, and sometimes channel protection, objectives in a watershed. Tank Storage Another variation of the dry detention pond design is the use of tank storage. In these designs, storm water runoff is conveyed to large storage tanks or vaults underground. This practice is most often used in the ultra-urban environment, on small sites where no other opportunity is available to provide flood control. Tank storage is provided on small areas because providing underground storage for a large drainage area would generally be cost-prohibitive. Because the drainage area contributing to tank storage is typically small, the outlet diameter needed to reduce the flow from very small storms would very small. A very small outlet diameter, along with the underground location of the tanks, creates the potential for debris being caught in the outlet and resulting maintenance problems. Since it is necessary to control small runoff events (such as the runoff from a 1-inch storm) to improve water quality, it is generally infeasible to use tank storage for water quality and generally impractical to use it to protect stream channels. Regional Variations Arid or Semi-Arid Climates In arid and semi-arid regions, some modifications might be needed to conserve scarce water resources. Any landscaping plans should prescribe drought-tolerant vegetation wherever possible. In addition, the wet forebay can be replaced with an alternative dry pretreatment, such as a detention cell. One opportunity in regions with a distinct wet and dry season, as in many arid regions, is to use regional extended detention ponds as a recreation area such as a ball field during the dry season.
Cold Climates In cold climates, some additional design features can help to treat the spring snowmelt. One such modification is to increase the volume available for detention to help treat this relatively large runoff event. In some cases, dry facilities may be an option as a snow storage facility to promote some treatment of plowed snow. If a pond is used to treat road runoff or is used for snow storage, landscaping should incorporate salt-tolerant species. Finally, sediment might need to be removed from the forebay more frequently than in warmer climates (see Maintenance Considerations for guidelines) to account for sediment deposited as a result of road sanding. Limitations Although dry extended detention ponds are widely applicable, they have some limitations that might make other storm water management options preferable:
Dry extended detention ponds have only moderate pollutant removal when compared to other structural storm water practices, and they are ineffective at removing soluble pollutants (See Effectiveness). Dry extended detention ponds may become a nuisance due to mosquito breeding. Habitat destruction may occur during construction if the practice is designed in-stream or within the stream buffer. Although wet ponds can increase property values, dry ponds can actually detract from the value of a home (see Cost Considerations).
Dry extended detention ponds on their own only provide peak flow reduction and do little to control overall runoff volume, which could result in adverse downstream impacts. Maintenance Considerations In addition to incorporating features into the pond design to minimize maintenance, some regular maintenance and inspection practices are needed. Table 1 outlines some of these practices. Effectiveness Structural management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals: flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Dry extended detention basins can provide flood control and channel protection, as well as some pollutant removal. Flood Control One objective of storm water management practices can be to reduce the flood hazard associated with large storm events by reducing the peak flow associated with these storms. Dry extended detention basins can easily be designed for flood control, and this is actually the primary purpose of most extended detention ponds.
Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for dry ponds (Source: Modified from WMI, 1997) Activity

Schedule Semiannual inspection
Note erosion of pond banks or bottom
Inspect for damage to the embankment Monitor for sediment accumulation in the facility and forebay Examine to ensure that inlet and outlet devices are free of debris and operational
Annual inspection
Repair undercut or eroded areas Mow side slopes Manage pesticide and nutrients Remove litter and debris

Standard maintenance
Seed or sod to restore dead or damaged ground cover Remove sediment from the forebay Monitor sediment accumulations, and remove sediment when the pond volume has been reduced by 25 percent
Annual maintenance (as needed) 5- to 7-year maintenance 25- to 50-year maintenance
Channel Protection One result of urbanization is the geomorphic changes that occur in response to modified hydrology. Traditionally, dry extended detention basins have provided control of the 2-year storm (i.e., the storm that occurs, on average, once every 2 years) for channel protection. It appears that this control has been relatively ineffective, and recent research suggests that control of a smaller storm might be more appropriate (MacRae, 1996). Slightly modifying the design of dry extended detention basins to reduce the flow of smaller storm events might make them effective tools in reducing downstream erosion. Pollutant Removal Dry extended detention basins provide moderate pollutant removal, provided that the design features described in the Siting and Design Considerations section are incorporated. Although they can be effective at removing some pollutants through settling, they are less effective at removing soluble pollutants because of the absence of a permanent pool. A few studies are available on the effectiveness of dry extended detention ponds. Typical removal rates, as reported by Schueler (1997), are as follows: Total suspended solids: 61% Total phosphorus: 19% Total nitrogen: 31% Nitrate nitrogen: 9% Metals: 26%54% There is considerable variability in the effectiveness of ponds, and it is believed that properly designing and maintaining ponds may help to improve their performance. The siting and design criteria presented in this sheet reflect the best current information and experience to improve the
10
performance of wet ponds. A recent joint project of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the USEPA Office of Water might help to isolate specific design features that can improve performance. The National Storm Water Best Management Practice (BMP) database is a compilation of storm water practices that includes both design information and performance data for various practices. As the database expands, inferences about the extent to which specific design criteria influence pollutant removal may be made. For more information on this database, access the ASCE web page at http://www.asce.org. Cost Considerations Dry extended detention ponds are the least expensive storm water management practice, on the basis of cost per unit area treated. The construction costs associated with these facilities range considerably. One recent study evaluated the cost of all pond systems (Brown and Schueler, 1997). Adjusting for inflation, the cost of dry extended detention ponds can be estimated with the equation C = 12.4V0.760 where: C = Construction, design, and permitting cost, and V = Volume needed to control the 10-year storm (ft3 ). Using this equation, typical construction costs are $ 41,600 for a 1 acre-foot pond $ 239,000 for a 10 acre-foot pond $ 1,380,000 for a 100 acre-foot pond Interestingly, these costs are generally slightly higher than the cost of wet ponds on a cost per total volume basis. Dry extended detention ponds are generally less expensive on a given site, however, because they are usually smaller than a wet pond design for the same site. Ponds do not consume a large area compared to the total area treated (typically 2 to 3 percent of the contributing drainage area). It is important to note, however, that each pond is generally large. Other practices, such as filters or swales, may be "squeezed in" on relatively unusable land, but ponds need a relatively large continuous area. For ponds, the annual cost of routine maintenance is typically estimated at about 3 to 5 percent of the construction cost. Alternatively, a community can estimate the cost of the maintenance activities outlined in the maintenance section. Finally, ponds are long-lived facilities (typically longer than 20 years). Thus, the initial investment into pond systems can be spread over a relatively long time period. Another economic concern associated with dry ponds is that they might detract slightly from the value of adjacent properties. One study found that dry ponds can actually detract from the perceived value of homes adjacent to a dry pond by between 3 and 10 percent (EmmerlingDinovo, 1995).
11
References Design References: Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. 1992. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria ManualVolume 3: Best Management Practices. Denver, CO. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Storm Water Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Washington, DC. Other References: Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Storm Water BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for Chesapeake Research Consortium. Edgewater, MD. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. Emmerling-Dinovo, C. 1995. Storm Water Detention Basins and Residential Locational Decisions. Water Resources Bulletin 31(3): 515521 Galli, J. 1990. Thermal Impacts Associated with Urbanization and Storm Water Management Best Management Practices. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Prepared for Maryland Department of the Environment, Baltimore, MD. MacRae, C. 1996. Experience from Morphological Research on Canadian Streams: Is Control of the Two-Year Frequency Runoff Event the Best Basis for Stream Channel Protection? In Effects of Watershed Development and Management on Aquatic Ecosystems. American Society of Civil Engineers. Edited by L. Roesner. Snowbird, UT. pp. 144162. Santana, F., J. Wood, R. Parsons, and S. Chamberlain. 1994. Control of Mosquito Breeding in Permitted Storm Water Systems. Prepared for Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL. Schueler, T. 1997. Influence of Ground Water on Performance of Storm Water Ponds in Florida. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):525528. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP), Environmental Quality Resources, and Loiederman Associates. 1997. Maryland Storm Water Design Manual. Draft. Prepared for Maryland Department of the Environment, Baltimore, MD. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Storm Water BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. Washington, DC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
12
Wet Ponds Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Wet ponds (a.k.a. storm water ponds, retention ponds, wet extended detention ponds) are constructed basins that have a permanent pool of water throughout the year (or at least throughout the wet season). Ponds treat incoming storm water runoff by settling and algal uptake. The primary removal mechanism is settling as storm water runoff resides in this pool, and pollutant uptake, particularly of nutrients, also occurs through biological activity in the pond. Wet ponds are among the most cost-effective and widely used storm water practices. While there are several different versions of the wet pond design, the most common modification is the extended detention wet pond, where storage is provided above the permanent pool in order to detain storm water runoff in order to provide settling. Applicability Wet ponds are widely applicable storm water management practices. Although they have limited applicability in highly urbanized settings and in arid climates, they have few other restrictions. Regional Applicability Wet extended detention ponds can be applied in most regions of the United States, with the exception of arid climates. In arid regions, it is difficult to justify the supplemental water needed to maintain a permanent pool because of the scarcity of water. Even in semi-arid Austin, Texas, one study found that 2.6 acre-feet per year of supplemental water was needed to maintain a permanent pool of only 0.29 acre-feet (Saunders and Gilroy, 1997). Other modifications and design variations are needed in semi-arid and cold climates, and karst (i.e., limestone) topography. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. It is difficult to use wet ponds in the ultra-urban environment because of the land area each pond consumes. They can, however, be used in an ultra-urban environment if a relatively large area is available downstream of the site.
13
Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. A typical example is a gas station. Wet ponds can accept runoff from storm water hot spots, but need significant separation from ground water if they will be used for this purpose. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Wet ponds are very useful storm water retrofits and have two primary applications as a retrofit design. In many communities, detention ponds have been designed for flood control in the past. It is possible to modify these facilities to develop a permanent wet pool to provide water quality control (see Treatment under Design Considerations), and modify the outlet structure to provide channel protection. Alternatively, wet ponds may be designed in-stream, or in open areas as a part of a retrofit study. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Wet ponds pose a risk to cold water systems because of their potential for stream warming. When water remains in the permanent pool, it is heated by the sun. A study in Prince George's County, Maryland, found that storm water wet ponds heat storm water by about 9F from the inlet to the outlet (Galli, 1990). Siting and Design Considerations Siting Considerations In addition to the restrictions and modifications to adapting wet ponds to different regions and land uses, designers need to ensure that this management practice is feasible at the site in question. The following section provides basic guidelines for siting wet ponds. Drainage Area Wet ponds need sufficient drainage area to maintain the permanent pool. In humid regions, this is typically about 25 acres, but a greater area may be needed in regions with less rainfall. Slope Wet ponds can be used on sites with an upstream slope up to about 15 percent. The local slope should be relatively shallow, however. Although there is no minimum slope requirement, there does need to be enough elevation drop from the pond inlet to the pond outlet to ensure that water can flow through the system. Soils / Topography Wet ponds can be used in almost all soils and geology, with minor design adjustments for regions of karst topography (see Design Considerations).
14
Ground Water Unless they receive hot spot runoff, ponds can often intersect the ground water table. However, some research suggests that pollutant removal is reduced when ground water contributes substantially to the pool volume (Schueler, 1997b). Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. There are some features, however, that should be incorporated into most wet pond designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment incorporates design features that help to settle out coarse sediment particles. By removing these particles from runoff before they reach the large permanent pool, the maintenance burden of the pond is reduced. In ponds, pretreatment is achieved with a sediment forebay. A sediment forebay is a small pool (typically about 10 percent of the volume of the permanent pool). Coarse particles remain trapped in the forebay, and maintenance is performed on this smaller pool, eliminating the need to dredge the entire pond. Treatment Treatment design features help enhance the ability of a storm water management practice to remove pollutants. The purpose of most of these features is to increase the amount of time that storm water remains in the pond. One technique of increasing the pollutant removal of a pond is to increase the volume of the permanent pool. Typically, ponds are sized to be equal to the water quality volume (i.e., the volume of water treated for pollutant removal). Designers may consider using a larger volume to meet specific watershed objectives, such as phosphorous removal in a lake system. Regardless of the pool size, designers need to conduct a water balance analysis to ensure that sufficient inflow is available to maintain the permanent pool. Other design features do not increase the volume of a pond, but can increase the amount of time storm water remains in the practice and eliminate short-circuiting. Ponds should always be designed with a length-to-width ratio of at least 1.5:1. In addition, the design should incorporate features to lengthen the flow path through the pond, such as underwater berms designed to create a longer route through the pond. Combining these two measures helps ensure that the entire pond volume is used to treat storm water. Another feature that can improve treatment is to use multiple ponds in series as part of a "treatment train" approach to pollutant removal. This redundant treatment can also help slow the rate of flow through the system. Conveyance Storm water should be conveyed to and from all storm water management practices safely and to minimize erosion potential. The outfall of pond systems should always be stabilized to prevent scour. In addition, an emergency spillway should be provided to safely convey large flood
15
events. To help mitigate warming at the outlet channel, designers should provide shade around the channel at the pond outlet. Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities needed to maintain the function of storm water practices, some design features can be incorporated to ease the maintenance burden of each practice. In wet ponds, maintenance reduction features include techniques to reduce the amount of maintenance needed, as well as techniques to make regular maintenance activities easier. One potential maintenance concern in wet ponds is clogging of the outlet. Ponds should be designed with a non-clogging outlet such as a reverse-slope pipe, or a weir outlet with a trash rack. A reverse-slope pipe draws from below the permanent pool extending in a reverse angle up to the riser and establishes the water elevation of the permanent pool. Because these outlets draw water from below the level of the permanent pool, they are less likely to be clogged by floating debris. Another general rule is that no orifice should be less than 3 inches in diameter. (Smaller orifices are more susceptible to clogging). Design features are also incorporated to ease maintenance of both the forebay and the main pool of ponds. Ponds should be designed with a maintenance access to the forebay to ease this relatively routine (57 year) maintenance activity. In addition, ponds should generally have a pond drain to draw down the pond for the more infrequent dredging of the main cell of the pond. Landscaping Landscaping of wet ponds can make them an asset to a community and can also enhance the pollutant removal of the practice. A vegetated buffer should be preserved around the pond to protect the banks from erosion and provide some pollutant removal before runoff enters the pond by overland flow. In addition, ponds should incorporate an aquatic bench (i.e., a shallow shelf with wetland plants) around the edge of the pond. This feature may provide some pollutant uptake, and it also helps to stabilize the soil at the edge of the pond and enhance habitat and aesthetic value. Design Variations There are several variations of the wet pond design. Some of these design alternatives are intended to make the practice adaptable to various sites and to account for regional constraints and opportunities. Wet Extended Detention Pond The wet extended detention pond combines the treatment concepts of the dry extended detention pond and the wet pond. In this design, the water quality volume is split between the permanent pool and detention storage provided above the permanent pool. During storm events, water is detained above the permanent pool and released over 12 to 48 hours. This design has similar pollutant removal to a traditional wet pond and consumes less space. Wet extended detention ponds should be designed to maintain at least half the treatment volume of the permanent pool. In addition, designers need to carefully select vegetation to be planted in the extended detention zone to ensure that the selected vegetation can withstand both wet and dry periods.
16
Pocket Pond In this design alternative, a pond drains a smaller area than a traditional wet pond, and the permanent pool is maintained by intercepting the ground water. While this design achieves less pollutant removal than a traditional wet pond, it may be an acceptable alternative on sites where space is at a premium, or in a retrofit situation. Water Reuse Pond Some designers have used wet ponds to act as a water source, usually for irrigation. In this case, the water balance should account for the water that will be taken from the pond. One study conducted in Florida estimated that a water reuse pond could provide irrigation for a 100-acre golf course at about one-seventh the cost of the market rate of the equivalent amount of water ($40,000 versus $300,000). Regional Adaptations Semi-Arid Climates In arid climates, wet ponds are not a feasible option (see Applicability), but they may possibly be used in semi-arid climates if the permanent pool is maintained with a supplemental water source, or if the pool is allowed to vary seasonally. This choice needs to be seriously evaluated, however. Saunders and Gilroy (1997) reported that 2.6 acre-feet per year of supplemental water were needed to maintain a permanent pool of only 0.29 acre-feet in Austin, Texas. Cold Climates Cold climates present many challenges to designers of wet ponds. The spring snowmelt may have a high pollutant load and a large volume to be treated. In addition, cold winters may cause freezing of the permanent pool or freezing at inlets and outlets. Finally, high salt concentrations in runoff resulting from road salting, and sediment loads from road sanding, may impact pond vegetation as well as reduce the storage and treatment capacity of the pond. One option to deal with high pollutant loads and runoff volumes during the spring snowmelt is the use of a seasonally operated pond to capture snowmelt during the winter, and retain the permanent pool during warmer seasons. In this option, proposed by Oberts (1994), the pond has two water quality outlets, both equipped with gate valves. In the summer, the lower outlet is closed. During the fall and throughout the winter, the lower outlet is opened to draw down the permanent pool. As the spring melt begins, the lower outlet is closed to provide detention for the melt event. This method can act as a substitute for using a minimum extended detention storage volume. When wetlands preservation is a downstream objective, seasonal manipulation of pond levels may not be desired. An analysis of the effects on downstream hydrology should be conducted before considering this option. In addition, the manipulation of this system requires some labor and vigilance; a careful maintenance agreement should be confirmed. Several other modifications may help to improve the performance of ponds in cold climates. Designers should consider planting the pond with salt-tolerant vegetation if the facility receives road runoff. In order to counteract the effects of freezing on inlet and outlet structures, the use of inlet and outlet structures that are resistant to frost, including weirs and larger diameter pipes, may be useful. Designing structures on-line, with a continuous flow of water through the pond, will also help prevent freezing of these structures. Finally, since freezing of the permanent pool
17
can reduce the effectiveness of pond systems, it may be useful to incorporate extended detention into the design to retain usable treatment area above the permanent pool when it is frozen. Karst Topography In karst (i.e., limestone) topography, wet ponds should be designed with an impermeable liner to prevent ground water contamination or sinkhole formation, and to help maintain the permanent pool. Limitations Limitations of wet ponds include:

If improperly located, wet pond construction may cause loss of wetlands or forest. Although wet ponds consume a small amount of space relative to their drainage areas, they are often inappropriate in dense urban areas because each pond is generally quite large. Their use is restricted in arid and semi-arid regions due to the need to supplement the permanent pool. In cold water streams, wet ponds are not a feasible option due to the potential for stream warming. Wet ponds may pose safety hazards.
Maintenance Considerations In addition to incorporating features into the pond design to minimize maintenance, some regular maintenance and inspection practices are needed. The table below outlines these practices. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for wet ponds (Source: WMI, 1997)
Activity

Schedule Semi-annual inspection
If wetland components are included, inspect for invasive vegetation. Inspect for damage. Note signs of hydrocarbon build-up, and deal with appropriately. Monitor for sediment accumulation in the facility and forebay. Examine to ensure that inlet and outlet devices are free of debris and operational. Repair undercut or eroded areas. Clean and remove debris from inlet and outlet structures. Mow side slopes. Manage and harvest wetland plants. Remove sediment from the forebay. Monitor sediment accumulations, and remove sediment when the pool volume has become reduced significantly or the pond becomes eutrophic.
18
Annual inspection
As needed maintenance Monthly maintenance Annual maintenance (if needed) 5- to 7-year maintenance 20-to 50-year maintenance
Effectiveness Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Wet ponds can provide flood control, channel protection, and pollutant removal. Flood Control One objective of storm water management practices can be to reduce the flood hazard associated with large storm events by reducing the peak flow associated with these storms. Wet ponds can easily be designed for flood control by providing flood storage above the level of the permanent pool. Channel Protection When used for channel protection, wet ponds have traditionally controlled the 2-year storm. It appears that this control has been relatively ineffective, and recent research suggests that control of a smaller storm may be more appropriate (MacRae, 1996). Ground Water Recharge Wet ponds cannot provide ground water recharge. Infiltration is impeded by the accumulation of debris on the bottom of the pond. Pollutant Removal Wet ponds are among the most effective storm water management practices at removing storm water pollutants. A wide range of research is available to estimate the effectiveness of wet ponds. Table 2 summarizes some of the research completed on wet pond removal efficiency. Typical removal rates, as reported by Schueler (1997a) are: Total Suspended Solids: 67% Total Phosphorous: 48% Total Nitrogen: 31% Nitrate Nitrogen: 24% Metals: 2473% Bacteria: 65%
19
Table 2. Wet pond percent removal efficiency data

Wet Pond Removal Efficiencies Study City of Austin, TX 1991. Woodhollow, TX Driscoll 1983. Westleigh, MD Dorman et al., 1989. West Pond, MN Driscoll, 1983. Waverly Hills, MI Driscoll, 1983. Unqua, NY Cullum, 1985. Timber Creek, FL City of Austin, TX 1996. St. Elmo, TX. Horner, Guedry, and Kortenhoff, 1990. SR 204, WA Horner, Guedry, and Kortenhoff, 1990. Seattle, WA Kantrowitz and Woodham, 1995. Saint Joe's Creek, FL Wu, 1989. Runaway Bay, NC Driscoll 1983. Pitt-AA, MI Bannerman and Dodds, 1992. Monroe Street, WI Horner, Guedry, and Kortenhoff, 1990. Mercer, WA Oberts, Wotzka, and Hartsoe 1989. McKnight, MN Yousef, Wanielista, and Harper 1986. Maitland, FL Wu, 1989. Lakeside Pond, NC Oberts, Wotzka, and Hartsoe, 1989. Lake Ridge, MN TSS TP 54 81 65 91 60 64 92 46 54 25 79 45 60 80 TN NO3 39 37 62 15 19 45 61 66 80 -17 Metals 6976 2682 4466 5795 80 258 Bacteria 46 86 89-91 Practice Type wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond
99
91
8890
wet pond
86.7 78.4
6567
wet pond
45 62 32 90
45 36 18 65
36 7 -
3882 3252 1362 6575
70
wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond
75
67
2351
wet pond
85
48
30
24
67
wet pond
93 90
45 61
41
87 10
7796 8087 73
wet pond wet pond wet pond
20
Table 2. (continued)
Wet Pond Removal Efficiencies Study Driscoll, 1983. Lake Ellyn, IL Dorman et al., 1989. I-4, FL Martin, 1988. Highway Site, FL Driscoll, 1983. Grace Street, MI Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory, 1983. Farm Pond, VA Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory, 1983. Burke, VA Dorman et al., 1989. Buckland, CT Holler, 1989. Boynton Beach Mall, FL Urbonas, Carlson, and Vang 1994. Shop Creek, CO Oberts and Wotzka, 1988. McCarrons, MN Gain, 1996. FL Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 1991. Uplands, Ontario Borden et al., 1996. Piedmont, NC Holler, 1990. Lake Tohopekaliga District, FL Ontario Ministry of the Environment 1991. KennedyBurnett, Ontario Ontario Ministry of the Environment 1991. East Barrhaven, Ontario Borden et al., 1996. Davis, NC TSS TP 84 54 83 32 85 34 69 37 12 86 TN 30 6 34 NO3 97 28 -1 Metals 71-78 4774 5077 26 Bacteria Practice Type wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond wet pond
-33.3 39 61 91 45 76
32 -
22 87
3884 -25 to -51 -
wet pond wet pond wet pond
78
49
-12
-85
5157
wet pond
91 54
78 30
85 16
24
90 4273
wet pond wet pond wet extended detention pond wet extended detention pond wet extended detention pond wet extended detention pond
82
69
97
19.6 36.5 35.1
65.9
-4 to-97
-6
85
98
79
54
2139
99
52
47
56
wet extended detention pond wet extended detention pond
60.4 46.2 16
18.2
1551
48
21
detention pond
There is considerable variability in the effectiveness of ponds, and it is believed that properly designing and maintaining ponds may help to improve their performance. The siting and design criteria presented in this sheet reflect the best current information and experience to improve the performance of wet ponds. A recent joint project of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the USEPA Office of Water may help to isolate specific design features that can improve performance. The National Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) database is a compilation of storm water practices which includes both design information and performance data for various practices. As the database expands, inferences about the extent to which specific design criteria influence pollutant removal may be made. More information on this database is available from the ASCE web page at www.asce.org. Cost Considerations Wet ponds are relatively inexpensive storm water practices. The construction costs associated with these facilities range considerably. A recent study (Brown and Schueler, 1997) estimated the cost of a variety of storm water management practices. The study resulted in the following cost equation, adjusting for inflation: C = 24.5V0.705 where: C = Construction, design and permitting cost; V = Volume in the pond to include the 10-year storm (ft3 ). Using this equation, typical construction costs are: $45,700 for a 1 acre-foot facility $232,000 for a 10 acre-foot facility $1,170,000 for a 100 acre-foot facility Ponds do not consume a large area (typically 23 percent of the contributing drainage area). Therefore, the land consumed to design the pond will not be very large. It is important to note, however, that these facilities are generally large. Other practices, such as filters or swales, may be "squeezed" into relatively unusable land, but ponds need a relatively large continuous area. For ponds, the annual cost of routine maintenance is typically estimated at about 3 to 5 percent of the construction cost. Alternatively, a community can estimate the cost of the maintenance activities outlined in the maintenance section. Ponds are long-lived facilities (typically longer than 20 years). Thus, the initial investment into pond systems may be spread over a relatively long time period. In addition to the water resource protection benefits of wet ponds, there is some evidence to suggest that they may provide an economic benefit by increasing property values. The results of one study suggest that "pond front" property can increase the selling price of new properties by about 10 percent (USEPA, 1995). Another study reported that the perceived value (i.e., the value
22
estimated by residents of a community) of homes was increased by about 15 to 25 percent when located near a wet pond (Emmerling-Dinovo, 1995). References Bannerman, R., and R. Dodds. 1992. Unpublished data. Bureau of Water Resources Management, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI. Borden, R. C., J.L. Dorn, J.B. Stillman, and S.K. Liehr. 1996. Evaluation of Ponds and Wetlands For Protection of Public Water Supplies. Draft Report. Water Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina, Department of Civil Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Edgewater, MD, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. City of Austin, TX. 1991. Design Guidelines for Water Quality Control Basins. Public Works Department, Austin, TX. City of Austin, TX. 1996. Evaluation of Non-Point Source Controls: A 319 Grant Project. Draft Water Quality Report Series, Public Works Department, Austin, TX. Cullum, M. 1985. Stormwater Runoff Analysis at a Single Family Residential Site. Publication 85-1. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL. pp. 247256. Dorman, M.E., J. Hartigan, R.F. Steg, and T. Quasebarth. 1989. Retention, Detention and Overland Flow for Pollutant Removal From Highway Stormwater Runoff. Vol. 1 Research Report. FHWA/RD 89/202. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Driscoll, E.D. 1983. Performance of Detention Basins for Control of Urban Runoff Quality. Presented at the 1983 International Symposium on Urban Hydrology, Hydraulics and Sedimentation Control, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY. Emmerling-Dinovo, C. 1995. Stormwater detention basins and residential locational decisions. Water Resources Bulletin, 31(3):51552. Gain, W.S. 1996. The Effects of Flow Path Modification on Water Quality Constituent Retention in an Urban Stormwater Detention Pond and Wetland System. Water Resources Investigations Report 95-4297. U.S. Geological Survey, Tallahassee, FL. Galli, F. 1990. Thermal Impacts Associated with Urbanization and Stormwater Best Management Practices. Prepared for the Maryland Department of the Environment, Baltimore, MD, by the Metropolitan Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Holler, J.D. 1989. Water quality efficiency of an urban commercial wet detention stormwater management system at Boynton Beach Mall in South Palm Beach County, FL. Florida Scientist 52(1):4857. Holler, J.D. 1990. Nonpoint source phosphorous control by a combination wet detention/filtration facility in Kissimmee, FL. Florida Scientist 53(1):2837.
23
Horner, R.R., J. Guedry, and M.H. Kortenhoff. 1990. Improving the Cost Effectiveness of Highway Construction Site Erosion and Pollution Control. Final Report. Washington State Transportation Commission, Olympia, WA. References (continued) Kantrowitz, I., and W. Woodham. 1995. Efficiency of a Stormwater Detention Pond in Reducing Loads of Chemical and Physical Constituents in Urban Streamflow, Pinellas County, Florida. Water Resources Investigations Report 94-4217. U.S. Geological Survey, Tallahassee, FL. Martin, E. 1988. Effectiveness of an urban runoff detention pond/wetland system. Journal of Environmental Engineering 114(4):810827. Oberts, G.L. 1994. Performance of stormwater ponds and wetlands in winter. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(2):6468. Oberts, G.L., P.J. Wotzka, and J.A. Hartsoe. 1989. The Water Quality Performance of Select Urban Runoff Treatment Systems. Publication No. 590-89-062a. Prepared for the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources, Metropolitan Council, St. Paul, MN. Oberts, G.L., and L. Wotzka. 1988. The water quality performance of a detention basin wetland treatment system in an urban area. In Nonpoint Source Pollution: Economy, Policy, Management and Appropriate Technology. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, VA. Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory. 1983. Metropolitan Washington Urban Runoff Project. Final Report. Prepared for the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC, by the Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory, Manassas, VA. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. 1991. Stormwater Quality Best Management Practices. Marshall Macklin Monaghan Limited, Toronto, Ontario. Saunders, G. and M. Gilroy. 1997. Treatment of Nonpoint Source Pollution With Wetland/Aquatic Ecosystem Best Management Practices. Texas Water Development Board, Lower Colorado River Authority, Austin, TX. Schueler, T. 1997a. Comparative pollutant removal capability of urban BMPs: A reanalysis. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):515520. Schueler, T. 1997b. Influence of groundwater on performance of stormwater ponds in Florida. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):525528. Urbonas, B., J. Carlson, and B. Vang. 1994. Joint Pond-Wetland System in Colorado. Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1995. Economic Benefits of Runoff Controls. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC, by the Watershed Management Institute, Ingleside, MD.
24
Wu, J. 1989. Evaluation of Detention Basin Performance in the Piedmont Region of North Carolina. Report No. 89-248. North Carolina Water Resources Research Institute, Raleigh, NC.
References (continued) Yousef, Y., M. Wanielista, and H. Harper. 1986. Design and Effectiveness of Urban Retention Basins. In Urban Runoff QualityImpact and Quality Enhancement Technology. B. Urbonas and L.A. Roesner (Eds.). American Society of Civil Engineering, New York, New York. pp. 338350. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1995. Stormwater Management Pond Design Example for Extended Detention Wet Pond. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington, DC, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. 1992. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria ManualVolume 3: Best Management Practices. Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. Galli, J. 1992. Preliminary Analysis of the Performance and Longevity of Urban BMPs Installed in Prince George's County, Maryland. Prince George's County, Maryland, Department of Natural Resources, Largo, MD. MacRae, C. 1996. Experience from Morphological Research on Canadian Streams: Is Control of the Two-Year Frequency Runoff Event the Best Basis for Stream Channel Protection? In Effects of Watershed Development and Management on Aquatic Ecosystems. American Society of Civil Engineers. Snowbird, UT. pp. 144162. Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas: Best Management Practices. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minneapolis, MN. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
25
Infiltration practices
Infiltration Basin Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description An infiltration basin is a shallow impoundment which is designed to infiltrate storm water into the ground water. This practice is believed to have a high pollutant removal efficiency and can also help recharge the ground water, thus restoring low flows to stream systems. Infiltration basins can be challenging to apply on many sites, however, because of soils requirements. In addition, some studies have shown relatively high failure rates compared with other management practices. Applicability Infiltration basins have select applications. Their use is often sharply restricted by concerns over ground water contamination, soils, and clogging at the site. Regional Applicability Infiltration basins can be utilized in most regions of the country, with some design modifications in cold and arid climates. In regions of karst (i.e., limestone) topography, these storm water management practices may not be applied due to concerns of sink hole formation and ground water contamination. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. In these areas, few storm water practices can be easily applied due to space limitations. Infiltration basins can rarely be applied in the ultra-urban environment. Two features that can restrict their use are the potential of infiltrated water to interfere with existing infrastructure, and the relatively poor infiltration capacity of most urban soils. In addition, while they consume only the space of the infiltration basin site itself, they need a continuous, relatively flat area. Thus, it is more difficult to fit them into small unusable areas on a site. Storm Water Hot Spots A storm water hot spot is an area where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. Infiltration basins should never receive runoff from storm water hot spots, unless the storm water
26
has already been treated by another practice. This caution is due to potential ground water contamination. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Infiltration basins have limited applications as a storm water retrofit. Their use is restricted by three factors. First, infiltration basins should be used to treat small sites (less than 5 acres). Practices that are applied to small sites, such as infiltration basins, are generally a high-cost retrofit option in terms of construction cost and the maintenance burden associated with the large number of practices needed to retrofit a watershed. Second, it is often difficult to find areas where soils are appropriate for infiltration in an already urban or suburban environment. Finally, infiltration basins are best applied to small sites, yet need a flat, relatively continuous area. It is often difficult to find sites with this type of area available. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Infiltration basins are an excellent option for cold water streams because they encourage infiltration of storm water and maintain dry weather flow. Because storm water travels underground to the stream, it has little opportunity to increase in temperature. Siting and Design Considerations When designing infiltration basins, designers need to carefully consider both the restrictions on the site and design features to improve the long-term performance of the practice. Siting Considerations Infiltration practices need to be located extremely carefully. In particular, designers need to ensure that the soils on the site are appropriate for infiltration, and that designs minimize the potential for ground water contamination and long-term maintenance problems. Drainage Area Infiltration basins have historically been used as regional facilities, serving for both quantity and quality control. In some regions of the country, this practice is feasible, particularly if the soils are particularly sandy. In most areas, however, infiltration basins experience high rates of failure when used in this manner. In general, the practice is best applied to relatively small drainage areas (i.e., less than 10 acres). Slope The bottom of infiltration basins needs to be completely flat to allow infiltration throughout the entire basin bottom. Soils/Topography Soils and topography are strongly limiting factors when locating infiltration practices. Soils must be significantly permeable to ensure that the practice can infiltrate quickly enough to reduce the potential for clogging, and soils that infiltrate too rapidly may not provide sufficient treatment,
27
creating the potential for ground water contamination. The infiltration rate should range between 0.5 and 3 inches per hour. In addition, the soils should have no greater than 20 percent clay content, and less than 40 percent silt/clay content (MDE, 2000). Finally, infiltration basins may not be used in regions of karst topography, due to the potential for sinkhole formation or ground water contamination. Ground Water Designers always need to provide significant separation distance (2 to 5 feet) from the bottom of the infiltration basin and the seasonally high ground water table, to reduce the risk of contamination. Infiltration practices should also be separated from drinking water wells. Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. There are some features, however, that should be incorporated into most infiltration basin designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment refers to design features that provide settling of large particles before runoff reaches a management practice, easing the long-term maintenance burden. Pretreatment is important for all structural management practices, but it is particularly important for infiltration practices. In order to ensure that pretreatment mechanisms are effective, designers should incorporate "multiple pretreatment," using practices such as grassed swales, sediment basins, and vegetated filter strips in series. Treatment Treatment design features enhance the pollutant removal of a practice. For infiltration practices, designers need to stabilize upland soils to ensure that the basin does not become clogged with sediment. In addition, the facility needs to be sized so that the volume of water to be treated infiltrates through the bottom in a given amount of time. Because infiltration basins are designed in this manner, infiltration basins designed on less permeable soils should be significantly larger than those designed on more permeable soils. Conveyance Storm water needs to be conveyed through storm water management practices safely and in a way that minimizes erosion. Designers need to be particularly careful in ensuring that channels leading to an infiltration practice are designed to minimize erosion. In general, infiltration basins should be designed to treat only small storms (i.e., only for water quality). Thus, these practices should be designed "off-line," using a flow separator to divert only small flows to the practice. Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities, designers also need to incorporate features into the design to ensure that the maintenance burden of a practice is reduced. These features can make regular maintenance activities easier or reduce the need to perform maintenance. In infiltration basins, designers need to provide access to the basin for regular maintenance activities. Where
28
possible, a means to drain the basin, such as an underdrain, should be provided in case the bottom becomes clogged. This feature allows the basin to be drained and accessed for maintenance in the event that the water has ponded in the basin bottom or the soil is saturated. Landscaping Landscaping can enhance the aesthetic value of storm water practices or improve their function. In infiltration basins, the most important purpose of vegetation is to reduce the tendency of the practice to clog. Upland drainage needs to be properly stabilized with a thick layer of vegetation, particularly immediately following construction. In addition, providing a thick turf at the basin bottom helps encourage infiltration and prevent the formation of rills in the basin bottom. Design Variations Some modifications may be needed to ensure the performance of infiltration basins in arid and cold climates. Arid or Semi-Arid Climates In arid regions, infiltration practices are often highly recommended because of the need to recharge the ground water. In arid regions, designers need to emphasize pretreatment even more strongly to ensure that the practice does not clog, because of the high sediment concentrations associated with storm water runoff in areas such as the Southwest. In addition, the basin bottom may be planted with drought-tolerant species and/or covered with an alternative material such as sand or gravel. Cold Climates In extremely cold climates (i.e., regions that experience permafrost), infiltration basins may be an infeasible option. In most cold climates, infiltration basins can be a feasible practice, but there are some challenges to its use. First, the practice may become inoperable during some portions of the year when the surface of the basin becomes frozen. Other design features also may be incorporated to deal with the challenges of cold climates. One such challenge is the volume of runoff associated with the spring snowmelt event. The capacity of the infiltration basin might be increased to account for snowmelt volume. Another option is the use of a seasonably operated facility (Oberts, 1994). A seasonally operated infiltration/detention basin combines several techniques to improve the performance of infiltration practices in cold climates. Two features, the underdrain system and level control valves, are useful in cold climates. These features are used as follows: At the beginning of the winter season, the level control valve is opened and the soil is drained. As the snow begins to melt in the spring, the underdrain and the level control valves are closed. The snowmelt is infiltrated until the capacity of the soil is reached. Then, the facility acts as a detention facility, providing storage for particles to settle. Other design features can help to minimize problems associated with winter conditions, particularly concerns that chlorides from road salting may contaminate ground water. The basin may be disconnected during the winter to ensure that chlorides do not enter the ground water in areas where this is a problem, or if the basin is used to treat roadside runoff. Designers may also want to reconsider application of infiltration practices on parking lots or roads where deicing is used, unless it is confirmed that the practice will not cause elevated chloride levels in the ground
29
water. If the basin is used for snow storage, or to treat roadside or parking lot runoff, the basin bottom should be planted with salt-tolerant vegetation. Limitations Although infiltration basins can be useful practices, they have several limitations. Infiltration basins are not generally aesthetic practices, particularly if they clog. If they clog, the soils become saturated, and the practice can be a source of mosquitoes. In addition, these practices are challenging to apply because of concerns over ground water contamination and sufficient soil infiltration. Finally, maintenance of infiltration practices can be burdensome, and they have a relatively high rate of failure. Maintenance Considerations Regular maintenance is critical to the successful operation of infiltration basins (see Table 1). Historically, infiltration basins have had a poor track record. In one study conducted in Prince George's County, Maryland (Galli, 1992), all of the infiltration basins investigated clogged within 2 years. This trend may not be the same in soils with high infiltration rates, however. A study of 23 infiltration basins in the Pacific Northwest showed better long-term performance in an area with highly permeable soils (Hilding, 1996). In this study, few of the infiltration basins had failed after 10 years. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for infiltration basins (Source: Modified from WMI, 1997) Activity

Schedule
Inspect facility for signs of wetness or damage to structures Note eroded areas. If dead or dying grass on the bottom is observed, check to ensure that water percolates 23 days following storms. Note signs of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination and handle properly. Mow and remove litter and debris. Stabilize of eroded banks. Repair undercut and eroded areas at inflow and outflow structures. Disc or otherwise aerate bottom. Dethatch basin bottom. Scrape bottom and remove sediment. Restore original crosssection and infiltration rate. Seed or sod to restore ground cover.
Semi-annual inspection
Standard maintenance (as needed) Annual maintenance 5-year maintenance
30
Effectiveness Structural management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Infiltration basins can provide ground water recharge and pollutant removal. Ground Water Recharge Infiltration basins recharge the ground water because runoff is treated for water quality by filtering through the soil and discharging to ground water. Pollutant Removal Very little data are available regarding the pollutant removal associated with infiltration basins. It is generally assumed that they have very high pollutant removal because none of the storm water entering the practice remains on the surface. Schueler (1987) estimated pollutant removal for infiltration basins based on data from land disposal of wastewater. The average pollutant removal, assuming the infiltration basin is sized to treat the runoff from a 1-inch storm, is: TSS 75% Phosphorous 6070% Nitrogen 5560% Metals 8590% Bacteria 90% These removal efficiencies assume that the infiltration basin is well designed and maintained. The information in the Siting and Design Considerations and Maintenance Considerations sections represent the best available information on how to properly design these practices. The design references below also provide additional information. Cost Considerations Infiltration basins are relatively cost-effective practices because little infrastructure is needed when constructing them. One study estimated the total construction cost at about $2 per ft 3 (adjusted for inflation) of storage for a 0.25-acre basin (SWRPC, 1991). Infiltration basins typically consume about 2 to 3 percent of the site draining to them, which is relatively small. Maintenance costs are estimated at 5 to 10 percent of construction costs. One cost concern associated with infiltration practices is the maintenance burden and longevity. If improperly maintained, infiltration basins have a high failure rate (see Maintenance Considerations). Thus, it may be necessary to replace the basin after a relatively short period of time.
31
References Galli, J. 1992. Analysis of Urban BMP Performance and Longevity in Prince George's County, Maryland. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Hilding, K. 1996. Longevity of infiltration basins assessed in Puget Sound. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3):124125. Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Oberts, G. 1994. Performance of Stormwater Ponds and Wetlands in Winter. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(2): 6468. Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SWRPC). 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. Washington, DC. Ferguson, B.K., 1994. Stormwater Infiltration. CRC Press, Ann Arbor, MI. USEPA. 1993. Guidance to Specify Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
32
Infiltration Trench Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description An infiltration trench (a.k.a. infiltration galley) is a rock-filled trench with no outlet that receives storm water runoff. Storm water runoff passes through some combination of pretreatment measures, such as a swale and detention basin, and into the trench. There, runoff is stored in the void space between the stones and infiltrates through the bottom and into the soil matrix. The primary pollutant removal mechanism of this practice is filtering through the soil.
33
Applicability Infiltration trenches have select applications. While they can be applied in most regions of the country, their use is sharply restricted by concerns due to common site factors, such as potential ground water contamination, soils, and clogging. Regional Applicability Infiltration trenches can be utilized in most regions of the country, with some design modifications in cold and arid climates. In regions of karst (i.e., limestone) topography, these storm water management practices may not be applied due to concerns of sink hole formation and ground water contamination. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. Infiltration trenches can sometimes be applied in the ultra-urban environment. Two features that can restrict their use are the potential of infiltrated water to interfere with existing infrastructure, and the relatively poor infiltration of most urban soils. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. Infiltration trenches should not receive runoff from storm water hot spots, unless the storm water has already been treated by another storm water management practice, because of potential ground water contamination. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Infiltration trenches may be used as a storm water retrofit. Their use is somewhat restricted, however, by two factors. First, infiltration trenches should be used to treat small sites (less than 5 acres). Small site storm water management practices are generally a high cost retrofit option in terms of construction cost and the maintenance burden associated with the number of small site practices. Second, it is often difficult to find areas where soils are appropriate for infiltration in an already urban or suburban environment. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Infiltration trenches are an excellent option for cold water streams because they encourage infiltration of storm water. This storm water does not warm as it travels underground to the receiving stream, lessening the temperature impacts commonly associated with urbanization. Siting and Design Considerations Infiltration trenches have select applications. Although they can be applied in a variety of situations, the use of infiltration trenches is restricted by concerns over ground water contamination, soils, and clogging.
34
Siting Considerations Infiltration practices need to be sited extremely carefully. In particular, designers need to ensure that the soils on site are appropriate for infiltration and that designs minimize the potential for ground water contamination and long-term maintenance. Drainage Area Infiltration trenches generally can be applied to relatively small sites (less than 5 acres), with relatively high impervious cover. Application to larger sites generally causes clogging, resulting in a high maintenance burden. Slope Infiltration trenches should be placed on flat ground, but the slopes of the site draining to the practice can be as steep as 15 percent. Soils/Topography Soils and topography are strongly limiting factors when locating infiltration practices. Soils must be significantly permeable to ensure that the storm water can infiltrate quickly enough to reduce the potential for clogging. In addition, soils that infiltrate too rapidly may not provide sufficient treatment, creating the potential for ground water contamination. The infiltration rate should range between 0.5 and 3 inches per hour. In addition, the soils should have no greater than 20percent clay content, and less than 40-percent silt/clay content (MDE, 2000). The infiltration rate and textural class of the soil need to be confirmed in the field; designers should not rely on more generic information such as a soil survey. Finally, infiltration trenches may not be used in regions of karst topography, due to the potential for sinkhole formation or ground water contamination. Ground Water Designers always need to provide significant separation (2 to 5 feet) from the bottom of the infiltration trench and the seasonally high ground water table, to reduce the risk of contamination. In addition, infiltration practices should be separated from drinking water wells. Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. There are some features, however, that should be incorporated into most infiltration trench designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment refers to design features that provide settling of large particles before runoff reaches a management practice, easing the long-term maintenance burden. Pretreatment is important for all structural storm water management practices, but it is particularly important for infiltration practices. To ensure that pretreatment mechanisms are effective, designers should incorporate "multiple pretreatment," using practices such as grassed swales, vegetated filter strips, detention, or a plunge pool in series.
35
Treatment Treatment design features enhance the pollutant removal of a practice. During the construction process, the upland soils of infiltration trenches need to be stabilized to ensure that the trench does not become clogged with sediment. Furthermore, the practice should be filled with large clean stones that can retain the volume of water to be treated in their voids. Like infiltration basins, this practice should be sized so that the volume to be treated can infiltrate out of the trench bottom in 24 hours. Conveyance Storm water needs to be conveyed through storm water management practices safely, and in a way that minimizes erosion. Designers need to be particularly careful in ensuring that channels leading to an infiltration practice are designed to minimize erosion. Infiltration trenches should be designed to treat only small storms, (i.e., only for water quality). Thus, these practices should be designed "off-line," using a structure to divert only small flows to the practice. Finally, the sides of an infiltration trench should be lined with a geotextile fabric to prevent flow from causing rills along the edge of the practice. Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities, designers also need to incorporate features into the design to ensure that the maintenance burden of a practice is reduced. These features can make regular maintenance activities easier or reduce the need to perform maintenance. As with all management practices, infiltration trenches should have an access path for maintenance activities. An observation well (i.e., a perforated PVC pipe that leads to the bottom of the trench) can enable inspectors to monitor the drawdown rate. Where possible, trenches should have a means to drain the practice if it becomes clogged, such as an underdrain. An underdrain is a perforated pipe system in a gravel bed, installed on the bottom of filtering practices to collect and remove filtered runoff. An underdrain pipe with a shutoff valve can be used in an infiltration system to act as an overflow in case of clogging. Landscaping In infiltration trenches, there is no landscaping on the practice itself, but it is important to ensure that the upland drainage is properly stabilized with thick vegetation, particularly following construction. Regional Variations Arid or Semi-Arid Climates In arid regions, infiltration practices are often highly recommended because of the need to recharge the ground water. One concern in these regions is the potential of these practices to clog, due to relatively high sediment concentrations in these environments. Pretreatment needs to be more heavily emphasized in these dryer climates. Cold Climates In extremely cold climates (i.e., regions that experience permafrost), infiltration trenches may be an infeasible option. In most cold climates, infiltration trenches can be a feasible management
36
practice, but there are some challenges to their use. The volume may need to be increased in order to treat snowmelt. In addition, if the practice is used to treat roadside runoff, it may be desirable to divert flow around the trench in the winter to prevent infiltration of chlorides from road salting, where this is a problem. Finally, a minimum setback from roads is needed to ensure that the practice does not cause frost heaving. Limitations Although infiltration trenches can be a useful management practice, they have several limitations. While they do not detract visually from a site, infiltration trenches provide no visual enhancements. Their application is limited due to concerns over ground water contamination and other soils requirements. Finally, maintenance can be burdensome, and infiltration practices have a relatively high rate of failure. Maintenance Considerations In addition to incorporating features into the design to minimize maintenance, some regular maintenance and inspection practices are needed. Table 1 outlines some of these practices. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for infiltration trenches (Source: Modified from WMI, 1997) Activity
Schedule
Check observation wells following 3 days of dry weather. Failure to percolate within this time period indicates clogging. Inspect pretreatment devices and diversion structures for sediment build-up and structural damage. Remove sediment and oil/grease from pretreatment devices and overflow structures. If bypass capability is available, it may be possible to regain the infiltration rate in the short term by using measures such as providing an extended dry period. Total rehabilitation of the trench should be conducted to maintain storage capacity within 2/3 of the design treatment volume and 72-hour exfiltration rate limit. Trench walls should be excavated to expose clean soil.
Semi-annual inspection
Standard maintenance 5-year maintenance
Upon failure
Infiltration practices have historically had a high rate of failure compared to other storm water management practices. One study conducted in Prince George's County, Maryland (Galli, 1992), revealed that less than half of the infiltration trenches investigated (of about 50) were still functioning properly, and less than one-third still functioned properly after 5 years. Many of
37
these practices, however, did not incorporate advanced pretreatment. By carefully selecting the location and improving the design features of infiltration practices, their performance should improve. Effectiveness Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Infiltration trenches can provide ground water recharge, pollutant control, and can help somewhat to provide channel protection. Ground Water Recharge Infiltration trenches recharge the ground water because runoff is treated for water quality by filtering through the soil and discharging to ground water. Pollutant Removal Very little data are available regarding the pollutant removal associated with infiltration trenches. It is generally assumed that they have very high pollutant removal, because none of the storm water entering the practice remains on the surface. Schueler (1987) estimated pollutant removal for infiltration trenches based on data from land disposal of wastewater. The average pollutant removal, assuming the infiltration trench is sized to treat the runoff from a 1-inch storm, is: TSS 75% Phosphorous 6070% Nitrogen 5560% Metals 8590% Bacteria 90% These removal efficiencies assume that the infiltration trench is well designed and maintained. The information in the Siting and Design Considerations and Maintenance Considerations sections represent the best available information on how to properly design these practices. The design references below provide additional information. Cost Considerations Infiltration trenches are somewhat expensive, when compared to other storm water practices, in terms of cost per area treated. Typical construction costs, including contingency and design costs, are about $5 per ft 3 of storm water treated (SWRPC, 1991; Brown and Schueler, 1997). Infiltration trenches typically consume about 2 to 3 percent of the site draining to them, which is relatively small. In addition, infiltration trenches can fit into thin, linear areas. Thus, they can generally fit into relatively unusable portions of a site. One cost concern associated with infiltration practices is the maintenance burden and longevity. If improperly maintained, infiltration trenches have a high failure rate (see Maintenance Considerations). In general, maintenance costs for infiltration trenches are estimated at between
38
5 percent and 20 percent of the construction cost. More realistic values are probably closer to the 20-percent range, to ensure long-term functionality of the practice. References Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Edgewater, MD, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Galli, J. 1992. Analysis of Urban BMP Performance and Longevity in Prince George's County, Maryland. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SWRPC). 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington, DC, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Ferguson, B.K. 1994. Stormwater Infiltration. CRC Press, Ann Arbor, MI. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas: Best Management Practices. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minneapolis, MN. USEPA. 1993. Guidance to Specify Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
39
Porous Pavement Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Porous pavement is a permeable pavement surface with an underlying stone reservoir to temporarily store surface runoff before it infiltrates into the subsoil. This porous surface replaces traditional pavement, allowing parking lot storm water to infiltrate directly and receive water quality treatment. There are a few porous pavement options, including porous asphalt, pervious concrete, and grass pavers. Porous asphalt and pervious concrete appear to be the same as traditional pavement from the surface, but are manufactured without "fine" materials, and incorporate void spaces to allow infiltration. Grass pavers are concrete interlocking blocks or synthetic fibrous gridded systems with open areas designed to allow grass to grow within the void areas. Other alternative paving surfaces can help reduce the runoff from paved areas but do not incorporate the stone trench for temporary storage below the pavement (see Green Parking fact sheet). While porous pavement has the potential to be a highly effective treatment practice, maintenance has been a concern in past applications of the practice. Application The ideal application for porous pavement is to treat low-traffic or overflow parking areas. Porous pavement may also have some application on highways, where it is currently used as a surface material to reduce hydroplaning. Regional Applicability Porous pavement can be applied in most regions of the country, but the practice has unique challenges in cold climates. Porous pavement cannot be used where sand is applied to the pavement surface because the sand will clog the surface of the material. Care also needs to be taken when applying salt to a porous pavement surface as chlorides from road salt may migrate into the ground water. For block pavers, plowing may be challenging because the edge of the snow plow blade can catch the edge of the blocks, damaging the surface. This difficulty does not imply that it is impossible to use porous pavement in cold climates. Another concern in cold climates is that infiltrating runoff below pavement may cause frost heave, although design modifications can reduce this risk. Porous pavement has been used successfully in Norway (Stenmark, 1995), incorporating design features to reduce frost heave. Furthermore, some experience suggests that snow melts faster on a porous surface because of rapid drainage below the snow surface (Cahill Associates, 1993).
40
Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. Porous pavements are a good option in these areas because they consume no space. They are not ideal for high-traffic areas, however, because of the potential for failure due to clogging (Galli, 1992). Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. These areas include commercial nurseries, auto recycle facilities, commercial parking lots, fueling stations, storage areas, industrial rooftops, marinas, outdoor container storage of liquids, outdoor loading/unloading facilities, public works storage areas, hazardous materials generators (if containers are exposed to rainfall), vehicle service and maintenance areas, and vehicle and equipment washing/steam cleaning facilities. Since porous pavement is an infiltration practice, it should not be applied on storm water hot spots due to the potential for ground water contamination. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Since porous pavement can only be applied to relatively small sites, using porous pavement as a primary tool for watershed retrofitting would be expensive. The best application of porous pavement for retrofits is on individual sites where a parking lot is being resurfaced. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Porous pavement can help to reduce the increased temperature commonly associated with increased impervious cover. Storm water ponds on the surface of conventional pavement, and is subsequently heated by the sun and hot pavement surface. By rapidly infiltrating rainfall, porous pavement reduces the time that storm water is exposed to the sun and heat. Siting and Design Considerations Siting Considerations Porous pavement has the same siting considerations as other infiltration practices (see Infiltration Trench fact sheet). The site needs to meet the following criteria:

Soils need to have a permeability between 0.5 and 3.0 inches per hour. The bottom of the stone reservoir should be completely flat so that infiltrated runoff will be able to infiltrate through the entire surface. Porous pavement should be sited at least 2 to 5 feet above the seasonally high ground water table, and at least 100 feet away from drinking water wells. Porous pavement should be sited on low-traffic or overflow parking areas, which are not sanded for snow removal.
41
Design Considerations Some basic features should be incorporated into all porous pavement practices. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. 1. Pretreatment. In porous pavement designs, the pavement itself acts as pretreatment to the stone reservoir below. Because the surface serves this purpose, frequent maintenance of the surface is critical to prevent clogging. Another pretreatment item can be the incorporation of a fine gravel layer above the coarse gravel treatment reservoir. Both of these pretreatment measures are marginal, which is one reason that these systems have a high failure rate. 2. Treatment. The stone reservoir below the pavement surface should be composed of layers of small stone directly below the pavement surface, and the stone bed below the permeable surface should be sized to attenuate storm flows for the storm event to be treated. Typically, porous pavement is sized to treat a small event, such as a water quality storm (i.e., the storm that will be treated for pollutant removal), which can range from 0.5 to 1.5 inches. As in infiltration trenches, water can be stored only in the void spaces of the stone reservoir. Conveyance. Water is conveyed to the stone reservoir through the surface of the pavement and infiltrates into the ground through the bottom of this stone reservoir. A geosynthetic liner and sand layer should be placed below the stone reservoir to prevent preferential flow paths and to maintain a flat bottom. Designs also need some method to convey larger storms to the storm drain system. One option is to use storm drain inlets set slightly above the elevation of the pavement. This would allow for some ponding above the surface, but would bypass flows that are too large to be treated by the system or when the surface clogs. 3. Maintenance Reduction. One nonstructural component that can help ensure proper maintenance of porous pavement is the use of a carefully worded maintenance agreement that provides specific guidance, including how to conduct routine maintenance and how the surface should be repaved. Ideally, signs should be posted on the site identifying porous pavement areas. One design option incorporates an "overflow edge," which is a trench surrounding the edge of the pavement. The trench connects to the stone reservoir below the surface of the pavement. Although this feature does not in itself reduce maintenance requirements, it acts as a backup in case the surface clogs. If the surface clogs, storm water will flow over the surface and into the trench, where some infiltration and treatment will occur. 4. Landscaping. For porous pavement, the most important landscaping feature is a fully stabilized upland drainage. Reducing sediment loads entering the pavement can help to prevent clogging. Design Variations In one design variation, the stone reservoir below the filter can also treat runoff from other sources such as rooftop runoff. In this design, pipes are connected to the stone reservoir to direct
42
flow throughout the bottom of the storage reservoir (Cahill Associates, 1993; Schueler, 1987). If used to treat off-site runoff, porous pavement should incorporate pretreatment, as with all structural management practices. Regional Adaptations In cold climates, the base of the stone reservoir should be below the frost line. This modification will help to reduce the risk of frost heave. Limitations In addition to the relatively strict siting requirements of porous pavement, a major limitation to the practice is the poor success rate it has experienced in the field. Several studies indicate that, with proper maintenance, porous pavement can retain its permeability (e.g., Goforth et al., 1983; Gburek and Urban, 1980; Hossain and Scofield, 1991). When porous pavement has been implemented in communities, however, the failure rate has been as high as 75 percent over 2 years (Galli, 1992). Maintenance Considerations Porous pavement requires extensive maintenance compared with other practices. In addition to owners not being aware of porous pavement on a site, not performing these maintenance activities is the chief reason for failure of this practice. Typical requirements are shown in Table 1. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for porous pavement (Source: WMI, 1997)
Activity Schedule N/A
Avoid sealing or repaving with non-porous materials. Ensure that paving area is clean of debris. Ensure that paving dewaters between storms. Ensure that the area is clean of sediments. Mow upland and adjacent areas, and seed bare areas. Vacuum sweep frequently to keep the surface free of sediment. Inspect the surface for deterioration or spalling.
Monthly
As needed (typically three to four times per year). Annual
43
Effectiveness Porous pavement can be used to provide ground water recharge and to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff. Some data suggest that as much as 70 to 80 percent of annual rainfall will go toward ground water recharge (Gburek and Urban, 1980). These data will vary depending on design characteristics and underlying soils. Two studies have been conducted on the long-term pollutant removal of porous pavement, both in the Washington, DC, area. They suggest high pollutant removal, although it is difficult to extrapolate these results to all applications of the practice. The results of the studies are presented in Table 2. Table 2. Effectiveness of porous pavement pollutant removal (Schueler, 1987)
Pollutant Removal (%) Study Prince William, VA Rockville, MD TSS 82 95 TP 65 65 TN 80 85 COD 82 Metals 9899
Cost Considerations Porous pavement is significantly more expensive than traditional asphalt. While traditional asphalt is approximately $0.50 to $1.00 per ft 2 , porous pavement can range from $2 to $3 per ft 2 , depending on the design (CWP, 1998; Schueler, 1987). Subtracting the cost of traditional pavement, this amounts to approximately $45,000 and $100,000 per impervious acre treated, which would be quite expensive. In addition, the cost of vacuum sweeping may be substantial if a community does not already perform vacuum sweeping operations. Finally, the practice life may be very short because the risk of clogging is high.
44
References Cahill Associates. 1993. Stormwater Management Systems: Porous Pavement with Underground Recharge Beds. Cahill Associates, West Chester, PA. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Galli, J. 1992. Preliminary Analysis of the Performance and Longevity of Urban BMPs Installed In Prince George's County, Maryland. Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Gburek, W., and J. Urban, 1980. Storm Water Detention and Groundwater Recharge Using Porous AsphaltExperimental Site. In Proceedings: International Symposium on Urban Storm Runoff. University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, p. 8997. Goforth, G., E. Diniz, and J. Rauhut. 1983. Stormwater Hydrological Characteristics of Porous and Conventional Paving Systems. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. Hossain, M., and L. Scofield, 1991. Porous Pavement for Control of Highway Runoff. Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix, AZ. Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Stenmark, C. 1995. An Alternative Road Construction for Stormwater Management. Water Science and Technology 32(1):7984. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington, DC, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD.
45
Filtration practices
Bioretention Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Bioretention areas are landscaping features adapted to provide on-site treatment of storm water runoff. They are commonly located in parking lot islands or within small pockets of residential land uses. Surface runoff is directed into shallow, landscaped depressions. These depressions are designed to incorporate many of the pollutant removal mechanisms that operate in forested ecosystems. During storms, runoff ponds above the mulch and soil in the system. Runoff from larger storms is generally diverted past the facility to the storm drain system. The remaining runoff filters through the mulch and prepared soil mix. Typically, the filtered runoff is collected in a perforated underdrain and returned to the storm drain system. Applicability Bioretention systems are generally applied to small sites and in a highly urbanized setting. Bioretention can be applied in many climatological and geologic situations, with some minor design modifications. Regional Applicability Bioretention systems are applicable almost everywhere in the United States. In arid or cold climates, however, some minor design modifications may be needed. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. Bioretention facilities are ideally suited to many ultra-urban areas, such as parking lots. While they consume a fairly large amount of space (approximately 5 percent of the area that drains to them), they can be fit into existing parking lot islands or other landscaped areas. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. A typical
46
example is a gas station or convenience store parking lot. Bioretention areas can be used to treat storm water hot spots as long as an impermeable liner is used at the bottom of the filter bed. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Bioretention can be used as a storm water retrofit, by modifying existing landscaped areas, or if a parking lot is being resurfaced. In highly urbanized areas, this is one of the few retrofit options that can be employed. However, it is very expensive to retrofit an entire watershed or subwatershed using storm water management practices designed to treat small sites. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Some species in cold water streams, notably trout, are extremely sensitive to changes in temperature. In order to protect these resources, designers should avoid treatment practices that increase the temperature of the storm water runoff they treat. Bioretention is a good option in cold water streams because water ponds in them for only a short time, decreasing the potential for stream warming. Siting and Design Considerations In addition to the broad applicability concerns described above, designers need to consider conditions at the site level. In addition, they need to incorporate design features to improve the longevity and performance of the practice, while minimizing the maintenance burden. Siting Some considerations for selecting a storm water management practice are the drainage area the practice will need to treat, the slopes both at the location of the practice and the drainage area, soil and subsurface conditions, and the depth of the seasonably high ground water table. Bioretention can be applied on many sites, with its primary restriction being the need to apply the practice on small sites. Drainage Area Bioretention areas should usually be used on small sites (i.e., 5 acres or less). When used to treat larger areas, they tend to clog. In addition, it is difficult to convey flow from a large area to a bioretention area. Slope Bioretention areas are best applied to relatively shallow slopes (usually about 5 percent). However, sufficient slope is needed at the site to ensure that water that enters the bioretention area can be connected with the storm drain system. These storm water management practices are most often applied to parking lots or residential landscaped areas, which generally have shallow slopes.
47
Soils/Topography Bioretention areas can be applied in almost any soils or topography, since runoff percolates through a man-made soil bed and is returned to the storm water system. Ground Water Bioretention should be separated somewhat from the ground water to ensure that the ground water table never intersects with the bed of the bioretention facility. This design consideration prevents possible ground water contamination. Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. There are some features, however, that should be incorporated into most bioretention area designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment refers to features of a management practice that cause coarse sediment particles and their associated pollutants to settle. Incorporating pretreatment helps to reduce the maintenance burden of bioretention and reduces the likelihood that the soil bed will clog over time. Several different mechanisms can be used to provide pretreatment in bioretention facilities. Often, runoff is directed to a grass channel or filter strip to filter out coarse materials before the runoff flows into the filter bed of the bioretention area. Other features may include a pea gravel diaphragm, which acts to spread flow evenly and drop out larger particles. Treatment Treatment design features help enhance the ability of a storm water management practice to remove pollutants. Several basic features should be incorporated into bioretention designs to enhance their pollutant removal. The bioretention system should be sized between 5 and 10 percent of the impervious area draining to it. The practice should be designed with a soil bed that is a sand/soil matrix, with a mulch layer above the soil bed. The bioretention area should be designed to pond a small amount of water (69 inches) above the filter bed. Conveyance Conveyance of storm water runoff into and through a storm water practice is a critical component of any storm water management practice. Storm water should be conveyed to and from practices safely and to minimize erosion potential. Ideally, some storm water treatment can be achieved during conveyance to and from the practice. Bioretention practices are designed with an underdrain system to collect filtered runoff at the bottom of the filter bed and direct it to the storm drain system. An underdrain is a perforated pipe system in a gravel bed, installed on the bottom of the filter bed. Designers should provide an overflow structure to convey flow from storms that are not treated by the bioretention facility to the storm drain.
48
Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities needed to maintain the function of storm water practices, some design features can be incorporated to reduce the required maintenance of a practice. Designers should ensure that the bioretention area is easily accessible for maintenance. Landscaping Landscaping is critical to the function and aesthetic value of bioretention areas. It is preferable to plant the area with native vegetation, or plants that provide habitat value, where possible. Another important design feature is to select species that can withstand the hydrologic regime they will experience. At the bottom of the bioretention facility, plants that tolerate both wet and dry conditions are preferable. At the edges, which will remain primarily dry, upland species will be the most resilient. Finally, it is best to select a combination of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous materials. Design Variations One design alternative to the traditional bioretention practice is the use of a "partial exfiltration" system, used to promote ground water recharge. Other design modifications may make this practice more effective in arid or cold climates. Partial Exfiltration In one design variation of the bioretention system, the underdrain is only installed on part of the bottom of the bioretention system. This design alternative allows for some infiltration, with the underdrain acting as more of an overflow. This system can be applied only when the soils and other characteristics are appropriate for infiltration (see Infiltration Trench and Infiltration Basin). Arid Climates In arid climates, bioretention areas should be landscaped with drought-tolerant species. Cold Climates In cold climates, bioretention areas can be used as snow storage areas. If used for this purpose, or if used to treat runoff from a parking lot where salt is used as a deicer, the bioretention area should be planted with salt-tolerant, nonwoody plant species. Limitations Bioretention areas have a few limitations. Bioretention areas cannot be used to treat a large drainage area, limiting their usefulness for some sites. In addition, although the practice does not consume a large amount of space, incorporating bioretention into a parking lot design may reduce the number of parking spaces available. Finally, the construction cost of bioretention areas is relatively high compared with many other management practices (see Cost Considerations).
49
Maintenance Considerations Bioretention requires frequent landscaping maintenance, including measures to ensure that the area is functioning properly, as well as maintenance of the landscaping on the practice. In many cases, bioretention areas initially require intense maintenance, but less maintenance is needed over time. In many cases, maintenance tasks can be completed by a landscaping contractor, who may already be hired at the site. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for bioretention areas (Source: ETA and Biohabitats, 1993) Activity

Schedule
Remulch void areas Treat diseased trees and shrubs Mow turf areas Water plants daily for 2 weeks Inspect soil and repair eroded areas Remove litter and debris Remove and replace dead and diseased vegetation Add mulch Replace tree stakes and wires
As needed At project completion Monthly Twice per year Once per year
Effectiveness Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. In general, bioretention areas can provide only pollutant removal. Flood Control Bioretention areas are not designed to provide flood control. These larger flows must be diverted to a detention pond that can provide flood peak reduction. Channel Protection Bioretention areas are generally not designed to provide channel protection because at the scale at which they are typically installed they are not able to infiltrate large volumes. (They are typically designed to treat and infiltrate the first inch of runoff and are bypassed by larger flows that can erode channels.) Channel protection must be provided by other means, such as ponds or other volume control practices.
50
Ground Water Recharge Bioretention areas do not usually recharge the ground water, except in the case of the partial exfiltration design (see Design Variations). Pollutant Removal Little pollutant removal data have been collected on the pollutant removal effectiveness of bioretention areas. A field and laboratory analysis of bioretention facilities conducted by Davis et al. (1997), showed very high removal rates (roughly 95 percent for copper, 98 percent for phosphorus, 20 percent for nitrate, and 50 percent for total Kjeldhal nitrogen (TKN). Table 2 shows data from two other studies of field bioretention sites in Maryland. Table 2. Pollutant removal effectiveness of two bioretention areas in Maryland (USEPA, 2000). Pollutant Copper Lead Zinc Phosphorus TKN NH4 + NO3 Total nitrogen (TN) Calcium Pollutant Removal 43%97% 70%95% 64%95% 65%87% 5267% 92% 15%16% 49% 27%
Assuming that bioretention systems behave similarly to swales, their removal rates are relatively high. The negative removal rate for bacteria may reflect sampling errors, such as failure to account for bacterial sources in the practice. Alternatively, these data may be the result of bacteria reproduction in the moist soils of swale systems. There is considerable variability in the effectiveness of bioretention areas, and it is believed that properly designing and maintaining these areas may help to improve their performance. The siting and design criteria presented in this sheet reflect the best current information and experience to improve the performance of bioretention areas. A recent joint project of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the EPA Office of Water may help to isolate specific design features that can improve performance. The National Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) database is a compilation of storm water practices which includes both design information and performance data for various practices. As the database expands,
51
inferences about the extent to which specific design criteria influence pollutant removal might be made. More information on this database is accessible on the ASCE web page at http://www.asce.org. Cost Considerations Bioretention areas are relatively expensive. A recent study (Brown and Schueler, 1997) estimated the cost of a variety of storm water management practices. The study resulted in the following cost equation for bioretention areas, adjusting for inflation: C = 7.30 V0.99 where: C = Construction, design, and permitting cost ($); and V = Volume of water treated by the facility (ft3 ). An important consideration when evaluating the costs of bioretention is that this practice replaces an area that most likely would have been landscaped. Thus, the true cost of the practice is less than the construction cost reported. Similarly, maintenance activities conducted on bioretention areas are not very different from maintenance of a landscaped area. The land consumed by bioretention areas is relatively high compared with other practices (about 5 percent of the drainage area). Again, this area should not necessarily be considered lost, since the practice may only be slightly larger than a traditional landscaped area. Finally, bioretention areas can improve upon existing landscaping and can therefore be an aesthetic benefit.
52
References Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for Chesapeake Research Consortium. Edgewater, MD. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. Davis, A., M. Shokouhian, H. Sharma, and C. Henderson. 1997. Bioretention Monitoring Preliminary Data Analysis. Environmental Engineering Program of the University of Maryland, College Park, MD. Engineering Technologies Associates and Biohabitats. 1993. Design Manual for Use of Bioretention in Stormwater Management. Prepared for Prince George's County Government, Watershed Protection Branch, Landover, MD. Schueler, T. 1997. Comparative Pollutant Removal Capability of Urban BMPs: A Reanalysis. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4): 515520. Information Resources Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Prepared for Chesapeake Research Consortium, Solomons, MD, and USEPA Region V, Chicago, IL. Prince George's County Department of Environmental Resources. 1997. Low Impact Development. Prince George's County Department of Environmental Resources, Largo, MD.
53
Sand and Organic Filters Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Sand filters are usually two-chambered storm water practices; the first is a settling chamber, and the second is a filter bed filled with sand or another filtering media. As storm water flows into the first chamber, large particles settle out, and then finer particles and other pollutants are removed as storm water flows through the filtering medium. There are several modifications of the basic sand filter design, including the surface sand filter, underground sand filter, perimeter sand filter, organic media filter, and Multi-Chamber Treatment Train. All of these filtering practices operate on the same basic principle. Modifications to the traditional surface sand filter were made primarily to fit sand filters into more challenging design sites (e.g., underground and perimeter filters) or to improve pollutant removal (e.g., organic media filter).
Applicability Sand filters can be applied in most regions of the country and on most types of sites. Some restrictions at the site level, however, might restrict the use of sand filters as a storm water management practice (see Siting and Design Considerations). Regional Applicability Although sand filters can be used in both cold and arid climates, some design modifications might be necessary (See Siting and Design Considerations).
54
Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface is present. Sand filters in general are good options in these areas because they consume little space. Underground and perimeter sand filters in particular are well suited to the ultra-urban setting because they consume no surface space. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. These areas include commercial nurseries, auto recycle facilities, commercial parking lots, fueling stations, storage areas, industrial rooftops, marinas, outdoor container storage of liquids, outdoor loading/unloading facilities, public works storage areas, hazardous materials generators (if containers are exposed to rainfall), vehicle service and maintenance areas, and vehicle and equipment washing/steam cleaning facilities. Sand filters are an excellent option to treat runoff from storm water hot spots because storm water treated by sand filters has no interaction with, and thus no potential to contaminate, the groundwater. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Sand filters are a good option to achieve water quality goals in retrofit studies where space is limited because they consume very little surface space and have few site restrictions. It is important to note, however, that sand filters cannot treat a very large drainage area. Using small-site BMPs in a retrofit may be the only option for a retrofit study in a highly urbanized area, but it is expensive to treat the drainage area of an entire watershed using many small-site practices, as opposed to one larger facility such as a pond. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Some species in cold water streams, notably trout, are extremely sensitive to changes in temperature. To protect these resources, designers should avoid treatment practices that increase the temperature of the storm water runoff they treat. Sand filters can be a good treatment option for cold water streams. In some storm water treatment practices, particularly wet ponds, runoff is warmed by the sun as it resides in the permanent pool. Surface sand filters are typically not designed with a permanent pool, although there is ponding in the sedimentation chamber and above the sand filter. Designers may consider shortening the detention time in cold water watersheds. Underground and perimeter sand filter designs have little potential for warming because these practices are not exposed to the sun. Siting and Design Considerations In addition to the broad applicability issues described above, designers need to consider conditions at the site level and need to incorporate design features to improve the longevity and performance of the practice, while minimizing the maintenance burden.
55
Siting Considerations Some considerations when selecting a storm water management practice are the drainage area the practice will need to treat, the slopes both at the location of the practice and draining to it, soil and subsurface conditions, and the depth of the seasonably high ground water table. Although sand filters are relatively versatile, some site restrictions such as available head might limit their use. Drainage Area Sand filters are best applied on relatively small sites (up to 10 acres for surface sand filters and closer to 2 acres for perimeter or underground filters [MDE, 2000]). Filters have been used on larger drainage areas, of up to 100 acres, but these systems can clog when they treat larger drainage areas unless adequate measures are provided to prevent clogging, such as a larger sedimentation chamber or more intensive regular maintenance. Slope Sand filters can be used on sites with slopes up to about 6 percent. It is challenging to use most sand filters in very flat terrain because they require a significant amount of elevation drop, or head (about 5 to 8 feet), to allow flow through the system. One exception is the perimeter sand filter, which can be applied with as little as 2 feet of head. Soils/Topography When sand filters are designed as a stand-alone practice, they can be used on almost any soil because they can be designed so that storm water never infiltrates into the soil or interacts with the ground water. Alternatively, sand filters can be designed as pretreatment for an infiltration practice, where soils do play a role. Ground Water Designers should provide at least 2 feet of separation between the bottom of the filter and the seasonally high ground water table. This design feature prevents both structural damage to the filter and possibly, though unlikely, ground water contamination. Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. Some features, however, should be incorporated into most designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment is a critical component of any storm water management practice. In sand filters, pretreatment is achieved in the sedimentation chamber that precedes the filter bed. In this chamber, the coarsest particles settle out and thus do not reach the filter bed. Pretreatment reduces the maintenance burden of sand filters by reducing the potential of these sediments to clog the filter. Designers should provide at least 25 percent of the water quality volume in a dry or wet sedimentation chamber as pretreatment to the filter system. The water quality volume is
56
the amount of runoff that will be treated for pollutant removal in the practice. Typical water quality volumes are the runoff from a 1-inch storm or inch of runoff over the entire drainage area to the practice. The area of the sedimentation chamber may be determined based on the Camp-Hazen equation, as adapted by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Washington State DOE, 1992). This equation can be expressed as: As = (Q o /W)ln(1-E) where: As = surface area (ft 2 ); Qo = discharge rate from basin (water quality volume/detention time); W = particle settling velocity (ft/s); [CWP (1996) used a settling of 0.0004 ft/s for drainage areas greater than 75% impervious and 0.0033 ft/s for drainage areas less than or equal to 75% impervious to account for the finer particles that erode from pervious surfaces.] E = removal efficiency fraction (usually assumed to be about 0.9(90%)). Using the simplifying assumption of a 24-hour detention time, CWP (1996) reduced the above equation to As = 0.066WTV (>75%) As = 0.0081WTV (< or = 75%) where WTV = water quality volume (ft3 ), or the volume of storm water to be treated by the practice. Treatment Treatment design features help enhance the ability of a storm water management practice to remove pollutants. In filtering systems, designers should provide at least 75 percent of the water quality volume in the practice (including both the sand chamber and the sediment chamber). In sand filters, designers should select a medium sand as the filtering medium. The filter bed should be sized using Darcy's Law, which relates the velocity of fluids to the hydraulic head and the coefficient of permeability of a medium. The resulting equation, as derived by the city of Austin, Texas, (1996), is AF = WTV d/[k t (h+d)] where AF = area of the filter bed (ft 2 ); d = depth of the filter bed (ft; usually about 1.5 feet, depending on the design);
57
k = coefficient of permeability of the filtering medium (ft/day); t = time for the water quality volume to filter through the system (days; usually assumed to be 1.67 days); and h = average water height above the sand bed (ft; assumed to be one-half of the maximum head). Typical values for k, as assembled by CWP (1996), are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Coefficient of permeability values for storm water filtering practices (CWP, 1996)
Filter Medium Sand Peat/Sand Compost Coefficient of Permeability (ft/day) 3.5 2.75 8.7
Conveyance Conveyance of storm water runoff into and through a storm water practice is a critical component of any storm water management practice. Storm water should be conveyed to and from practices safely and in a manner that minimizes erosion potential. Ideally, some storm water treatment can be achieved during conveyance to and from the practice. Typically, filtering practices are designed as "off-line" systems, meaning that they have the smaller water quality volume diverted to them only during larger storms, using a flow splitter, which is a structure that bypasses larger flows to the storm drain system or to a stabilized channel. One exception is the perimeter filter; in this design, all flows enter the system, but larger flows overflow to an outlet chamber and are not treated by the practice. All filtering practices, with the exception of exfilter designs (see Design Variations) are designed with an under drain below the filtering bed. An under drain is a perforated pipe system in a gravel bed, installed on the bottom of filtering practices and used to collect and remove filtered runoff. Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities needed to maintain the function of storm water practices, some design features can be incorporated to ease the maintenance burden of each practice. Designers should provide maintenance access to filtering systems. In underground sand filters, confined space rules defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) need to be addressed. Landscaping Landscaping can add to both the aesthetic value and the treatment ability of storm water practices. In sand filters, little landscaping is generally used on the practice, although surface
58
sand filters and organic media filters may be designed with a grass cover on the surface of the filter. In all filters, designers need to ensure that the contributing drainage has dense vegetation to reduce sediment loads to the practice. Design Variations As mentioned earlier in this fact sheet, there are five basic storm water filter designs--surface sand filter, underground filter, perimeter filter (also known as the "Delaware" filter), organic media filter, and Multi-Chamber Treatment Train. Other design variations can incorporate design features to recharge ground water or to meet the design challenges of cold or arid climates. Surface Sand Filter The surface sand filter is the original sand filter design. In this practice both the filter bed and the sediment chamber are aboveground. The surface sand filter is designed as an off-line practice, where only the water quality volume is directed to the filter. The surface sand filter is the least expensive filter option and has been the most widely used. Underground Sand Filter The underground sand filter is a modification of the surface sand filter, where all of the filter components are underground. Like the surface sand filter, this practice is an off-line system that receives only the smaller water quality events. Underground sand filters are expensive to construct but consume very little space. They are well suited to highly urbanized areas. Perimeter Sand Filter The perimeter sand filter also includes the basic design elements of a sediment chamber and a filter bed. In this design, however, flow enters the system through grates, usually at the edge of a parking lot. The perimeter sand filter is the only filtering option that is on-line, with all flows entering the system but larger events bypassing treatment by entering an overflow chamber. One major advantage to the perimeter sand filter design is that it requires little hydraulic head and thus is a good option in areas of low relief. Organic Media Filter Organic media filters are essentially the same as surface filters, with the sand medium replaced with or supplemented by another medium. Two examples are the peat/sand filter (Galli, 1990) and the compost filter system (CSF, 1996). The assumption is that these systems will have enhanced pollutant removal for many compounds because of the increased cation exchange capacity achieved by increasing the organic matter. Multi-Chamber Treatment Train The Multi-Chamber Treatment Train (Robertson et al., 1995) is essentially a "deluxe sand filter." This underground system consists of three chambers. Storm water enters into the first chamber, where screening occurs, trapping large sediments and releasing highly volatile materials. The second chamber provides settling of fine sediments and further removal of volatile compounds and also floatable hydrocarbons through the use of fine bubble diffusers and sorbent pads. The final chamber provides filtration by using a sand and peat mixed medium for reduction of the remaining pollutants. The top of the filter is covered by a filter fabric that evenly distributes the
59
water volume and prevents channelization. Although this practice can achieve very high pollutant removal rates, it might be prohibitively expensive in many areas and has been implemented only on an experimental basis. Exfiltration/Partial Exfiltration In exfilter designs, all or part of the under drain system is replaced with an open bottom that allows infiltration to the ground water. When the under drain is present, it is used as an overflow device in case the filter becomes clogged. These designs are best applied in the same soils where infiltration practices are used (see Infiltration Basin and Infiltration Trench fact sheets). Regional Variations Arid Climates Filters have not been widely used in arid climates. In these climates, however, it is probably necessary to increase storage in the sediment chamber to account for high sediment loads. Designers should consider increasing the volume of the sediment chamber to up to 40 percent of the water quality volume. Cold Climates In cold climates, filters can be used, but surface or perimeter filters will not be effective during the winter months, and unintended consequences might result from a frozen filter bed. Using alternative conveyance measures such as a weir system between the sediment chamber and filter bed may avoid freezing associated with the traditional standpipe. Where possible, the filter bed should be below the frost line. Some filters, such as the peat/sand filter, should be shut down during the winter. These media will become completely impervious during freezing conditions. Using a larger under drain system to encourage rapid draining during the winter months may prevent freezing of the filter bed. Finally, the sediment chamber should be larger in cold climates to account for road sanding (up to 40 percent of the water quality volume). Limitations Sand filters can be used in unique conditions where many other storm water management practices are inappropriate, such as in karst (i.e., limestone) topography or in highly urbanized settings. There are several limitations to these practices, however. Sand filters cannot control floods and generally are not designed to protect stream channels from erosion or to recharge the ground water. In addition, sand filters require frequent maintenance, and underground and perimeter versions of these practices are easily forgotten because they are out of sight. Perhaps one of the greatest limitations to sand filters is that they cannot be used to treat large drainage areas. Finally, surface sand filters are generally not aesthetically pleasing management practices. Underground and perimeter sand filters are not visible, and thus do not add or detract from the aesthetic value of a site. Maintenance Considerations Intense and frequent maintenance and inspection practices are needed for filter systems. Table 2 outlines some of these requirements.
60
Table 2: Typical maintenance/inspection activities for filtration systems (Adapted from WMI, 1997; CWP, 1997)
Activity Ensure that contributing area, filtering practice, inlets, and outlets are clear of debris. Ensure that the contributing area is stabilized and mowed, with clippings removed. Check to ensure that the filter surface is not clogging (also after moderate and major storms). Ensure that activities in the drainage area minimize oil/grease and sediment entry to the system. If a permanent pool is present, ensure that the chamber does not leak and that normal pool level is retained. Replace sorbent pillows (Multi-Chamber Treatment Train only). Check to see that the filter bed is clean of sediments, and the sediment chamber is no more than one-half full of sediment. Remove sediment if necessary. Make sure that there is no evidence of deterioration, sailing, or cracking of concrete. Inspect grates (if used). Inspect inlets, outlets, and overflow spillway to ensure good condition and no evidence of erosion. Repair or replace any damaged structural parts. Stabilize any eroded areas. Ensure that flow is not bypassing the facility. Ensure that no noticeable odors are detected outside the facility. Annual Biannual Monthly Schedule
Effectiveness Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals: flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Filtering practices are for the most part adapted only to provide pollutant removal. Ground Water Recharge In exfilter designs, some ground water recharge can be provided; however, none of the other sand filter designs can provide recharge.
61
Pollutant Removal Sand filters are effective storm water management practices for pollutant removal. Removal rates for all sand filters and organic filters are presented in Table 3. With the exception of nitrates, which appear to be exported from filtering systems, they perform relatively well at removing pollutants. The export of nitrates from filters may be caused by mineralization of organic nitrogen in the filter bed. Table 3 shows typical removal efficiencies for sand filters. Table 3: Sand filter removal efficiencies (percent)
Sand Filters (Schueler, 1997) Compost Filter Peat/Sand System Filter (Curran, Stewart, Leif, 1996) 1992 1999 66 51 47 22 26-75 95 41 -34 61-88 85 4 -95 44-75 Multi-Chamber Treatment Train Pitt et al., 1997 85 80 65-90 Pitt, 1996 83 14 91-100 -
Greb et al., 1998 98 84 83-89 -
TSS TP TN Nitrate Metals Bacteria
87 51 44 -13 34-80 55
From the few studies available, it is difficult to determine if organic filters necessarily have higher removal efficiencies than sand filters. The Multi-Chamber Treatment Train appears to have high pollutant removal for some constituents, although these data are based on only a handful of studies. The siting and design criteria presented in this fact sheet reflect the best current information and experience to improve the performance of sand filters. A recent joint project of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the U.S. EPA Office of Water may help to isolate specific design features that can improve performance. The National Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) database is a compilation of storm water practices that includes both design information and performance data for various practices. As the database expands, inferences about the extent to which specific design criteria influence pollutant removal may be made. For more information on this database, access the ASCE web page at http://www.asce.org.
Cost Considerations There are few consistent data on the cost of sand filters, largely because, with the exception of Austin, Texas, Alexandria, Virginia, and Washington, D.C., they have not been widely used. Furthermore, filters have such varied designs that it is difficult to assign a cost to filters in
62
general. A study by Brown and Schueler (1997) was unable to find a statistically valid relationship between the volume of water treated in a filter and the cost of the practice, but typical total cost of installation ranged between $2.50 and $7.50 per cubic foot of storm water treated, with an average cost of about $5 per cubic foot. (This estimate includes approximately 25 percent contingency costs beyond the construction costs reported). The cost per impervious acre treated varies considerably depending on the region and design used (see Table 4). It is important to note that, although underground and perimeter sand filters can be more expensive than surface sand filters, they consume no surface space, making them a relatively cost-effective practice in ultra-urban areas where land is at a premium. Table 4: Construction costs for various sand filters (Source: Schueler, 1994) Region (Design) Delaware (Perimeter) Alexandria, VA (Perimeter) Austin, TX (<2 acres) (Surface) Austin, TX (>5 acres) (Surface) Washington, DC (underground) Denver, CO Multi-Chamber Treatment Train Cost/Impervious Acre $10,000 $23,500 $16,000 $3,400 $14,000 $30,000$50,000 $40,000$80,000
Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. EPA Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington, DC, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. City of Alexandria, VA. Unconventional BMP Design Criteria. In Alexandria Supplement to the Northern Virginia BMP Handbook. Alexandria, VA. Shaver, E. and R. Baldwin. 1991. Sand Filter Design for Water Quality Treatment. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Dover, DE. Urbonas, B.R. 1999. Design of a Sand Filter for Stormwater Quality Enhancement. Water Environ. Res., 71:102113.
63
Appendix I. Filter removal efficiency data Filter Removal Efficiencies Study

Bell et al., 1995 Horner and Horner, 1995 Horner and Horner, 1995 Harper and Herr, 1993 Welborn and Veenhuis, 1987 City of Austin, TX, 1990 City of Austin, TX, 1990 City of Austin, TX, 1990 City of Austin, TX, 1990 Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District, 1996 Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District, 1996 Stewart, 1992 Curran, 1996
TSS TP TN NO3 Metals Bacteria

79 83 8 98 78 75 92 86 87 81 65.5 46.3 20 61 27 59 80 19 61 39 47 27 44 71 31 32 13 -53.3 27 -100 -13 23 -5 -79 -11 2591 2233 3169 3789 3360 3467 8491 3371 60-86 5879 -
Practice Type
perimeter sand filter perimeter sand filter perimeter sand filter surface sand filter surface sand filter surface sand filter surface sand filter surface sand filter surface sand filter vertical sand filter
81 36 83 37 37 -
55 95 66
45 41 51
15 47
-87 -34 22
5860 6187 2675
vertical sand filter organic filter organic filter
References AquaLogicTM Stormwater Filtration System Engineering Manual. AquaLogic Storm Water Abatement Filter Systems. San Antonio, TX. August 2000. Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District. 1996. Final Report: Enhanced Roadway Runoff Best Management Practices. City of Austin, Drainage Utility, LCRA, TDOT. Austin, TX. 200 pp. Bell, W., L. Stokes, L.J. Gavan, and T.N. Nguyen. 1995. Assessment of the Pollutant Removal Efficiencies of Delaware Sand Filter BMPs. Final Report. Department of Transportation and Environmental Services. Alexandria, VA. 140 pp. Also in Performance of Delaware Sand Filter Assessed. Watershed Protection Techniques. Center for Watershed Protection. Fall 1995. Vol. 2(1): 291293.
64
Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Edgewater, MD, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Solomons, MD, and U.S. EPA Region 5, Chicago, IL, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Multi-Chamber Treatment Train developed for stormwater hot spots. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(3):445449. City of Austin, TX. 1990. Removal Efficiencies of Stormwater Control Structures. Final Report. Environmental Resource Management Division. 36 p. Also in: Developments in Sand Filter Technology to Improve Stormwater Runoff Quality. Watershed Protection Techniques. Center for Watershed Protection. Summer 1994. Vol. 1(2): 4754. City of Austin, TX. 1996. Design of Water Quality Controls. City of Austin, TX. CSF Treatment Systems, Inc. (CSF). 1996. Stormwater management promotional brochure. CSF Treatment Systems, Inc., Portland, OR. Curran, T. 1996. Peat Sand Efficiency Calculations for McGregor Park. Unpublished data. Lower Colorado River Authority. Austin, TX. Galli, F. 1990. Peat-Sand Filters: A Proposed Stormwater Management Practice for Urban Areas. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Greb, S., S. Corsi, and R. Waschbush. 1998. Evaluation of Stormceptor and Multi-Chamber Treatment Train as Urban Retrofit Strategies. Presented at Retrofit Opportunities for Water Resource Protection in Urban Environments, A National Conference. The Westin Hotel, Chicago, IL, February 1012, 1998. Harper, H., and J. Herr. 1993. Treatment Efficiency of Detention With Filtration Systems. Environmental Research and Design, Inc. Final Report Submitted to Florida Department of Environmental Regulation. Orlando, FL. 164 pp. Horner, R.R., and C.R. Horner. 1995. Design, Construction and Evaluation of a Sand Filter Stormwater Treatment System. Part II. Performance Monitoring. Report to Alaska Marine Lines, Seattle, WA. 38 p. Also in Performance of Delaware Sand Filter Assessed. Watershed Protection Techniques. Center for Watershed Protection. Fall 1995. Vol. 2(1): 291293. King County, Washington, Department of Natural Resources. 2000. King County Surface Water Design Manual. [http://splash.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/manual.htm]. Last updated March 6, 2000. Accessed January 5, 2001. Leif, T. 1999. Compost Stormwater Filter Evaluation. Snohomish County, Washington, Department of Public Works, Everett, WA. Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001.
65
Pitt, R. 1996. The Control of Toxicants at Critical Source Areas. Presented at the ASCE/Engineering Foundation Conference, Snowbird, UT, August 1996. Pitt, R., M. Lilburn, and S. Burian. 1997. Storm Drainage Design for the Future: Summary of Current U.S. EPA Research. American Society of Civil Engineers Technical Conference, Gulf Shores, AL, July 1997. Robertson, B., R. Pitt, A. Ayyoubi, and R. Field. 1995. A Multi-Chambered Stormwater Treatment Train. In Proceedings of the Engineering Foundation Conference: Stormwater NPDES-Related Monitoring Needs, Mt. Crested Butte, Colorado, August 712, 1994, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, New York. Schueler, T. 1994. Developments in sand filter technology to improve stormwater runoff quality. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(2):4754. Schueler, T. 1997. Comparative Pollutant Removal Capability of Urban BMPs: A Reanalysis. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):515520. Stewart, W. 1992. Compost Stormwater Treatment System. W&H Pacific Consultants. Draft Report. Portland, OR. Also in Innovative Leaf Compost System Used to Filter Runoff at Small Sites in the Northwest. Watershed Protection Techniques. Center for Watershed Protection. February 1994. Vol. 1(1): 1314. Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE). 1992. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin, Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. EPA Office of Water, Washington, DC, by Watershed Management Institute. Welborn, C., and J. Veenhuis. 1987. Effects of Runoff Controls on the Quantity and Quality of Urban Runoff in Two Locations in Austin, TX. USGS Water Resources Investigations Report. 874004. 88 pp.
66
Storm Water Wetland Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Storm water wetlands (a.k.a. constructed wetlands) are structural practices similar to wet ponds (see Wet Pond fact sheet) that incorporate wetland plants into the design. As storm water runoff flows through the wetland, pollutant removal is achieved through settling and biological uptake within the practice. Wetlands are among the most effective storm water practices in terms of pollutant removal and they also offer aesthetic value. Although natural wetlands can sometimes be used to treat storm water runoff that has been properly pretreated, storm water wetlands are fundamentally different from natural wetland systems. Storm water wetlands are designed specifically for the purpose of treating storm water runoff, and typically have less biodiversity than natural wetlands in terms of both plant and animal life. Several design variations of the storm water wetland exist, each design differing in the relative amounts of shallow and deep water, and dry storage above the wetland. A distinction should be made between using a constructed wetland for storm water management and diverting storm water into a natural wetland. The latter practice is not recommended because altering the hydrology of the existing wetland with additional storm water can degrade the resource and result in plant die-off and the destruction of wildlife habitat. In all circumstances, natural wetlands should be protected from the adverse effects of development, including impacts from increased storm water runoff. This is especially important because natural wetlands provide storm water and flood control benefits on a regional scale. Applicability Constructed wetlands are widely applicable storm water management practices. While they have limited applicability in highly urbanized settings and in arid climates, wetlands have few other restrictions. Regional Applicability Storm water wetlands can be applied in most regions of the United States, with the exception of arid climates. In arid and semi-arid climates, it is difficult to design any storm water practice that has a permanent pool. Because storm water wetlands are shallow, a relatively large area is subject to evaporation relative, to the volume of the practice. This makes maintaining the permanent pool in wetlands both more challenging and more important than maintaining the pool of a wet pond (see Wet Pond fact sheet).
67
Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. It is difficult to use wet ponds in the ultra-urban environment because of the land area each wetland consumes. They can, however, be used in an ultra-urban environment if a relatively large area is available downstream of the site. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. A typical example is a gas station. Wetlands can accept runoff from storm water hot spots, but need significant separation from ground water if they will be used for this purpose. Caution also needs to be exercised, if these practices are designed to encourage wildlife use, to ensure that pollutants in storm water runoff do not work their way through the food chain of organisms living in or near the wetland. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. When retrofitting an entire watershed, storm water wetlands have the advantage of providing both educational and habitat value. One disadvantage to wetlands, however, is the difficulty of storing large amounts of runoff without consuming a large amount of land. It is also possible to incorporate wetland elements into existing practices, such as wetland plantings (see Wet Pond and Dry Extended Detention Pond fact sheets) Cold Water (Trout) Streams Wetlands pose a risk to cold water systems because of their potential for stream warming. When water remains in the permanent pool, it is heated by the sun. A study in Prince George's County, Maryland, investigated the thermal impacts of a wide range of storm water management practices (Galli, 1990). In this study, only one wetland was investigated, which was an extended detention wetland (see Design Variations). The practice increased the average temperature of storm water runoff that flowed through the practice by about 3F. As a result, it is likely that wetlands increase water temperature. Siting and Design Considerations In addition to the broad applicability concerns described above, designers need to consider conditions at the site level. In addition, they need to incorporate design features to improve the longevity and performance of the practice, while minimizing the maintenance burden. Siting Considerations In addition to the restrictions and modifications to adapting storm water wetlands to different regions and land uses, designers need to ensure that this management practice is feasible at the site in question. The following section provides basic guidelines for siting wetlands. Drainage Area
68
Wetlands need sufficient drainage area to maintain the permanent pool. In humid regions, this is typically about 25 acres, but a greater area may be needed in regions with less rainfall. Slope Wetlands can be used on sites with an upstream slope of up to about 15 percent. The local slope should be relatively shallow, however. While there is no minimum slope requirement, there does need to be enough elevation drop from the inlet to the outlet to ensure that hydraulic conveyance by gravity is feasible (generally about 3 to 5 feet). Soils/Topography Wetlands can be used in almost all soils and geology, with minor design adjustments for regions of karst (i.e. limestone) topography (see Design Considerations). Ground Water Unless they receive hot spot runoff, wetlands can often intersect the ground water table. Some research suggests that pollutant removal is reduced when ground water contributes substantially to the pool volume (Schueler, 1997b). It is assumed that wetlands would have a similar response. Design Considerations Specific designs may vary considerably, depending on site constraints or preferences of the designer or community. There are some features, however, that should be incorporated into most wetland designs. These design features can be divided into five basic categories: pretreatment, treatment, conveyance, maintenance reduction, and landscaping. Pretreatment Pretreatment incorporates design features that help to settle out coarse sediment particles. By removing these particles from runoff before they reach the large permanent pool, the maintenance burden of the pond is reduced. In wetlands, pretreatment is achieved with a sediment forebay. A sediment forebay is a small pool (typically about 10 percent of the volume of the permanent pool). Coarse particles remain trapped in the forebay, and maintenance is performed on this smaller pool, eliminating the need to dredge the entire pond. Treatment Treatment design features help enhance the ability of a storm water management practice to remove pollutants. The purpose of most of these features is to increase the amount of time and flowpath by which storm water remains in the wetland. Some typical design features include
The surface area of wetlands should be at least 1 percent of the drainage area to the practice. Wetlands should have a length-to-width ratio of at least 1.5:1. Making the wetland longer than it is wide helps prevent "short circuiting" of the practice. Effective wetland design displays "complex microtopography." In other words, wetlands should have zones of both very shallow (<6 inches) and moderately shallow (<18 inches) wetlands incorporated, using underwater earth berms to create the zones. This design will
69
provide a longer flow path through the wetland to encourage settling, and it provides two depth zones to encourage plant diversity. Conveyance Conveyance of storm water runoff into and through a storm water management practice is a critical component of any practice. Storm water should be conveyed to and from practices safely and to minimize erosion potential. The outfall of pond systems should always be stabilized to prevent scour. In addition, an emergency spillway should be provided to safely convey large flood events. To help mitigate warming at the outlet channel, designers should provide shade around the channel at the pond outlet. Maintenance Reduction In addition to regular maintenance activities needed to maintain the function of storm water practices, some design features can be incorporated to ease the maintenance burden of each practice. In wetlands, maintenance reduction features include techniques to reduce the amount of maintenance needed, as well as techniques to make regular maintenance activities easier. One potential maintenance concern in wet ponds is clogging of the outlet. Wetlands should be designed with a nonclogging outlet such as a reverse-slope pipe or a weir outlet with a trash rack. A reverse-slope pipe draws from below the permanent pool extending in a reverse angle up to the riser and establishes the water elevation of the permanent pool. Because these outlets draw water from below the level of the permanent pool, they are less likely to be clogged by floating debris. Another general rule is that no orifice should be less than 3 inches in diameter. Smaller orifices are generally more susceptible to clogging, without specific design considerations to reduce this problem. Another feature that can help reduce the potential for clogging of the outlet is to incorporate a small pool, or "micropool" at the outlet. Design features are also incorporated to ease maintenance of both the forebay and the main pool of wetlands. Wetlands should be designed with a maintenance access to the forebay to ease this relatively routine (5- to 7-year) maintenance activity. In addition, the permanent pool should have a pond drain to draw down the pond for the more infrequent dredging of the main cell of the wetland. Landscaping Landscaping of wetlands can make them an asset to a community and can also enhance the pollutant removal of the practice. In wetland systems, landscaping is an integral part of the design. To ensure the establishment and survival of wetland plants, a landscaping plan should provide detailed information about the plants selected, when they will be planted, and a strategy for maintaining them. The plan should detail wetland plants, as well as vegetation to be established adjacent to the wetland. A variety of techniques can be used to establish wetland plants. The most effective techniques are the use of nursery stock as dormant rhizomes, live potted plants, and bare rootstock. A "wetland mulch," soil from a natural wetland or a designed "wetland mix," can be used to supplement wetland plantings or alone to establish wetland vegetation. Wetland mulch carries with it the seed bank from the original wetland, and can help to enhance diversity in the wetland. The least expensive option to establish wetlands is to allow the wetland to colonize itself. One
70
disadvantage to this last technique is that invasive species such as cattails or Phragmites may dominate the wetland. When developing a plan for wetland planting, care needs to be taken to ensure that plants are established in the proper depth and within the planting season. This season varies regionally, and is generally between 2 and 3 months long in the spring to early summer. Plant lists are available for various regions of the United States through wetland nurseries, extension services, and conservation districts. Design Variations There are several variations of the wetland design. The designs are characterized by the volume of the wetland in deep pool, high marsh, and low marsh, and whether the design allows for detention of small storms above the wetland surface. Other design variations help to make wetland designs practical in cold climates. Shallow Marsh In the shallow marsh design, most of the wetland volume is in the relatively shallow high marsh or low marsh depths. The only deep portions of the shallow wetland design are the forebay at the inlet to the wetland and the micropool at the outlet. One disadvantage to this design is that, since the pool is very shallow, a large amount of land is typically needed to store the water quality volume (i.e., the volume of runoff to be treated in the wetland). Extended Detention Wetland This design is the same as the shallow marsh, with additional storage above the surface of the marsh. Storm water is temporarily ponded above the surface in the extended detention zone for between 12 and 24 hours. This design can treat a greater volume of storm water in a smaller space than the shallow wetland design. In the extended detention wetland option, plants that can tolerate wet and dry periods should be specified in the extended detention zone. Pond/Wetland System The pond/wetland system combines the wet pond (see Wet Pond fact sheet) design with a shallow marsh. Storm water runoff flows through the wet pond and into the shallow marsh. Like the extended detention wetland, this design requires less surface area than the shallow marsh because some of the volume of the practice is in the relatively deep (i.e., 68 feet) pond. Pocket Wetland This design is very similar to the pocket pond (see Wet Pond fact sheet). In this design, the bottom of the wetland intersects the ground water, which helps to maintain the permanent pool. Some evidence suggests that ground water flows may reduce the overall effectiveness of storm water management practices (Schueler, 1997b). This option may be used when there is not significant drainage area to maintain a permanent pool.
Gravel-Based Wetlands
71
In this design, runoff flows through a rock filter with wetland plants at the surface. Pollutants are removed through biological activity on the surface of the rocks, as well as by pollutant uptake of the plants. This practice is fundamentally different from other wetland designs because, while most wetland designs behave like wet ponds with differences in grading and landscaping, gravelbased wetlands are more similar to a filtering system. Regional Variations Cold Climates Cold climates present many challenges to designers of wetlands. During the spring snowmelt, a large volume of water runs off in a short time, carrying a relatively high pollutant load. In addition, cold winter temperatures may cause freezing of the permanent pool or freezing at inlets and outlets. Finally, high salt concentrations in runoff resulting from road salting, as well as sediment loads from road sanding, may impact wetland vegetation. One of the greatest challenges of storm water wetlands, particularly shallow marshes, is that much of the practice is very shallow. Therefore, much of the volume in the wetland can be lost as the surface of the practice freezes. One study found that the performance of a wetland system was diminished during the spring snowmelt because the outlet and surface of the wetland had frozen. Sediment and pollutants in snowmelt and rainfall events "skated" over the surface of the wetland, depositing at the outlet of the wetland. When the ice melted, this sediment was washed away by storm events (Oberts, 1994). Several design features can help minimize this problem, including:
"On-line" designs allowing flow to move continuously can help prevent outlets from freezing. Wetlands should be designed with multiple cells, with a berm or weir separating each cell. This modification will help to retain storage for treatment above the ice layer during the winter season. Outlets that are resistant to freezing should be used. Some examples include weirs or pipes with large diameters.
The salt and sand used to remove ice from roads and parking lots may also create a challenge to designing wetlands in cold climates. When wetlands drain highway runoff, or parking lots, salttolerant vegetation, such as pickle weed or cord grass should be used. (Contact a local nursery or extension agency for more information in your region). In addition, designers should consider using a large forebay to capture the sediment from road sanding. Karst Topography In karst (i.e., limestone) topography, wetlands should be designed with an impermeable liner to prevent ground water contamination or sinkhole formation, and to help maintain the permanent pool.
Limitations
72
Some features of storm water wetlands that may make the design challenging include the following:

Each wetland consumes a relatively large amount of space, making it an impractical option on many sites. Improperly designed wetlands can become a breeding area for mosquitoes. Wetlands require careful design and planning to ensure that wetland plants are sustained after the practice is in place. It is possible that storm water wetlands may release nutrients during the nongrowing season. Designers need to ensure that wetlands do not negatively impact natural wetlands or forest during the design phase. Wetlands consume a large amount of land. This characteristic may limit their use in areas where land values are high.
Maintenance Considerations In addition to incorporating features into the wetland design to minimize maintenance, some regular maintenance and inspection practices are needed. Table 1 outlines these practices. Table 1. Regular maintenance activities for wetlands (Source: Adapted from WMI, 1997, and CWP, 1998)
Activity Replace wetland vegetation to maintain at least 50% surface area coverage in wetland plants after the second growing season. Inspect for invasive vegetation and remove where possible. Inspect for damage to the embankment and inlet/outlet structures. Repair as necessary. Note signs of hydrocarbon build-up, and deal with appropriately. Monitor for sediment accumulation in the facility and forebay. Examine to ensure that inlet and outlet devices are free of debris and are operational. Repair undercut or eroded areas. Clean and remove debris from inlet and outlet structures. Mow side slopes. Supplement wetland plants if a significant portion have not established (at least 50% of the surface area). Harvest wetland plants that have been "choked out" by sediment build-up. Remove sediment from the forebay. Monitor sediment accumulations, and remove sediment when the pool volume has become reduced significantly, plants are "choked" with sediment, or the wetland becomes eutrophic . Schedule One-time Semi-annual inspection
Annual inspection
As needed maintenance Frequent (34 times/year) maintenance Annual maintenance (if needed) 5- to 7-year maintenance 20- to 50-year maintenance
Effectiveness
73
Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Wetlands can provide flood control, channel protection, and pollutant removal. Flood Control One objective of storm water management practices can be to reduce the flood hazard associated with large storm events by reducing the peak flow associated with these storms. Wetlands can easily be designed for flood control by providing flood storage above the level of the permanent pool. Channel Protection When used for channel protection, wetlands have traditionally controlled the 2-year storm. It appears that this control has been relatively ineffective, and recent research suggests that control of a smaller storm may be more appropriate (MacRae, 1996). Ground Water Recharge Wetlands cannot provide ground water recharge. The build-up of debris at the bottom of the wetland prevents the movement of water into the subsoil. Pollutant Removal Wetlands are among the most effective storm water management practices at removing storm water pollutants. A wide range of research is available to estimate the effectiveness of wetlands. Wetlands have high pollutant removal rates, and are more effective than any other practice at removing nitrate and bacteria. Table 2 provides pollutant removal data derived from the Center for Watershed Protections's National Pollutant Removal Database for Stormwater Treatment Practices (Winer, 2000). The effectiveness of wetlands varies considerably, but many believe that proper design and maintenance might help to improve their performance. The siting and design criteria presented in this sheet reflect the best current information and experience to improve the performance of wetlands. A recent joint project of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the U.S. EPA Office of Water may help to isolate specific design features that can improve performance. The National Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) database is a compilation of storm water practices which includes both design information and performance data for various practices. As the database expands, inferences about the extent to which specific design criteria influence pollutant removal may be made. More information on this database is available on the ASCE web page at http://www.asce.org.
Table 2. Typical Pollutant Removal Rates of Wetlands (%) (Winer, 2000)

74
Stormwater Treatment Practice Design Variation Pollutant Shallow Marsh 8351 4340 2649 7349 3685 761 ED Wetland1 69 39 56 35 (-80)63 NA Pond/Wetland System 7135 5635 1929 4068 057 NA Submerged Gravel Wetland1 83 64 19 81 2183 78
TSS TP TN NOx Metals Bacteria

1
Data based on fewer than five data points
Cost Considerations Wetlands are relatively inexpensive storm water practices. Construction cost data for wetlands are rare, but one simplifying assumption is that they are typically about 25 percent more expensive than storm water ponds of an equivalent volume. Using this assumption, an equation developed by Brown and Schueler (1997) to estimate the cost of wet ponds can be modified to estimate the cost of storm water wetlands using the equation: C = 30.6V0.705 where: C = Construction, design, and permitting cost; V = Wetland volume needed to control the 10-year storm (ft3 ). Using this equation, typical construction costs are the following: $ 57,100 for a 1 acre-foot facility $ 289,000 for a 10 acre-foot facility $ 1,470,000 for a 100 acre-foot facility Wetlands consume about 3 to 5 percent of the land that drains to them, which is relatively high compared with other storm water management practices. In areas where land value is high, this may make wetlands an infeasible option.
For wetlands, the annual cost of routine maintenance is typically estimated at about 3 percent to 5 percent of the construction cost. Alternatively, a community can estimate the cost of the
75
maintenance activities outlined in the maintenance section. Wetlands are long-lived facilities (typically longer than 20 years). Thus, the initial investment into these systems may be spread over a relatively long time period. Although no studies are available on wetlands in particular, there is some evidence to suggest that wet ponds may provide an economic benefit by increasing property values. The results of one study suggest that "pond frontage" property can increase the selling price of new properties by about 10 percent (USEPA, 1995). Another study reported that the perceived value (i.e., the value estimated by residents of a community) of homes was increased by about 15 to 25 percent when located near a wet pond (Emmerling-Dinovo, 1995). It is anticipated that well-designed wetlands, which incorporate additional aesthetic features, would have the same benefit. References Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for Chesapeake Research Consortium, Edgewater, MD by Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Emmerling-Dinovo, C. 1995. Stormwater Detention Basins and Residential Locational Decisions. Water Resources Bulletin, 31(3):515521. Galli, F. 1990. Thermal Impacts Associated with Urbanization and Stormwater Best Management Practices. Prepared for Maryland Department of the Environment, Baltimore, MD, by Metropolitan Council of Governments, Washington, DC. MacRae, C. 1996. Experience from morphological research on canadian streams: Is control of the two-year frequency runoff event the best basis for stream channel protection? In Effects of Watershed Development and Management on Aquatic Ecosystems. American Society of Civil Engineers, Snowbird, UT. Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Oberts, G. 1994. Performance of stormwater ponds and wetlands in winter. Watershed Protection Techniques, 1(2): 6468 Schueler, T. 1997b. Influence of ground water on performance of stormwater ponds in Florida. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):525528. USEPA. 1995. Economic Benefits of Runoff Controls. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC, by Watershed Management Institute, Ingleside, MD. Winer, R. 2000. National Pollutant Removal Database for Stormwater Treatment Practices: 2nd Edition. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Information Resources
76
Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC, by Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. 1992. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual: Volume 3Best Management Practices. Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. Egan, T., S. Burroughs, and T. Attaway. 1995. Packed bed filter. In: Proceedings Fourth Biennial Stormwater Research Conference, Clearwater, FL. Horsley, S. 1994. The Storm Treat SystemA new technology for treating stormwater runoff. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1):304307. Kadlec, R.H., and R.L. Knight. 1996. Treatment Wetlands. CRC Lewis Press, Boca Raton, FL. Mellichamp, T., J. Matthews, and M. Murray. 1996. Selection and Planting Guide for Aquatic and Wetland Plants in the Piedmont Region of North Carolina. University of North Carolina, Charlotte, NC. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas: Best Management Practices. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minneapolis, MN. Reuter, J., T. Djohan, and C. Goldman. 1992. The Use of Wetlands for Nutrient removal from Surface Runoff in a Cold-Climate Region of California-Results from a Newly Constructed Wetland at Lake Tahoe. Journal of Environmental Management, 36:35-53. Schueler, 1992. Design of Stormwater Wetland Systems: Guidelines for Creating Diverse and Effective Stormwater Wetlands in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Schueler, T. 1997a. Comparative pollutant removal capability of urban BMPs: A reanalysis. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):515520. Thunhorst, G.A. 1993. Wetland Planning Guide for the Northeastern United States Plants for Wetland Creation, Restoration, and Enhancement. Environmental Concern, Inc., St. Michaels, MD. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
77
Grassed Swales Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description The term swale (a.k.a. grassed channel, dry swale, wet swale, biofilter) refers to a series of vegetated, open channel management practices designed specifically to treat and attenuate storm water runoff for a specified water quality volume. As storm water runoff flows through these channels, it is treated through filtering by the vegetation in the channel, filtering through a subsoil matrix, and/or infiltration into the underlying soils. Variations of the grassed swale include the grassed channel, dry swale, and wet swale. The specific design features and methods of treatment differ in each of these designs, but all are improvements on the traditional drainage ditch. These designs incorporate modified geometry and other features for use of the swale as a treatment and conveyance practice. Applicability Grassed swales can be applied in most situations with some restrictions. Swales are very well suited for treating highway or residential road runoff because they are linear practices. Regional Applicability Grassed swales can be applied in most regions of the country. In arid and semi-arid climates, however, the value of these practices needs to be weighed against the water needed to irrigate them. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. Grassed swales are generally not well suited to ultra-urban areas because they require a relatively large area of pervious surfaces. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. A typical example is a gas station or convenience store. With the exception of the dry swale design (see Design Variations), hot spot runoff should not be directed toward grassed channels. These
78
practices either infiltrate storm water or intersect the ground water, making use of the practices for hot spot runoff a threat to ground water quality. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural) put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. One retrofit opportunity using grassed swales modifies existing drainage ditches. Ditches have traditionally been designed only to convey storm water away from roads. In some cases, it may be possible to incorporate features to enhance pollutant removal or infiltration such as check dams (i.e., small dams along the ditch that trap sediment, slow runoff, and reduce the longitudinal slope). Since grassed swales cannot treat a large area, using this practice to retrofit an entire watershed would be expensive because of the number of practices needed to manage runoff from a significant amount of the watershed's land area. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Grassed channels are a good treatment option within watersheds that drain to cold water streams. These practices do not pond water for a long period of time and often induce infiltration. As a result, standing water will not typically be subjected to warming by the sun in these practices. Siting and Design Considerations In addition to the broad applicability concerns described above, designers need to consider conditions at the site level. In addition, they need to incorporate design features to improve the longevity and performance of the practice, while minimizing the maintenance burden. Siting Considerations In addition to considering the restrictions and adaptations of grassed swales to different regions and land uses, designers need to ensure that this management practice is feasible at the site in question because some site conditions (i.e., steep slopes, highly impermeable soils) might restrict the effectiveness of grassed channels. Drainage Area Grassed swales should generally treat small drainage areas of less than 5 acres. If the practices are used to treat larger areas, the flows and volumes through the swale become too large to design the practice to treat storm water runoff through infiltration and filtering. Slope Grassed swales should be used on sites with relatively flat slopes of less than 4 percent slope; 1 to 2 percent slope is recommended. Runoff velocities within the channel become too high on steeper slopes. This can cause erosion and does not allow for infiltration or filtering in the swale. Soils / Topography Grassed swales can be used on most soils, with some restrictions on the most impermeable soils. In the dry swale (see Design Variations) a fabricated soil bed replaces on-site soils in order to ensure that runoff is filtered as it travels through the soils of the swale.
79
Ground Water The depth to ground water depends on the type of swale used. In the dry swale and grassed channel options, designers should separate the bottom of the swale from the ground water by at least 2 ft to prevent a moist swale bottom, or contamination of the ground water. In the wet swale option, treatment is enhanced by a wet pool in the practice, which is maintained by intersecting the ground water. Design Considerations Although there are different design variations of the grassed swale (see Design Variations), there are some design considerations common to all three. One overriding similarity is the crosssectional geometry of all three options. Swales should generally have a trapezoidal or parabolic cross section with relatively flat side slopes (flatter than 3:1). Designing the channel with flat side slopes maximizes the wetted perimeter. The wetted perimeter is the length along the edge of the swale cross section where runoff flowing through the swale is in contact with the vegetated sides and bottom of the swale. Increasing the wetted perimeter slows runoff velocities and provides more contact with vegetation to encourage filtering and infiltration. Another advantage to flat side slopes is that runoff entering the grassed swale from the side receives some pretreatment along the side slope. The flat bottom of all three should be between 28 ft wide. The minimum width ensures a minimum filtering surface for water quality treatment, and the maximum width prevents braiding, the formation of small channels within the swale bottom. Another similarity among all three designs is the type of pretreatment needed. In all three design options, a small forebay should be used at the front of the swale to trap incoming sediments. A pea gravel diaphragm, a small trench filled with river run gravel, should be used as pretreatment for runoff entering the sides of the swale. Two other features designed to enhance the treatment ability of grassed swales are a flat longitudinal slope (generally between 1 percent and 2 percent) and a dense vegetative cover in the channel. The flat slope helps to reduce the velocity of flow in the channel. The dense vegetation also helps reduce velocities, protect the channel from erosion, and act as a filter to treat storm water runoff. During construction, it is important to stabilize the channel before the turf has been established, either with a temporary grass cover or with the use of natural or synthetic erosion control products. In addition to treating runoff for water quality, grassed swales need to convey larger storms safely. Typical designs allow the runoff from the 2-year storm (i.e., the storm that occurs, on average, once every two years) to flow through the swale without causing erosion. Swales should also have the capacity to pass larger storms (typically a 10-year storm) safely. Design Variations The following discussion identifies three different variations of open channel practices, including the grassed channel, the dry swale, and the wet swale. Grassed Channel Of the three grassed swale designs, grassed channels are the most similar to a conventional drainage ditch, with the major differences being flatter side slopes and longitudinal slopes, and a slower design velocity for water quality treatment of small storm events. Of all of the grassed
80
swale options, grassed channels are the least expensive but also provide the least reliable pollutant removal. The best application of a grassed channel is as pretreatment to other structural storm water practices. One major difference between the grassed channel and most of the other structural practices is the method used to size the practice. Most storm water management water quality practices are sized by volume. This method sets the volume available in the practice equal to the water quality volume, or the volume of water to be treated in the practice. The grassed channel, on the other hand, is a flow-rate-based design. Based on the peak flow from the water quality storm (this varies from region to region, but a typical value is the 1-inch storm), the channel should be designed so that runoff takes, on average, 10 minutes to flow from the top to the bottom of the channel. A procedure for this design can be found in Design of Storm Water Filtering Systems (CWP, 1996). Dry Swales Dry swales are similar in design to bioretention areas (see Bioretention fact sheet). These designs incorporate a fabricated soil bed into their design. The existing soil is replaced with a sand/soil mix that meets minimum permeability requirements. An underdrain system is used under the soil bed. This system is a gravel layer that encases a perforated pipe. Storm water treated in the soil bed flows through the bottom into the underdrain, which conveys this treated storm water to the storm drain system. Dry swales are a relatively new design, but studies of swales with a native soil similar to the man-made soil bed of dry swales suggest high pollutant removal. Wet Swales Wet swales intersect the ground water and behave almost like a linear wetland cell (see Storm Water Wetland fact sheet). This design variation incorporates a shallow permanent pool and wetland vegetation to provide storm water treatment. This design also has potentially high pollutant removal. One disadvantage to the wet swale is that it cannot be used in residential or commercial settings because the shallow standing water in the swale is often viewed as a potential nuisance by homeowners and also breeds mosquitos. Regional Variations Cold Climates In cold or snowy climates, swales may serve a dual purpose by acting as both a snow storage/treatment and a storm water management practice. This dual purpose is particularly relevant when swales are used to treat road runoff. If used for this purpose, swales should incorporate salt-tolerant vegetation, such as creeping bentgrass. Arid Climates In arid or semi-arid climates, swales should be designed with drought-tolerant vegetation, such as buffalo grass. As pointed out in the Applicability section, the value of vegetated practices for water quality needs to be weighed against the cost of water needed to maintain them in arid and semi-arid regions.
81
Limitations Grassed swales have some limitations, including the following:

Grassed swales cannot treat a very large drainage area. Wet swales may become a nuisance due to mosquito breeding. If designed improperly (e.g., if proper slope is not achieved), grassed channels will have very little pollutant removal. A thick vegetative cover is needed for these practices to function properly.
Maintenance Considerations Maintenance of grassed swales mostly involves maintenance of the grass or wetland plant cover. Typical maintenance activities are included in Table 1. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for grassed swales (Source: Adapted from CWP, 1996) Activity
Schedule
Inspect pea gravel diaphragm for clogging and correct the problem. Inspect grass along side slopes for erosion and formation of rills or gullies and correct. Remove trash and debris accumulated in the inflow forebay. Inspect and correct erosion problems in the sand/soil bed of dry swales. Based on inspection, plant an alternative grass species if the original grass cover has not been successfully established. Replant wetland species (for wet swale) if not sufficiently established. Rototill or cultivate the surface of the sand/soil bed of dry swales if the swale does not draw down within 48 hours. As needed (infrequent) Remove sediment build-up within the bottom of the swale once it has accumulated to 25 percent of the original design volume. Mow grass to maintain a height of 34 inches As needed (frequent seasonally) Annual (semi-annual the first year)
82
Effectiveness Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. Grassed swales can be used to meet ground water recharge and pollutant removal goals. Ground Water Recharge Grassed channels and dry swales can provide some ground water recharge as infiltration is achieved within the practice. Wet swales, however, generally do not contribute to ground water recharge. Infiltration is impeded by the accumulation of debris on the bottom of the swale. Pollutant Removal Few studies are available regarding the effectiveness of grassed channels. In fact, only 9 studies have been conducted on all grassed channels designed for water quality (Table 2). The data suggest relatively high removal rates for some pollutants, but negative removals for some bacteria, and fair performance for phosphorous. One study of available performance data (Schueler, 1997) estimates the removal rates for grassed channels as: Total Suspended Solids: 81% Total Phosphorous: 29% Nitrate Nitrogen: 38% Metals: 14% to 55% Bacteria: -50% Table 2. Grassed swale pollutant removal efficiency data
Removal Efficiencies (% Removal) Study Goldberg 1993 Seattle Metro and Washington Department of Ecology 1992 Seattle Metro and Washington Department of Ecology, 1992 Wang et al., 1981 Dorman et al., 1989 Harper, 1988 Kercher et al., 1983 Harper, 1988. Koon, 1995 Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Lab, 1983 TSS 67.8 60 83 80 98 87 99 81 67 -100 TP 4.5 45 29 18 83 99 17 39 100 TN 84 99 40 100 NO3 31.4 -25 -25 45 80 99 52 9 Metals Bacteria 4262 216 4673 7080 3781 8890 99 3769 -35 to 6 -100 -100 -25 -25 Type grassed channel grassed channel grassed channel dry swale dry swale dry swale dry swale wet swale wet swale drainage channel
83
Removal Efficiencies (% Removal) Study Yousef et al., 1985 Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Lab, 1983 Yousef et al., 1985 Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Lab, 1983 Welborn and Veenhuis, 1987 Yu et al., 1993 Dorman et al., 1989 Pitt and McLean, 1986 Oakland, 1983 Dorman et al., 1989 TSS -50 31 0 68 65 0 33 -85 TP 8 -9.1 19.5 -23 -25 60 41 -25 12 TN 13 18.2 8 36.5 -25 0 NO3 11 2 -25 11 -100 Metals Bacteria 1429 -100 4190 -100 to 33 0 74 14-55 0 2058 1488 0 0 Type drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel drainage channel
While it is difficult to distinguish between different designs based on the small amount of available data, grassed channels generally have poorer removal rates than wet and dry swales, although wet swales appear to export soluble phosphorous (Harper, 1988; Koon, 1995). It is not clear why swales export bacteria. One explanation is that bacteria thrive in the warm swale soils. Another is that studies have not accounted for some sources of bacteria, such as local residents walking dogs within the grassed swale area. Cost Considerations Little data are available to estimate the difference in cost between various swale designs. One study (SWRPC, 1991) estimated the construction cost of grassed channels at approximately $0.25 per ft 2 . This price does not include design costs or contingencies. Brown and Schueler (1997) estimate these costs at approximately 32 percent of construction costs for most storm water management practices. For swales, however, these costs would probably be significantly higher since the construction costs are so low compared with other practices. A more realistic estimate would be a total cost of approximately $0.50 per ft 2 , which compares favorably with other storm water management practices.
84
References Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Solomons, MD, and USEPA Region V, Chicago, IL, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Brown, W., and T. Schueler. 1997. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Edgewater, MD, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Dorman, M.E., J. Hartigan, R.F. Steg, and T. Quasebarth. 1989. Retention, Detention and Overland Flow for Pollutant Removal From Highway Stormwater Runoff. Vol. 1. FHWA/RD 89/202. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Goldberg. 1993. Dayton Avenue Swale Biofiltration Study. Seattle Engineering Department, Seattle, WA. Harper, H. 1988. Effects of Stormwater Management Systems on Groundwater Quality. Prepared for Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee, FL, by Environmental Research and Design, Inc., Orlando, FL. Kercher, W.C., J.C. Landon, and R. Massarelli. 1983. Grassy swales prove cost-effective for water pollution control. Public Works, 16: 5355. Koon, J. 1995. Evaluation of Water Quality Ponds and Swales in the Issaquah/East Lake Sammamish Basins. King County Surface Water Management, Seattle, WA, and Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Oakland, P.H. 1983. An evaluation of stormwater pollutant removal through grassed swale treatment. In Proceedings of the International Symposium of Urban Hydrology, Hydraulics and Sediment Control, Lexington, KY. pp. 173182. Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory. 1983. Final Report: Metropolitan Washington Urban Runoff Project. Prepared for the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC, by the Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory, Manassas, VA. Pitt, R., and J. McLean. 1986. Toronto Area Watershed Management Strategy Study: Humber River Pilot Watershed Project. Ontario Ministry of Environment, Toronto, ON. Schueler, T. 1997. Comparative Pollutant Removal Capability of Urban BMPs: A reanalysis. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(2):379383. Seattle Metro and Washington Department of Ecology. 1992. Biofiltration Swale Performance: Recommendations and Design Considerations. Publication No. 657. Water Pollution Control Department, Seattle, WA. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SWRPC). 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical report no. 31. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI.
85
References (continued) Wang, T., D. Spyridakis, B. Mar, and R. Horner. 1981. Transport, Deposition and Control of Heavy Metals in Highway Runoff. FHWA-WA-RD-39-10. University of Washington, Department of Civil Engineering, Seattle, WA. Welborn, C., and J. Veenhuis. 1987. Effects of Runoff Controls on the Quantity and Quality of Urban Runoff in Two Locations in Austin, TX. USGS Water Resources Investigations Report No. 87-4004. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Yousef, Y., M. Wanielista, H. Harper, D. Pearce, and R. Tolbert. 1985. Best Management Practices: Removal of Highway Contaminants By Roadside Swales. University of Central Florida and Florida Department of Transportation, Orlando, FL. Yu, S., S. Barnes, and V. Gerde. 1993. Testing of Best Management Practices for Controlling Highway Runoff. FHWA/VA-93-R16. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, VA. Information Resources Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Reeves, E. 1994. Performance and Condition of Biofilters in the Pacific Northwest. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3):117119. Seattle Metro and Washington Department of Ecology. 1992. Biofiltration Swale Performance. Recommendations and Design Considerations. Publication No. 657. Seattle Metro and Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. USEPA 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Washington, DC. Watershed Management Institute (WMI). 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Washington, DC, by the Watershed Management Institute, Ingleside, MD.
86
Grassed Filter Strip Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Grassed filter strips (vegetated filter strips, filter strips, and grassed filters) are vegetated surfaces that are designed to treat sheet flow from adjacent surfaces. Filter strips function by slowing runoff velocities and filtering out sediment and other pollutants, and by providing some infiltration into underlying soils. Filter strips were originally used as an agricultural treatment practice, and have more recently evolved into an urban practice. With proper design and maintenance, filter strips can provide relatively high pollutant removal. One challenge associated with filter strips, however, is that it is difficult to maintain sheet flow, so the practice may be "short circuited" by concentrated flows, receiving little or no treatment. Applicability Filter strips are applicable in most regions, but are restricted in some situations because they consume a large amount of space relative to other practices. Filter strips are best suited to treating runoff from roads and highways, roof downspouts, very small parking lots, and pervious surfaces. They are also ideal components of the "outer zone" of a stream buffer (see Buffer Zones fact sheet), or as pretreatment to a structural practice. This recommendation is consistent with recommendations in the agricultural setting that filter strips are most effective when combined with another practice (Magette et al., 1989). In fact, the most recent storm water manual for Maryland does not consider the filter strip as a treatment practice, but does offer storm water volume reductions in exchange for using filter strips to treat some of a site. Regional Applicability Filter strips can be applied in most regions of the country. In arid areas, however, the cost of irrigating the grass on the practice will most likely outweigh its water quality benefits. Ultra-Urban Areas Ultra-urban areas are densely developed urban areas in which little pervious surface exists. Filter strips are impractical in ultra-urban areas because they consume a large amount of space. Storm Water Hot Spots Storm water hot spots are areas where land use or activities generate highly contaminated runoff, with concentrations of pollutants in excess of those typically found in storm water. A typical
87
example is a gas station. Filter strips should not receive hot spot runoff, because the practice encourages infiltration. In addition, it is questionable whether this practice can reliably remove pollutants, so it should definitely not be used as the sole treatment of hot spot runoff. Storm Water Retrofit A storm water retrofit is a storm water management practice (usually structural), put into place after development has occurred, to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding, or meet other specific objectives. Filter strips are generally a poor retrofit option because they consume a relatively large amount of space and cannot treat large drainage areas. Cold Water (Trout) Streams Some cold water species, such as trout, are sensitive to changes in temperature. While some treatment practices, such as wet ponds (see Wet Ponds fact sheet), can warm storm water substantially, filter strips do not warm pond water on the surface for long periods of time and are not expected to increase storm water temperatures. Thus, these practices are good for protection of cold-water streams. Siting and Design Considerations Siting Considerations In addition to the restrictions and modifications to adapting filter strips to different regions and land uses, designers need to ensure that this management practice is feasible at the site in question. The following section provides basic guidelines for siting filter strips. Drainage Area Typically, filter strips are used to treat very small drainage areas. The limiting design factor, however, is not the drainage area the practice treats but the length of flow leading to it. As storm water runoff flows over the ground's surface, it changes from sheet flow to concentrated flow. Rather than moving uniformly over the surface, the concentrated flow forms rivulets which are slightly deeper and cover less area than the sheet flow. When flow concentrates, it moves too rapidly to be effectively treated by a grassed filter strip. As a rule, flow concentrates within a maximum of 75 feet for impervious surfaces, and 150 feet for pervious surfaces (CWP, 1996). Using this rule, a filter strip can treat one acre of impervious surface per 580-foot length. Slope Filter strips should be designed on slopes between 2 and 6 percent. Greater slopes than this would encourage the formation of concentrated flow. Except in the case of very sandy or gravelly soil, runoff would pond on the surface on slopes flatter than 2 percent, creating potential mosquito breeding habitat. Soils /Topography Filter strips should not be used on soils with a high clay content, because they require some infiltration for proper treatment. Very poor soils that cannot sustain a grass cover crop are also a limiting factor.
88
Ground Water Filter strips should be separated from the ground water by between 2 and 4 ft to prevent contamination and to ensure that the filter strip does not remain wet between storms. Design Considerations Filter strips appear to be a minimal design practice because they are basically no more than a grassed slope. However, some design features are critical to ensure that the filter strip provides some minimum amount of water quality treatment.
A pea gravel diaphragm should be used at the top of the slope. The pea gravel diaphragm (a small trench running along the top of the filter strip) serves two purposes. First, it acts as a pretreatment device, settling out sediment particles before they reach the practice. Second, it acts as a level spreader, maintaining sheet flow as runoff flows over the filter strip. The filter strip should be designed with a pervious berm of sand and gravel at the toe of the slope. This feature provides an area for shallow ponding at the bottom of the filter strip. Runoff ponds behind the berm and gradually flows through outlet pipes in the berm. The volume ponded behind the berm should be equal to the water quality volume. The water quality volume is the amount of runoff that will be treated for pollutant removal in the practice. Typical water quality volumes are the runoff from a 1-inch storm or -inch of runoff over the entire drainage area to the practice. The filter strip should be at least 25 feet long to provide water quality treatment. Designers should choose a grass that can withstand relatively high velocity flows and both wet and dry periods. Both the top and toe of the slope should be as flat as possible to encourage sheet flow and prevent erosion.
Regional Variations In cold climates, filter strips provide a convenient area for snow storage and treatment. If used for this purpose, vegetation in the filter strip should be salt-tolerant, (e.g., creeping bentgrass), and a maintenance schedule should include the removal of sand built up at the bottom of the slope. In arid or semi-arid climates, designers should specify drought-tolerant grasses (e.g., buffalo grass) to minimize irrigation requirements. Limitations Filter strips have several limitations related to their performance and space consumption:

The practice has not been shown to achieve high pollutant removal. Filter strips require a large amount of space, typically equal to the impervious area they treat, making them often infeasible in urban environments where land prices are high. If improperly designed, filter strips can become a mosquito breeding ground.
89
Proper design requires a great deal of finesse, and slight problems in the design, such as improper grading, can render the practice ineffective in terms of pollutant removal.
Maintenance Considerations Filter strips require similar maintenance to other vegetative practices (see Grassed Swales fact sheet). These maintenance needs are outlined below. Maintenance is very important for filter strips, particularly in terms of ensuring that flow does not short circuit the practice. Table 1. Typical maintenance activities for grassed filter strips (Source: CWP, 1996)
Activity Inspect pea gravel diaphragm for clogging and remove built-up sediment. Inspect vegetation for rills and gullies and correct. Seed or sod bare areas. Inspect to ensure that grass has established. If not, replace with an alternative species. Mow grass to maintain a 34 inch height Remove sediment build-up within the bottom when it has accumulated to 25% of the original capacity. Regular (frequent) Annual inspection (semiannual the first year) Schedule
Regular (infrequent)
Effectiveness Structural storm water management practices can be used to achieve four broad resource protection goals. These include flood control, channel protection, ground water recharge, and pollutant removal. The first two goals, flood control and channel protection, require that a storm water practice be able to reduce the peak flows of relatively large storm events (at least 1- to 2year storms for channel protection and at least 10- to 50-year storms for flood control). Filter strips do not have the capacity to detain these events, but can be designed with a bypass system that routes these flows around the practice entirely. Filter strips can provide a small amount of ground water recharge as runoff flows over the vegetated surface and ponds at the toe of the slope. In addition, it is believed that filter strips can provide modest pollutant removal. Studies from agricultural settings suggest that a 15-foot-wide grass buffer can achieve a 50 percent removal rate of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment, and that a 100-foot buffer can reach closer to 70 percent removal of these constituents (Desbonette et al., 1994). It is unclear how these results can be translated to the urban environment, however. The characteristics of the incoming flows are radically different both in terms of pollutant concentration and the peak flows associated with similar storm events. To date, only one study (Yu et al., 1992) has investigated the effectiveness of a grassed filter strip to treat runoff from a large parking lot. The study found that the pollutant removal varied depending on the length of flow in the filter strip. The narrower (75-foot) filter strip had moderate removal for some pollutants and actually appeared to export lead, phosphorus, and nutrients (See Table 2).
90
Table 2. Pollutant removal of an urban vegetated filter strip (Source: Yu et al., 1993)
Pollutant Removal (%) 75-Ft Filter Strip Total suspended solids Nitrate+nitrite Total phosphorus Extractable lead Extractable zinc 54 -27 -25 -16 47 150-Ft Filter Strip 84 20 40 50 55
Cost Considerations Little data are available on the actual construction costs of filter strips. One rough estimate can be the cost of seed or sod, which is approximately 30 per ft 2 for seed or 70 per ft 2 for sod. This amounts to between $13,000 and $30,000 per acre for a filter strip, or the same amount per impervious acre treated. This cost is relatively high compared with other treatment practices. However, the grassed area used as a filter strip may have been seeded or sodded even if it were not used for treatment. In these cases, the only additional costs are the design, which is minimal, and the installation of a berm and gravel diaphragm. Typical maintenance costs are about $350/acre/year (adapted from SWRPC, 1991). This cost is relatively inexpensive and, again, might overlap with regular landscape maintenance costs. The true cost of filter strips is the land they consume, which is higher than for any other treatment practice. In some situations this land is available as wasted space beyond back yards or adjacent to roadsides, but this practice is cost-prohibitive when land prices are high and land could be used for other purposes.
91
References Design Reference Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Prepared for Chesapeake Research Consortium, Solomons, MD, and EPA Region V, Chicago, IL. Other References Desbonette, A., P. Pogue, V. Lee, and N. Wolff. 1994. Vegetated Buffers in the Coastal Zone: A Summary Review and Bibliography. Coastal Resources Center. University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI. Magette, W., R. Brinsfield, R. Palmer and J. Wood. 1989. Nutrient and Sediment Removal by Vegetated Filter Strips. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 32(2): 663667. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SWRPC). 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Technical report no. 31. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha, WI. Yu, S., S. Barnes and V. Gerde. 1993. Testing of Best Management Practices for Controlling Highway Runoff. FHWA/VA 93-R16. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, VA. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. Washington, DC. Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [http://www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001.
92
Runoff pretreatment practices
Catch Basin Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description A catch basin (a.k.a. storm drain inlet, curb inlet) is an inlet to the storm drain system that typically includes a grate or curb inlet and a sump to capture sediment, debris, and associated pollutants. They are also used in combined sewer overflow (CSO) watersheds to capture floatables and settle some solids. Catch basins act as pretreatment for other treatment practices by capturing large sediments. The performance of catch basins at removing sediment and other pollutants depends on the design of the catch basin (e.g., the size of the sump) and maintenance procedures to retain the storage available in the sump to capture sediment. Applicability Catch basins are used in drainage systems throughout the United States. However, many catch basins are not ideally designed for sediment and pollutant capture. Ideal application of catch basins is as pretreatment to another storm water management practice. Retrofitting existing catch basins may help to improve their performance substantially. A simple retrofit option is to ensure that all catch basins have a hooded outlet to prevent floatable materials, such as trash and debris, from entering the storm drain system. Limitations Catch basins have three major limitations, including:
Even ideally designed catch basins cannot remove pollutants as well as structural storm water management practices, such as wet ponds, sand filters, and storm water wetlands. Unless frequently maintained, catch basins can become a source of pollutants through resuspension. Catch basins cannot effectively remove soluble pollutants or fine particles.
Siting and Design Considerations The performance of catch basins is related to the volume in the sump (i.e., the storage in the catch basin below the outlet). Lager et al. (1997) described an "optimal" catch basin sizing criterion, which relates all catch basin dimensions to the diameter of the outlet pipe (D):
93
The diameter of the catch basin should be equal to 4D. The sump depth should be at least 4D. This depth should be increased if cleaning is infrequent or if the area draining to the catch basin has high sediment loads. The top of the outlet pipe should be 1.5 D from the bottom of the inlet to the catch basin.
Catch basins can also be sized to accommodate the volume of sediment that enters the system. Pitt et al. (1997) propose a sizing criterion based on the concentration of sediment in storm water runoff. The catch basin is sized, with a factor of safety, to accommodate the annual sediment load in the catch basin sump. This method is preferable where high sediment loads are anticipated, and where the optimal design described above is suspected to provide little treatment. The basic design should also incorporate a hooded outlet to prevent floatable materials and trash from entering the storm drain system. Adding a screen to the top of the catch basin would not likely improve the performance of catch basins for pollutant removal, but would help capture trash entering the catch basin (Pitt et al., 1997). A variety of other materials may also be used to filter runoff entering the catch basin. These products are known as "catch basin inserts." There are two basic catch basin insert varieties. One insert option consists of a series of trays, with the top tray serving as an initial sediment trap, and the underlying trays composed of media filters. Another option uses filter fabric to remove pollutants from storm water runoff. These devices have a very small volume, compared to the volume of the catch basin sump, and would typically require very frequent sediment removal. Bench test studies found that a variety of options showed little removal of total suspended solids, partially due to scouring from relatively small (6-month) storm events (ICBIC, 1995). One design adaptation of the standard catch basin is to incorporate infiltration through the catch basin bottom. Two challenges are associated with this design. The first is potential ground water impacts, and the second is potential clogging, preventing infiltration. Infiltrating catch basins should not be used in commercial or industrial areas, because of possible ground water contamination. While it is difficult to prevent clogging at the bottom of the catch basin, it might be possible to incorporate some pretreatment into the design. Maintenance Considerations Typical maintenance of catch basins includes trash removal if a screen or other debris capturing device is used, and removal of sediment using a vactor truck. Operators need to be properly trained in catch basin maintenance. Maintenance should include keeping a log of the amount of sediment collected and the date of removal. Some cities have incorporated the use of GIS systems to track sediment collection and to optimize future catch basin cleaning efforts. One study (Pitt, 1985) concluded that catch basins can capture sediments up to approximately 60 percent of the sump volume. When sediment fills greater than 60 percent of their volume, catch basins reach steady state. Storm flows can then resuspend sediments trapped in the catch basin, and will bypass treatment. Frequent clean-out can retain the volume in the catch basin sump available for treatment of storm water flows. At a minimum, catch basins should be cleaned once or twice per year (Aronson et al., 1993). Two studies suggest that increasing the frequency of maintenance can improve the performance
94
of catch basins, particularly in industrial or commercial areas. One study of 60 catch basins in Alameda County, California, found that increasing the maintenance frequency from once per year to twice per year could increase the total sediment removed by catch basins on an annual basis (Mineart and Singh, 1994). Annual sediment removed per inlet was 54 pounds for annual cleaning, 70 pounds for semi-annual and quarterly cleaning, and 160 pounds for monthly cleaning. For catch basins draining industrial uses, monthly cleaning increased total annual sediment collected to six times the amount collected by annual cleaning (180 pounds versus 30 pounds). These results suggest that, at least for industrial uses, more frequent cleaning of catch basins may improve efficiency. However, the cost of increased operation and maintenance costs needs to be weighed against the improved pollutant removal. In some regions, it may be difficult to find environmentally acceptable disposal methods for collected sediments. The sediments may not always be land-filled, land-applied, or introduced into the sanitary sewer system due to hazardous waste, pretreatment, or ground water regulations. This is particularly true when catch basins drain runoff from hot spot areas. Effectiveness What is known about the effectiveness of catch basins is limited to a few studies. Table 1 outlines the results of some of these studies. Table 1. Pollutant removal of catch basins (percent).
Study Pitt et al., 1997 Aronson et al., 1983 Notes Only very small storms were monitored in this study. Annual load reduction estimated based on concentrations and mass of catch basin sediment. TSSa CODa BODa 32 TNa TPa Metals
6097 1056 5488
Mineart and Singh, 1994
For Copper: 34% (Annual cleaning) 15% (Monthly cleaning)
TSS=total suspended solids; COD=chemical oxygen demand; BOD=biological oxygen demand; TN=total nitrogen; TP=total phosphorus
Cost Considerations A typical pre-cast catch basin costs between $2,000 and $3,000. The true pollutant removal cost associated with catch basins, however, is the long-term maintenance cost. A vactor truck, the most common method of catch basin cleaning, costs between $125,000 and $150,000. This initial cost may be high for smaller Phase II communities. However, it may be possible to share a vactor truck with another community. Typical vactor trucks can store between 10 and 15 cubic yards of material, which is enough storage for three to five catch basins with the "optimal" design and an 18-inch inflow pipe. Assuming semi-annual cleaning, and that the vactor truck could be filled and material disposed of twice in one day, one truck would be sufficient to clean between 750 and 1,000 catch basins. Another maintenance cost is the staff time needed to
95
operate the truck. Depending on the regulations within a community, disposal costs of the sediment captured in catch basins may be significant. References Aronson, G., D. Watson, and W. Pisaro. Evaluation of Catch Basin Performance for Urban Stormwater Pollution Control. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Interagency Catch Basin Insert Committee (ICBIC). 1995. Evaluation of CommerciallyAvailable Catch Basin Inserts for the Treatment of Stormwater Runoff from Developed Sites. Seattle, WA. Lager, J., W. Smith, R. Finn, and E. Finnemore. 1977. Urban Stormwater Management and Technology: Update and Users' Guide. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-600/8-77-014. 313 pp. Mineart, P., and S. Singh. 1994. Storm Inlet Pilot Study. Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program, Oakland, CA. Pitt, R., and P. Bissonnette. 1984. Bellevue Urban Runoff Program Summary Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Planning Division, Washington, DC. Pitt, R., M. Lilburn, S. Nix, S.R. Durrans, S. Burian, J. Voorhees, and J. Martinson. 2000. Guidance Manual for Integrated Wet Weather Flow (WWF) Collection and Treatment Systems for Newly Urbanized Areas (New WWF Systems). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH.
96
In-Line Storage Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description In-line storage refers to a number of practices designed to use the storage within the storm drain system to detain flows. While these practices can reduce storm peak flows, they are unable to improve water quality or protect downstream channels. Storage is achieved by placing devices in the storm drain system to restrict the rate of flow. Devices can slow the rate of flow by backing up flow, as in the case of a dam or weir, or through the use of vortex valves, devices that reduce flow rates by creating a helical flow path in the structure. A description of various flow regulators is included in Urbonas and Stahre (1990). Applicability In-line storage practices serve the same purpose as traditional detention basins (see Dry Extended Detention Pond). These practices can act as a surrogate for aboveground storage when little space is available for aboveground storage facilities. Limitations In-line storage has several limitations, including:

In-line storage practices only control flow, and thus are not able to improve the water quality of storm water runoff. If improperly designed, these practices may cause upstream flooding.
Siting and Design Cons iderations Flow regulators cannot be applied to all storm drain systems. In older cities, the storm drainpipes may not be oversized, and detaining storm water within them would cause upstream flooding. Another important issue in siting these practices is the slope of the pipes in the system. In areas with very flat slopes, restricting flow within the system is likely to cause upstream flooding because introducing a regulator into the system will cause flows to back up a long distance before the regulator. In steep pipes, on the other hand, a storage flow regulator cannot utilize much of the storage available in the storm drain system.
97
Maintenance Considerations Flow regulators require very little maintenance, because they are designed to be "self cleaning," much like the storm drain system. In some cases, flow regulators may be modified based on downstream flows, new connections to the storm drain, or the application of other flow regulators within the system. For some designs, such as check dams, regulations will require only moderate construction in order to modify the structure's design. Effectiveness The effectiveness of in-line storage practices is site-specific and depends on the storage available in the storm drain system. In one study, a single application was able to reduce peak flows by approximately 50 percent (VDCR, 1999). Cost Considerations Flow regulators are relatively low cost options, particularly since they require little maintenance and consume little surface area. References Urbonas, B., and T. Stahre. 1990. Storm Water Best Management Practices and Detention for Water Quality, Drainage and CSO Management. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VDCR). 1999. Watershed and Lake BMPs--Best Management Practices for Established Urban Communities. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Richmond, VA.
98
Manufactured Products for Storm Water Inlets Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment
Description A variety of products for storm water inlets known as swirl separators, or hydrodynamic structures, have been widely applied in recent years. Swirl separators are modifications of the traditional oil-grit separator and include an internal component that creates a swirling motion as storm water flows through a cylindrical chamber. The concept behind these designs is that sediments settle out as storm water moves in this swirling path. Additional compartments or chambers are sometimes present to trap oil and other floatables. There are several different types of proprietary separators, each of which incorporates slightly different design variations, such as off-line application. Another common manufactured product is the catch basin insert. These products are discussed briefly in the Catch Basin fact sheet. Applicability Swirl separators are best installed on highly impervious sites. Because little data are available on their performance, and independently conducted studies suggest marginal pollutant removal, swirl separators should not be used as a stand-alone practice for new development. The best
99
application of these products is as pretreatment to another storm water device, or in a retrofit situation where space is limited. Limitations Limitations to swirl separators include:
Very little data are available on the performance of these practices, and independent studies suggest only moderate pollutant removal. In particular, these practices are ineffective at removing fine particles and soluble pollutants. The practice has a high maintenance burden (i.e., frequent cleanout). Swirl concentrators are restricted to small and highly impervious sites.
Siting and Design Considerations The specific design of swirl concentrators is specified by product literature available from each manufacturer. For the most part, swirl concentrators are a rate-based design. That is, they are sized based on the peak flow of a specific storm event. This design contrasts with most other storm water management practices, which are sized based on capturing and storing or treating a specific volume. Sizing based on flow rate allows the practice to provide treatment within a much smaller area than other storm water management practices. Maintenance Considerations Swirl concentrators require frequent maintenance (typically quarterly). Maintenance is performed using a vactor truck, as is used for catch basins (see Catch Basin). In some regions, it may be difficult to find environmentally acceptable disposal methods. The sediments may not always be land-filled, land-applied, or introduced into the sanitary sewer system due to hazardous waste, pretreatment, or groundwater regulations. This is particularly true when catch basins drain runoff from hot spot areas. Effectiveness While manufacturers' literature typically reports removal rates for swirl separator design, there is actually very little independent data to evaluate the effectiveness of these products. Two studies investigated one of these products. Both studies reported moderate pollutant removal. While the product outperforms oil/grit separators, which have virtually no pollutant removal (Schueler, 1997), the removal rates are not substantially different from the standard catch basin. One longterm advantage of these products over catch basins is that, if they incorporate an off-line design, trapped sediment will not become resuspended. Data from two studies are presented below. Both of these studies are summarized in a Claytor (1999).
100
Table 1. Effectiveness of manufactured products for storm water inlets

Study Greb et al., 1998 Investigated 45 precipitation events over a 9-month period. Percent removal rates reflect overall efficiency, accounting for pollutants in bypassed flows. 21 -21 17 17 24 17 32 5 Labatiuk et al., 1997 Data represent the mean percent removal rate for four storm events. 51.5 51.2 39.1 21.5 -
Notes
TSSa TDS a TPa DPa Pba Zna Cua PAHa NO2 +NO3 a
a
TSS=total suspended solids; TDS=total dissolved solids; TP=total phosphorus; DP=dissolved phosphorus; Pb=lead; Zn=zinc; Cu=copper; PAH=polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; NO2 +NO3 =nitrite+nitrate-nitrogen
Cost Considerations A typical swirl separator costs between $5,000 and $35,000, or between $5,000 and $10,000 per impervious acre. This cost is within the range of some sand filters, which also treat highly urbanized runoff (see Sand Filters). Swirl separators consume very little land, making them attractive in highly urbanized areas. The maintenance of these practices is relatively expensive. Swirl concentrators typically require quarterly maintenance, and a vactor truck, the most common method of cleaning these practices, costs between $125,000 and $150,000. This initial cost may be high for smaller Phase II communities. However, it may be possible to share a vactor truck with another community. Depending on the rules within a community, disposal costs of the sediment captured in swirl separators may be significant.
101
References Claytor, R. 1999. Performance of a proprietary stormwater treatment device: The Stormceptor. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(1):605608. Greb, S., S. Corsi, and R. Waschbusch. 1998. Evaluation of Stormceptor and multi-chamber treatment train as urban retrofit strategies. In Proceedings: National Conference on Retrofit Opportunities for Water Resource Protection in Urban Environments, Chicago, IL, February 9 12, 1998. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Labatiuk, C., V. Natal, and V. Bhardwaj. 1997. Field evaluation of a pollution abatement device for stormwater quality improvement. In Proceedings of the 1997 CSCE-ASCE Environmental Engineering Conference, Edmonton, Alberta. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montral, Qubec, and American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA. Schueler, T. 1997. Performance of oil-grit separator at removing pollutants at small sites. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4): 539542. King County, WA. 2000. King County Surface Water Design Manual. [splash.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/manual.htm]. Last updated March 6, 2000. Accessed January 5, 2001.
102
Nonstructural BMPs
Experimental practices
Alum Injection Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Alum injection is the addition of alum (an aluminum sulfate salt) solution to storm water, causing fine particles to flocculate (i.e., gather together to form larger particles) and settle out. Other pollutants also can be scavenged. Alum injection can help meet downstream pollutant concentration loads by reducing the concentrations of fine particles and soluble phosphorus. Alum treatment systems generally consist of a flow-weighted dosing system designed to fit inside a storm sewer manhole, remotely located storage tanks to provide the doser with alum, and a downstream pond which allows the alum, pollutants, and sediments to settle out (Kurz, 1998). When alum is injected into storm water it forms harmless precipitates, aluminum phosphate and aluminum hydroxide. These precipitates combine with heavy metals and phosphorus, causing them to be deposited into the sediments in a stable, inactive state (WEF, 1992). The collected mass of alum precipitates, pollutants, and sediments is commonly referred to as floc. Applicability The injection of liquid alum into storm sewers has been used to reduce the water quality impacts of storm water runoff to lakes and receiving waterbodies, particularly to reduce high phosphorus levels. Because of high installation and operation costs, alum injection is best applied in situations where a large volume of water is stored in one area, as in the case of combined sewer overflow (CSO) storage areas at wastewater treatment plants. Alum treatment can also be implemented as a pretreatment step to further reduce turbidity and total suspended solids (TSS) (Kurz, 1998). Siting and Design Considerations Alum injection systems need to incorporate several design features to properly apply alum and dispose of the floc formed during the process. Dosage rates, which range from 5 to 10 mg of Al per liter, are determined on a flow-weighted basis during storm events (Harper, 1996). Other chemicals, such as lime, may also be added during the process to enhance the pollutant settling. (Often, the pH is raised to between 8 and 11). The design needs to incorporate a doser system, as well as sufficient chemical storage in tanks to minimize the frequency with which they need to be refilled. Disposal of the floc that settles in the downstream basin is critical, because of the concentration of dissolved chemicals, and also because bacteria and viruses remain viable in the floc layer (Kurz, 1998). In addition to the settling pond, a separate floc collection pump-out facility should be installed to further reduce the chance of resuspension and transport of floc to receiving
103
waterbodies. The pump disposes the floc into the sanitary sewer system or onto nearby upland areas or sludge drying beds. A permit will be required to pump to the sanitary sewer, however. The quantity of sludge produced at a site can be as much as 0.5 percent of the volume of water treated (Gibb et al., 1991). Limitations While alum shows some potential as a storm water treatment practice, it has several limitations, including:
Alum injection is an experimental practice, and little is known about its long-term performance. In addition to maintenance, alum injection requires ongoing operation, unlike most other post-construction storm water treatment practices. While alum injection can reduce pollutant loads, it cannot control flows or protect downstream channels from erosion. Chemicals added during the alum injection process may have negative impacts on downstream waters. The precipitates from the alum increase the solids that must be disposed of from the treatment.
Maintenance Considerations Operation and maintenance for alum treatment is critical. Some typical items include:
There must be routine inspection and repair of equipment, including the doser and pumpout facility. A trained operator should be on-site to adjust the dosage of alum and other chemicals, and possibly to regulate flows through the basin. If floc is stored on-site in drying beds, it will need to be disposed of on a regular basis. The settling basin will need to be dredged periodically to dispose of accumulated floc.
Effectiveness Limited performance data of alum injection is available in Table 1. One study (Harper and Herr, 1996) found high removal rates for TSS and fecal coliform bacteria. This study and another (Carr, 1998) showed mixed results on total phosphorus and ortho-phosphorus.
104
Table 1. Alum injection removal rates

Study TSS TP Orthophosphorus TN Fecal Coliform Bacteria Heavy Zinc Ammonia Metals
Harper and Herr, 9599 8595 1996 Carr, 1998 37
9095
6070
]99
5090
42
52.2
41
24.5
Cost Considerations Alum injection is a relatively expensive practice. Construction costs for alum treatment systems range from $135,000 to $400,000; the cost depends on the watershed size and the number of outfall locations treated. Generally, alum treatment is applied to large drainage areas. In one study (Kurz, 1998), an alum treatment system was a successful storm water retrofit for a 460acre urbanized watershed in downtown Tampa. Operation and maintenance costs, which include routine and chemical inspections, range from $6,500 to $25,000 per year (Harper and Herr, 1996). References Carr, D. 1998. An Assessment of an In-Line Injection Facility Used to Treat Stormwater Runoff in Pinellas County, Florida. Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL. Gibb, A., B. Bennet, and A. Birkbeck. 1991. Urban Runoff Quality and Treatment: A Comprehensive Review. Prepared for the Greater Vancouver Regional District, the Municipality of Surrey, British Columbia, Ministry of Transportation and Highways, and British Columbia Ministry of Advanced Education and Training. Document No. 2-51-246 (242). Harper, H.H. and J.L. Herr. 1996. Alum Treatment of Stormwater Runoff: The First Ten Years. Environmental Research and Design, Orlando, FL. Kurz, R. 1998. Removal of Microbial Indicators from Stormwater Using Sand Filtration, Wet Detention, and Alum Treatment Best Management Practices. Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL. Water Environmental Federation and the American Society of Civil Engineers. 1992. Design and Construction of Urban Stormwater Management Systems. Water Environmental Federation, Alexandria, VA, and American Society of Civil Engineers, Washington, DC.
105
On-lot Treatment
On-Lot Treatment Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description The term "on-lot treatment" refers to a series of practices that are designed to treat runoff from individual residential lots. The primary purpose of most on-lot practices is to manage rooftop runoff and, to a lesser extent, driveway and sidewalk runoff. Rooftop runoff, and particularly residential rooftop runoff, generally has low pollutant concentrations compared with other urban sources (Schueler, 1994b). The primary advantage of managing runoff from rooftops is to disconnect these impervious surfaces, reducing the effective impervious cover in a watershed. Many of the impacts of urbanization on the habitat and water quality of streams are related to the fundamental change in the hydrologic cycle caused by the increase of impervious cover in the landscape (Schueler, 1994a). Although there are a wide variety of on-lot treatment options, they can all be classified into one of three categories: 1) practices that infiltrate rooftop runoff; 2) practices that divert runoff or soil moisture to a pervious area; and 3) practices that store runoff for later use. The best option depends on the goals of a community, the feasibility at a specific site, and the preferences of the homeowner. The practice most often used to infiltrate rooftop runoff is the dry well. In this design, the storm drain is directed to an underground rock-filled trench that is similar in design to an infiltration trench (see Infiltration Trench fact sheet). French drains or Dutch drains can also be used for this purpose. In these designs, the relatively deep dry well is replaced with a long trench with a perforated pipe within the gravel bed to distribute flow throughout the length of the trench. Runoff can be diverted to a pervious area or to a treatment area using site grading, or channels and berms. Treatment options can include grassed swales, bioretention, or filter strips. The bioretention design can be simplified for an on-lot application by limiting the pre-treatment filter and in some cases eliminating the underdrain (see Bioretention fact sheet). Alternatively, rooftop runoff can simply be diverted to pervious lawn areas, as opposed to flowing directly to the street and thus to the storm drain system. Practices that store rooftop runoff, such as cisterns and rain barrels, are the simplest in design of all of the on-lot treatment systems. Some of these practices are available commercially and can
106
be applied in a wide variety of site conditions. Cisterns and rain barrels are particularly valuable in the arid southwest, where water is at a premium, rainfall is infrequent, and reuse for irrigation can save homeowners money. Application Some sort of on-lot treatment can be applied to almost all sites, with very few exceptions (e.g., very small lots or lots with no landscaping). Traditionally, on-site treatment of residential storm water runoff has been encouraged, but has not generally been an option to meet storm water requirements. There are currently at least two jurisdictions, however, who offer "credits" in exchange for the application of on-site storm water management practices. In Denver, Colorado, sites designed with methods to reduce "directly connected impervious cover," including disconnection of downspout runoff from the storm system, are permitted to use a lower site impervious area when computing the required storage of storm water facilities (DUDFCD, 1992). Similarly, new regulations for Maryland allow designers to subtract each rooftop that is disconnected from the total site impervious cover when calculating required storage in storm water management practices (MDE, 2000). Siting and Design Considerations Although most residential lots can incorporate on-lot treatment, the best option for a site depends on site design constraints and the preferences of the homeowner. On-lot infiltration practices have the same restrictions regarding soils as other infiltration practices (see Infiltration Basin and Infiltration Trench fact sheets). If other design practices are used, such as bioretention or grassed swales, they need to meet the siting requirements of those practices (see Bioretention and Grassed Swale fact sheets). Of all of the practices, cisterns and rain barrels have the fewest site constraints. In order for the practice to be effective, however, homeowners need to have a use for the water stored in the practice, and the design must accommodate overflow and winter freezing conditions. These practices are best suited to an individual who has some active interest in gardening or landscaping. Although these practices are simple compared with many other post construction storm water practices, the design needs to incorporate the same basic elements of any storm water practice. Pretreatment is important for all of these practices to ensure that they do not become clogged with leaf debris. Infiltration practices may be preceded by a settling tank or, at a minimum, a grate or filter in the downspout to trap leaves and other debris. Rain barrels and cisterns also often incorporate some sort of pretreatment, such as a mesh filter at the top of the barrel or cistern. Both infiltration practices and storage practices typically incorporate some type of bypass so that larger storms flow away from the house. In rain barrels or cisterns, this bypass may be a hose set at a high level of the practice and directed away from the practice and building foundation. These practices also include a hose set at the elevation of the bottom of the practice. The homeowner can use the practice to irrigate landscaping or for other uses by attaching this hose to a standard garden hose, and controlling flow with an adjustable valve. In infiltration practices the bypass may be an aboveground opening of the downspout. As on-lot practices, grassed swales and bioretention can be designed on-line. The design directs all flows to the management practice, but larger flows generally flow over the practice and are not treated.
107
One important design feature of infiltration practices is that the infiltration area must be located sufficiently far from the house's foundation to prevent undermining of the foundation or seepage into basements. The infiltration area should be separated from the house by at least 10 feet to prevent these problems. Limitations There are some limitations to the use of on-lot practices, including the following:
These practices require some maintenance and require some effort on the part of the homeowner. For homeowners who do not enjoy landscaping, it may be difficult for them to find a use for water stored in a rain barrel or cistern, since the water is not potable. On small lots, some of these practices may be impractical. Even if applied to every home in a watershed, these practices would only treat a relatively small portion of the watershed imperviousness, which is largely composed of roads and parking areas (see Narrower Residential Streets and Green Parking fact sheets).
Maintenance Considerations Bioretention areas, filter strips, and grassed swales require regular maintenance to ensure that the vegetation remains in good condition (see Bioretention; Grassed Filter Strip; and Grassed Swale fact sheets). Infiltration practices require regular removal of sediment and debris settled in the pretreatment area, and the media might need to be replaced if it becomes clogged (see Infiltration Trench fact sheet). Rain barrels and cisterns require minimal maintenance, but the homeowner needs to ensure that the hose remains elevated during the winter to prevent freezing and cracking. In addition, the tank needs to be cleaned out approximately once per year. Effectiveness Although the practices used for on-lot applications can have relatively high pollutant removals (see Infiltration Trench; Bioretention; Grassed Filter Strip; and Grassed Swale fact sheets), it is not clear that these pollutant removal rates can be realized with the relatively low pollutant concentrations entering the practices. Some data suggest that, at least for storm water ponds, there may be an "irreducible concentration" below which no further pollutant removal can be achieved (Schueler, 1996). Another benefit of many on-lot practices is that they generally promote ground water recharge, either directly through infiltration or indirectly by applying or directing runoff to pervious areas. Cost Considerations On a cost per unit area treated, on-lot practices are relatively expensive compared with other storm water treatment options. It is difficult to make this comparison, however, because the cost burden of on-lot practices is born directly by homeowners. Typical costs are $100 for a rain barrel and $200 for a dry well or French drain. For many of these practices, homeowners can reduce costs by making their own on-lot practice rather than purchasing a commercial product.
108
Some treatment practices, such as rain barrels and on-lot bioretention, offer additional benefits to the homeowner that may offset the cost of applying the practice. Similarly, maintenance costs are essentially free, with the exception of replacement of a dry well system, which may require outside help. References Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (DUDFCD). 1992. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual: Volume 3Best Management Practices. Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. [www.mde.state.md.us/environment/wma/stormwatermanual]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Schueler, T. 1994a. The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3):100111. Schueler, T. 1994b. Sources of urban stormwater pollutants defined in Wisconsin. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(1):3032. Schueler, T. 1996. Irreducible pollutant concentrations discharged from urban BMPs. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3):100111. Information Resources City of Tucson, Arizona, Stormwater Quality Program. 1996. Water harvesting fact sheets. City of Tucson Stormwater Quality Program, Tucson, AZ. Konrad, C., B. Jensen, S. Burges, and L. Reinelt. 1995. On-Site Residential Stormwater Management Alternatives. University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Prince George's County, Maryland, Department of Environmental Resources. 1997. Low Impact Development. Prince George's County, Maryland, Department of Environmental Resources, Laurel, MD. Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Center for Watershed Protection. 1998a. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD.
109
Better site design
Buffer Zones Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description An aquatic buffer is an area along a shoreline, wetland, or stream where development is restricted or prohibited. The primary function of aquatic buffers is to physically protect and separate a stream, lake, or wetland from future disturbance or encroachment. If properly designed, a buffer can provide storm water management and act as a right-of-way during floods, sustaining the integrity of stream ecosystems and habitats. Technically, aquatic buffers are one type of conservation area that function as an integral part of the aquatic ecosystem and can also function as part of an urban forest. The three types of buffers are water pollution hazard setbacks, vegetated buffers, and engineered buffers. Water pollution hazard setbacks are areas that separate a potential pollution hazard from a waterway. By providing setbacks from these areas in the form of a buffer, the potential for pollution can be reduced. Vegetated buffers are any number of natural areas that exist to divide land uses or provide landscape relief. Engineered buffers are areas specifically designed to treat storm water before it enters into a stream, lake, or wetland. Applicability Buffers can be applied to new development by establishing specific preservation areas and sustaining management through easements or community associations. For existing developed areas, an easement may be needed from adjoining landowners. A local ordinance can help set specific criteria for buffers to achieve storm water management goals. In many regions of the country, the benefits of buffers are amplified if they are managed in a forested condition. In some settings, buffers can remove pollutants traveling in storm water or ground water. Shoreline and stream buffers situated in flat soils have been found to be effective in removing sediment, nutrients, and bacteria from storm water runoff and septic system effluent in a wide variety of rural and agricultural settings along the East Coast and with some limited
110
capability in urban settings. Buffers can also provide wildlife habitat and recreation, and can be reestablished in urban areas as part of an urban forest. Siting and Design Considerations There are ten key criteria to consider when establishing a stream buffer:

Minimum total buffer width Three-zone buffer system Mature forest as a vegetative target Conditions for buffer expansion or contraction Physical delineation requirements Conditions where buffer can be crossed Integrating storm water and storm water management within the buffer Buffer limit review Buffer education, inspection, and enforcement Buffer flexibility.
In general, a minimum base width of at least 100 feet is recommended to provide adequate stream protection. The three-zone buffer system, consisting of inner, middle, and outer zones, is an effective technique for establishing a buffer. The zones are distinguished by function, width, vegetative target, and allowable uses. The inner zone protects physical and ecological integrity and is a minimum of 25 feet plus wetland and critical habitats. The vegetative target consists of mature forest, and allowable uses are very restricted (flood controls, utility right-of-ways, footpaths, etc.). The middle zone provides distance between upland development and the inner zone and is typically 50 to 100 feet, depending on stream order, slope, and 100-year floodplain. The vegetative target for this zone is managed forest, and usage is restricted to some recreational uses, some storm water BMPs, and bike paths. The outer zone functions to prevent encroachment and filter backyard runoff. The width is at least 25 feet and, while forest is encouraged, turfgrass can be a vegetative target. Uses for the outer zone are unrestricted and can include lawn, garden, compost, yard wastes, and most storm water BMPs. For optimal storm water treatment, the following buffer designs are recommended. The buffer should be composed of three lateral zones: a storm water depression area that leads to a grass filter strip that in turn leads to a forested buffer. The storm water depression is designed to capture and store storm water during smaller storm events and bypass larger stormflows directly into a channel. The captured runoff within the storm water depression can then be spread across a grass filter designed for sheetflow conditions for the water quality storm. The grass filter then discharges into a wider forest buffer designed to have zero discharge of surface runoff to the stream (i.e., full infiltration of sheetflow).
111
Stream buffers must be highly engineered in order to satisfy these demanding hydrologic and hydraulic conditions. In particular, simple structures are needed to store, split, and spread surface runoff within the storm water depression area. Although past efforts to engineer urban stream buffers were plagued by hydraulic failures and maintenance problems, recent experience with similar bioretention areas has been much more positive (Claytor and Schueler, 1996). Consequently, it may be useful to consider elements of bioretention design for the first zone of an urban stream buffer (shallow ponding depths, partial underdrains, drop inlet bypass, etc). Limitations Only a handful of studies have measured the ability of stream buffers to remove pollutants from storm water. One limitation is that urban runoff concentrates rapidly on paved and hard-packed turf surfaces and often crosses the buffer as channel flow, effectively shortcutting through the buffer. To achieve optimal pollutant removal, the engineered buffer should be carefully designed with a storm water depression area, grass filter, and forested strip. Maintenance Considerations An effective buffer management plan should include establishment, management, and distinctions of allowable and unallowable uses in the buffer zones. Buffer boundaries should be well defined and visible before, during, and after construction. Without clear signs or markers defining the buffer, boundaries become invisible to local governments, contractors, and residents. Buffers designed to capture storm water runoff from urban areas will require more maintenance if the first zone is designated as a bioretention or other engineered depression area. Effectiveness The pollutant removal effectiveness of buffers depends on the design of the buffer; while water pollution hazard setbacks are designed to prevent possible contamination from neighboring land uses, they are not designed for pollutant removal during a storm. With vegetated buffers, some pollutant removal studies have shown that they range widely in effectiveness (Table 1). Proper design of buffers can help increase the pollutant removal from storm water runoff (Table 2). Table 1: Pollutant removal rates in buffer zones
Reference Dillaha et al., 1989 Magette et al., 1987 Schwer and Clausen, 1989 Lowrance et al., 1983 Doyle et al., 1977 Barker and Young, 1984 Lowrance et al., 1984 Overman and Schanze, 1985 Buffer Vegetation Grass Grass Grass Native hardwood forest Grass Grass Forested Grass Buffer Width (meters) 4.69.1 4.69.2 26 2040 1.5 79 Total % TSS Removal 6378 7286 89 Total % Phosphorous Removal 5774 4153 78 23 8 Total % Nitrogen Removal 5067 1751 76

81
57 99 85 67
3042 39

112
Table 2: Factors that enhance/reduce buffer pollutant removal performance

Factors that Enhance Performance Slopes less than 5% Contributing flow lengths <150 feet. Water table close to surface Check dams/level spreaders Permeable but not sandy soils Growing season Long length of buffer or swale Organic matter, humus, or mulch layer Small runoff events Entry runoff velocity less than 1.5 feet/sec Swales that are routinely mowed Poorly drained soils, deep roots Dense grass cover, 6 inches tall Factors that Reduce Performance Slopes greater than 5% Overland flow paths over 300 feet Ground water far below surface Contact times less than 5 minutes Compacted soils Nongrowing season Buffers less than 10 feet Snowmelt conditions, ice cover Runoff events >2 year event. Entry runoff velocity more than 5 feet/sec Sediment buildup at top of swale Trees with shallow root systems Tall grass, sparse vegetative cover
Cost Considerations Several studies have documented the increase of property values in areas adjacent to buffers. At the same time, the real costs of instituting a buffer program for local government involve the extra staff and training time to conduct plan reviews, and to provide technical assistance, field delineation, construction, and ongoing buffer education programs. To implement a stream buffer program, a community will need to adopt an ordinance, develop technical criteria, and invest in additional staff resources and training. The adoption of a buffer program also requires an investment in training for the plan reviewer and the consultant alike. Manuals, workshops, seminars, and direct technical assistance are needed to explain the new requirements to all the players in the land development business. Lastly, buffers need to be maintained, and resources should include systematic inspection of the buffer network before and after construction and work to increase resident awareness about buffers. One way to relieve some of the significant financial hardships for developers is to provide flexibility through buffer averaging. Buffer averaging allows developers to narrow the buffer width at some points if the average width of the buffer and the overall buffer area meet the minimum criteria. Variances can also be granted if the developer or landowner can demonstrate severe economic hardship or unique circumstances that make compliance with the buffer ordinance difficult.
113
References Barker, J.C. and B.A. Young. 1984. Evaluation of a vegetative filter for dairy wastewater in southern Appalachia, Water Resource Research Institute, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Claytor, R., and T. Schueler. 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, Solomons, Maryland, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, IL, by the Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Dillaha, T.A., R.B. Renear, S. Mostaghimi, and D. Lee. 1989. Vegetative Filter Strips for Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Control. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 32(2):513519. Doyle, R.C., G.C. Stanton, and D.C. Wolf. 1977. Effectiveness of forest and grass buffer filters in improving the water quality of manure polluted runoff. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Paper No. 77-2501. St. Joseph, MI. Lowrance, R.R., R.L. Todd, and L.E. Asmussen. 1983. Waterborne nutrient budgets for the riparian zone of an agricultural watershed. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment 10:371 384. Lowrance, R.R., R.L. Todd, J. Fail, O. Hendrickson, R. Leonard, and L.E. Asmussen. 1984. Riparian forests as nutrient filters in agricultural watersheds. Bioscience 34:374377. Magette, W.L., R.B. Brinsfield, R.E. Palmer, J.D. Wood, T.A. Dillaha, and R.B. Reneau. 1987. Vegetated Filter Strips for Agriculture Runoff Treatment. Report #CBP/TRS 2/87-003314-01. United States Environmental Protection Agency Region III, Philadelphia, PA. Overman, A.R., and T. Schanze. 1985. Runoff Water Quality from Wastewater Irrigation. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 28:15351538. Schwer, C.B., and J.C. Clausen. 1989. Vegetative Filter Treatment of Diary Milkhouse Wastewater. Journal of Environmental Quality 18:446451. Information Resources Peterjohn, W.T., and D.L. Correll. 1984. Nutrient Dynamics in an Agricultural Watershed: Observations in the Role of the Riparian Forest. Ecology 65(5):14661475. Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Washington, DC.
114
Open Space Design Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Open space design, also known as conservation development or cluster development, is a better site design technique that concentrates dwelling units in a compact area in one portion of the development site in exchange for providing open space and natural areas elsewhere on the site. The minimum lot sizes, setbacks and frontage distances for the residential zone are relaxed in order to create the open space at the site. Open space designs have many benefits in comparison to the conventional subdivisions that they replace: they can reduce impervious cover, storm water pollutants, construction costs, grading, and the loss of natural areas. However, many communities lack zoning ordinances to permit open space development, and even those that have enacted ordinances might need to revise them to achieve greater water quality and environmental benefits. The benefits of open space design can be amplified when it is combined with other better site design techniques such as narrow streets, open channels, and alternative turnarounds (see Narrower Residential Streets, Eliminating Curbs and Gutters, and Alternative Turnarounds). Applicability The codes and ordinances that govern residential development in many communities do not allow developers to build anything other than conventional subdivisions. Consequently, it may be necessary to enact a new ordinance or revise current development regulations to enable developers to pursue this design option. Model ordinances and regulations for open space design can be found on http://www.cwp.org and in Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community (CWP, 1998). Open space design is widely applicable to most forms of residential development. The greatest storm water and pollutant reduction benefits typically occur when open space design is applied to residential zones that have larger lots (less than two dwelling units per acre). In these types of large lot zones, a great deal of natural or community open space can be created by shrinking lot sizes. However, open space design may not always be a viable option for high-density residential zones, redevelopment, or infill development, where lots are small to begin with and clustering
115
will yield little open space. In rural areas, open space design may need to be adapted, especially in communities where shared septic fields are not currently allowed by public health authorities. Open space design can be employed in nearly all geographic regions of the country, with the result of different types of open space being conserved (forest, prairie, farmland, chaparral, or desert). Siting and Design Conditions Several site planning techniques have been proposed for designing effective open space developments (Arendt, 1996, and DE DNREC, 1997). Often, a necessary first step is adoption of a local ordinance that allows open space design within conventional residential zones. Such ordinances specify more flexible and smaller lot sizes, setbacks, and frontage distances for the residential zone, as well as minimum requirements for open space and natural area conservation. Other key elements of effective open space ordinances include requirements for the consolidation and use of open space, as well as enforceable provisions for managing the open space on a common basis. Limitations A number of real and perceived barriers hinder wider acceptance of open space designs by developers, local governments, and the general public. For example, despite strong evidence to the contrary, some developers still feel that open space designs are less marketable than conventional residential subdivisions. In other cases, developers contend that the review process for open space design is more lengthy, costly, and potentially controversial than that required for conventional subdivisions, and thus, not worth the trouble. Local governments may be concerned that homeowner associations lack the financial resources, liability insurance, or technical competence to maintain open space adequately. Finally, the general public is often suspicious of cluster or open space development proposals, feeling that they are a "Trojan Horse" for more intense development, traffic, and other local concerns. At the regional level, open space design policies and ordinances need to be carefully constructed and implemented so as not to lead to "leap-frogging," which is the creation of additional development in already built-up areas. An open space development that requires new infrastructure, such as roads, water and sewer lines, and commercial areas, can actually create more imperviousness at the regional level than it saves at the site level. In reality, many of these misconceptions can be directly addressed through a clear open space ordinance and by providing training and incentives to the development and engineering community. The Natural Resources Defense Council presents several examples of successful conservation-oriented developments in Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution (1999). Maintenance Considerations Once established, common open space and natural conservation areas must be managed by a responsible party able to maintain the areas in a natural state in perpetuity. Typically, the open space is protected by legally enforceable deed restrictions, conservation easements, and maintenance agreements. In most communities, the authority for managing open space falls to a homeowner or community association or a land trust. Annual maintenance tasks for open space
116
managed as natural areas are almost non-existent, and the annual maintenance cost for managing an acre of natural area is less than $75 (CWP, 1998). It may be useful to develop a habitat plan for natural areas that may require periodic management actions. Effectiveness Recent redesign research indicates that open space design can provide impressive pollutant reduction benefits compared to the conventional subdivisions they replace. For example, the Center for Watershed Protection (1998) reported that nutrient export declined by 45 percent to 60 percent when two conventional subdivisions were redesigned as open space subdivisions. Other researchers have reported similar levels of pollutant reductions when conventional subdivisions were replaced by open space subdivisions (Maurer, 1996; DE DNREC, 1997; Dreher and Price, 1994; and SCCCL, 1995). In all cases, the reduction in pollutants was due primarily to the sharp drop in runoff caused by the lower impervious cover associated with open space subdivisions. In the redesign studies cited above, impervious cover declined by an average of 34 percent when open space designs were utilized. Along with reduced imperviousness, open space designs provide a host of other environmental benefits lacking in most conventional designs. These developments reduce potential pressure to encroach on resource and buffer areas because enough open space is usually reserved to accommodate resource protection areas. As less land is cleared during the construction process, the potential for soil erosion is also greatly diminished. Perhaps most importantly, open space design reserves 25 to 50 percent of the development site in green space that would not otherwise be protected, preserving a greater range of landscapes and habitat "islands" that can support considerable diversity in mammals, songbirds, and other wildlife. Cost Considerations Open space developments can be significantly less expensive to build than conventional subdivisions. Most of the cost savings are due to savings in road building and storm water management conveyance costs. In fact, the use of open space design techniques at a residential development in Davis, California, provided an estimated infrastructure construction costs savings of $800 per home (Liptan and Brown, 1996). Other examples demonstrate infrastructure costs savings ranging from 11 to 66 percent. Table 1 lists some of the projected construction cost savings generated by the use of open space redesign at several residential sites. While open space developments are frequently less expensive to build, developers find that these properties often command higher prices than homes in more conventional developments. Several regional studies estimate that residential properties in open space developments garner premiums that are 5 to 32 percent higher than conventional subdivisions and moreover, sell or lease at an increased rate. In Massachusetts, cluster developments were found to appreciate 12 percent faster than conventional subdivisions over a 20-year period (Lacey and Arendt, 1990). In Atlanta, Georgia, the presence of trees and natural areas measurably increased the residential property tax base (Anderson and Cordell, 1982).
117
Table 1. Projected construction cost savings for open space designs from redesign analyses
Residential Development Remlik Hall 1 Duck Crossing 2 Tharpe Knoll 3 Chapel Run 3 Pleasant Hill 3 Rapahannock 2 Buckingham Greene 3 Canton, Ohio 4 Construction Savings 52% 12% 56% 64% 43% 20% 63% 66% Notes Includes costs for engineering, road construction, and obtaining water and sewer permits Includes roads, storm water management, and reforestation Includes roads and storm water management Includes roads, storm water management, and reforestation Includes roads, storm water management, and reforestation Includes roads, storm water management, and reforestation Includes roads and storm water management Includes roads and storm water management
Sources: 1 Maurer, 1996; 2 CWP, 1998; 3 DE DNREC, 1997; 4 NAHB, 1986
In addition to being aesthetically pleasing, the reduced impervious cover and increased tree canopy associated with open space development reduce the size and cost of downstream storm water treatment facilities. The resulting cost savings can be considerable, as the cost to treat the quality and quantity of storm water from a single impervious acre can range from $2,000 to a staggering $50,000. The increased open space within a cluster development also provides a greater range of locations for more cost-effective storm water practices. Clearly, open space developments are valuable from an economic as well as an environmental standpoint.
118
References Anderson, L.M., and H.K. Cordell. Residential Property Values Improved by Landscaping With Trees. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry:162166. Arendt, R. 1996. Conservation Design for Subdivisions: A Practical Guide to Creating Open Space Networks. American Planning Association Planners Book Service, Chicago, IL. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DE DNREC) and The Environmental Management Center of the Brandywine Conservancy. 1997. Conservation Design for Stormwater Management. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Dover, DE, and the Environmental Management Center of the Brandywine Conservancy, Media, PA. Dreher, D.W., and T.H. Price. 1994. Reducing the Impacts of Urban Runoff: The Advantages of Alternative Site Design Approaches. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. Lacey, J., and R. Arendt. 1990. An Examination of Market Appreciation for Clustered Housing with Permanently Protected Open Space. Center for Rural Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. Liptan, T., and C.K. Brown. 1996. A Cost Comparison of Conventional and Water QualityBased Stormwater Designs. City of Portland, Oregon, Bureau of Environmental Services, Portland, OR. Maurer, G. 1996. A Better Way to Grow: For More Livable Communities and a Healthier Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Annapolis, MD. National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB). 1986. Cost Effective Site Planning. National Association of Homebuilders, Washington, DC. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, Washington, DC. South Carolina Coastal Conservation League (SCCCL). 1995. Getting a rein on runoff: How sprawl and traditional towns compare. Land Development Bulletin (Number 7). South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Charleston, SC. Information Resources Arendt, R. 1994. Rural by Design. American Planning Association Planners Book Service, Chicago, IL. Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Planning Commission. Guidelines for Open Space Management in the Land Preservation District. Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Planning Commission, Norristown, PA. Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC.
119
Urban Forestry Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Urban forestry is the study of trees and forests in and around towns and cities. Since trees absorb water, patches of forest and the trees that line streets can help provide some of the storm water management required in an urban setting. Urban forests also help break up a landscape of impervious cover, provide small but essential green spaces, and link walkways and trails. Successful urban forestry requires a conservation plan for individual trees as well as forest areas larger than 10,000 feet2 . A local forest or tree ordinance is one technique for achieving conservation, and when specific measures to protect and manage these areas are included, urban forests and trees can also help reduce storm water management needs in urban areas. Applicability From a stream preservation perspective, it is ideal to retain as much contiguous forest as possible. At the same time, this may not be an option in many urban areas. If forested areas are fragmented, it is ideal to retain the closest fragments together. In rapidly urbanizing areas, where clearing and grading are important, tree preservation areas should be clearly marked. Delineating lines along a critical root zone (CRZ) rather than a straight line is essential to preserving trees and can help reduce homeowner complaints about tree root interference into sewer or septic lines. Implementation The concept of the CRZ is essential to a proper management plan. The CRZ is the area around a tree required for the tree's survival. Determined by the tree size and species, as well as soil conditions, for isolated specimen trees, the CRZ can be estimated as 1-1/2 feet of radial distance for every inch of tree diameter. In larger areas of trees, the CRZ of forests can be estimated at 1 foot of radial distance for every inch of tree diameter, or a minimum of 8 feet. An urban forestry plan should include measures to establish, conserve, and/or reestablish preservation areas. A forest preservation ordinance is one way to set design standards outlining how a forest should be preserved and managed. The ordinance should outline some basic management techniques and should contain some essential elements. The following is a list of some typical elements of a forest conservation plan:
120
A map and narrative description of the forest and the surrounding area that includes topography, soils, streams, current forested and unforested areas, tree lines, critical habitats, and 100-year flood plain. An assessment that establishes preservation, reforestation, and afforestation areas. A forest conservation map that outlines forest retention areas, reforestation, afforestation, protective devices, limits of disturbance, and stockpile areas. A schedule of any additional construction in and around the forest area. A specific management plan, including tree and forest protection measures. A reforestation and afforestation plan.
An ordinance can also be developed that addresses tree preservation at the site level both during construction and after construction is complete. This type of ordinance can be implemented on a smaller scale and can be integrated with a proposed development's erosion and sediment control and storm water pollution prevention plans, which many communities require of new developments. American Forests, a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving and restoring forests in the United States, adopted an ecosystem restoration and maintenance agenda in 1999 to assist communities in planning and implementing tree and forest actions to restore and maintain healthy ecosystems and communities (American Forests, 2000). The agenda presents the organization's core values and policy goals as the basis for policy statements and as information to help community-based partners to prepare their own policy statements. Key policy goals include
Increasing public and private sector investment in ecosystem restoration and maintenance activities Promoting an ecosystem workforce through training and apprenticeship programs and new job opportunities Building support for innovative monitoring systems to ensure collaborative learning and adaptive management Encouraging a "civic science" approach to ecosystem research that respects local knowledge, seeks community participation, and provides accessible information for communities.
Limitations One of the biggest limitations to urban forestry is development pressure. Ordinances, conservation easements, and other techniques that are designed into a management program can help alleviate future development pressures. The size of the land may also limit the ability to protect individual trees. In these areas, a tree ordinance may be a more practical approach. Forests may also harbor undesirable wildlife elements including insects and other pests. If forests border houses, this may be a concern for residents.
121
Maintenance Considerations Maintenance considerations for urban forests may require fringe landscaping and trash pick-up. By using native vegetation and keeping the area as natural as possible, maintenance efforts can be minimized. Effectiveness There are numerous environmental and storm water benefits to urban forestry. These include the absorption of carbon dioxide by trees, reduction of temperature, and provision of habitat for urban wildlife. Urban forests can also act as natural storm water management areas by filtering particulate matter (pollutants, some nutrients, and sediment) and by absorption of water. Urban forestry also reduces noise levels, provides recreational benefits, and increases property values. Urban forests and trees are known to have numerous environmental benefits, including pollutant removal. Trees can absorb water, pollutant gases, airborne particulates, sediment, nitrogen, phosphorous, and pesticides. There are numerous economic benefits to urban forests, including proven increases in property values. In addition, by preserving trees and forests, clearing and grading as well as erosion and sediment costs are saved during construction. Maintenance costs are also minimized by keeping areas as natural as possible (Table 1). Table 1: Annual maintenance costs of different types of green spaces (Adapted from Brown et al., 1998)
Land Use Natural Open Space: Only minimum maintenance, trash/debris cleanup Lawns: Regular mowing Passive Recreation Approximate Annual Maintenance Costs $75/acre/year Source
NPS, 1995
$270 to $240/acre/year $200/acre/year
WHEC, 1992 NPS, 1995
122
References American Forests. 2000. Ecosystem Maintenance and Restoration Agenda. [www.americanforests.org/about_us/erma] . Accessed April 23, 2002. Brown, W.E., D.S. Caraco, R.A. Claytor, P.M. Hinkle, H.Y. Kwon, and T.R. Schueler. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. National Park Service, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program (NPS). 1995. Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails and Greenway Corridors. 4th ed. National Park Service, Western Office, San Francisco, CA. Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council (WHEC). 1992. The Economic Benefits of Wildlife Habitat Enhancement on Corporate Lands. Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council, Silver Spring, MD. Information Resources Coder, K.D. 1996. Identified Benefits of Community Trees and Forests, University of Georgia, Atlanta, GA. Fazio, J.R., ed. 1996. Placing a Value on Trees. Tree City USA Bulletin #28. The National Arbor Day Foundation, Nebraska City, NE. Greenfeld, J., L. Herson, N. Karouna, and G. Bernstein. 1991. Forest Conservation Manual: Guidance for the Conservation of Maryland Forests During Land Use Changes Under the 1991 Forest Conservation Act. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC.
123
Conservation Easements Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Conservation easements are voluntary agreements that allow an individual or group to set aside private property to limit the type or amount of development on their property. The conservation easement can cover all or a portion of a property and can either be permanent or last for a specified time. The easement is typically described in terms of the resource it is designed to protect (e.g., agricultural, forest, historic, or open space easements) and explains and mandates the restrictions on the uses of the particular property. Easements relieve property owners of the burden of managing these areas by shifting responsibility to a private organization (land trust) or government agency better equipped to handle maintenance and monitoring issues. Conservation easements are thought to make a contribution to protecting water quality, mostly in an indirect way. Land set aside in a permanent conservation easement is land that will have a prescribed set of uses or activities, generally restricting future development. The location of the land held in a conservation easement may also determine if it will provide water quality benefits. Property along stream corridors and shorelines can act as a vegetated buffer that may filter out pollutants from storm water runoff. The ability of a conservation easement to function as a stream buffer is related to the width of the easement and in what vegetated state the easement is maintained (see Buffer Zones fact sheet). Applicability Conservation easements are typically done to preserve agricultural lands and natural areas that are facing development pressure on the suburban-rural fringe. For rapidly urbanizing areas, conservation easements may be a way to preserve open space before land prices make the purchase of land containing important cultural and natural features impractical for governmental agencies with limited budgets. Conservation easements are not often used in ultra-urban areas, due to both the lack of available open space for purchase and the high cost of undeveloped land. In addition, private land trusts may limit the size and type of the land that they are willing to manage as conservation easements. Implementation Conservation easements are designed to assure that the land is preserved in its current state long after the original owners no longer control the property. By agreeing to give up or restrict the development rights for a parcel of land, a landowner can guarantee that their property will remain in a prescribed state for perpetuity while receiving tax benefits. Often, state agencies and private land trusts have specific qualifications for a property before they will enter into an easement agreement with land owners. Table 1 contains examples of criteria that are used by private land trusts to determine if a property is worth managing in a conservation easement.
124
Table 1: Typical criteria that land trusts use to determine feasibility of entering into conservation easement agreement
Criteria Natural resource value Details Does the property provide a critical habitat or important environmental aspects worth preserving? Does the property have unique traits worth preserving? Is the land large enough to have a natural resource or conservation value? Are funds available to meet all financial obligations? Is the conservation agreement a perpetual one? Does the property align with the land trust's mission and the organization's specific criteria?
Uniqueness of the property
Size of land Financial considerations Perpetuity Land trust's mission
Conservation easements have been used in all parts of the country, and many private groups, both nationally and locally, exist to preserve natural lands and manage conservation easements. States also use conservation easements and land purchase programs to protect significant environmental features and tracts of open space. Maryland is one state that has been nationally recognized for its programs that provide funding for state and local parks and conservation areas. The state is one of the first to use real estate transfer taxes to pay for land conservation programs. Several programs are funded through this transfer tax of one-half of one percent ($5 per thousand) of the purchase price of a home or land, or other state funding programs. Conservation programs include:
Program Open Space. This program is responsible for acquiring 150,000 acres of open space for state parks and natural resource areas and more than 25,000 acres of local park land. Every county must create a Land Preservation and Recreation Plan that outlines acquisition and development goals in order to receive a portion of the 50 percent that is granted to local governments (MDNR, no date). Maryland Environmental Trust. This trust is a state-funded agency that helps citizen groups form and operate local land trusts and offers the land trusts technical assistance, training, grants for land protection projects and administrative expenses, and participation in the Maryland Land Trust Alliance (MDNR, 2001a). Rural Legacy Program. This program is a Smart Growth Initiative that redirects existing state funds into a focused and dedicated land preservation program specifically designed to limit the adverse impacts of sprawl on agricultural lands and natural resources. The program purchases conservation easements for large contiguous tracts of agricultural, forest, and natural areas subject to development pressure, and purchases fee interests in open space where public access and use is needed (MDNR, 2001b).
125
Regardless of whether a conservation easement is held by a government agency or a private land trust, certain management responsibilities must be addressed by the easement holder. The following is a list of some of these management duties:

Ensure that the language of the easement is clear and enforceable. Develop maps, descriptions and baseline documentation of the property's characteristics. Monitor the use of the land on a regular basis. Provide information regarding the easement to new or prospective property owners. Establish a review and approval process for land activities stipulated in the easement. Enforce the restrictions of the easement through the legal system if necessary. Maintain property/easement-related records.
Limitations A number of limitations exist for using conservation easements as a storm water management tool. One is that there is no hard evidence that conservation easements actually do protect water quality. Another is that conservation easements are often not an option in more urbanized areas, where the size, quality, and cost of land can restrict the use of easements. Easements might also not be held in perpetuity, which means that land could still face development pressure in the future. Easements also may not provide for the filtering of pollutants from concentrated flows. More information on the filtering potential of stream buffers can be found in the Buffer Zones fact sheet. Maintenance Considerations The responsibility for maintenance of property in a conservation easement depends on the individual agreement with a land trust or agency. While many organizations assume the responsibility for managing and monitoring a property, some land trusts leave maintenance responsibilities to the landowner and act only to monitor that the terms of the easement are met. Effectiveness The pollutant removal efficiency of a conservation area will depend on how much is conserved, the techniques used to conserve it, and the specific nature of the easement. Conservation easements are assumed to contribute water quality benefits, but no national studies proving this have been released.
126
Cost Considerations Table 2 summarizes the costs of maintaining green spaces with different types of uses. Table 2: Annual maintenance costs of different types of green space uses (Adapted from CWP, 1998)
Land Use Natural open space Only minimum maintenance, trash/debris cleanup Lawns Regular mowing Passive recreation Approximate Annual Maintenance Costs $75/acre/year
$270 to $240/acre/year $200/acre/year
References Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Costs and Benefits of Stormwater BMPs: Final Report. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). 2001a. Maryland Environmental Trust. [http://www.dnr.state.md.us/met/]. Last updated January 4, 2001. Accessed May 22, 2001. Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). 2001b. Rural Legacy Program. [http://www.dnr.state.md.us/rurallegacy.html]. Last updated February 7, 2001. Accessed May 22, 2001. Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). No date. Program Open Space. [http://www.dnr.state.md.us/pos.html]. Accessed May 22, 2001. Information Resources Brown, W.E., D.S. Caraco, R.A. Claytor, P.M. Hinkle, H.Y. Kwon, and T.R. Schueler. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. Daniels, T., and D. Bowers. 1997. Holding Our Ground: Protecting America's Farms and Farmland. Washington DC: Island Press. Diehl, J., and T. Barnett, eds. 1988. The Conservation Easement Handbook. Land Trust Alliance and Trust For Public Land, Alexandria, VA. Schear, P., and T. W. Blaine. 1998. Ohio State University Fact Sheet: Conservation Easements. CDFS-1261-98, Land Use Series, Columbus, OH.
127
Infrastructure Planning Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description This practice requires changes in the regional growth planning process to contain sprawl development. Sprawl development is the expansion of low-density development into previously undeveloped land. The American Farmland Trust has estimated that the United States is losing about 50 acres an hour to suburban and exurban development (Longman, 1998). This sprawl development requires local governments to extend public services to new residential communities whose tax payments often do not cover the cost of providing those services. For example, in Prince William County, Virginia, officials have estimated that the costs of providing services to new residential homes exceeds what is brought in from taxes and other fees by $1,600 per home (Shear and Casey, 1996). Infrastructure planning makes wise decisions to locate public serviceswater, sewer, roads, schools, and emergency servicesin the suburban fringe and direct new growth into previously developed areas, discouraging low-density development. Generally, this is done by drawing a boundary or envelope around a community, beyond which major public infrastructure investments are discouraged or not subsidized. Meanwhile, economic and other incentives are provided within the boundary to encourage growth in existing neighborhoods. By encouraging housing growth in areas that are already provided with public serviceswater, sewer, roads, schools, and emergency servicescommunities not only save infrastructure development costs, but reduce the impacts of sprawl development on urban streams and water quality. Sprawl development negatively impacts water quality in several ways. The most significant impact comes from the increase in impervious cover that is associated with sprawl growth. In addition to rooftop impervious area from new development, extension of road systems and additions of paved surface from driveways create an overall increase in imperviousness. This increase in the impervious cover level of an area directly influences local streams and water quality by increasing the volume of storm water runoff. These elevated runoff levels impact urban streams in several ways, including enlarging stream channels, increasing sediment and pollutant loads, degrading stream habitat, and reducing aquatic diversity (Schueler, 1995). Sprawl has been reported to generate 43 percent more runoff that contains three times greater sediment loads than traditional development (SCCCL, 1995). Sprawl development influences water quality in other ways. This type of development typically occurs in areas not served by centralized sewer or water services. For example, over 80 percent of the land developed in the state of Maryland in the last decade has been outside the sewer and water "envelope." This requires new housing developments to use septic systems or another form of on-site wastewater disposal to treat household sewage. These on-site treatment systems can
128
represent a significant source of nutrients and bacteria that affect both surface waters and groundwater. More information about septic systems is contained in the fact sheets in both the Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Category and the Pollution Prevention Category. Applicability Sprawl development occurs in all regions of the country and has recently become the subject of many new programs to counteract its impacts. These programs seldom focus on the water quality implications of sprawl growth, instead concentrating on economic and transportation issues. Even so, methods such as infrastructure planning can reduce the impact of new development. Promoting the infill and redevelopment of existing urban areas in combination with other better site design techniques (see the other fact sheets in this category) will decrease impervious cover levels and lessen the amount of pollution discharged to urban streams. Siting and Design Conditions Various techniques have been used to manage urban growth while conserving resources. Although none of these techniques specifically concentrates on infrastructure planning, each of the techniques recognizes that directing growth to areas that have been previously developed or promoting higher density development in areas where services exist prevents sprawl development and helps communities to mitigate the water quality impacts of economic growth. Among the techniques that have been used are:
Urban Growth Boundaries. This planning tool establishes a dividing line that defines where a growth limit is to occur and where agricultural or rural land is to be preserved. Often, an urban services area is included in this boundary that creates a zone where public services will not be extended. Infill/Community Redevelopment. This practice encourages new development in unused or underutilized land in existing urban areas. Communities may offer tax breaks or other economic incentives to developers to promote the redevelopment of properties that are vacant or damaged.
The State of Maryland has been one of the states that has recently passed legislation to control growth. This "Smart Growth" legislation allows the State to direct its programs and funding to support locally-designated growth areas and protect rural and natural areas. The central component of this legislative package is the "Priority Funding Areas" legislation that limits most state infrastructure funding and economic development program monies to areas that local governments designate for growth and that meet guidelines for intended use, availability of plans for sewer and water systems, and permitted residential density (MOP, no date). The other bills in the legislative package also support development of existing areas and preservation of undeveloped land. A brownfields program encourages revitalization of existing neighborhoods and industrial areas and establishes a brownfield revitalization incentive program that provides grants and low-interest loans to fund brownfield redevelopment. A new "Live Near Your Work" pilot program supports this effort by providing cash contributions to workers buying homes in certain older neighborhoods. The "Rural Legacy Program" spurs preservation of undeveloped land by providing financial resources for the protection of farm and forest lands from development and for the conservation of these essential rural resources from development.
129
Limitations Intense development of existing areas can create a new set of challenges for storm water program managers. Storm water management solutions are often more difficult and complex in ultraurban areas than in suburban areas. The lack of space for structural storm water controls and the high cost of available land where structural controls could be installed are just two problems that program managers will face in managing storm water in intensely developed areas. Infrastructure planning is often done on a regional scale and requires a cooperative effort between all the communities within a given region in order to be successful. Phase II program managers will need to develop lines of communication with other state and local agencies and community leaders to ensure that infrastructure plans direct growth to those areas that will have the least impacts on watersheds and water quality. Effectiveness The effectiveness of infrastructure planning at protecting water quality is currently unknown. Although studies exist detailing the economic benefits of infrastructure planning, how this translates to storm water pollutant reductions is difficult if not impossible to calculate. However, a relationship does exist between impervious cover levels and urban stream characteristics, and one can assume that tools such as infrastructure planning that help control imperviousness have a positive impact on water quality. Compact development benefits program managers in numerous ways. One benefit is that compact development can preserve prime agricultural land and sensitive areas while reducing costly construction of new infrastructure (Pelley, 1997). Less new land developed translates into less need for new infrastructure and public services. Cost Considerations The economic benefits of reducing costly construction of new infrastructure and providing new services can be quite substantial. The following is a list of examples of the projected savings of limiting sprawl through managed growth (APA, no date): New Jersey's plan for managed growth will save the state $700 million in road costs, $562 million in sewer and water costs, $178 million in school costs, and up to $380 million in operating costs per year. Fifteen years of continued sprawl would cost Maryland $10 billion more than a more compact pattern of growth. A 1989 Florida study demonstrated that planned, concentrated growth would cost the taxpayer 50 percent to 75 percent less than continued sprawl. The Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul will spend $3.1 billion by the year 2020 for new water and sewer services to accommodate sprawl. Since 1980 the City of Fresno, California, has added $56 million in yearly revenues but has added $123 million in service costs. Other studies have found that planned development consumes about 45 percent less land and costs 25 percent less for roads, 15 percent less for utilities, 5 percent less for housing, and 2 percent less for other fiscal impacts (Burchell and Listokin, 1995, as cited in Pelley, 1997).
130
The control of sprawl development through legislation and "Smart Growth" programs is currently being implemented in a number of states and counties across the U.S. As these programs mature and begin to influence development patterns in urban areas, local governments should begin to see the positive impacts of condensed growth on the aquatic environment and water quality of local streams. References American Planning Association (APA). No date. Points of View: Paying for Sprawl. [www.planning.org/info/pointsofview/sprawl.htm]. Accessed May 23, 2001. Burchell, R.W., and Listokin. 1995. Land, Infrastructure, Housing Costs and Fiscal Impacts Associated with Growth: The Literature on the Impacts of Sprawl Versus Managed Growth. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA. Longman, P. 1998. Who Pays for Sprawl? U.S. News and World Report. [www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/980427/27spra.htm]. Last updated April 27, 1998. Accessed May 23, 2001. Maryland Office of Planning (MOP). No date. Priority Funding Areas. [www.op.state.md.us/smartgrowth/smartpfa.htm]. Accessed May 23, 2001. Pelley, J. 1997. The Economics of Urban Sprawl. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):461 467. Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Shear, M.D., and W. Casey. 1996, June 21. Just Saying "Yes" to Developers. The Washington Post, p. A1. South Carolina Coastal Conservation League (SCCCL). 1995. Land Development Bulletin. Fall 1995. South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Charleston, SC. Information Resources Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Harbinger Institute. 1998. Smart Talk for Growing Communities: Meeting the Challenges of Growth and Development. Prepared for the Congressional Exchange, Washington, DC, by the Harbinger Institute, Kapa'au, HI. International City/County Management Association (ICMA). 1998. Why Smart Growth: A Primer. International City/County Management Association, Washington, DC. Redman Johnston Associates, Ltd. 1997. Beyond Sprawl: Land Management Techniques to Protect the Chesapeake Bay. EPA 903-B-97-005. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program, by Redman Johnston Associates, Ltd., Easton, MD.
131
Narrower Residential Streets Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description This better site design practice promotes the use of narrower streets to reduce the amount of impervious cover created by new residential development and, in turn, reduce the storm water runoff and associated pollutant loads. Currently, many communities require wide residential streets that are 32, 36, and even 40 feet wide. These wide streets provide two parking lanes and two moving lanes, but provide much more parking than is actually necessary. In many residential settings, streets can be as narrow as 22 to 26 feet wide without sacrificing emergency access, on-street parking or vehicular and pedestrian safety. Even narrower access streets or shared driveways can be used when only a handful of homes need to be served. However, developers often have little flexibility to design narrower streets, as most communities require wide residential streets as a standard element of their local road and zoning standards. Revisions to current local road standards are often needed to promote more widespread use of narrower residential streets. Applicability Narrower streets can be used in residential development settings that generate 500 or fewer average daily trips (ADT), which is generally about 50 single family homes, and may sometimes also be feasible for streets that are projected to have 500 to 1,000 ADT. However, narrower streets are not feasible for arterials, collectors, and other street types that carry greater traffic volumes or are not expected to have a constant traffic volume over time. In most communities, existing local road standards will need to be modified to permit the use of narrower streets. Several communities have successfully implemented narrower streets, including Portland, OR; Bucks County, PA; Boulder, CO; and throughout New Jersey. In addition, there are numerous examples of communities where developers have successfully narrowed private streets within innovative subdivisions. Siting and Design Conditions Residential street design requires a careful balancing of many competing objectives: design, speed, traffic volume, emergency access, parking, and safety. Communities that want to change their road standards to permit narrower streets need to involve all the stakeholders who influence
132
street design in the revision process. Several excellent references on narrow street design are provided at the end of this fact sheet. Limitations A number of real and perceived barriers hinder wider acceptance of narrower streets at the local level. Advocates for narrower streets will need to respond to the concerns of many local agencies and the general public. Some of the more frequent concerns about narrower streets are listed below.
Inadequate On-Street Parking. Recent research and local experience have demonstrated that narrow streets can easily accommodate residential parking demand. A single family home typically requires 2 to 2.5 parking spaces. In most residential zones, this parking demand can be easily satisfied by one parking lane on the street and driveways. Car and Pedestrian Safety. Recent research indicates that narrow streets have lower accident rates than wide streets. Narrow streets tend to lower the speed of vehicles and act as traffic calming devices. Emergency Access. When designed properly, narrower streets can easily accommodate fire trucks, ambulances and other emergency vehicles. Large Vehicles. Field tests have shown that school buses, garbage trucks, moving vans, and other large vehicles can generally safely negotiate narrower streets, even when cars are parked on both sides of the street. In regions with high snowfall, streets may need to be slightly wider to accommodate snowplows and other equipment. Utility Corridors. It is often necessary to place utilities underneath the street rather than in the right of way.
In addition, local communities may lack the authority to change road standards when the review of public roads is retained by state agencies. In these cases, street narrowing can be accomplished only on private streets (i.e., maintained by residents rather than a local or state agency). Maintenance Considerations Narrower streets should slightly reduce road maintenance costs for local communities, since they present a smaller surface area to maintain and repair. Effectiveness Since streets constitute the largest share of impervious cover in residential developments (about 40 to 50 percent), a shift to narrower streets can result in a 5-to 20-percent overall reduction in impervious area for a typical residential subdivision (Schueler, 1995). As nearly all the pollutants deposited on street surfaces or trapped along curbs are delivered to the storm drain system during storm events, this reduced imperviousness translates directly into less storm water runoff and pollutant loadings from the development. From the standpoint of storm water quality, residential
133
streets rank as a major source area for many storm water pollutants, including sediment, bacteria, nutrients, hydrocarbons, and metals (Bannerman, 1994). Cost Considerations Narrower streets cost less to build than wider streets. Considering that the cost of paving a road averages $15 per square yard, shaving even a mere four feet from existing street widths can yield cost savings of more than $35,000 per mile of residential street. In addition, since narrower streets produce less impervious cover and runoff, additional savings can be realized in the reduced size and cost of downstream storm water management facilities. References Bannerman, R. 1994. Sources of Pollutants in Wisconsin Stormwater. Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources. Milwaukee, WI. Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Information Resources American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 1994. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. AASHTO Publications, Washington, DC. Bucks County Planning Commission. 1980. Performance Streets: A Concept and Model Standards for Residential Streets. Doylestown, PA. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Ellicott City, MD. Ewing, R. 1996. Best Development Practices: Doing the Right Thing and Making Money at the Same Time. American Planning Association, Planners Book Service. Chicago, IL. Institute of Traffic Engineers. 1997. Traditional Neighborhood Development Street Design Guidelines. Washington, DC. Portland Office of Transportation. 1994. Report on New Standards for Residential Streets in Portland, Oregon. City of Portland, Portland, OR. Urban Land Institute. Residential Streets. 2d ed. Washington, DC.
134
Eliminating Curbs and Gutters Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description This better site design practice involves promoting the use of grass swales as an alternative to curbs and gutters along residential streets. Curbs and gutters are designed to quickly convey runoff from the street to the storm drain and, ultimately, to the local receiving water. Consequently, curbs and gutters provide little or no removal of storm water pollutants. Indeed, curbs often act as a pollutant trap where deposited pollutants are stored until they are washed out in the next storm. Many communities require curb and gutters as a standard element of their road sections, and discourage the use of grass swales. Revisions to current local road and drainage regulations are needed to promote greater use of grass swales along residential streets, in the appropriate setting. The storm water management and pollutant removal benefits of grass swales are documented in detail in the Grassed Swales fact sheet. Applicability The use of engineered swales in place of curbs and gutters should be encouraged in low- and medium-density residential zones where soils, slope and housing density permit. However, eliminating curbs and gutters is generally not feasible for streets with high traffic volume or extensive on-street parking demand (i.e., commercial and industrial roads), nor is it a viable option in arid and semi-arid climates where grass cannot grow without irrigation. Moreover, the use of grass swales may not be permitted by current local or state street and drainage standards. Siting and Design Conditions A series of site factors must be evaluated to determine whether a grass swale is a viable replacement for curbs and gutters at a particular site. Contributing drainage area. Most individual swales cannot accept runoff from more than 5 acres of contributing drainage area, and typically serve 12 acres each. Slope. Swales generally require a minimum slope of 1 percent and a maximum slope of 5 percent.
135
Soils. The effectiveness of swales is greatest when the underlying soils are permeable (hydrologic soil groups A and B). The swale may need more engineering if soils are less permeable. Water Table. Swales should be avoided if the seasonally high water table is within 2 feet of the proposed bottom of the swale. Development Density. The use of swales is often difficult when development density becomes more intense than four dwelling units per acre, simply because the number of driveway culverts increases to the point where the swale essentially becomes a broken-pipe system. Typically, grass swales are designed with a capacity to handle the peak flow rate from a 10-year storm, and fall below erosive velocities for a 2-year storm. Limitations A number of real and perceived limitations hinder the use of grass swales as an alternative to curb and gutters:
Snowplow operation can be more difficult without a defined road edge. However, on the plus side, roadside swales increase snow storage at the road edge, and smaller snowplows may be adequate. The pavement edge along the swale can experience more cracking and structural failure, increasing maintenance costs. The potential for pavement failure at the road/grass interface can be alleviated by "hardening" the interface with grass pavers or geosynthetics placed beneath the grass. Other options include placing a low-rising concrete strip along the pavement edge. The shoulder and open channel will require more maintenance. In reality, maintenance requirements for grass channels are generally comparable to those of curb and gutter systems. The major requirements involve turf mowing, debris removal, and periodic inspections. Some grass swales can have standing water, which make them difficult to mow, and can cause nuisance problems such as odors, discoloration, and mosquitoes. In reality, grass channels are not designed to retain water for any appreciable period of time, and the potential for snakes and other vermin can be minimized by frequent mowing.
Other concerns involve fears about utility installation and worries that the grass edge along the pavement will be torn up by traffic and parking. While utilities will need to be installed below the paved road surface instead of the right of way, most other concerns can frequently be alleviated through the careful design and integration of the open channels along the residential street. (Consult the Grassed Swales fact sheet for details on design variations that can reduce these problems.) Maintenance Considerations The major maintenance requirement for grass swales involves mowing during the growing season, a task usually performed by homeowners. In addition, sediment deposits may need to be
136
removed from the bottom of the swale every ten years or so, and the swale may need to be tilled and re-seeded periodically. Occasionally, erosion of swale side slopes may need to be stabilized. The overall maintenance burden of grass swales is low in relation to other storm water practices, and is usually within the competence of the individual homeowner. The only major maintenance problem that might arise pertains to "problem" swales that have standing water and are too wet to mow. This particular problem is often alleviated by the installation of an underground storm drain system. Effectiveness Under the proper design conditions, grass swales can be effective in removing pollutants from urban storm water (Schueler, 1996). More information on the pollutant removal capability of various grass swale designs can be found in the Grassed Swales fact sheet. Cost Considerations Engineered swales are a much less expensive option for storm water conveyance than the curb and gutter systems they replace. Curbs and gutters and the associated underground storm sewers frequently cost as much as $36 per linear foot, which is roughly twice the cost of a grass swale (Schueler, 1995, and CWP, 1998). Consequently, when curbs and gutters can be eliminated, the cost savings can be considerable. References Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Washington, DC. Schueler, T.R. 1996. "Ditches or Biological Filters? Classifying the Pollutant Removal Performance of Open Channels." Watershed Protection Techniques 2(2) pp. 37983. Information Resources Claytor, R.A., and T.R. Schueler. 1997. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD.
137
Green Parking Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Green parking refers to several techniques applied together to reduce the contribution of parking lots to the total impervious cover in a lot. From a storm water perspective, application of green parking techniques in the right combination can dramatically reduce impervious cover and, consequently, the amount of storm water runoff. Green parking lot techniques include setting maximums for the number of parking lots created, minimizing the dimensions of parking lot spaces, utilizing alternative pavers in overflow parking areas, using bioretention areas to treat storm water, encouraging shared parking, and providing economic incentives for structured parking. Applicability All of the green parking techniques can be applied in new developments and some can be applied in redevelopment projects, depending on the extent and parameters of the project. In urban areas, application of some techniques, like encouraging shared parking and providing economic incentives for structured parking, can be very practical and necessary. Commercial areas can have excessively high parking ratios, and application of green parking techniques in various combinations can dramatically reduce the impervious cover of a site. Implementation Many parking lot designs result in far more spaces than actually required. This problem is exacerbated by a common practice of setting parking ratios to accommodate the highest hourly parking during the peak season. By determining average parking demand instead, a lower maximum number of parking spaces can be set to accommodate most of the demand. Table 1 provides examples of conventional parking requirements and compares them to average parking demand.
138
Table 1: Conventional minimum parking ratios (Source: ITE, 1987; Smith, 1984; Wells, 1994)
Parking Requirement Land Use Parking Ratio Single family homes Shopping center Convenience store Industrial Medical/ dental office 2 spaces per dwelling unit 5 spaces per 1000 ft 2 GFA 3.3 spaces per 1000 ft 2 GFA 1 space per 1000 ft 2 GFA 5.7 spaces per 1000 ft 2 GFA Typical Range 1.52.5 4.06.5 2.010.0 0.52.0 4.510.0 Actual Average Parking Demand
1.11 spaces per dwelling unit 3.97 per 1000 ft 2 GFA -1.48 per 1000 ft 2 GFA 4.11 per 1000 ft 2 GFA
GFA = Gross floor area of a building without storage or utility spaces.
Another green parking lot technique is to minimize the dimensions of the parking spaces. This can be accomplished by reducing both the length and width of the parking stall. Parking stall dimensions can be further reduced if compact spaces are provided. While the trend toward larger sport utility vehicles (SUVs) is often cited as a barrier to implementing stall minimization technique, stall width requirements in most local parking codes are much larger than the widest SUVs (CWP, 1998). Utilizing alternative pavers is also an effective green parking technique. They can replace conventional asphalt or concrete in both new developments and redevelopment projects. Alternative pavers can range from medium to relatively high effectiveness in meeting storm water quality goals. The different types of alternative pavers include gravel, cobbles, wood mulch, brick, grass pavers, turf blocks, natural stone, pervious concrete, and porous asphalt. In general, alternate pavers require proper installation and more maintenance than conventional asphalt or concrete. For more specific information on alternate pavers, refer to the Alternative Pavers fact sheet. Bioretention areas can effectively treat storm water leaving a parking lot. Storm water is directed into a shallow, landscaped area and temporarily detained. The runoff then filters down through the bed of the facility and is infiltrated into the subsurface or collected into an underdrain pipe for discharge into a stream or another storm water facility. Bioretention facilities can be attractively integrated into landscaped areas and can be maintained by commercial landscaping firms. For detailed design specifications of bioretention areas, refer to the Bioretention fact sheet. Shared parking in mixed-use areas and structured parking also are green parking techniques that can further reduce the conversion of land to impervious cover. A shared parking arrangement could include usage of the same parking lot by an office space that experiences peak parking demand during the weekday with a church that experiences parking demands during the weekends and evenings. Costs may dictate the usage of structured parking, but building upward or downward can help minimize surface parking.
139
Limitations Some limitations to applying green parking techniques include applicability, cost, and maintenance. For example, shared parking is only practical in mixed use areas, and structured parking may be limited by the cost of land versus construction. Alternative pavers are currently only recommended for overflow parking because of the considerable cost of maintenance. Bioretention areas increase construction costs. The pressure to provide excessive parking spaces can come from fear of complaints as well as requirements of bank loans. These factors can pressure developers to construct more parking than necessary and present possible barriers to providing the greenest parking lot possible. Effectiveness Applied together, green parking techniques can effectively reduce the amount of impervious cover, help to protect local streams, result in storm water management cost savings, and visually enhance a site. Proper design of bioretention areas can help meet storm water management and landscaping requirements while keeping maintenance costs at a minimum. Utilizing green parking lots can dramatically reduce the amount of impervious cover created. The level of the effectiveness depends on how much impervious cover is reduced as well as the combination of techniques utilized to provide the greenest parking lot. While the pollutant removal rates of bioretention areas have not been directly measured, their capability is considered comparable to a dry swale, which removes 91 percent of total suspended solids, 67 percent of total phosphorous, 92 percent of total nitrogen, and 8090 percent of metals (Claytor and Schueler, 1996). An excellent example of the multiple benefits of rethinking parking lot design is the Fort Bragg vehicle maintenance facility parking lot in North Carolina (NRDC, 1999). This redesign reduced impervious cover by 40 percent, increased parking by 20 percent, and saved $1.6 million (20 percent) on construction costs over the original, conventional design. Stormwater management features, such as detention basins located within grassed islands and an onsite drainage system that took advantage of existing sandy soils, were incorporated into the parking lot design as well. Cost Considerations Setting maximums for parking spaces, minimizing stall dimensions, and encouraging shared parking can result in considerable construction cost savings. At the same time, implementing green parking techniques can also reduce storm water management costs.
140
References Center for Watershed Protection. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Claytor, R.A., and T.R. Schueler. 1996. Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. Invisible Structures. No date. Aerial view of east parking lot just after installation. [http://www.invisiblestructures.com/Project%20Profiles/Grasspave/ Orange%20Bowl/Stadium.jpg]. Accessed May 22, 2001. ITE. 1987. Parking Generation, 2nd edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, Washington, DC. Smith, T. 1984. Flexible Parking Requirements. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 377. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. Wells, C. 1994. Impervious Surface Reduction Technical Study. Draft Report. City of Olympia Public Works Department. Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Information Resources Bergman, D. 1991. Off-Street Parking Requirements. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. Brown, W.E., D.S. Caraco, R.A. Claytor, P.M. Hinkle, H.Y. Kwon, and T.R. Schueler. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. Brown, W.E., and T.R. Schueler. 1996. The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region: Final Report. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Diniz, E. 1993. Hydrologic and Water Quality Comparisons of Runoff from Porous and Conventional Pavements. CRC Press, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. Morris, M. 1989. Parking StandardsProblems, Solutions, Examples. PAS Memo, December 1989 issue. American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago, IL. Smith, D.R. 1981. Life Cycle and Energy Comparison of Grass Pavement and Asphalt Based on Data and Experience from the Green Parking Lot. The Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, Washington, DC. Smith, D.R., and D.A. Sholtis. 1981. An Experimental Installation of Grass Pavement. The Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, Washington, DC.
141
Alternative Turnarounds Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Alternative turnarounds are designs for end-ofstreet vehicle turnaround that replace cul-de-sacs and reduce the amount of impervious cover created in residential neighborhoods. Cul-de-sacs are local access streets with a closed circular end that allows for vehicle turnarounds. Many of these cul-de-sacs can have a radius of more than 40 feet. From a storm water perspective, cul-desacs create a huge bulb of impervious cover, increasing the amount of storm water runoff. For this reason, reducing the size of cul-de-sacs through the use of alternative turnarounds or eliminating them altogether can reduce the amount of impervious cover created at a site. Numerous alternatives create less impervious cover than the traditional 40-foot cul-de-sac. These alternatives include reducing cul-de-sacs to a 30-foot radius and creating hammerheads, loop roads, and pervious islands in the cul-de-sac center. Applicability Alternative turnarounds can be applied in the design of residential, commercial, and mixed-use developments. Combined with alternative pavers, green parking, curb elimination, and other techniques, the total reduction to site impervious cover can be dramatic, reducing the amount of storm water runoff from the site. With proper designs, much of the remaining storm water can be treated on site. Implementation Sufficient turnaround area is a significant factor to consider in the design of cul-de-sacs. In particular, the types of vehicles entering into the cul-de-sac should be considered. Fire trucks, service vehicles, and school buses are often cited as examples for increased turning radii. However, research shows that some fire trucks are designed for smaller turning radii. In addition, many new larger service vehicles are designed using a tri-axle, and school buses usually do not enter individual cul-de-sacs. Implementation of alternative turnarounds will also have to address local regulations and marketing issues. Communities may have specific design criteria for cul-de-sacs and other alternative turnarounds. Also, although cul-de-sacs are often featured as highly marketable, actual research on market preference is not widely available.
142
Limitations Local regulations often dictate requirements for turnaround radii, and some of the alternatives may not be allowed by local codes. In addition, marketing perceptions may also dictate designs, particularly in residential areas. While changing local codes is no small effort, by initiating a local site planning roundtable, communities can change some of these regulations through a cluster ordinance or through a collective effort to review local codes to promote better site design. Maintenance Considerations If islands are constructed as part of a turnaround, these areas will need to be maintained. Kept as a natural area, the costs could be minimal. Bioretention areas will also require maintenance. The other options create less asphalt to repave, and maintenance will remain the same and cost less. Effectiveness In comparisons of several different turnaround options, hammerheads were found to create the least amount of impervious cover, as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Impervious cover created by each turnaround option (Schueler, 1995) Turnaround Option 40-foot radius 40-foot radius with island 30-foot radius 30-foot radius with island Hammerhead Impervious Area (square feet) 5,024 4,397 2,826 2,512 1,250
Costs Since alternative turnarounds reduce the amount of impervious cover created, construction savings can be an incentive (asphalt costs $0.50$1.00 per square foot in materials alone). Bioretention is estimated at $6.40 per cubic foot, and while it costs more than providing naturally vegetated areas, it can help reduce overall storm water management costs.
143
Information Resources American Society of Civil Engineers, National Association of Home Builders, and Urban Land Institute. 1990. Residential Streets (2nd edition). Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC. Brown, W.E., D.S. Caraco, R.A. Claytor, P.M. Hinkle, H.Y. Kwon, and T.R. Schueler. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. Bucks County Planning Commission. 1980. Performance Streets: A Concept and Model Standards for Residential Streets. Bucks County Planning Commission, Doylestown, PA. Institute of Transportation Engineers. 1993. Guidelines for Residential Subdivision Street Design. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC. Schueler, T. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC.
144
Alternative Pavers Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Alternative pavers are permeable surfaces that can replace asphalt and concrete and can be used for driveways, parking lots, and walkways. From a storm water perspective, this is important because alternative pavers can replace impervious surfaces, creating less storm water runoff. The two broad categories of alternative pavers are paving blocks and other surfaces, including gravel, cobbles, wood, mulch, brick, and natural stone. While porous pavement is an alternative paver, as an engineered storm water management practice it is discussed in detail in the Porous Pavement fact sheet. Paving Blocks Paving blocks are concrete or plastic grids with gaps between them. Paving blocks make the surface more rigid and gravel or grass planted inside the holes allows for infiltration. Depending on the use and soil types, a gravel layer can be added underneath to prevent settling and allow further infiltration. Other Alternative Surfaces Gravel, cobbles, wood, and mulch also allow varying degrees of infiltration. Brick and natural stone arranged in a loose configuration allow for some infiltration through the gaps. Gravel and cobbles can be used as driveway material, and wood and mulch can be used to provide walking trails. Applicability Alternative pavers can replace conventional asphalt or concrete in parking lots, driveways, and walkways. At the same time, traffic volume and type can limit application. For this reason, alternative pavers for parking are recommended only for overflow areas. In residential areas, alternative surfaces can be used for driveways and walkways, but are not ideal for areas that require handicap accessibility. Siting and Design Criteria Accessibility, climate, soil type, traffic volume, and long-term performance should be considered, along with costs and storm water quality controls, when choosing paving materials. Use of alternative pavers in cold climates will require special consideration, as snow shovels are not practical for many of these surfaces. Sand is particularly troublesome if used with paving blocks, as the sand that ends up between the blocks cannot effectively wash away or be removed.
145
In addition, salt used to de-ice can also infiltrate directly into the soil and cause potential ground water pollution. Soil types will affect the infiltration rates and should be considered when using alternative pavers. Clayey soils (D soils) will limit the infiltration on a site. If ground water pollution is a concern, use of alternative pavers with porous soils should be carefully considered. The durability and maintenance cost of alternative pavers also limits use to low-traffic-volume areas. At the same time, alternative pavers can abate storm water management costs. Used in combination with other better-site-design techniques, the cumulative effect on storm water can be dramatic. Limitations Alternative pavers are not recommended for high-traffic volumes for durability reasons. Access for wheelchairs is limited with alternative pavers. In addition, snow removal is difficult since plows cannot be used, sand can cause the system to clog, and salt can be a potential pollutant. Maintenance Considerations Alternative pavers require periodic maintenance, and costs increase when the permeable surface must be restored. Effectiveness The most obvious benefit of utilizing alternative pavers includes reduction or elimination of other storm water management techniques. Applied in combination with other techniques such as bioretention and green parking, pollutant removal and storm water management can be further improved. (see Bioretention and Green Parking fact sheets for more information.) Alternative pavers all provide better water quality improvement than conventional asphalt or concrete, and the range of improvement depends on the type of paver used. Table 1 provides a list of pavers and the range of water quality improvement achievable by different types of alternative pavers. Table 1. Water quality improvement of various pavers (Source: BASMAA, 1997)
Material Conventional Asphalt/ Concrete Brick (in a loose configuration) Natural Stone Gravel Wood Mulch Cobbles Water Quality Effectiveness Low Medium Medium High High Medium
146
Cost Considerations The range of installation and maintenance costs of various pavers is provided in Table 2. Depending on the material used, installation costs can be higher or lower for alternative pavers than for conventional asphalt or concrete, but maintenance costs are almost always higher. Table 2. Installation and maintenance costs for various pavers (Source: BASMAA, 1997)
Material Conventional Asphalt/Concrete Brick (in a loose configuration) Natural Stone Gravel Wood Mulch Cobbles Installation Cost Medium High High Low Low Low Maintenance Cost Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
Reference Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). January 1997. Start at the Source: Residential Site Planning and Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection. BASMAA, San Francisco, CA. Information Sources Brown, W.E., D.S. Caraco, R.A. Claytor, P.M. Hinkle, H.Y. Kwon, and T.R. Schueler. 1998. Better Site Design: A Handbook for Changing Development Rules in Your Community. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. Schueler, T.R. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Schueler, T.R. 1983. Urban Runoff in the Washington Metropolitan Area. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Smith, D.R. 1981. Life Cycle and Energy Comparison of Grass Pavement and Asphalt Based on Data and Experience from the Green Parking Lot. The Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. Smith, D.R., and D.A. Sholtis. 1981. An Experimental Installation of Grass Pavement. The Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service.
147
BMP Inspection and Maintenance Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description To maintain the effectiveness of postconstruction storm water control best management practices (BMPs), regular inspection of control measures is essential. Generally, inspection and maintenance of BMPs can be categorized into two groups expected routine maintenance and nonroutine (repair) maintenance. Routine maintenance refers to checks performed on a regular basis to keep the BMP in good working order and aesthetically pleasing. In addition, routine inspection and maintenance is an efficient way to prevent potential nuisance situations (odors, mosquitoes, weeds, etc.), reduce the need for repair maintenance, and reduce the chance of polluting storm water runoff by finding and correcting problems before the next rain. In addition to maintaining the effectiveness of storm water BMPs and reducing the incidence of pests, proper inspection and maintenance is essential to avoid the health and safety threats inherent in BMP neglect (Skupien, 1995). The failure of structural storm water BMPs can lead to downstream flooding, causing property damage, injury, and even death. Applicability Under the proposed Storm Water Phase II rule, owners and operators of small municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) facilities would be responsible for implementing BMP inspection and maintenance programs and having penalties in place to deter infractions (USEPA, 1999). All storm water BMPs should be inspected for continued effectiveness and structural integrity on a regular basis. Generally, all BMPs should be checked after each storm event in addition to these regularly scheduled inspections. Scheduled inspections will vary among BMPs. Structural BMPs such as storm drain drop inlet protection may require more frequent inspection to ensure proper operation. During each inspection, the inspector should document whether the BMP is performing correctly, any damage to the BMP since the last inspection, and what should be done to repair the BMP if damage has occurred. Siting and Design Considerations In the case of vegetative or other infiltration BMPs, inspection of storm water management practices following a storm event should occur after the expected drawdown period for a given
148
BMP. This allows the inspector to see whether detention and infiltration devices are draining correctly. Inspection checklists should be developed for use by BMP inspectors. Checklists might include each BMP's minimum performance expectations, design criteria, structural specifications, date of implementation, and expected life span. In addition, the maintenance requirements for each BMP should be listed on the inspection checklist. This will aid the inspector in determining whether a BMP's maintenance schedule is adequate or needs revision. Also, a checklist will help the inspector determine renovation or repair needs. Limitations Routine maintenance materials such as shovels, lawn mowers, and fertilizer may be easily obtained on short notice with little effort. Unfortunately, not all materials that may be needed for emergency structural repairs are obtained with such ease. Thought should be given to stockpiling essential materials in case immediate repairs must be made to safeguard against property loss and to protect human health. Maintenance Considerations It is important that routine maintenance and nonroutine repair of storm water BMPs be done according to schedule or as soon as a problem is discovered. Because many BMPs are rendered ineffective for runoff control if not installed and maintained properly, it is essential that maintenance schedules are maintained and repairs are made promptly. In fact, some cases of BMP neglect can have detrimental effects on the landscape and increase the potential for erosion. However, "routine" maintenance, such as mowing grasses, should be flexible enough to accommodate the fluctuations in need based on relative weather conditions. For example, more harm than good may be caused by mowing during an extremely dry period or immediately following a storm event. Effectiveness The effectiveness of BMP inspection will be a function of the familiarity of the inspector with each particular BMP's location, design specifications, maintenance procedures, and performance expectations. Documentation should be kept regarding the dates of inspection, findings, and maintenance and repairs that result from the findings of an inspector. Such records are helpful in maintaining an efficient inspection and maintenance schedule and providing evidence of ongoing inspection and maintenance. Because maintenance work for storm water BMPs is usually not technically complicated (mowing, removal of sediment, etc.), workers can be drawn from a large labor pool. As structural BMPs increase in their sophistication, however, more specialized maintenance training might be needed to sustain BMP effectiveness. Cost Considerations Mowing of vegetated and grassed areas may be the costliest routine maintenance consideration (WEF, 1998). Management practices using relatively weak materials (such as filter fabric and wooden posts) may mean more frequent replacement and therefore increased costs. The use of more sturdy materials (such as metal posts) where applicable may increase the life of certain BMPs and reduce replacement cost. However, the disposal requirements of all materials should
149
be investigated before BMP implementation to ensure proper handling after the BMP has become ineffective or when it needs to be disposed of after the site has reached final stabilization. Table 1 shows maintenance costs, specific activities, and schedules for several postconstruction runoff BMPs. Table 1. Maintenance costs, activities, and schedules for urban management practices (Adapted from CWP, 1998)
Annual Maintenance Maintenance Cost (% of Cost for a Management Construction "Typical" Practice Cost) Application
Type of Practice
Maintenance Activity
Schedule
Detention/ Retention Practices
Ponds/ wetlands
3%6%
$3,000 to $6,000
Cleaning and removal of debris after major storm events; (>f rainfall) Harvest vegetation when a 50% Annual or as reduction in the original open water needed surface area occurs Repair of embankment and side slopes Repair of control structure Removal of accumulated sediment from forebays or sediment storage 5-year cycle areas when 60% of the original volume has been lost Removal of accumulated sediment from main cells of pond once 50% of the original volume has been lost 20-year cycle
Dry Ponds Wetlands
~1% ~2%
$1,200 $3,800
See above See above Cleaning and removal of debris after major storm events; (>2" rainfall) Mowing and maintenance of upland Annual or as vegetated areas needed Sediment cleanout Repair or replacing of stone aggregate Maintenance of inlets and outlets Removal of accumulated sediment from forebays or sediment storage 4-year cycle areas when 50% of the original volume has been lost Cleaning and removal of debris after major storm events; (>2" rainfall) Mowing and maintenance of upland vegetated areas Sediment cleanout Removal of accumulated sediment from forebays or sediment storage areas when 50% of the original volume has been lost
Infiltration Trench
5%20%
$2,300 to $9,000
Infiltration Facilities Infiltration Basin 1%10% $150$1,500
Annual or as needed
3- to 5-year cycle
150
Annual Maintenance Maintenance Cost (% of Cost for a Management Construction "Typical" Practice Cost) Application
Type of Practice
Maintenance Activity Removal of trash and debris from control openings Repair of leaks from the sedimentation chamber or deterioration of structural components Removal of the top few inches of sand, and cultivation of the surface, when filter bed is clogged Clean out of accumulated sediment from filter bed chamber once depth exceeds approximately inch, or when the filter layer will no longer draw down within 24 hours Clean out of accumulated sediment from sedimentation chamber once depth exceeds 12 inches
Schedule
Annual or as needed
Sand Filters 11%13% $2,200
3- to 5-year cycle
5%7% $200 to $2,000
Filtration Practices
Dry Swales, Grassed Channels, Biofilters
Mowing and litter/debris removal Stabilization of eroded side slopes and bottom Annual or Nurtient and pesticide use management as needed Dethatching swale bottom and removal of thatching Discing or aeration of swale bottom Scraping swale bottom and removal of sediment to restore original cross section and infiltration rate 5-year cycle Seeding or sodding to restore ground cover (use proper erosion and sediment control) Mowing and litter/debris removal Nutrient and pesticide use management Annual or as needed Aeration of soil on the filter strip Repair of eroded or sparse grass areas Repair of erosion areas Mulching of void areas Removal and replacement of all dead and diseased vegetation Watering of plant material Removal of mulch and application of a new layer
Filter Strips
$320/acre (maintained)
$1,000
Bioretention
5%7%
$3,000 to $4,000
Biannual or as needed
Annual
151
References Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1998. Costs and Benefits of Storm Water BMP's: Final Report 9/14/98. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Skupien, J. 1995. Postconstruction Responsibilities for Effective Performance of Best Management Practices. In National Conference on Urban Runoff Management: Enhancing Urban Watershed Management at the Local, County, and State Levels. Seminar Publication. EPA 625-R-95-003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1999. Fact Sheet 2.6: Storm Water Phase II Proposed Rule, Construction Site Runoff Control Minimum Control Measure. EPA 833-F-99-008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Water Environment Federation. 1998. Urban Runoff Quality Management. WEF Manual of Practice No. 23, ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87. Water Environment Federation and American Society of Civil Engineers, Alexandria, VA.
152
Ordinances for Postconstruction Runoff Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description The management of storm water runoff from sites after the construction phase is vital to controlling the impacts of development on urban water quality. The increase in impervious surfaces such as rooftops, roads, parking lots, and sidewalks due to land development can have a detrimental effect on aquatic systems. Heightened levels of impervious cover have been associated with stream warming and loss of aquatic biodiversity in urban areas. Runoff from impervious areas can also contain a variety of pollutants that are detrimental to water quality, including sediment, nutrients, road salts, heavy metals, pathogenic bacteria, and petroleum hydrocarbons. An ordinance promotes the public welfare by guiding, regulating, and controlling the design, construction, use, and maintenance of any development or other activity that disturbs or breaks the topsoil or results in the movement of earth on land. The goal of a storm water management ordinance for postconstruction runoff is to limit surface runoff volumes and reduce water runoff pollutant loadings. Applicability These ordinances are applicable to all major subdivisions in a municipality. The size of the development to which postconstruction storm water management runoff control applies varies, but many communities opt for a size limit of 5,000 square feet or more. Applicability should be addressed in more detail in the ordinance itself. It is important to note that all plans must be reviewed by local environmental protection officials to ensure that established water quality standards will be maintained during and after development of the site and that postconstruction runoff levels are consistent with any local and regional watershed plans. Several resources are available to assist in developing an ordinance. EPA's (2000) postconstruction model ordinance web site (http://www.epa.gov/nps/ordinance/postcons.htm) provides a model ordinance and examples of programs currently being implemented. In addition, the Stormwater Managers Resource Center (http://www.stormwatercenter.net), which was created by the Center for Watershed Protection (no date) and sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, provides information to storm water management program managers in Phase II communities to assist in meeting the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase II regulations. Siting and Design Considerations The purpose of the postconstruction ordinance is to establish storm water management requirements and controls to protect and safeguard the general health, safety, and welfare of the public residing in watersheds within a jurisdiction. The following paragraphs provide the general language and concepts that can be included in your ordinance.
153
General Provisions This section should identify the purpose, objectives, and applicability of the ordinance. The size of the development to which postconstruction runoff controls apply varies, but many communities opt for a size limit of 5,000 square feet or more. This section can also contain a discussion of the development of a storm water design manual. This manual can include a list of acceptable storm water treatment practices and may include the specific design criteria for each storm water practice. In addition, local communities should select the minimum water quality performance standards they will require for storm water treatment practices, and place them in the design manual. Definitions It is important to define the terms that will be used throughout the ordinance to assist the reader and prevent misinterpretation. Permit Procedures and Requirements This section should identify the permit required; the application requirements, procedures, and fees; and the permit duration. The intent of the permit should be to ensure that no activities that disturb the land are issued permits prior to review and approval. Communities may elect to issue a storm water management permit separate from any other land development permits required, or, as in this ordinance, to tie the issuing of construction permits to the approval of a final storm water management plan. Waivers to Storm Water Management Requirements This section should discuss the process for requesting a waiver and to whom this waiver would be applicable. Alternatives such as fees or other provisions for those requesting a waiver should be addressed as well. General Performance Criteria for Storm Water Management The performance criteria that must be met should be discussed in this section. The performance criteria can include the following:
All sites must establish storm water practices to control the peak flow rates of storm water discharge associated with specified design storms and reduce the generation of storm water. New development may not discharge untreated storm water directly into a jurisdictional wetland or local waterbody without adequate treatment. Annual groundwater recharge rates must be maintained by promoting infiltration through the use of structural and non-structural methods. For new development, structural sewage treatment plants must be designed to remove a certain percentage of the average annual postdevelopment total suspended solids (TSS) load.
154
Basic Storm Water Management Design Criteria Rather than place specific storm water design criteria into an ordinance, it is often preferable to fully detail these requirements in a storm water design manual. This approach allows specific design information to be changed over time as new information or techniques become available without requiring the formal process needed to change ordinance language. The ordinance can then require those submitting any development application to consult the current storm water design manual for the exact design criteria for the storm water management practices appropriate for their site. Topics in the manual can include minimum control requirements, site design feasibility, conveyance issues, pretreatment requirements, and maintenance agreements. Requirements for Storm Water Management Plan Approval The requirements for a storm water management plan to be approved should be addressed in this section. This can be accomplished by including a submittal checklist in the storm water design manual. A checklist is particularly beneficial because changes in submittal requirements can be made as needed without needing to revisit and later revise the original ordinance. Construction Inspection This section should include information on the notice of construction commencement, as-built plans, and landscaping and stabilization requirements. Maintenance and Repair of Storm Water Facilities Maintenance agreements, failure to maintain practices, maintenance covenants, right-of-entry for inspection, and records of installation and maintenance activities should be addressed in this section. Enforcement and Penalties This section should include information regarding violations, notices of violation, stop work orders, and civil and criminal penalties. Limitations Site inspections are required for a postconstruction storm water ordinance to be effective. In addition, an adequate staff must be available to review permit applications and proposed plans. Maintenance Considerations The operation and maintenance language in a storm water ordinance can ensure that designs facilitate easy maintenance and that regular maintenance activities are completed. In the "Maintenance and Repair of Storm Water Facilities" section of your ordinance, it is important to include language regarding a maintenance agreement, failure to maintain practices, maintenance covenants, right-of-entry for inspection, and records of installation and maintenance activities. Effectiveness If a storm water management ordinance for existing development is properly implemented and enforced, the community can effectively achieve the following:
155
Minimize increases in storm water runoff from any development to reduce flooding, siltation, and streambank erosion and to maintain the integrity of stream channels. Minimize increases in nonpoint source pollution caused by storm water runoff from development that would otherwise degrade local water quality. Minimize the total annual volume of surface water runoff that flows from any specific site during and following development so as not to exceed the predevelopment hydrologic regime to the maximum extent practicable. Reduce storm water runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, and nonpoint source pollution, wherever possible, through storm water management controls and ensure that these management controls are properly maintained and pose no threat to public safety.
Cost Considerations Municipalities that implement and enforce postconstruction ordinances must budget for the drafting and enforcement of the regulation. References Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). No date. Stormwater Manager's Resource Center. [www.stormwatercenter.net]. Accessed May 24, 2001. USEPA. 2000. Model Ordinances to Protect Local Resources: Postconstruction Controls. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.[www.epa.gov/nps/ordinance/postcons.htm]. Accessed October 3, 2000. Last updated July 12, 2000.
156
Zoning Postconstruction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment Description Zoning is a classification scheme for land use planning. Zoning can serve numerous functions and can help mitigate storm water runoff problems by facilitating better site designs. By correctly applying the right zoning technique, development can be targeted into specific areas, limiting development in other areas and providing protection for the most important land conservation areas. There are numerous types of zoning techniques for better site design, including watershed-based zoning, overlay zoning, floating zones, incentive zoning, performance zoning, urban growth boundaries, large lot zoning, infill/community redevelopment, transfer of development rights, and limiting infrastructure extensions. Table 1 describes each of these zoning techniques and its utility. Applicability The type of zoning to apply will depend on management goals. If water or land quality is a primary goal of the zoning technique, then watershed-based zoning can provide a comprehensive approach. At the same time, incentive zoning, performance zoning, and transfer of development rights can be used as protection measures for specific conservation areas. Implementation Watershed-Based Zoning: Watershed-based zoning can employ a mixture of land use and zoning options to achieve desired results. A watershed-based zoning approach should include the following nine steps:

Conduct a comprehensive stream inventory. Measure current levels of impervious cover. Verify impervious cover/stream quality relationships. Project future levels of impervious cover.
157
Table 1. Zoning techniques (Source: Caraco et al., 1998)

Land Use Planning Technique Watershed-Based Zoning Description Utility as a Watershed Protection Technique
Watershed and subwatershed Protects receiving water quality on the boundaries are the foundation for subwatershed scale by relocating development out land use planning. of particular subwatersheds. Superimposes additional regulations or specific development criteria within specific mapped districts. Specific overlay zoning that limits total impervious cover within mapped districts. Applies a special zoning district without identifying the exact location until land owner specifically requests the zone. Requires development restrictions or allows alternative site design techniques in specific areas.
Overlay Zoning
Impervious Overlay Zoning
Protects receiving water quality at both the subwatershed and site level. Obtains proffers or other watershed protective measures that accompany specific land uses within the district.
Floating Zones
Incentive Zoning
Applies bonuses or incentives to Encourages development within a particular encourage creation of amenities subwatershed or to obtain open space in exchange or environmental protection. for a density bonus at the site level. Specifies a performance requirement that accompanies a zoning district. Requires additional levels of performance within a subwatershed or at the site level.
Performance Zoning
Urban Growth Boundaries
Establishes a dividing line that Used in conjunction with natural watershed or defines where a growth limit is to subwatershed boundaries to protect specific water occur and where agricultural or bodies. rural land is to be preserved. Zones land at very low densities. Decreases impervious cover at the site or subwatershed level, but may have an adverse impact on regional or watershed imperviousness. Encourages new development and redevelopment within existing developed areas. Used in conjunction with watershed-based zoning or other zoning tools to restrict development in sensitive areas and foster development in areas with existing infrastructure.
Large Lot Zoning
Infill/Community Redevelopment
Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs)
Transfers potential development Used in conjunction with watershed-based zoning from a designated "sending area" to restrict development in sensitive areas and to a designated "receiving area." encourage development in areas capable of accommodating increased densities. A conscious decision is made to limit or deny extending infrastructure (such as public sewer, water, or roads) to designated areas to avoid increased development in these areas. A temporary method to control growth in a targeted watershed or subwatershed. Usually delays development until the economic or political climate changes.
Limiting Infrastructure Extensions
158
Classify subwatersheds-based on stream management "templates" and current impervious cover. Modify master plans/zoning to correspond to subwatershed impervious cover targets and other management strategies identified in Subwatershed Management Templates. Incorporate management priorities from larger watershed management units such as river basins or larger watersheds (see discussion later in this fact sheet). Adopt specific watershed protection strategies for each subwatershed. Conduct long-term monitoring over a prescribed cycle to assess watershed status.
Overlay Zoning: The advantage of overlay zones is that specific criteria can be applied to isolated areas without the threat of being considered spot zoning. Overlay districts are not necessarily restricted by the limits of the underlying base zoning. An overlay zone may take up only a part of an underlying zone or may even encompass several underlying zones. Often the utilization of an overlay zone is optional. Impervious Overlay Zoning: This type of overlay zoning limits future impervious areas. The environmental impacts of future impervious cover are estimated and a limit is set on the maximum imperviousness within a given planning area. Site development proposals are then reviewed in the context of an imperviousness cap. Subdivision layout options must then conform to the total impervious limit of the planning area. Floating Zones: Normally, a parcel of land will not qualify for the application of the floating zone district unless it is large enough to allow the buffering of its development from the surrounding area. It is important to note that the existence of a floating zone district does not automatically grant rezoning to each landowner whose property complies with the prescribed conditions. Each property owner must have his or her application for rezoning reviewed and approved by the local governing body to determine if it is consistent with a comprehensive development plan. Incentive Zoning: This planning technique relies on bonuses or incentives for developers to encourage the creation of certain amenities or land use designs. A developer is granted the right to build more intensively on a property or given some other bonus in exchange for an amenity or a design that the community considers beneficial. Developers stand to gain an increase in profits from the more intensive use of the property, while a community might use incentive zoning to promote more compact development, encourage open space designs, or generate other desired amenities such as trails, parks, or totlots. Performance Zoning: Performance zoning is a flexible approach that has been employed in a variety of fashions in several different communities across the country. Some performance factors include traffic or noise generation limits, lighting requirements, storm water runoff quality and quantity criteria, protection of wildlife and vegetation, and even architectural style criteria. Urban Growth Boundaries: Urban growth boundaries are sometimes called development service districts and include areas where public services are already provided (e.g., sewer, water, roads, police, fire, and schools). The delineation of the boundary is very important. Several important issues to consider in establishing an urban growth boundary include the following:
159
Public facilities and services must be nearby and/or can be provided at reasonable cost and in a specific time frame. A sufficient amount of land to meet projected growth over the planning period must be provided. A mix of land uses must be provided. The potential impact of growth within the boundary on existing natural resources should be analyzed. The criteria for defining the boundary needs to be fair and should consider natural features (versus man-made features) wherever possible. The use of watershed boundaries as the urban growth boundary is one such natural feature.
Large Lot Zoning: Although large lot zoning does tend to reduce the impervious cover and therefore the amount of storm water runoff at a particular location, it also spreads development over vast areas. The road networks required to connect these large lots can actually increase the total amount of imperviousness created for each dwelling unit (Schueler, 1995). In addition, large lot zoning contributes to regional sprawl. Sprawl-like development increases the expense of providing community services such as fire protection, water and sewer systems, and school transportation. Infill/Community Redevelopment: Infill and redevelopment can be employed in either large or small projects. Some of the existing impediments to more widespread implementation of these types of projects include the existing condition of a potential redevelopment site in terms of environmental constraints, the restrictive nature of many land use regulations, and pressing social and economic issues. Local governments may need to modify local zoning or building codes to make infill and redevelopment a more inviting attraction to developers. In addition, citizen involvement has been demonstrated to be a vital catalyst for leveraging funding or revising codes. Furthermore, lending institutions must be progressive in their view of funding infill and redevelopment projects. One possibility is to partner with local governments or community organizations. Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs): The principle of TDRs is based on the premise that ownership of land entails certain property rights. While some of these rights may be restricted by zoning, building codes, and environmental constraints, landowners are "entitled" to use their land for the "highest and best use." TDRs are based on a market-driven incentive program where it is possible to sell development potential (zoned density) without buying or selling land. Landowners in preservation areas are compensated for lost development potential , while conventional down-zoning deprives landowners of this potential value. Limitations Some zoning techniques may be limited by economic and political acceptance and should be evaluated on these criteria as well as storm water management goals. Maintenance Considerations Some maintenance issues to consider for the long term are the following:
What are the most economically and politically acceptable zoning technique(s) that can be used to shift or reduce impervious cover among the subwatersheds?
160
How accurate are the estimates of the amount and location of future impervious cover in the watershed? Are better projections needed? Will future increases in impervious cover create unacceptable changes to a watershed and/or subwatershed? Which subwatersheds appear capable of absorbing future growth in impervious cover?
Effectiveness There are numerous case studies of performance-based zoning used in different communities. Some of these examples are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Case examples of performance-based zoning (Source: Porter et al., 1991)
Location Performance Zoning Provisions Planned Unit Development (PUD) options are applied to all parcels in city. Developers may choose conventional zoning or the optional PUD. PUD proposals must meet a point value for an absolute criterion and a relative criterion. The Land Use Plan defines uses and densities. Four overlay "policy"districts (environmental conservation, management, redevelopment, and downtown) define general standards and prohibited uses. Each land use within a policy district falls into a one of three classes (allowable, allowable with special mitigating measures, or prohibited). Notes Applications are discussed at a conceptual stage where suggestions are made to improve scores. The local planning board has quite a bit of latitude to use discretion to require special conditions. A variety of uses are permitted within the 4 policy districts when applying the special mitigating measures. The city also has a fivetiered system of review and approval that facilitates fast reviews for many common applications and a more involved process for projects that require mitigation.
Fort Collins, Colorado
Largo, Florida
The land development ordinance allows agricultural and single family uses by right. All other uses must be evaluated by a three-step process. At the first step, the agricultural and Hardin County, development potential is evaluated using a point Kentucky system. If the site scores a minimum threshold value, than it moves onto the second step, a compatibility assessment. The final step involves typical review of subdivis ion standards and requirements. The township's ordinance provides five zoning districts: two traditional districts for rural, lowdensity residential; and three applied to existing settlements/expected development corridor. These three districts allow a range of uses either "by right" or with special permits for certain uses.
The program places a special emphasis on preserving agricultural uses. The process involves a unique feature that calls on citizen consensus for each step. This decision making process might be considered highly discretionary, but with a widespread interest by most Hardin County citizens in seeing development proceed, there have been few complaints.
Bath Charter Township, Michigan
The ordinance is a compromise between complex, inflexible zoning and no zoning at all. The process allows for extensive review and individual decisions for individual controversial cases.
161
Location Performance Zoning Provisions Notes Development of cluster and performance standards are "by rights," and as such, do not require public hearings. The sensitivity of natural areas makes the zoning more flexible in unrestricted areas but less flexible than most conventional zoning in placing restrictions for protecting natural areas. Termed "impact zoning," the ordinance aimed to create incentives for developers to build more diverse and environmentally sensitive housing. Developers are choosing standard subdivisions over the optional techniques to avoid lengthy and complex reviews.
Buckingham Township, Pennsylvania
The ordinance contains typical zoning districts but provides cluster and performance standard development provisions. It aims to preserve natural resources by clustering housing on the least environmentally sensitive areas.
Two new categories of development (planned developments and cluster) were created in Duxbury, addition to existing traditional zoning. Both types Massachusetts are allowed in different portions of the town under a special permit process.
Cost Considerations Subwatershed planning for better site design zoning involves many costs. Mapping, photography, delineations, and involving the public are some of the items typically in such a budget (Table 3). Table 3. Unit prices for subwatershed planning (Adapted from CWP, 1998)
Budget Item Aerial Photography Base Mapping Estimated Unit Cost $500 per photo $500 Assumptions Includes aerial flyover and developing of one color photograph. For Subwatershed Management Map using USGS 7.5 minute Quad. Sheet. Includes, subwatershed delineation, overlaying land use, monitoring stations, and transportation routes. For Aquatic Corridor Management Map, using aerial topography at 2' contour interval. Includes, aerial topography at 1" = 200', locating existing utilities, floodplain, wetlands, and riparian cover from existing maps (no field walk and no topo. survey control). Detailed analysis beyond FEMA, cross-sections plotted at 1000 ft on-center, topo spot-checked, road crossings evaluated, includes report, assumes flow data are available. High end work station and software (e.g., ARC/INFO), includes approx. 2 weeks of training for operator. Does not include data layers
Base Mapping
$5,000
Floodplain Delineation Geographic Information System (GIS) start-up GISObtain or Digitize Data Layers Impervious Cover Measurement Actual
$5,000
$15,000
Data layers include impervious cover, topography (5' C.I.), zoning, utilities, vegetative cover (broad categories) Uses digital orthophotography, impervious layer clipped at subwatershed boundary, algorithm to calculate impervious area 162
$3,000
Budget Item Impervious Cover EstimationLand Use Impervious Cover ProjectionBased on Future Land Use Public Attitude Survey Stakeholder Involvement Program Estimated Unit Cost $600 Assumptions Uses land use designations or zoning and measured areas compared against tables, requires review of aerial photo (not included) to estimate build-out.
$800
Uses zoning or master plan and measured areas compared against tables, requires assessment of future build-out
$15,000 per 1000 homes contacted by telephone, includes survey questionnaire preparation survey and data analysis. $15,000 Plan and hold four public and four community meetings, direct mail to 20,000 people, staff time and direct expenses included.
163
References Caraco, D.S., R.A. Claytor, P.M. Hinkle, H.Y. Kwon, T.R. Schueler, C.P. Swann, S. Vysotsky, and J. Zielinski. 1998. Rapid Watershed Planning Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide for Managing Urbanizing Watersheds. Center for Watershed Protection, Inc., Ellicott City, MD. Porter, D.R., P.L. Phillips, T.J. Lassar. 1991. Flexible Zoning: How it Works. Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC. Schueler, T. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Information Resources Easley, G. 1992. Staying Inside the Lines: Urban Growth Boundaries. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. Kendig, L., S. Connor, C. Byrd, and J. Heyman. 1973. Performance Zoning. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. Lerable, C. 1995. Preparing a Conventional Zoning Ordinance. Planning Advisory Service, Chicago, IL. Meshenberg, M.J. 1976. The Administration of Flexible Zoning Techniques. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. Murphy, M. and J. Stinson. 1997. Incentive Zoning. Pace University School of Law, White Plains, NY. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission. 1988. Model Stream and Wetland Protection Ordinance for the Creation of a Lowland Conservancy Overlay District. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. Planning Commissioner Service. 1996. Innovative Controls for Land Use Regulation. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. Rahenkamp Sachs Wells and Associates, Inc. and the American Society of Planning Officials. 1977. Innovative Zoning: A Local Official's Guidebook. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, Washington, DC. Simons, R.A. 1998. Turning Brownfields into Greenbacks. Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC.
164
Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations

Regulatory Text You must develop and implement an operation and maintenance program that includes a training component and has the ultimate goal of preventing or reducing pollutant runoff from municipal operations. Using training materials that are available from EPA, your State, Tribe, or other organizations, your program must include employee training to prevent and reduce storm water pollution from activities such as park and open space maintenance, fleet and building maintenance, new construction and land disturbances, and storm water system maintenance. Guidance EPA recommends that, at a minimum, you consider the following in developing your program: maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term inspection procedures for structural and nonstructural storm water controls to reduce floatables and other pollutants discharged from your separate storm sewers; controls for reducing or eliminating the discharge of pollutants from streets, roads, highways, municipal parking lots, maintenance and storage yards, fleet or maintenance shops with outdoor storage areas, salt/sand storage locations and snow disposal areas operated by you, and waste transfer stations; procedures for properly disposing of waste removed from the separate storm sewers and areas listed above (such as dredge spoil, accumulated sediments, floatables, and other debris); and ways to ensure that new flood management projects assess the impacts on water quality and examine existing projects for incorporating additional water quality protection devices or practices. Operation and maintenance should be an integral component of all storm water management programs. This measure is intended to improve the efficiency of these programs and require new programs where necessary. Properly developed and implemented operation and maintenance programs reduce the risk of water quality problems.
BMP Fact Sheets Source controls Pet waste collection Automobile maintenance Vehicle washing Illegal dumping control Landscaping and lawn care Pest control Parking lot and street cleaning Roadway and bridge maintenance Septic system controls Storm drain system cleaning Alternative discharge options for chlorinated water Materials management Alternative products Hazardous materials storage Road salt application and storage Spill response and prevention Used oil recycling Materials management
Additional Fact Sheets Airplane Deicing Fluid Recovery System Catch Basin Cleaning Coverings Employee Training Flow Diversion Handling and Disposal of Residuals Environmental Effects from Highway Ice and Snow Removal Operations Internal Reporting Materals Inventory Preventative Maintenance Record Keeping Spill Prevention Planning Storm Water Contamination Assessment Visual Inspections
Source controls
Pet Waste Collection Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Pet waste collection as a source control involves using a combination of educational outreach and enforcement to encourage residents to clean up after their pets. The presence of pet waste in storm water runoff has a number of implications for urban stream water quality, with perhaps the greatest impact from fecal bacteria. According to recent research, nonhuman waste represents a significant source of bacterial contamination in urban watersheds. Genetic studies by Alderiso et al. (1996) and Trial et al. (1993) both concluded that 95 percent of fecal coliform found in urban storm water were of nonhuman origin. Bacterial source-tracking studies in a watershed in the Seattle, Washington, area also found that nearly 20 percent of the bacteria isolates that could be matched with host animals were matched with dogs. These bacteria can pose health risks to humans and other animals and result in the spread of disease. It has been estimated that for watersheds of up to 20 square miles draining to small coastal bays, 2 or 3 days of droppings from a population of about 100 dogs would contribute enough bacteria and nutrients to temporarily close a bay to swimming and shellfishing (USEPA, 1993). Pet waste may also be a factor in the eutrophication of lakes. The release of nutrients from the decay of pet waste promotes weed and algae growth, limiting light penetration and the growth of aquatic vegetation. This situation, in turn, can reduce oxygen levels in the water, affecting fish and other aquatic organisms. Pet waste collection programs use pet awareness and education, signs, and pet waste control ordinances to alert residents to the proper disposal techniques for pet droppings. In some parts of the country, the concept of parks or portions of parks established specifically for urban dog owners has gained in popularity. With provisions for proper disposal of dog feces and siting and design to address storm water runoff, these parks may represent another option for protecting local water quality.
Applicability Pet ownership is not limited by factors such as region of the country, climate, or topography. For this reason, educational outreach regarding pet waste is appropriate throughout the country. In a survey of Chesapeake Bay residents, it was found that about 40 percent of households own a dog. Just about half of these dog owners actually walked their dog in public areas. Of the half that did walk their dog, about 60 percent claimed to pick up after their dog (Swann, 1999), which is generally consistent with other studies (Table 1). Men were found to be less prone to pick up after their dog than women were (Swann, 1999). Residents seem to be of two minds when it comes to dog waste. While a strong majority agree that dog waste can be a water quality problem (Hardwick, 1997; Swann, 1999), they generally rank it as the least important local water quality problem (Syferd, 1995 and MSRC, 1997). This finding strongly suggests the need to dramatically improve watershed education efforts to increase public recognition about the water quality and health consequences of dog waste. Table 1. A comparison of three resident surveys about cleaning up after dogs
Study Maryland (HGIC, 1996) Washington (Hardwick, 1997) Chesapeake Bay (Swann, 1999) Survey Results 62% always cleaned up after the dog, 23% sometimes, 15% never Disposal method: trash can (66%), toilet (12%), other 22% Pet ownership: 58% 51% of dog owners do not walk dogs 69% claimed that they cleaned up after the dog 31% do not pick up Disposal methods: trash can 54%, toilet 20%, compost pile 4% 4% train pet to poop in own yard 85% agreed that pet wastes contribute to water quality problems Dog ownership: 41% 44% of dog owners do not walk dogs Dog walkers who clean up most/all of the time 59% Dog walkers who never or rarely cleanup 41% Of those who never or rarely clean up, 44% would not cleanup even with fine, complaints, or improved sanitary collection or disposal methods 63% agreed that pet wastes contribute to water quality problems
Design Considerations Programs to control pet waste typically use "pooper-scooper" ordinances to regulate pet waste cleanup. These ordinances require the removal and proper disposal of pet waste from public areas and other people's property before the dog owner leaves the immediate area. Often a fine is associated with failure to perform this act as a way to encourage compliance. Some ordinances also include a requirement that pet owners remove pet waste from their own property within a prescribed time frame. Public education programs are another way to encourage pet waste removal. Often pet waste messages are incorporated into a larger non-point source message relaying the effects of pollution on local water quality. Brochures and public service announcements describe proper pet waste disposal techniques and try to create a storm drain-water quality link between pet waste and runoff. Signs in public parks and the provision of receptacles for pet waste will also encourage cleanup. Another option for pet waste management could be the use of specially designated dog parks where pets are allowed off-leash. These parks typically include signs reminding pet owners to remove waste, as well as other disposal options for pet owners. The following management options have been used in Australian dog parks and could be incorporated for dog parks in the United States (Harlock Jackson et al., 1995):
Doggy loos. These disposal units are installed in the ground and decomposition occurs within the unit. Minimal maintenance is required (no refuse collection). Pooch patch. A pole is placed in the park surrounded by a light scattering of sand. Owners are encouraged to introduce their dog to the pole on entry to the park. Dogs then return to the patch to defecate and special bins are provided in which owners then place the deposit. The "Long Grass Principle." Dogs are attracted to long grass for defecating and areas that are mowed less frequently can be provided for feces to disintegrate naturally. A height of around 10 cm (about 4 inches) is appropriate.
The design of these dog parks should be done to mitigate storm water impacts. The use of vegetated buffers, pooper-scooper stations, and the siting of parks out of drainageways, streams, and steep slopes will help control the impacts of dog waste on receiving waters. Limitations The reluctance of many residents to handle dog waste is the biggest limitation to controlling pet waste. According to a Chesapeake Bay survey, 44 percent of dog walkers who do not pick up indicated they would still refuse to pick up, even if confronted by complaints from neighbors, threatened with fines, or provided with more sanitary and convenient options for retrieving and disposing of dog waste. Table 2 provides factors that compel residents to pick up after their dog, along with some rationalizations for not doing so.
This strong resistance to handling dog wastes suggests that an alternative message may be necessary. One such example might be to encourage the practice of rudimentary manure management by training dogs to use areas that are not hydraulically connected to the stream or close to a buffer. Table 2. Dog owners rationale for picking up or not picking up after their dog (Source: HGIC, 1996)
Reasons for not picking it up because it eventually goes away just because too much work on edge of my property it's in my yard it's in the woods not prepared no reason small dog, small waste use as fertilizer sanitary reasons own a cat or other kind of pet Reasons for picking up
it's the law environmental reasons hygiene/health reasons neighborhood courtesy it should be done keep the yard clean
Effectiveness The pollutant removal abilities of pet waste collection programs has never been quantified. There is ample evidence that programs such as these are required in urban areas. For example, in the Four Mile Run watershed in Northern Virginia, a dog population of 11,400 is estimated to contribute about 5,000 pounds of solid waste every day and has been identified as a major contributor of bacteria to the stream. Approximately 500 fecal coliform samples have been taken from Four Mile Run and its tributaries since 1990, and about 50 percent of these samples have exceeded the Virginia State water quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria (NVRC, 2001). A project is currently underway to pinpoint the source of bacterial contamination through DNA fingerprinting. There is plenty of evidence that pets and urban wildlife can be significant bacterial sources. According to van der Wel (1995) a single gram of dog feces can contain 23 million fecal coliform bacteria. Dogs can also be significant hosts of both Giardia and Salmonella (Pitt, 1998). A 1982 study of Baltimore, Maryland, catchments reported that dog feces were the single greatest contributor of fecal coliform and fecal strep bacteria (Lim and Olivieri, 1982). This evidence points to a need for enforcement and education to raise resident awareness regarding the water quality impacts of this urban pollutant source.
Cost Considerations The cost of pet waste collection programs will vary depending on the intensity of the effort and the paths chosen to control pet waste. The most popular way is through an ordinance, but managers must consider the cost of enforcement, including staff and equipment requirements. Public education program costs are determined by the type of materials produced and the method of distribution selected. Signs in parks may initially have a higher cost than printed materials, but can last for many years. Signs may also be more effective because they act as on-site reminders to dog owners to clean up in parks.
References Alderserio, K., D. Wait, and M. Sobsey. 1996. Detection and characterization of male-specific RNA coliphages in a New York City reservoir to distinguish between human and non-human sources of contamination. In Proceedings of a Symposium on New York City Water Supply Studies, ed. McDonnell et al. TPS-96-2. American Water Resources Association. Herndon, VA. Hardwick, N. 1997. Lake Sammamish Watershed Water Quality Survey. King County Water and Land Resources Division, Seattle, WA. 122 pp. Harlock Jackson PTY. 1995. Public Open Space and Dogs: a Design and Management Guide for Open Space Professionals and Local Government . Harlock Jackson. Victoria, Australia. Home and Garden Information Center (HGIC). 1996. Residential Fertilizer Use Survey. University of Maryland Cooperative Extension. College Park, MD. Unpublished surveys. Lim, S. and V. Olivieri. 1982. Sources of Microorganisms in Urban Runoff. John Hopkins School of Public Health and Hygiene. Jones Falls Urban Runoff Project. Baltimore, MD. 140 pp Minnesota Center for Survey Research (MCSR). 1997. Lawn Care Survey Results and Technical Report. Technical Report 97-9. University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN. 60 pp Northen Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC). 2001. Welcome to NVRC'S Four Mile Run Program. [http://www.novaregion.org/4MileRun/4mr.htm]. Last updated April 19, 2001. Accessed June 4, 2001. Pitt, R. 1998. Epidemiology and stormwater management. In Stormwater Quality Management. CRC/Lewis Publishers, New York, NY. Swann, C. 1999. A survey of residential nutrient behaviors in the Chesapeake Bay. WidenerBurrows, Inc. Chesapeake Research Consortium. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. 112 pp. Syferd, E. 1995. Water Quality Consortium. Research Summary Report. Seattle, WA. Trial, W. et al. 1993. Bacterial source tracking: studies in an urban Seattle watershed. Puget Sound Notes 30:13. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. van der Wel, B. 1995. Dog pollution. The Magazine of the Hydrological Society of South Australia 2(1).
Automobile Maintenance Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description This pollution prevention measure involves creating a program of targeted outreach and training for businesses and municipal fleets (public works, school buses, fire, police, and parks) involved in automobile maintenance about practices that control pollutants and reduce storm water impacts. Automotive maintenance facilities are considered to be storm water "hot spots" where significant loads of hydrocarbons, trace metals, and other pollutants can be produced that can affect the quality of storm water runoff. Some of the waste types generated at automobile maintenance facilities and at homes of residents performing their own car maintenance include the following:

Solvents (paints and paint thinners) Antifreeze Brake fluid and brake lining Batteries Motor oils Fuels (gasoline, diesel, kerosene) Lubricating grease.
Estimates show that each year over 180 million gallons of used oil is disposed of improperly (Alameda CCWP, 1992) and that a single quart of motor oil can pollute 250,000 gallons of drinking water (DNREC, 1994). For this reason, automotive maintenance facilities' discharges to storm and sanitary sewer systems are highly regulated. Fluid spills and improper disposal of materials result in pollutants, heavy metals, and toxic materials entering ground and surface water supplies, creating public health and environmental risks. Alteration of practices involving the cleanup and storage of automotive fluids and cleaning of vehicle parts can help reduce the influence of automotive maintenance practices on storm water runoff and local water supplies.
10
Applicability The automotive repair industry is the leader in number of generators and amount of total waste produced for small quantity generators of hazardous waste in the United States (USEPA, 1985). Common activities at maintenance shops that generate this waste include the cleaning of parts, changing of vehicle fluids, and replacement and repair of equipment. These activities are also performed by residents at home in their driveway in the course of normal vehicle care. Since the use of automobiles is not limited by geographic or climatic conditions, maintenance facilities are present nationwide and the concerns involving waste created during vehicle repair are similar across the country. In ultra-urban areas, the impacts of automotive maintenance practices are more pronounced due to the greater concentrations of vehicles and higher levels of impervious surface. Design Considerations The most effective way to minimize the impacts of automotive maintenance generated waste is by preventing its production. Pollution prevention programs seeking to reduce liquid discharges to sewer and storm drains from automotive maintenance should stress techniques that allow facilities to run a dry shop. Among the suggestions for creating a dry operation are the following:
Spills should be cleaned up immediately, and water should not be used for clean up whenever possible. Floor drains that are connected to the sanitary sewer should be sealed off. A solvent service might be hired to supply parts and cleaning materials, and to collect the spent solvent.
Those facilities that are not able to eliminate discharges to the sanitary sewer system may be required to treat their wastewater prior to release from the site. There are several methods for preventing untreated wastewater from entering storm water runoff. Some municipalities require the use of structural treatment devices to pretreat wastes before they are discharged for treatment at sewage treatment plants. These devices prevent oils and grease from entering the sewer system, often by separating the oil and solids from the water through settling or filtration. Other methods are also available to help prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants from vehicle maintenance. Table 1 lists some of the common suggestions found regarding practices that can reduce vehicle maintenance and repair impacts. Many of these practices apply both to business owners and to residents who maintain their own vehicles. Additionally, these practices also apply to maintaining municipal fleets, including school buses, public works, fire, police, parks, and other types of municipal fleets. This list is not comprehensive, and many other suggestions for reducing impacts are available to those responsible for managing storm water runoff from maintenance facilities.
11
Table 1. Recommendations for reducing the storm water impacts of automotive maintenance Pollution Prevention Method
Waste Reduction
Suggested Activities
The number of solvents used should be kept to a minimum to make recycling easier and to reduce hazardous waste management cost. Do all liquid cleaning at a centralized station to ensure that solvents and residues stay in one area. Locate drip pans and draining boards to direct solvents back into solvent sink or holding tank for reuse. Use non-hazardous cleaners when possible. Replace chlorinated organic solvents with nonchlorinated ones like kerosene or mineral spirits. Recycled products such as engines, oil, transmission fluid, antifreeze, and hydraulic fluid can be purchased to support the market of recycled products. Use as little water as possible to clean spills leaks, and drips. Rags should be used to clean small spills, dry absorbent material for larger spills, and a mop for general cleanup. Mop water can be disposed of via the sink or toilet to the sanitary sewer. Employee training and public outreach are necessary to reinforce proper disposal practices. Conduct maintenance work such as fluid changes indoors. Update facility schematics to accurately reflect all plumbing connections. Parked vehicles should be monitored closely for leaks and pans placed under any leaks to collect the fluids for proper disposal or recycling. Promptly transfer used fluids to recycling drums or hazardous waste containers. Do not pour liquid waste down floor drains, sinks, or outdoor storm drain inlets. Obtain and use drain mats to cover drains in the event of a spill. Store cracked batteries in leakproof secondary containers. Use detergent-based or water-based cleaning systems instead of organic solvent degreasers. Steam cleaning and pressure washing may be used instead of solvent parts cleaning. The wastewater generated from steam cleaning can be discharged to the on-site oil/water separator.
Using Safer Alternatives
Spill Clean Up
Good Housekeeping Parts Cleaning
12
Limitations There are a number of limitations to implementing recommendations for automotive maintenance facilities. Space and time constraints may make performing work indoors unfeasible. Containment of spills from vehicles brought on-site after working hours may not be possible. Proper disposal education for employees must continually be updated. Installation of structural BMPs for pretreatment of wastewater discharges can be expensive. Prices for recycled materials and fluids may be higher than those of non-recycled materials. Some facilities can be limited by a lack of providers of recycled materials and by the absence of businesses to provide services such as hazardous waste removal, structural BMP maintenance, or solvent recycling equipment. Maintenance Considerations For facilities responsible for pretreating their wastewater prior to discharging, the proper functioning of structural BMPs is an important maintenance consideration. Routine cleanout of oil and grease is required for the devices to maintain their effectiveness, usually at least once a month. During periods of heavy rainfall, cleanout is required more often to ensure that pollutants are not washed through the trap. Sediment removal is also required on a regular basis to keep the device working efficiently. Effectiveness The effectiveness of automotive maintenance best management practices at removing pollutants is difficult to quantify. However, there are studies that demonstrate the effect pollution prevention practices can have in reducing impacts from automotive fluids. A 1994 study of auto recycling facilities demonstrates the effect that using best management practices can have on reducing storm water toxicity and pollutant loads. Through the use of structural and nonstructural BMPs, the study facility was able to reduce concentrations of lead, oil, and grease to levels approaching USEPA benchmarks. A program that has had great success in controlling contaminated flows from vehicle maintenance facilities is the Clean Bay Business Program in Palo Alto, California. In exchange for allowing inspectors to visit a facility once a year and implementing recommended management practices, the facility is designated as a Clean Bay Business. This entitles the facility to promotional tools like listings twice a year in full-page newspaper ads, decals for shop windows, and other Clean Bay Business materials. Other promotions involving prize drawings and discount coupon giveaways help generate business for the facilities in the program. The effectiveness of the program at creating behavioral changes is evident in the increase in the number of facilities that have received the Clean Bay Business designation. In 1992 when the program began, only 4 percent of businesses used all of the recommended management practices. By 1998, 94 percent of businesses had instituted the practices suggested (NRDC, 1999).
13
The effectiveness of those programs aimed at altering behaviors detrimental to storm water is impressive. After participation in the program, the changes facilities made had the following impacts:
78 direct discharges to storm drains were eliminated by ceasing or modifying the practices used for activities such as parking lot cleaning, vehicle washing, and wet sanding. Violations of storm drain protection requirements fell by 90 percent from 1992 through 1995. The number of shops conducting outdoor removal of vehicle fluids without secondary containment fell from 43 to 4.
Cost Considerations The initial per-facility cost for the program was approximately $300, with a cost of $150 for each subsequent year. This cost includes inspector visits and follow-up work, outreach materials, mailing lists, and database management. The program has been expanded to include auto parts stores and outreach to local high schools and adult education repair classes. References Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Industrial/Commercial Best Management Practice Handbook. Stormwater Quality Task Force, Sacramento, CA. Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program. 1992. Keeping it all in tune: Car repair and pollution prevention. Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program, Hayward, CA. Natural Resources Defense Council. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc, New York, NY. USEPA. 1991. Guides to Pollution Prevention: The Automotive Repair Industry. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. 1992. Best Management Practices for Automotive-Related Industries: Practices for Sanitary Sewer Discharges and Storm Water Pollution Control. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, San Jose, CA. USEPA. July 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Compliance, Washington, DC. Center for Watershed Protection. 1995. Auto Recyclers-Onsite BMPs Mitigate Urban Runoff Hotspots. Watershed Protection Techniques, Vol 1, No. 4.
14
Vehicle Washing Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description This management measure involves educating the general public, businesses, and municipal fleets (public works, school buses, fire, police, and parks) on the water quality impacts of the outdoor washing of automobiles and how to avoid allowing polluted runoff to enter the storm drain system. Outdoor car washing has the potential to result in a high loads of nutrients, metals, and hydrocarbons during dry weather conditions in many watersheds, as the detergent-rich water used to wash the grime off our cars flows down the street and into the storm drain. Commercial car wash facilities often recycle their water or are required to treat their wash water discharge prior to release to the sanitary sewer system, so most storm water impacts from car washing are from residents, businesses, and charity car wash fundraisers that discharge polluted wash water to the storm drain system. According to the surveys, 55 to 70 percent of households wash their own cars, with the remainder going to a commercial car wash. Sixty percent of residents could be classified as "chronic car-washers" who wash their cars at least once a month (Smith, 1996, and Hardwick, 1997). Between 70 and 90 percent of residents reported that their car wash water drained directly to the street and, presumably, to the nearest stream. It has been estimated that 25 percent of the population of the United States may be classified as chronic car washers, which translates into about 27 million potential residential car wash polluters (Center for Watershed Protection, 1999). Applicability Car washing is a common routine for residents and a popular way for organizations such as scout troops, schools, and sports teams to raise funds. This activity is not limited by geographic region, but its impact on water quality is greatest in more urbanized areas with higher concentrations of automobiles. Currently, only a few pollution prevention programs incorporate proper car washing practices as part of an overall message to residents on ways to reduce nonpoint source pollution. Other programs have extended this message to include charity car washes and provide these charity groups with equipment and training to alleviate the problems associated with polluted wash water entering the storm drain system.
15
Implementation The development of a prevention program to reduce the impact of car wash runoff includes outreach on management practices to reduce discharges to storm drains. Some of these management practices include the following:

Using a commercial car wash. Washing cars on gravel, grass, or other permeable surfaces. Blocking off the storm drain during charity carwash events or using a insert to catch wash water. Pumping soapy water from car washes into a sanitary sewer drain. If pumping into a drain is not feasible, pumping car wash water onto grass or landscaping to provide filtration. Using hoses with nozzles that automatically turn off when left unattended. Using only biodegradable soaps.
Storm drain stenciling programs (see the Storm Drain Stenciling fact sheet) emphasizing the connection between the storm drain system and runoff can also help reinforce the idea that car washing activities can affect local water quality. In the Pacific Northwest, outreach programs provide materials to charity carwash organizers to prevent car wash water from entering storm drains. These "water friendly "carwash kits are provided free of charge to charity organizers, along with training and educational videos on planning an environmentally friendly carwash. Two types of equipment are available for charity organizations to borrow: a catch-basin insert with a sump pump, or a vacuum/boom device known as a Bubble Buster (Kitsap County, 1999). Both devices capture wash water runoff, allowing it to be pumped to either a sanitary sewer or a vegetated area for treatment. For businesses, good housekeeping practices can minimize the risk of contamination from wash water discharges. The following are some general best management practices that those businesses with their own vehicle washing facilities can incorporate to control the water quality impacts of wash water discharges:
All vehicle washing should be done in areas designed to collect and hold the wash and rinse water or effluent generated. Wash water effluent should be recycled, collected, or treated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. Pressure cleaning and steam cleaning should be done off-site to avoid generating runoff with high pollutant concentrations. If done on-site, no pressure cleaning and steam cleaning should be done in areas designated as wellhead protection areas for public water supply. On-site storm drain locations should be mapped to avoid discharges to the storm drain system. Spills should be immediately contained and treated. 16
Limitations The biggest limitation to implementing residential car wash best management practices may be the lack of knowledge regarding the impacts of polluted runoff. Many people do not associate the effects of their vehicle washing activities with local water quality and may be unaware that the discharges that enter storm drains are not treated at plants before being discharged into local waters. Surveys indicate that the average citizen does not fully understand the hydrologic connection between their yard, the street, the storm sewer, and the streams. For example, a recent Roper survey found that just 22 percent of Americans know that storm water runoff is the most common source of pollution of streams, rivers, and oceans (NEETF, 1999). Most car washing best management practices are inexpensive and rely more on good housekeeping practices than on expensive technology. However, the construction of a specialized area for vehicle washing can be expensive for businesses. Also, for facilities that cannot recycle their wash water, the cost of pretreating wash water, through either structural practices or planning for collection and hauling of contaminated water to sewage treatment plants, can represent a cost limitation. Effectiveness The effectiveness of car washing management practices at reducing nonpoint source pollutant loads has yet to be measured accurately. Due to the diffuse nature of nonpoint source pollution, it is often difficult to determine the exact impact of a particular pollution prevention measure at reducing pollutant loading. While not much is known about the water quality of car wash water, it is clear that car washing is a common watershed behavior. Three recent surveys have asked residents where and how frequently they wash their cars (Table 2). Table 2. A comparison of three surveys about car washing.
Study Smith, 1996 Maryland Pellegrin, 1998 California Hardwick, 1997 Washington Car Washing Behavior 60% washed car more than once a month
73% washed their own cars 73% report that wash-water drains to pavement 56% washed their own cars 44% used a commercial car wash 91% report that wash-water drains to pavement 56% washed car more than once a month 50% would shift if given discounts or free commercial car washes
Residents are typically not aware of the water quality consequences of car washing and do not understand the chemical content of the soaps and detergents they use. Car washing is a very difficult watershed behavior to change since it is often hard to define a better alternative. However, as with all pollution prevention measures, the reduction of pollutant loads from outdoor car washing activities are bound to have a positive effect on storm water quality. 17
Cost Considerations Staffing and materials represent the largest expenditure for local governments seeking to administer a nonpoint source education program. Car wash outreach programs are relatively inexpensive to staff and often require only a limited outlay for materials (brochures, training videos, etc.), and staff time devoted specifically to car wash education can be less than 5 percent of an employee's time. For Kitsap County, Washington, the Sound Car Wash program requires roughly 10 to 15 hours a week of staff time over a 25-week period from April to September. Cost for materials and equipment replacement is estimated to be between $1,500 and $3,000 for the same 25-week period (Kitsap County, 1999). The Clean Bay Car Wash kits program in Tacoma, Washington, uses only the catch basin insert option and estimates that it spends no more than $2,000 per year and less than 2 weeks of staff time per year to handle requests for its program (Tacoma Stormwater Utility, 1999). The purchase of wash water containment equipment is often a one-time expense, and this equipment is often used for a number of years. Two pieces of equipment used in car wash programs developed in the Pacific Northwest provide an example of the potential equipment cost. For the catch-basin insert, the approximate cost of installation is $65. In some cases, locations where charity car washes are frequently held have constructed their own catch basin inserts using plywood. For the Bubble Buster, the cost ranges from $2,000 to $2,500. References Center for Watershed Protection. 1999. On Watershed Behavior. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(3): 671-679. Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Industrial/Commercial Best Management Practice Handbook. Stormwater Quality Task Force, Sacramento, CA. City of Tacoma Stormwater Utility. 1999. Personal Communication. Tacoma, WA. Hardwick, N. 1997. Lake Sammamish watershed water quality survey. King County Water and Land Resources Division, Seattle, WA. 122 pp. Kitsap County Sound Car Wash Program. 1999. Personal communication and web site. Kitsap County Government, Port Orchard, WA. [http://www.wa.gov/kitsap/departments/pubworks/carwash.html]. Lance Winslow III. 1999. How to Run a Successful Car Wash Fundraiser. Car Wash Guys International, Inc, Tempe, AZ. Natural Resources Defense Council. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc, New York, NY Smith, J. 1996. Public survey used to estimate pollutant loads in Maryland. Technical Note 73. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(2): 361363. Pellegrin Research Group. 1998. Stormwater/urban runoff public education program. Interim evaluation. Resident population. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Los Angeles, CA. 18
Illegal Dumping Control Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Illegal dumping control as a management practice involves using public education to familiarize residents and businesses with how illegal dumping can affect storm water. By locating and correcting illegal dumping practices through education and enforcement measures, the many risks to public safety and water quality associated with illegal disposal actions can be prevented. For storm water managers, illegal dumping control is important to preventing contaminated runoff from entering wells and surface water, as well as averting flooding due to blockages of drainage channels for runoff. Several types of illegal dumping can occur. The first is the illegal dumping (also known as "open dumping," "fly dumping," or "midnight dumping") of litter that occurs at abandoned industrial, commercial, or residential buildings, vacant lots, and poorly lit areas such as rural roads and railway lines. This dumping primarily happens to avoid disposal fees or the time and effort required for proper disposal at landfills or recycling facilities. A second type of illegal dumping involves disposal of water that has been exposed to industrial activities and then released to the storm drainage system, introducing pollutants into storm water runoff. Applicability Illegal dumping can occur in both urban and rural settings and can happen in all geographic regions. The effects of illegal dumping may be more pronounced in areas with heavier rainfall, due to the greater volume of runoff. In more urbanized areas, illegal dumping may occur due to inaccessibility of recycling or solid waste disposal centers, which are often located on the suburban-rural fringe. Design Considerations Illegal dumping control programs focus on community involvement and targeted enforcement to eliminate or reduce illegal dumping practices. The key to successfully using this BMP is increasing public awareness of the problem and its implications. Illegal dumping control programs use a combination of public education, citizen participation, site maintenance, and authorized enforcement measures to address illegal waste disposal. Some of the issues that need to be examined when creating a program include the following:

The locations of persistent illegal dumping activity Types of waste dumped and the profile of dumpers Possible driving forces behind illegal dumping, such as excessive user fees, restrictive curbside trash pickup, or ineffective recycling programs 19
Previous education and cleanup efforts Current control programs and local laws or ordinances addressing the problem Sources of funding and additional resources that may be required.
Effective illegal dumping control programs use practices that educate and involve the community, local industries, and elected officials in an effort to eliminate the illegal discarding of wastes. An EPA toolkit for preventing illegal dumping focuses on four programmatic areas (USEPA 1998): 1. Cleanup efforts Cleanup projects will require a coordinated planning effort to ensure that adequate resources and funding are available. Once a site has been cleaned, signs, lighting, or barriers may be required to discourage future dumping. Signs should indicate the fines and penalties for illegal dumping, and a phone number for reporting incidents. Landscaping and beautification efforts might also discourage future dumping, as well as providing open space and increasing property values. 2. Community Outreach and Involvement This might be the most important tool in ensuring that this best management practice is effective. The organization of special cleanup events where communities are provided with the resources to properly dispose of illegally dumped materials increases the understanding among residents of illegal dumping impacts and supplies opportunities to correctly dispose of materials which may otherwise be illegally dumped. Integration of illegal dumping prevention into community policing programs or use of programs such as Crimestoppers may also be an effective way to increase enforcement opportunities without the additional cost of hiring new staff. Producing simple messages relating the cost of illegal dumping on local taxes, and directions to proper disposal sites will aid in eliminating the problem. Having a hotline where citizens can report illegal activities and educating the public on the connection between the storm drain and water quality will decrease disposal of waste into storm drain inlets. 3. Targeted Enforcement This tool involves the use of ordinances to regulate waste management and eliminate illegal dumping through methods such as fines, cost recovery penalties for cleanup, and permit requirements for waste management activities. These fines and penalties can be used to help fund the prevention program or to provide rewards to citizens who report illegal dumping activities. Other recommendations for this tool include training of staff from all municipal departments in recognizing and reporting illegal dumping incidents, and dedicating staff who have the authority to conduct surveillance and inspections and write citations for those caught illegally dumping. 4. Tracking and Evaluation This tool measures the impact of prevention efforts and determines if goals are being met. Using mapping techniques and computer databases allows officials to identify areas where dumping most often occurs, record patterns of dumping occurrence (time of day, day of week, etc.), and calculate the number of citations issued to the responsible parties. This allows for better allocation of resources and more specific targeting of outreach and education efforts for offenders. 20
Limitations Illegal dumping is often spurred by cost and convenience considerations, and a number of factors encourage this practice. The cost of fees for dumping at a proper waste disposal facility are often more than the fine for an illegal dumping offense, thereby discouraging people from complying with the law. The absence of routine or affordable pickup service for trash and recyclables in some communities also encourages illegal dumping. A lack of understanding regarding applicable laws or the inadequacy of existing laws may also contribute to the problem. Municipalities can coordinate with state and federal agencies to help enforce illegal dumping control measures when resources such as funding and staff for enforcement activities are scarse. Effectiveness While the effectiveness of illegal dumping control measures at removing pollutant loads to local waters is hard to quantify, there are numbers to demonstrate the preventative effects these programs have in keeping waste from illegal dump sites and ultimately from storm water runoff. Some examples follow:
The City/County of Spokane, Washington, Litter Control program is responsible for removing indiscriminate dumping on publicly owned properties and road right-of-ways. The program is estimated to remove 350 tons of illegally dumped material each year. Project HALT in Phoenix, Arizona, cleaned up a reported 15,000 tons of waste in 1996 and 1997 and issued more than 165 citations. The "Tire Roundup" program sponsored by the Southwest Detroit Environmental Visions community organization pays local residents to bring in illegally dumped tires. In 1995, residents were paid 25 cents per tire, and more than 8,000 tires were collected.
Illegal dumping of household and commercial waste has a variety of impacts on water quality. Hazardous chemicals generated from household, commercial, and industrial sources can contaminate ground and surface water supplies, affecting drinking water and public health as well as aquatic habitat. Reduced drainage of runoff due to blockage of streams, culverts and drainage basins can result in flooding and channel modification. Open burning associated with some illegal sites can cause forest fires that create severe erosion and cause sediment loading in streams. Economically, property values decrease as a result of illegal dumping and affect the local tax base and the ability to maintain pollution prevention programs. Cost Considerations The cost of illegal dumping control program activities can vary due to economic and social factors, but with creative thinking potential costs may be reduced. Possible sources of labor for dumping site cleanups can include community and youth groups, county or state corrections programs, or corporations. Equipment for cleanup may be available through either public works or transportation agencies or through donations by private companies. Training municipal staff to report incidents of illegal dumping witnessed during the performance of other duties reduces the need for full-time staff for the program.
21
References Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Municipal Best Management Practice Handbook. Blue Print Service, Oakland, CA. City of Spokane. 1999. Waste to Energy Plant-Litter Control/Indiscriminate Dumping. Spokane, WA. [http://www.spokanesolidwaste.org/wtelittr.htm]. National Center for Environmental Decision Making Research. 1997. Decision Makers Guide to Controlling Litter and Illegal Dumping. NCEDR, Knoxville, TN. NCDENR. 2000. Illegal Dumping in North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC. [http://wastenot.ehnr.state.nc.us/swhome/illdump.htm]. Last updated January 12, 2000. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1998. Illegal Dumping Prevention Guidebook. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5, Waste, Pesticides, and Toxics Division, Chicago, IL.
22
Landscaping and Lawn Care Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description This management measure seeks to control the storm water impacts of landscaping and lawn care practices through education and outreach on methods that reduce nutrient loadings and the amount of storm water runoff generated from lawns. Research has indicated that nutrient runoff from lawns has the potential to cause eutrophication in streams, lakes, and estuaries (CWP, 1999a, and Schueler, 1995a). Nutrient loads generated by suburban lawns as well as municipal properties can be significant, and recent research has shown that lawns produce more surface runoff than previously thought (CWP, 1999b). Pesticide runoff (see Pest Control fact sheet) can contribute pollutants that contaminate drinking water supplies and are toxic to both humans and aquatic organisms. Landscaping, lawn care, and grounds maintenance are a big business in the United States. It has been estimated that there are 25 to 30 million acres of turf and lawn in the United States (Robert and Roberts, 1989, Lawn and Landscape Institute, 1999). If lawns were classified as a crop, they would rank as the fifth largest in the country on the basis of area, after corn, soybeans, wheat, and hay (USDA, 1992). In terms of fertilizer inputs, nutrients are applied to lawns at about the same application rates as those used for row crops (Barth, 1995a). The urban lawn is also estimated to receive an annual input of 5 to 7 pounds of pesticides per acre (Schueler, 1995b). Not many residents understand that lawn fertilizer can cause water quality problems overall, less than one-fourth of residents rated it as a water quality concern (Syferd, 1995 and Assing, 1994), although ratings were as high as 60 percent for residents who lived adjacent to lakes (Morris and Traxler, 1996, and MCSR, 1997). Interestingly, in one Minnesota survey, only 21 percent of homeowners felt their own lawn contributed to water quality problems, while over twice as many felt that their neighbors' lawns did (MCSR, 1997). Unlike farmers, suburban and rural landowners are often ignorant of the actual nutrient needs of their lawns. According to surveys, only 10 to 20 percent of lawn owners take the trouble to take soil tests to determine whether fertilization is even needed (CWP, 1999). The majority of lawn owners are not aware of the phosphorus or nitrogen content of the fertilizer they apply (Morris and Traxler, 1996) or that mulching grass clippings into lawns can reduce or eliminate the need to fertilize. Informing residents, municipalities, and lawn care professionals on methods to reduce fertilizer and pesticide application, limit water use, and avoid land disturbance can help alleviate the potential impacts of a major contributor of nonpoint source pollution in residential communities.
23
Applicability Lawn care, landscaping, and grounds maintenance are done in all parts of the country, in all types of climates, and in every type of community from rural to urban. Lawn fertilization is one of the most widespread watershed practices conducted by homeowners. In a survey of resident attitudes in the Chesapeake Bay, 89 percent of residents owned a yard, and of these, about 50 percent applied fertilizer every year (Swann, 1999). The average rate of fertilization in 10 other resident surveys was even higher, at 78 percent, although this could reflect the fact that these surveys were biased toward predominantly suburban neighborhoods, or excluded non-lawn owners. Because lawn care, landscaping, and grounds maintenance are such common practices, education programs for both residents, municipalities, and lawn care professionals on reducing the storm water impacts of these practices are an excellent way to improve local water quality. Design Considerations Designers of education programs that seek to change the impacts of fertilizer, pesticide, and herbicide use on receiving water quality should first consider creating training programs for those involved in the lawn care industry. Nationally, lawn care companies are used by 7 to 50 percent of consumers, depending on household income and lot size. Lawn care companies can exercise considerable authority over which practices are applied to the lawns they tend, as long as they still produce an attractive lawn. For example, 94 percent of lawn care companies reported that they had authority to change practices, and that about 60 percent of their customers were "somewhat receptive to new ideas", according to a Florida study (Israel et al., 1995). De Young (1997) also found that suburban Michigan residents expressed a high level of trust in their lawn care company. Local governments that want to influence lawn care companies must have an active program that supports those companies that employ techniques to limit fertilizer and pesticide use to the minimum necessary to maintain a green lawn. One way to do this is through providing promotional opportunities. One example is the state of Virginia Water Quality Improvement program that includes the chance for lawn care professionals to enter into an agreement to use more environmentally friendly lawn care practices. In exchange, the lawn care company can use their participation in the program as a promotional tool (VA DCR, 1999). Providing certification for representatives from lawn care companies for attending training workshops put on by cooperative extension offices can also be an effective promotional tool. Training for employees of lawn and garden centers is another important tool in spreading the message regarding lawn care and pollution control. Many studies indicate that product labels and store attendants are the primary and almost exclusive source of lawn care information for the average consumer who takes care of their own lawn. The Florida Yards and Neighbors program has worked with 19 stores of a large national hardware and garden chain to educate store employees and incorporate messages regarding fertilizer use and pesticide reduction (NRDC, 1999). Often the key strategy to implementing a program like this is to substitute watershedfriendly products for those that are not, and to offer training for the store attendants at the point of sale on how to use and, perhaps more importantly, how not to abuse or overuse such products.
24
A recent Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) survey of 50 nutrient education programs provides a number of tips to program managers on making outreach programs more effective. The results of the study showed that there were a number of important considerations for increasing the recall and implementation of pollution prevention messages. Table 1 provides some tips that appear to work the best at relaying pollution prevention messages and changing pollution-producing behaviors. Table 1. Tips for creating more effective resident lawn care outreach programs Tip 1: Develop a stronger Outreach techniques should continually stress the link between connection between the yard, lawn care and the undesirable water quality it helps to create (e.g., the street, the storm, and the algae blooms and sedimentation). stream. Since most communities operate on small budgets, they should consider pooling their resources to develop regional media campaigns that can use the outreach techniques that are proven to reach and influence residents. In particular, regional campaigns allow communities to hire the professionals needed to create and Tip 2: Form regional media deliver a strong message through the media. Also, the campaign approach allows a community to employ a combination of media, campaigns. such as radio, television, and print, to reach a wider segment of the population. It is important to keep in mind that since no single outreach technique will be recalled by more than 30 percent of the population at large, several different outreach techniques will be needed in an effective media campaign. Television is the most influential medium for influencing the public, but careful choices need to be made on the form of television that is used. The CWP survey found that community cable access channels are much less effective than commercial or public television channels. Program managers should consider Tip 3: Use television wisely. using cable network channels targeted for specific audiences, and develop thematic shows that capture interest of the home, garden and lawn crowd (e.g., shows along the lines of "Gardening by the Yard"). Well-produced public service announcements on commercial television are also a sensible investment.
25
Table 1. Tips for creating more effective resident lawn care outreach programs (Continued) Watershed education should not be preachy, complex, or Tip 4: Keep messages simple depressing. Indeed, the most effective outreach techniques and funny. combine a simple and direct message with a dash of humor. Educators continually struggle about how to impart the detailed information to residents on how to really practice good lawn care behaviors, without losing their interest. One should avoid creating a ponderous and boring handbook. One solution is to create small, colorful and durable packets that contain the key essentials about lawn care behaviors, and direct contact information to get better advice. These packets can be stuck on the refrigerator, the kitchen drawer or the workbench for handy reference when the impulse for better lawn care behavior strikes. Knowing the unique demographics of a watershed allows a program manager to determine what outreach techniques are likely to work for that particular area. For example, if some residents speak English as a second language, a certain percentage of outreach materials should be produced in their native language. Similarly, watershed managers should consider more direct channels to send watershed messages to reach particular groups, such as through church leaders or ethnic-specific newspapers and television channels.
Tip 5: Make information packets small, slick, and durable.
Tip 6: Understand the demographics of your watershed.
Pollution prevention programs may also wish to incorporate a much stronger message that promotes a low- or zero-input lawn. Watershed education programs might strongly advocate no chemical fertilization, reduced turf area, and the use of native plants adapted to the ecoregion (Barth, 1995b). This message provides a balance to the pro-fertilization message that is marketed by the lawn care industry. Program managers need to incorporate some method for evaluating the effectiveness of their programs at reaching residents. Many programs use "before and after" market surveys to provide information on the level of understanding of residents and the percentage of residents that implement good lawn care practices. These surveys provide insights on what outreach techniques work best for a community and the level of behavior change that can be expected. Alternative landscaping techniques such as naturescaping and xeriscaping can also be used. Xeriscaping is considered to be a viable alternative to the high water requirements of typical landscaping. It is a form of landscaping that conserves water and protects the environment. Xeriscaping does not result in landscaping with cactus and rock gardens. Rather, cool, green landscapes can be used when they are maintained with water-efficient practices. The main benefit of xeriscaping is that it reduces water use (TAMU, 1996). Xeriscaping incorporates seven basic principles that reduce water use (NYDEP, 1997):
Planning and design. Consider drainage, light, and soil conditions; desired maintenance level; which existing plants will remain; plant and color preferences; and budget. 26
Soil improvement. Mix peat moss or compost into soil before planting to help the soil retain water. Use terraces and retaining walls to reduce water run-off from sloped yards. Appropriate plant selection. Choose low-water-using flowers, trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. Many of these plants need watering only in the first year. Practical lawns. Limit the amount of grass area. Plant groundcovers or add hard surface areas like decks, patios, or walkways. If replanting lawns, use drought-tolerant grass seed mixes. Efficient irrigation. Install drip or trickle irrigation systems, as they use water efficiently. Effective use of mulches. Use a 3-inch deep layer of mulches such as pine needles or shredded leaves or bark. This keeps soil moist, prevents erosion, and smothers weeds. Appropriate maintenance. Properly timed fertilizing, weeding, pest control, and pruning will preserve the beauty of the landscape and its water efficiency.
Naturescaping is a way of putting native plants and beneficial wildlife habitat back into your yard or community. It is also a beautiful way to conserve water and energy, reduce pollution of water and soil, and create habitat for wildlife. Native plants are the foundation of naturescaping. The plants that evolved in your region are well adapted to our climate and naturally resistant to local pests and diseases. Once established, natives can often survive on rainwater alone. Naturescaping areas can include replacing some lawn area with a wildflower meadow; hummingbird and butterfly garden, plants and trees selected for seeds, fruit, and nectar; and nesting boxes. When creating a naturescape, it is important to include four elements: food, water, shelter, and adequate space. When creating a naturescape in your yard or community, keep in mind these steps:
Visit "wild" places and naturescaped sites and imagine how these landscapes would fit in your yard or community. Educate yourself and your community. Learn about native plants and basic design and care concepts. You can attend workshops and read plant and design books. When you are ready to develop a site plan, choose a small viewable site. When planning, consider maintenance water, gardening, access to feeders. Know the existing conditions of the area shade/sun, wet/dry, wind patterns, drainage, existing plants and critters. Once you develop a plan and you have gotten any necessary permits, you are ready to gather your material and begin.
A local government can meet with local neighborhood and creek groups to promote community naturescaping, host naturescaping workshops, and establish naturescaping demonstration sites in neighborhoods, and can offer naturescaping assistance to many residential, business, and public projects.
27
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is an effective and environmentally sensitive approach to pest management that relies on a combination of common-sense practices. IPM programs use current, comprehensive information on the life cycles of pests and their interaction with the environment. This information, in combination with available pest control methods, is used to manage pest damage by the most economical means, and with the least possible hazard to people, property, and the environment. The IPM approach can be applied to both agricultural and nonagricultural settings, such as the home, garden, and workplace. IPM takes advantage of all appropriate pest management options, including -- but not limited to -- the judicious use of pesticides. In contrast, organic food production applies many of the same concepts as IPM but limits the use of pesticides to those that are produced from natural sources, as opposed to synthetic chemicals. IPM is not a single pest control method but, rather, a series of pest management evaluations, decisions, and controls. Integrated pest management is a sustainable approach to managing pests by combining biological, cultural, physical, and chemical tools. Municipalities can encourage homeowners to practice IPM and train/encourage municipal maintenance crews to use these techniques for managing public green areas. There are many methods and types of integrated pest management, including the following:
Mulching can be used to prevent weeds where turf is absent, fencing installed to keep rodents out, and netting used to keep birds and insects away from leaves and fruit. Visible insects can be removed by hand (with gloves or tweezers) and placed in soapy water or vegetable oil. Alternatively, insects can be sprayed off the plant with water or in some cases vacuumed off of larger plants. Store-bought traps, such as species-specific, pheromone-based traps or colored sticky cards, can be used. Sprinkling the ground surface with abrasive diatomaceous earth can prevent infestations by soft-bodied insects and slugs. Slugs also can be trapped in small cups filled with beer that are set in the ground so the slugs can get in easily. In cases where microscopic parasites, such as bacteria and fungi, are causing damage to plants, the affected plant material can be removed and disposed of. (Pruning equipment should be disinfected with bleach to prevent spreading the disease organism.) Small mammals and birds can be excluded using fences, netting, tree trunk guards. Beneficial organisms, such as bats, birds, green lacewings, ladybugs, praying mantis, ground beetles, parasitic nematodes, trichogramma wasps, seedhead weevils, and spiders that prey on detrimental pest species can be promoted.
28
Limitations The overriding public desire for green lawns is probably the biggest impediment to limiting pollution from this source. For example, when residents were asked their opinions on more than 30 statements about lawns in a Michigan survey, the most favorable overall response was to the statement "a green, attractive lawn is an important asset in a neighborhood" (De Young, 1997). Nationally, homeowners spend about $27 billion each year to maintain their own yard or to pay someone else to do it (PLCAA, 1999). In terms of labor, a majority of homeowners spend more than an hour a week taking care of the lawn (Aveni, 1994, De Young, 1997). Convincing residents that a nice, green lawn can be achieved without using large amounts of chemicals and fertilizers is difficult when conventional lawn care techniques are often seen as more effective, less time-consuming, and more convenient. Effectiveness The effectiveness of pollution prevention programs designed to educate residents on lawn care and landscaping practices has not been well documented to date. However, the need for such programs is evident. Source area monitoring in Marquette, Michigan, found that nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in residential lawn runoff were 5 to 10 times higher than from any other source area (CWP, 1999). This report confirms earlier Wisconsin research findings that residential lawns yielded the highest phosphorus concentrations of 12 urban pollutant sources examined (Bannerman et al, 1993). A critical step in crafting an education program is to select the right outreach techniques to send the lawn care message. From the results of a number of market surveys, two outreach techniques have shown some promise in actually changing behavior -- media campaigns and intensive training. Media campaigns typically use a mix of radio, TV, direct mail, and signs to broadcast a general watershed message to a large audience. Intensive training uses workshops, consultation, and guidebooks to send a much more complex message to a smaller and more interested audience. Intensive training requires a more substantial time commitment, ranging from several hours to a few days. From evaluations of several market surveys, it appears that media campaigns and intensive training can each produce up to a 10- to 20-percent improvement in selected watershed behaviors among their respective target populations. A combination of both outreach techniques is probably needed in most watersheds, as each complements the other. For example, media campaigns cost just a few cents per watershed resident reached, while intensive training can cost several dollars for each resident that is actually influenced. Media campaigns are generally better at increasing awareness and sending messages about negative watershed behaviors. Intensive training, on the other hand, is superior at changing individual practices in the home, lawn, and garden.
29
Cost Considerations The cost of creating and maintaining a program that addresses lawn care and landscaping practices and water quality varies depending on the intensity of the effort and what outreach techniques are selected. Media campaigns often require a greater amount of money to create, but are also most likely to reach the largest proportion of the community. Intensive training campaigns may not require as large a creation cost, but often require more staff time. Production costs for materials such as flyers and brochures is often inexpensive ($0.10 to $0.50 per brochure), and soil kits and testing may be provided through a local university to reduce expense. Many cooperative extension offices have already produced materials on lawn care and landscaping techniques to protect water quality, and program managers may save money by utilizing these available resources. An example of a program that educates residents on better lawn care practices is The WaterWise Gardener Program of the Prince William County, Virginia, Cooperative Extension service. Through the changes in behavior of more than 700 participants, an estimated aggregate reduction in fertilizer application of 20 tons has been realized in the county in 5 years. The program operates on an average annual budget of approximately $30,000 and requires the yearly time of 1.5 staff persons. Expense is deferred by the use of master gardener volunteers, who act as consultants for volunteer lawns where lawn care practices have been implemented. The program has recently been developed into a regional model that has been applied in several other Virginia counties. References Assing, J. 1994. Survey of public attitudes February and July, 1994. Russian Hill Associates. Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program. San Francisco CA. 84 pp. Aveni, M. 1994. Homeowner survey reveals lawn management practices in Virginia. Technical Note 26. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(2):8586. Barth, C. 1995a. Nutrients: from the lawn to the stream. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1): 239246. Barth, C. 1995b. Toward a low input lawn. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1): 254264. Bowers, Keith J. 1994. A Call for the End of Landscaping, Watershed Protection Techniques, Vol. 1, No. 3. pp 112113. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1999. Diazinon sources in runoff from the San Francisco Bay region. Technical Note 106. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(1): 613616. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1999. On Watershed Behavior. [www.cwp.org]. De Young, R. 1997. Healthy Lawn and Garden Survey: Data Analysis Report. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project. Oakland County, MI. 40 pp. Israel, G., S. Pinheiro and G. Knox. 1995. Environmental Landscape Management Assessing Practices Among Commercial Groups. University of Florida. Cooperative Extension Service. Bulletin 307. Monticello, FL. 18 pp. 30
References (Continued). Minnesota Center for Survey Research (MCSR). 1997. Lawn Care Survey Results and Technical Report, Technical Report 979. University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN. 60 pp. Morris, W. and D. Traxler. 1996. Dakota County Subwatersheds: Residential Survey on Lawn Care and Water Quality. Dakota County, MN, Decision Resources, Ltd. Natural Resources Defense Council. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc, New York, NY. NYDEP. 1997. Seven Steps to a Water-Saving Garden. [http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/dep/html/xeris.html]. Accessed October 1, 2000. Professional Lawn Care Association of America (PLCAA). 1999. Profile of lawn care industry. [http://www.plcaa.org]. Schueler, T. 1995a. Nutrient movement from the lawn to the stream. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1): 239246. Schueler, T. 1995b. Urban Pesticides: from the lawn to the stream. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1): 247253. Swann, C. 1999. A Survey of Residential Nutrient Behaviors in the Chesapeake Bay. WidenerBurrows, Inc. Chesapeake Research Consortium. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. 112 pp. Syferd, E. 1995. Water Quality Consortium. Research Summary Report. Seattle, WA. Texas A&M University(TAMU), Texas Agricultural Extension Service. 1996. Xeriscaping. [http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/plantanswers/drought/drought1.html]. Accessed October 2000. Relf, D., and Day, S.D. 1994. The Virginia Gardener Easy Reference to Sustainable Landscape Management and Water Quality Protection. Virginia Cooperative Extension Publication 426612. Virginia Cooperative Extension, Blacksburg, VA. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. 1999. Personal Communication. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Richmond, VA.
31
Pest Control Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description This management measure involves limiting the impact of pesticides on water quality by educating residents and businesses on alternatives to pesticide use and proper storage and on application techniques. The presence of pesticides in storm water runoff has a direct impact on the health of aquatic organisms and can present a threat to humans through contamination of drinking water supplies. The pesticides of greatest concern are insecticides, such as diazinon and chloropyrifos (CWP, 1999 and Schueler, 1995), which even at very low levels can be harmful to aquatic life. A recent study of urban streams by the U.S. Geological Survey found that some of the more commonly used household and garden insecticides occurred at higher frequencies and concentrations in urban streams than in agricultural streams (USGS, 1999). The study also found that these insecticide concentrations were frequently in excess of USEPA guidelines for protection of aquatic life. The major source of pesticides to urban streams is home application of products designed to kill insects and weeds in the lawn and garden. It has been estimated that an average acre of a wellmaintained urban lawn receives an annual input of 5 to 7 pounds of pesticides (Schueler, 1995). Pesticide pollution prevention programs try to limit adverse impacts of insecticides and herbicides by providing information on alternative pest control techniques other than chemicals or explaining how to determine the correct dosages needed to manage pests. Lawn care and landscaping management programs often include pesticide use management as part of their outreach message. Applicability EPA estimates that nearly 70 million pounds of active pesticide ingredients are applied to urban lawns each year. Table 1 compares surveys on residential pesticide use in eleven different areas of the country, broken down by insecticides and herbicides use. It appears that pesticide application rates vary greatly, ranging from a low of 17 percent to a high of 87 percent, but climate is an important factor in determining insecticide and herbicide use.
32
Table 1. A comparison of eleven surveys of residential insecticide and weedkiller use

Study Chesapeake Bay Swann, 1999 Maryland, Kroll and Murphy,1994 Virginia, Aveni, 1998 Maryland, Smith, 1994 Minnesota, Morris and Traxler, 1997 Michigan, De Young, 1997 Minnesota, Dindorf, 1992 Wisconsin, Kroupa, 1995 Florida, Knox et al, 1995 Texas, NSR, 1998 California, Scanlin and Cooper, 1997 Number of Respondents 656 403 100 100 981 432 136 204 659 350 600 % Using Insecticides 21% 42% 66% 23% 40% 17% 83% 87% 50% % Using Herbicides 32% n/a 75% 59% 76% 24% **
Notes: (**) note difference in self-reported herbicide use and those that use a weed and feed product (herbicide combined with fertilizer)
Insecticides appear to be applied more widely in warm weather climates where insect control is a year-round problem (such as Texas, California, and Florida). Anywhere from 50 to 90 percent of residents reported that they had applied insecticides in the last year in warm-weather areas. This can be compared to 20 to 50 percent levels of insecticide use reported in colder regions, where hard winters can help keep insects in check. By contrast, herbicide application rates tend to be higher in cold weather climates to kill the weeds that arrive with the onset of spring (60 to 75 percent in the Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota surveys). Design Considerations The use of integrated pest management (IPM) is a popular way for program managers to educate residents and businesses on alternatives to chemical pesticides. IPM reflects a holistic approach to pest control that examines the interrelationship between soil, water, air, nutrients, insects, diseases, landscape design, weeds, animals, weather, and cultural practices to select an appropriate pest management plan. The goal of an IPM program is not to eliminate pests but to 33
manage them to an acceptable level while avoiding disruptions to the environment. An IPM program incorporates preventative practices in combination with nonchemical and chemical pest controls to minimize the use of pesticides and promote natural control of pest species. Three different nonchemical pest control practices biological (good bugs that eat pests), cultural (handpicking of pests, removal of diseased plants, etc.), and mechanical (zappers, paper collars, etc) are used to limit the need for chemicals. In those instances when pesticides are required, programs seek to have users try less toxic products such as insecticidal soaps. The development of higher tolerance levels among residents for certain weed species is a central concept of IPM programs for reducing herbicide use. Education on the proper use of pesticides is often included in many lawn care and landscaping management programs. Most often this is in the form of informational brochures or fact sheets on pesticide use around the home or garden. These information packets include tips on identifying pest problems and selecting treatment approaches that reduce environmental impacts; less-toxic pest control products if chemical control is necessary; and the proper mixing, application rates, and cleanup procedures for pesticide use. Program managers can consult cooperative extension programs and university agricultural programs for more information regarding pest control techniques that are more water quality friendly. Limitations The public perception that no alternative to pesticide use exists is probably the greatest limitation that program managers will face. Surveys tell us that the public has a reasonably good understanding about the potential environmental dangers of pesticides. Several surveys indicate that residents do understand environmental concerns about pesticides, and consistently rank them as the leading cause of pollution in the neighborhood (Elgin DDB, 1996). Even so, pesticide use still remains high in many urban areas (see Table 1). The time required for homeowners to learn more about alternative pest control techniques may also limit program effectiveness. Many residents prefer the ease of spraying a chemical on their lawns to other pest control techniques they perceive as more time intensive and less reliable. Managers should recognize that IPM programs have their own limitations, including questions about the effectiveness of alternative pest control techniques. Effectiveness A national study of the effectiveness of alternative pest control programs at reducing pesticide use and protecting water quality has not yet been performed. Cooperative extension and university agriculture programs across the country have performed studies of the ability of distinct alternative pest control techniques at limiting pesticide use, but a synthesis of these individual studies into a national report has not been performed. However, the need for pesticide control programs is evident from recent studies on the presence of insecticides in storm water. Results of recent sampling of urban streams caused the USGS to conclude that the presence of insecticides in urban streams may be a significant obstacle to restoring urban streams. (USGS, 1999). Table 2 examines eight studies on storm water runoff and insecticide concentrations and provides an example of how insecticides persist even after their use is discontinued. Additional research done in the San Francisco Bay Region regarding diazinon use further illustrates the need for pest control programs. Results of the study show that harmful diazinon levels can be produced in urban streams from use at only a handful of individual homes in a 34
given watershed (CWP, 1999). Due to the solubility of diazinon, current storm water and wastewater treatment technologies cannot significantly reduce diazinon levels. The best tool for controlling diazinon in urban watersheds is through source control by educating residents and businesses on pesticide alternatives and safe application. An example of successful use of IPM is the Grounds Maintenance Program for the City of Eugene, Oregon. This program was started in the early 1980's and includes all the city public parks and recreation areas. The city uses a variety of IPM methods, including water blasting to remove aphids, insecticidal soaps, and limited use of pesticides. The city has also adopted higher tolerance levels for certain weed and pest species that reduces the need to apply pesticides and herbicides. Since the program's inception, pesticide usage by the City of Eugene has dropped bay more than 75 percent (Lehner et. al., 1999). Although no exact cost savings have been calculated from the use of the IPM program, the city turf and grounds supervisor believes the program saves money and has little citizen opposition. Table 2: Banned or restricted insecticides found in storm water runoff concentrations in g/l (ppb) (Source: Schueler, 1995)
Study Baltimore Kroll/Murphy Rhode Island Cohen Atlanta Hippe Atlanta Thomas Milwaukee Bannerman Washington MWCOG Northern Virginia Dewberry and Davis Toronto D'Andrea Toronto D'Andrea Chlordane 0.52 Detected NA Detected Detected 0.2 ND NA NA Lindane 0.18 NA 0.01 (0.048) NX Detected 0.2 Trace 0.5 to 2 0.5 to 2 Dieldrin 2.44 NA NA NX Detected 0.2 ND 0.1 to 2 0.1 to 2 Other NA heptachlor DDT, DDE Heptachlor Endrin
ND=Not Detected, NA=Not Analyzed, NX= Detection reported only if they exceeded water quality standards.
Cost Considerations The cost of educating residents on proper pesticide use varies greatly depending on the intensity of the effort. Some cities have begun partnerships that include training of retail employees on IPM techniques, similar to lawn care and landscaping programs. In addition, promotional materials and displays on safer pesticide alternatives are set up. The cost of staff time for training and production of materials must be included in any cost estimate. Since there are currently a 35
number of good fact sheets on IPM and pesticide use available through cooperative extension programs, managers should consider using this source instead of creating a new one. Another way to save cost would be to utilize master gardener volunteers to help with training, for both residents and store employees. References Aveni, M. 1998. Water-wise gardener program: Summary report. Unpublished data. Virginia Cooperative Extension. Prince William County, VA. Bannerman, R. 1994. Unpublished data on diazinon concentrations and toxicity in stormwater ponds. Bureau of Water Management. Wisconsin DNR. Madison, WI. California Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Consumer Factsheet: Urban IPM. Department of Pesticide Regulation, Sacramento, CA. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). 1999. Diazinon sources in runoff from the San Francisco Bay region. Technical Note 106. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(1): 613616. Cohen, S., S. Nickerson, R. Maxey, A. Dupuy, and J. Senita. 1990. A groundwater monitoring study for pesticides and nitrates associated with golf courses on Cape Cod. Groundwater Monitoring Review 5: 166173. D'Andrea, M., and D. Maunder. 1994. Characterization of Urban Nonpoint Source Discharges in Metropolitan Toronto. Dewbery and Davis. 1989. Toxicity of Sediments from BMP Ponds. Final Report. Prepared for Northern Virginia Planning District Commission. Annandale, VA. 26 pp. De Young, R. 1997. Healthy Lawn and Garden Survey: Data Analysis Report. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project. Oakland County, MI. 40 pp. Dindorf, C. 1992. Toxic and Hazardous Substances in Urban Runoff. Hennepin Conservation District. Minnetonka, MN. 98 pp. Elgin DDB. 1996. Public Awareness Study: Summary Report. The Water Quality Consortium. Seattle, WA. 24 pp. Hippe, D, D. Wangsness, E. Frick, and J. Garret. 1994. Pesticide Monitoring in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin. US Geological Survey. National Water Quality Assessment Program. Water Resources Investigation Report 94118. Atlanta, GA. Knox, G., A. Fugate, and G. Israel. 1995. Environmental Landscape Management Use of Practices by Florida Consumers. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service. Bulletin 307. Monticello, FL. 26 pp. Kroll, J., and D. Murphy. 1994b. Pilot monitoring for 14 pesticides in Maryland surface waters. Maryland Dept. of Environment. Chesapeake Bay Program Technical Report 93020. 108 pp.
36
References (Continued). Kroupa and Associates. 1995. Westmorland Lawn Care Survey. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 12 pp. Lehner, P., G. Aponte Clarke, D. Cameron, and A. Frank. 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution. Natural Resources Defense Council, New York, NY. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1983. Urban Runoff in the Washington Metropolitan Area: Final NURP Report. Department of Environmental Programs. Washington, DC. 222 pp. Morris, W., and D. Traxler. 1996. Dakota County Subwatersheds: Residential Survey on Lawn Care and Water Quality. Dakota County, Minnesota, Decision Resources, Ltd. National Service Research (NSR). 1998. Pesticide Usage and Impact Awareness Study: Executive Summary. City of Forth Worth Water Department. Fort Worth Texas. 44 pp. Scanlin, J., and A. Cooper. 1997. Outdoor Use of Diazinon and Other Insecticides: Final Draft. Alameda County Clean Water Program and Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Oakland, CA. 20 pp. Schueler, T. 1995. Urban pesticides: from the lawn to the stream. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1): 247253. Smith, J. 1996. Public survey used to estimate pollutant loads in Maryland. Technical Note 73. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(2): 361363. Swann, C. 1999. A Survey of Residential Nutrient Behaviors in the Chesapeake Bay. WidenerBurrows, Inc. Chesapeake Research Consortium. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. 112 pp. Thomas, P., and S. McClelland. 1994. NPDES monitoring Atlanta Georgia Region. In US EPA. 1983. Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Project. Final Report. Vol 1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1999. The Quality of Our Nation's Waters Nutrients and Pesticides. U.S. Geological Circular #1225. [http://water.usgs.gov].
37
Parking Lot and Street Cleaning Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description This management measure involves employing pavement cleaning practices such as street sweeping on a regular basis to minimize pollutant export to receiving waters. These cleaning practices are designed to remove from road and parking lot surfaces sediment debris and other pollutants that are a potential source of pollution impacting urban waterways (Bannerman, 1999). Although performance monitoring for the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) indicted that street sweeping was not very effective in reducing pollutant loads (USEPA, 1983), recent improvements in street sweeper technology have enhanced the ability of present day machines to pick up the fine grained sediment particles that carry a substantial portion of the storm water pollutant load. Many of today's sweepers can now significantly reduce the amount of street dirt entering streams and rivers, some by significant amounts (Runoff Report, 1998). A debate as to whether this ability to pick up finer particles will improve the overall pollutant removal effectiveness of street sweepers is ongoing, and further research is required to establish the optimal sweeping frequency for pollutant removal and what streets are most appropriate for a sweeping program. Applicability Street sweeping is practiced in most urban areas, often as an aesthetic practice to remove sediment buildup and large debris from curb gutters. In colder climates, street sweeping is used during the spring snowmelt to reduce pollutant loads from road salt and to reduce sand export to receiving waters. Seventy percent of cold climate storm water experts recommend street sweeping during the spring snowmelt as a pollution prevention measure (CWP, 1997). The frequency and intensity of rainfall for a region are also key variables in determining how streets need to be swept to obtain a desired removal efficiency. Other factors that affect a street sweeper's ability to reduce nonpoint pollution include the condition of the street, its geographical location, the operator's skill, the presence of parked cars, and the amount of impervious area devoted to rooftop. Design Considerations One factor considered most essential to the success of street sweeping as a pollutant removal practice is use of the most sophisticated sweepers available. Innovations in sweeper technology have improved the performance of these machines at removing finer sediment particles, especially for machines that use vacuum-assisted dry sweeping to remove particulate matter. By using the most sophisticated sweepers in areas with the highest pollutant loads, greater reductions in sediment and accompanied pollutants can be realized. 38
Another important aspect of street sweeping programs is the ability to regulate parking. The ability to impose parking regulations in densely populated areas and on heavily traveled roads is essential. The frequency and location of street sweeping is another consideration for any program. How often and what roads to sweep are determined by the program budget and the level of pollutant removal the program wishes to achieve. Computer modeling of pollutant removal in the Pacific Northwest suggests that the optimum sweeping frequency appears to be once every week or two (CWP, 1999). More frequent sweeping operations yielded only a small increment in additional removal. The model also suggests that somewhat higher removal could be obtained on residential streets as opposed to more heavily traveled arterial roads. Sweeping of parking lots is also employed as a nonstructural management practice for industrial sites. This sweeping involves using brooms to remove small quantities of dry chemicals and solids from areas that are exposed to rainfall or storm water runoff. While the effectiveness of this practice at pollutant removal is unknown, the sweeping and proper disposal of materials is a reasonably inexpensive method of pollution prevention that requires no special training or equipment. Limitations For street sweeping, the high cost of current sweeper technologies is a large limitation to using this management practice. With costs approaching $200,000 for some of the newer sweeper technologies, storm water managers with limited budgets must consider the high equipment cost together with the uncertainty about pollutant removal efficiency to decide whether a sweeping program is an attractive management option. The potential inability to restrict parking in urban areas may present another limitation. Other possible limitations include the need for sweeper operator training, the inability of current sweeper technology to remove oil and grease, and the lack of solid evidence regarding the expected levels of pollutant removal. Proper disposal of swept materials might also be a limitation. Maintenance Considerations Street cleaning programs require a significant investment of capital and a yearly operation and maintenance budget. Sweepers have a useful life of about four years, and proper maintenance can greatly improve sweeping efficiency. Arrangements for disposal of the swept material collected must also be made, as well as accurate tracking of the streets swept and the frequency of sweeping. The operation and maintenance costs for two types of sweepers are included in Table 1. Effectiveness Street sweeping programs had largely fallen out of favor as a pollutant removal practice following the 1983 NURP report, but improvements in sweeper technology have caused a recent reevaluation of their effectiveness. New studies show that conventional mechanical broom and vacuum-assisted wet sweepers reduce nonpoint pollution by 5 to 30 percent and nutrient content by 0 to 15 percent. However, newer dry vacuum sweepers can reduce nonpoint pollution by 35 to 80 percent and nutrients by 15 to 40 percent for those areas that can be swept (Runoff Report, 1998). 39
While actual reductions in storm water pollutants have not yet been established, information on the reductions in finer sediment particles that carry a significant portion of the storm water pollutant load is available. Recent estimates are that the new vacuum assisted dry sweeper might achieve a 5088 percent overall reduction in the annual sediment loading for a residential street, depending on sweeping frequency (Bannerman, 1999). A benefit of high-efficiency street sweeping is that by capturing pollutants before they are made soluble by rainwater, the need for structural storm water control measures might be reduced. Structural controls often require costly added measures, such as adding filters to remove some of these pollutants and requiring regular manpower to change-out filters. Street sweepers that can show a significant level of sediment removal efficiency may prove to be more cost-effective than certain structural controls, especially in more urbanized areas with greater areas of pavement. Cost Considerations The largest expenditures for street sweeping programs are in staffing and equipment. The capital cost for a conventional street sweeper is between $60,000 and $120,000. Newer technologies might have prices approaching $180,000. The average useful life of a conventional sweeper is about four years, and programs must budget for equipment replacement. Sweeping frequencies will determine equipment life, so programs that sweep more often should expect to have a higher cost of replacement. If investing in newer technologies, training for operators must be included in operation and maintenance budgets. Costs for public education are small, and mostly deal with the need to obey parking restrictions and litter control. Parking tickets are an effective reminder to obey parking rules, as well as being a source of revenue. Table 1 gives sweeper cost data for two types of sweepers: mechanical and vacuum-assisted. The table shows that while the purchase price of vacuum-assisted sweepers is significantly higher, the operation and maintenance costs are lower. Table 1. Estimated costs for two types of street sweepers Sweeper Type Mechanical Life (Years) 5 Purchase Price ($) 75,000 O&M Cost ($/curb mile) 30 Sources Finley, 1996 SWRPC, 1991 Finley, 1996 Satterfield, 1991
Vacuumassisted
150,000
15
Cost data for two cities in Michigan provide some guidance on the overall cost of a street cleaning program. Table 2 contains a review of the labor, equipment, and material costs for street cleaning for the year 1995 (Ferguson et al., 1997). The average cost for street cleaning was $68/curb mile and approximately 11 curb miles/day were swept. 40
Table 2. The cost of street cleaning for two cities in Michigan City Livonia Plymouth Township Labor Equipment $23,840 $18,050 $85,630 $14,550 Material and Services $5,210 $280 Total $114,680 $32,880
References Bannerman, R. 1999. Sweeping Water Clean. American Sweeper Magazine, Huntsville, AL. Volume 7, Number 1. Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Municipal Best Management Practice Handbook. Stormwater Quality Task Force, Sacramento, CA. Caraco, D., and R. Claytor. 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Claytor, R. 1999. New Developments in Street Sweeper Technology. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Watershed Protection Techniques, Volume 3, Number 1. Finley, S. 1996. Sweeping Works. Pavement Maintenance and Reconstruction. October/November. pp. 1617 Ferguson et.al. 1997. Cost Estimating Guidelines: Best Management Practices and Engineered Controls. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, MI. A Clean Sweep Now Possible. Runoff Report. The Terrene Institute, Alexandria, VA. Vol. 6 No. 4, July/August 1998. Satterfield, C. 1996. Enviro Whirl 1 PM-10 Efficiency Study Removing Reentrained Road Dust. Lake, CA. SWRPC. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control Measures. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. Waukesha, WI. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance, Washington, DC.
41
Roadway and Bridge Maintenance Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description This practice involves pollution prevention techniques that reduce or eliminate pollutant loadings from existing road surfaces as part of an operation and maintenance program. Substantial amounts of sediment and pollutants are generated during daily roadway and bridge use and scheduled repair operations, and these pollutant loadings can threaten local water quality by contributing heavy metals, hydrocarbons, sediment, and debris to storm water runoff. Table 1 shows some of the constituents that can be present in highway runoff and their primary sources. As Table 1 demonstrates, numerous pathways for pollutant deposition on roadways and bridges influence the water quality of storm water runoff. Routine performance of general maintenance activities such as sweeping, vegetation maintenance, and cleaning of runoff control structures can help alleviate the impacts of these pollutants. Modifications in roadway resurfacing practices and application techniques for salt and other deicers can also help reduce pollutant loads to storm water runoff and protect the quality of receiving waters. Table 1. Highway runoff constituents and their primary sources (Source: USEPA, 1993)
Constituent Particulates Nitrogen, Phosphorus Lead Zinc Iron Copper Cadmium Primary Sources Pavement wear, vehicles, atmosphere Atmosphere, roadside fertilizer application Tire wear, auto exhaust Tire wear, motor oil, grease Auto body rust, steel highway structures, moving engine parts Metal plating, brake lining wear, moving engine parts, bearing and bushing wear, fungicides and insecticides Tire Wear, insecticides
42
Table 1. Highway runoff constituents and their primary sources (Source: USEPA, 1993) (Continued)
Chromium Nickel Manganese Cyanide Sodium, Calcium, Chloride Sulphate Petroleum Metal plating, moving engine parts, brake lining wear Diesel fuel and gasoline, lubricating oil, metal plating, brake lining wear, asphalt paving Moving engine parts Anticake compound used to keep deicing salt granular Deicing salts Roadway beds, fuel, deicing salts Spills, leaks or blow-by of motor lubricants, antifreeze and hydraulic fluids, asphalt surface leachate
Applicability Roadway systems are a large part of the infrastructure of urban areas across the country, and require regular repairs and maintenance due to traffic use and climatic conditions. The level of pollutants found in road and bridge runoff is variable and is determined by a number of factors in addition to traffic volume and climate. Other factors affecting pollutant levels include surrounding land use, the design of the bridge or roadway, the presence of roadside vegetation, the use of insecticides, and the frequency of accidents and spills that can introduce hazardous chemicals. In colder climates, the amount of deicer applied to melt ice and snow can also influence the level of certain pollutants in road runoff and its impacts on local water quality. Design Considerations Road and bridge maintenance programs have a number of options for reducing the level of pollutants generated during the maintenance of existing road surfaces. Changes in the methods used for maintaining road surfaces, removing debris and sediment from roadways, and cleaning of runoff control structures can help improve the overall quality of storm water discharges from roads and bridges. Proper planning for road and bridge resurfacing operations is a simple but effective method to control pollution. Many techniques can be implemented to control the impacts of this maintenance operation. First, paving operations should be performed using concrete, asphalt, or other sealers only in dry weather situations to prevent contamination of runoff. Second, proper staging techniques should be used to reduce the spillage of paving materials during the repair of potholes and worn pavement. These techniques can include covering storm drain inlets and manholes during paving operations; using erosion and sediment control measures to decrease runoff from repair sites; and utilizing pollution prevention materials such as drip pans and absorbent material for all paving machines to limit leaks and spills of paving materials and fluids. 43
Finally, resurfacing operations could employ porous asphalt for pothole repair and for shoulder areas to reduce the level of storm water runoff from road systems. For more information on permeable road surface materials, see the Porous Pavement fact sheet. Good cleaning practices can help diminish impacts to storm water runoff. Sweeping and vacuuming of heavily traveled roadways to remove sediment and debris can reduce the amount of pollutants in runoff. Street sweeping as a pollution source control is discussed more extensively in the Parking Lot and Street Cleaning fact sheet. Regular cleaning of runoff control structures such as catch basins can help reduce sediment loads in runoff that will end up in local waterways (see Catch Basins fact sheet). Proper application of road salt or other deicers also reduces storm water pollution. By routinely calibrating spreaders, a program manager can prevent over-application of deicing materials. In addition to reducing the effects of these materials on the aquatic environment, cost savings may be realized due to reductions in the purchase of deicing materials. Training for transportation employees in proper deicer application techniques, the timing of deicer application, and what type of deicer to apply will also determine the impacts on water quality and aquatic habitat. Maintenance practices for roadside vegetation also determine the storm water quality of road runoff. Restrictions on the use of herbicides and pesticides on roadside vegetation, and training to ensure that employees understand the proper handling and application of pesticides and other chemicals, can help prevent contamination of runoff. Selection of roadside vegetation with higher salt tolerances will also help to maintain vegetated swales and biofilters that filter out runoff. For more information on vegetated storm water practices, see the Grassed Filter Strips fact sheet. Bridge runoff may require additional maintenance practices to eliminate storm water runoff impacts. In addition to some of the roadway practices listed above improved, practices in bridge siting and design can help reduce water quality impacts. One technique is to avoid using bridge scupper drains for any new bridges and to routinely clean existing ones to prevent sediment and debris buildup. Scupper drains can cause direct discharges to surface waters and have been found to carry relatively high concentrations of pollutants (CDM, 1993). Program managers should consider endorsing retrofits of scupper drains with catch basins or redirecting water from these drains to vegetated areas to provide treatment. Other techniques such as using suspended tarps, booms, and vacuums to capture pollutants (e.g., paint, solvents, rust, and paint scrapings) generated during bridge maintenance will also help reduce impacts to receiving waters. In addition, using deicers such as glycol, urea, or calcium magnesium acetate (CMA) reduces the corrosion of metal bridge supports that can occur when salt is used. Limitations Generally, limitations to instituting pollution prevention practices for road and bridge maintenance involve the cost for additional equipment and training. Since maintenance of roadways and bridges is already required in all communities, staffing is usually in place and alteration of current practices should not require additional staffing or administrative labor.
44
Limitations may arise in the location of new bridges. The availability and cost of land and other economic and political factors may dictate where the placement of a new bridge will occur. Better design of the bridge to control runoff is required if it is being placed near sensitive waters. The practice of controlling paved areas to limit impervious surface might also be restricted by community regulations of required widths for roadways and shoulders. Effectiveness Limited data are available on the actual effectiveness of road and bridge maintenance practices at removing pollutants from storm water runoff. Table 2 examines the effectiveness and cost of some of the operation and maintenance practices recommended for storm water pollution control. Table 2. Road and bridge maintenance management practices: cost and effectiveness (Source: USEPA, 1993)
Effectiveness (% Removal)a Maintaining Roadside Vegetation Sediment Control: 90% average P and N: 40% average COD, Lead, and Zinc: 50% average TSS: 60% average Smooth Street Frequent Cleaning: TSS: 20% COD: 5% Lead: 25% Smooth Street Infrequent Cleaning: TSS: N/A COD: N/A Lead: 5% N/A N/A N/A Cost Natural succession allowed to occur Average: $100/acre/year Range: $50-$200/acre/year Average: $20/curb mile Range: $10$30/curb mile
Street Sweeping
Litter Control General Maintenance Minimizing Deicer Application

a
All are accepted as economical practices to control or prevent storm water impacts.
P=phosphorus; N=nitrogen; TSS=total suspended solids; COD=chemical oxygen demand
Although data may be limited on cost and effectiveness, preventative maintenance and strategic planning are time-proven and cost-effective methods to limit contamination of storm water runoff. It can be assumed that the management practices recommended will have a positive affect on storm water quality by working to reduce pollutant loads and the quantity of runoff. Protecting and restoring roadside vegetation, removal of debris and sediment from roads and bridges, and directing runoff to vegetated areas are all effective ways to treat storm water runoff. Other practices, such as minimizing deicer application, litter control, and proper handling of fertilizers, pesticides, and other toxic materials, work to control some of the pathways of storm water pollution. Employing good road and bridge maintenance practices is an efficient and lowcost means of eliminating some of the impacts of pollutants associated with road systems on local streams and waterways. 45
Cost Considerations The maintenance of local roads and bridges is already a consideration of most community public works or transportation departments. Therefore, the cost of pollutant reducing management practices will involve the training and equipment required to implement these new practices. Cost data for some of the new practices that have been recommended are included in Table 2. Costs may vary greatly in the type of deicer selected for application. Table 3 includes a comparison of four different deicers and the cost for application. It should be noted that CMA has a higher cost than the other deicers, but that reductions in corrosion to infrastructure, damage to roadside vegetation, and amount of material used may offset the higher cost. Table 3. The estimated cost of four deicer types (Source: Caraco and Claytor, 1997)
Deicer Type Sodium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA) CG-90 Surface Saver Material Cost Per Ton $20$40 $200 $650$675 $185 Cost Per Lane Mile Per Season $6,371$6,909 $6,977$7,529 $12,958$16,319 $5,931$6,148
References Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). 1995. Blueprint for a Clean Bay: Best Management Practices to Prevent Stormwater Pollution from ConstructionRelated Sites. Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association, Oakland, CA. Camp Dresser & McKee et al. 1993. California Storm Water Municipal Best Management Practice Handbook. Stormwater Quality Task Force, Sacramento, CA. Caraco, D., and R. Claytor. 1997. Stormwater BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Ohrel, R. 1995. Rating Deicing AgentsRoad Salt Stands Firm. Watershed Protection Techniques Vol 1, No 4. pp. 217220. Ohrel, R. 1995. Choosing Appropriate Vegetation for Salt-Impacted Roadways. Watershed Protection Techniques Vol 1, No 4. pp. 221223. Virginia Department of Transportation. 2000. Springfield Interchange Current Construction. [http://www.springfieldinterchange.com]. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. 46
Septic System Controls Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Septic system source control refers to the use of outreach programs to educate homeowners about the proper operation and maintenance of their septic systems to reduce the likelihood of failure. Septic systems are designed to treat wastewater by separating solids from liquids and then draining the liquid into the ground. Sewage flows into the tank where settling and bacterial decomposition of larger particles takes place, while treated liquid filters into the soil. When system failures occur, untreated wastewater and sewage can be introduced into ground water or nearby streams and water bodies. Pollution prevention practices are designed to restrict pollutant and nutrient loads from improperly functioning septic systems from entering local water sources. These loadings occur for a number of reasons, including improper siting, inadequate installation, or system operation failures (see Failing Septic Systems fact sheet). As many as 75 percent of all system failures have been attributed to hydraulic overloading (Jarrett et al., 1985). Failures may also occur due to lapses in the regular inspection and maintenance that are required to ensure proper operation during the design life of the septic system. Homeowners may be unaware of the age of their system and whether preemptive planning is necessary before the system fails. Applicability Outreach regarding septic systems controls is applicable for large lot development in rural areas that are not served by sewer. When septic systems are used for wastewater treatment, there is a need for educational outreach and training to avoid system failures for owners of both new and existing systems. Septic system maintenance education is extremely important in coastal areas for shoreline development near shellfish beds and spawning areas, where septic effluent discharges can influence water quality and lead to bed closures and algal blooms. There is also a significant need for educational outreach regarding septic system maintenance near lake shoreline developments, where nitrogen inputs can lead to lake eutrophication. Implementation The most effective way to control on-site wastewater problems is through a comprehensive management program. An onsite wastewater management program can reduce water quality degradation and save local governments and homeowners time and money, as well as better tracking of the performance of routine maintenance practices. This comprehensive plan is administered by one agency that has ultimate responsibility for all aspects of wastewater management, including on-site disposal systems. (see Failing Septic Systems fact sheet). 47
Public outreach and training are vital elements in the control of septic system failure. Many of the problems associated with improper septic system functioning may be attributed to a lack of homeowner knowledge of operation and maintenance of the system. Educational materials for homeowners and training courses for installers and inspectors can reduce the incidence of failure. Education is most effective when used in concert with other source reduction practices, such as phosphate bans and use of low-volume plumbing fixtures. Simple messages that can be conveyed to homeowners to reduce system failures and ensure proper functioning include
Do not wait until septic system shows sign of failure. Inspect the system annually and have it pumped-out at least once every 3 years. Keep records of pumping and maintenance and a map of the location of your system and drainfield. Practice water conservation indoors and divert roof drains and surface water away from the system. Use caution in disposing materials down the drain. Household chemicals can kill the bacteria that make the system work and nondegradable materials (cigarette butts, etc.) can clog the system. Keep heavy equipment and vehicles off your system and drainfield. Don't cover your drainfield with impermeable surfaces that can block evaporation and the air needed for effluent treatment.
In addition to the general suggestions above, there are other management measures which can be implemented to help maintain a properly operating system. These measures include the following: Chemical Additive Restrictions Organic solvents are often advertised for use as septic system cleaners. Little evidence shows that such cleaners perform any useful functions, and they might instead exterminate the microbes necessary for waste treatment, resulting in increased discharge of pollutants. In addition, the chemicals themselves often contain constituents that are listed with U.S. EPA as priority pollutants. Restrictions on the use of these additives can prevent improper system operation and ground water contamination (USEPA, 1993). Phosphorus Detergent Restrictions Conventional septic systems are usually very effective at removing phosphorus (see the Failing Septic Systems fact sheet). However, certain soil conditions combined with proximity to sensitive surface waters can result in phosphorus pollutant loading. If such conditions are sufficiently prevalent within areas of concern, restrictions or bans on the use of detergents containing phosphate can be implemented. Eliminating phosphates from detergent can reduce phosphorus loads to septic systems by 40 to 50 percent (USEPA, 1993). As of October 1993, 17 states had enacted phosphate detergent restrictions or bans (Osmond et al, 1995).
48
Elimination of Garbage Disposals for Households Served by Septic System Garbage disposals contribute to the loading of suspended solids, nutrients, and biological oxygen demand (BOD) to septic systems, as well as increasing the buildup of solids in septic tanks. Garbage disposals can double the amount of solids added to a septic tank, creating the need for more frequent pumpouts. Proper Septic System Maintenance Depending on soil conditions and other factors, septic systems have a failure rate of 5 to 35 percent. When they fail, septic systems can discharge untreated or partially treated wastewater into groundwater. As a result, it is important to ensure that septic systems are maintained and operating properly. This can be accomplished by homeowners or trained inspectors through regular inspections of onsite systems. During inspections, the holding or septic tank should be checked to determine whether or not pumping is necessary. Additionally, the inspection port should be opened and the baffles checked to ensure that they have not been damaged since the last inspection. The absorption field should also be checked for flooding or sogginess, which are indicators of a clogged system or excessive water use. Finally, the entire area should be checked for odors or damp or soggy areas, which are indicative of a leak in the system. The holding tank should be pumped regularly, with the frequency depending on the capacity of the tank, the flow of wastewater, and the volume of solids in the tank. First, a tank's capacity might become too small if new high-water-use technologies such as a hot tub or whirlpool are installed, or if more people move into the house than when the system was originally installed. Second, when more people move into a house, the wastewater flow will increase, requiring more frequent pumping. Finally, if the house has a garbage disposal or if the occupation of someone in the household results in their having excessively soiled clothing, the volume of solids entering the tank might be greater than usual and require more frequent pumping. These factors should be accounted for when determining how frequently to pump a septic tank. Table 2 lists estimates of how frequently septic tanks should be pumped on average, based on the size of the tank and household size (NSFC). These values were calculated assuming there was no garbage disposal, which can increase solids by up to 50 percent. Individuals can determine specifically when the holding tank should be pumped by occasionally checking the depth of solids and the level of scum built up on top of the water in the tank. As this can be an unpleasant chore, it is best to have the tank routinely pumped by a certified contractor approximately every 3 years. Limitations As with all pollution prevention measures, public ignorance about the suggested practices may be the biggest limitation to septic system source control. Many residents appear to be either unaware of or unwilling to implement the necessary steps to ensure the proper operation and maintenance of their septic systems. A recent survey of residents in the Chesapeake Bay region found that 50 percent of septic owners had not had their systems inspected within the last 3 years and that 46 percent had not had their system cleaned within the same time frame (Swann, 1999). Twelve percent of residents did not even know where their septic system was located. This finding indicates that residents are not receiving the necessary information on septic system care to prevent or reduce the incidence of failure. 49
Table 2. Estimated septic tank pumping frequencies in years

Household Size (number of people) 1 5.8 9.1 11.0 12.4 15.6 18.9 22.1 25.4 28.6 31.9 2 2.6 4.2 5.2 5.9 7.5 9.1 10.7 12.4 14.0 15.6 3 1.3 2.6 3.3 3.7 4.8 5.9 6.9 8.0 9.1 10.2 4 1.0 1.8 2.3 2.6 3.4 4.2 5.0 5.9 6.7 7.5 5 0.7 1.3 1.7 2.0 2.6 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.2 5.9 6 0.4 1.0 1.3 1.3 2.0 2.6 3.1 3.7 4.2 4.8
Tank Size (gallons) 500 750 900 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000 2,250 2,500
Effectiveness Failing septic systems have been linked to water quality problems in streams, lakes, shellfish beds, and coastal areas. Improvements in system operation and maintenance should be a strong element in watershed plans for those areas where septic systems are used for wastewater treatment. Public education and outreach regarding septic system operation and maintenance can be assumed to produce some positive effect on water quality, but studies on resident behaviors regarding septic pollution prevention practices are limited. Instead, effectiveness of septic source controls is most often measured in the number of informational packets mailed out or the number of attendees for training workshops. While this may help to define the demand for information, it gives no indication of whether the operation and maintenance practices presented are implemented. To better determine whether pollution prevention outreach is being effective, residential surveys should be part of any program seeking to educate residents on septic systems and their influence on water quality. Cost Considerations The cost of septic system pollution prevention programs can vary greatly, depending on factors such as staff time, outreach components, and the extent of septic use within a region. Table 3 provides some examples of programs from various parts of the country and the expenditures for septic outreach. 50
Once a program is well established, the cost of creating educational materials and training programs decreases and funding can be redistributed to those outreach techniques that have proven to be the most successful. Programs should be sure to secure some funding for media outreach (especially television), as this often ranks as the most popular information source in surveys of resident preferences. Table 3. Some examples of cost and staff time for septic outreach programs Program Expenditure City of Olympia, Washington Thurston County, Washington Staff time (Full time equivalent)
Components Flyers/brochures Training workshops System monitoring Flyer/brochures Discount coupons for septic pumping Training workshops Publications/videos Flyers/brochures Training Workshops/community Visits Septic owners guide distributed with new permits Satellite conferences for policy makers Train the trainers program
$40,000
0.5
$35,000
0.5
Minnesota Cooperative Extension
$18,000
0.25
51
References Maine Department of Environmental Protection. No Date. Septic Systems: How they work and How to Keep them Working. Maine DEP, Augusta, ME. Matuszeski, W. 1997. Notes from Bayside: Even at their best, septic systems are bad for the Bay. Bay Journal 7(1). New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy. 1992. Ground Water Protection Practices for Septic Systems. Trenton, NJ. NSFC. No Date. So Now You Own a Septic Tank. National Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, Department of Technology Education, Morgantown, WV. NSFC. No Date. The Care and Feeding of Your Septic Tank. National Small Flows Clearinghouse. West Virginia University, Department of Technology Education, Morgantown, WV. Ohrel, R. 1995. Dealing with Septic System Impacts. Watershed Protection Techniques 2(1): 265-272. Osmond, D.L., D.E. Line, J.A. Gale, R.W. Gannon, C.B. Knott, K.A. Bartenhagen, M.H. Turner, S.W. Coffey, J. Spooner, J. Wells, J.C. Walker, L.L. Hargrove, M.A. Foster, P.D. Robillard, and D.W. Lehning. 1995. WATERSHEDS: Water, Soil and Hydro-Environmental Decision Support System. North Carolina State University Water Quality Group, Raleigh, NC. Olson, K., D. Gustafson, B. Liukkonen, and V. Cook. 1997. Septic System Owner's Guide. Minnesota Extension Service, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Swann, C. 1999. A Survey of Residential Nutrient Behavior in the Chesapeake Bay. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. Texas A&M University. 1996. Texas A&M-El Paso, UTEP Researchers Use High Tech Methods to Assess Contamination from On-Site Systems. [http://twri.tamu.edu/twripubs/Insights/v5n2/article-5.html]. Accessed January 2001. University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. 1992. Understanding Your Septic System. Reno, NV. University of Washington Extension and Soil Conservation Service. 1992. Venturing Beyond the Flush: Septic Systems and Water Quality. The Water Spot, December 1992.
52
Storm Drain System Cleaning Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Storm drain systems need to be cleaned regularly. Routine cleaning reduces the amount of pollutants, trash, and debris both in the storm drain system and in receiving waters. Clogged drains and storm drain inlets can cause the drains to overflow, leading to increased erosion (Livingston et al., 1997). Benefits of cleaning include increased dissolved oxygen, reduced levels of bacteria, and support of instream habitat. Areas with relatively flat grades or low flows should be given special attention because they rarely achieve high enough flows to flush themselves (Ferguson et al., 1997). Applicability This measure is applicable to all storm drain systems. The same principles can be applied to material and waste handling areas, paved and vegetated areas, waterways, and new development projects (Ferguson et al., 1997). Limitations While cleaning is necessary for all storm drain systems, there are limitations (adapted from Ferguson et al., 1997) as follows:
Cleaning the storm drain by flushing is more successful for pipes smaller than 36 inches in diameter. A water source is necessary for cleaning. The wastewater must be collected and treated once flushed through the system. Depending on the condition of the wastewater, it may or may not be disposed to sanitary sewer systems. The efficiency of storm system flushing decreases when the length of sewer line being cleaned exceeds 700 feet.
Maintenance Considerations Ferguson et al. (1997) report removal of 55 to 65 percent for nonorganic materials and grits and 65 to 75 percent for organics.
53
Cost Considerations The cost of a vactor truck can range from $175,000 to $200,000, and labor rates range from $125 to $175 per hour (Ferguson et al., 1997). Ferguson et al. (1997) also cited costs of $1.00 to $2.00 per foot for storm drain system cleaning. References Drain Patrol. No date. Services. [www.drainpatrol.com/pages/services.html]. Accessed January 2001. Ferguson, T., R. Gignac, M. Stoffan, A. Ibrahim, and H. Aldrich. 1997. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project Cost Estimating Guidelines: Best Management Practices and Engineered Controls. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, MI. Livingston, E., E. Shaver, and J.J. Skupien. 1997. Operation, Maintenance, & Management of Stormwater Management Systems. Watershed Management Institute, Inc. Ingleside, MD
54
Alternative Discharge Options for Chlorinated Water Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Chlorinated water discharged to surface waters has an adverse impact on local water quality. Swimming pools are a major source of chlorinated water discharged into sanitary and storm sewer systems. An average swimming pool holds 19,000 gallons of chlorinated water. Pools have high concentrations of chlorine, which is toxic to wildlife and fish. Applicability Many pool owners who live in cooler climates drain their swimming pools to reduce maintenance and potential damage from freezing during harsh winters. These individuals should not discharge pool water to the storm sewer system or directly into a waterbody and should investigate alternative discharge options. Siting and Design Considerations The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality suggests that
Pool owners obtain permission from local sanitary sewer operators or municipal treatment plant operators and discharge to the sanitary sewer system. Discharge the chlorinated water to land, where it will not drain to local surface waters. Dechlorinate the water before draining the pool.
Montgomery County, Maryland's, Department of Environmental Protection (1997) provides the following guidelines to pool owners and operators:

Community pools must discharge to the sanitary sewer using a surge tank. Residential pools must discharge backwash water to the sanitary sewer. If the only option for draining pool water is to discharge directly into the environment, water quality must comply with the applicable water quality criteria. Pool water must sit for at least 2 days after the addition of chlorine or bromine or until chlorine or bromine levels are below 0.1 mg/l. The pH of discharge water must be between 6.5 and 8.5 before it is discharged. Algicides such as copper or silver can interrupt normal algal and plant growth and should not be used. 55
Total suspended solids must be below 60 mg/lsuspended particles should be allowed to settle out and the water should not appear murky. Settled material should not be discharged with pool water. Discharges to the environment should be directed over a land surface so that some level of filtration by soil particles can occur. The above water quality requirements also apply to land-applied water.
Limitations Enforcement of safe discharge of chlorinated water may be difficult to achieve. References MCDEP. 1997. Montgomery County NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Annual Report. MS-MO-95-006. Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection, Rockville, MD. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ). 1997. Environmentally Safe Methods for Draining Swimming Pools. News release. [http://www.deq.state.or.us/news/releases/archived/swimpool.htm]. Last updated October 1, 1997. Accessed June 1, 2001. The Pool Guy. 2001. The Pool Guy's Homepage. [www.geocities.com/Athens/8205/]. Accessed January 2001.
56
Materials management
Alternative Products Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Using alternatives to toxic substances drastically reduces their presence in storm water and receiving waters. The most common toxic substances found in the home are cleaners, automotive products, and pesticides. Fertilizers, paints, and fuels are among other common hazardous substances frequently found in ground water because of improper disposal (WEF and ASCE, 1998). Applicability The promotion of safer alternative products should be coupled with other programs designed to reduce the presence of hazardous or toxic materials in homes and storm water runoff. Examples of such programs are hazardous materials collection, good housekeeping or material management practices, oil and automotive waste recycling, and spill response and prevention (WEF and ASCE, 1998). Examples of commonly used products and safer alternatives are as follows (adapted from Washington State Department of Ecology):

Aerosols. Pump-type or non-aerosol products should be used. Art supplies. One should purchase water-based paints or inks. They should not contain lead or other toxic materials. Batteries. Rechargeable batteries are a cost-effective alternative to disposable batteries. Chemical fertilizers. Composting yard clippings and food scraps is an option. Manure (in measured amounts) is another alternative to chemical fertilizers. Gasoline. Not driving at all is the best way to reduce gasoline use. Purchasing a superefficient or electric vehicle is the next best alternative. Carpooling, walking, bicycling, and public transportation are other viable options. Household cleaners and detergents. Baking soda is an excellent cleanser with mild abrasive power that can be used in lieu of heavy-duty cleansers. A mixture of 1 quart water and 2 tablespoons of vinegar can be used as a window cleaner. Three parts olive oil mixed with one part white vinegar can be used for a wood cleanser. Borax and lemon juice make an excellent toilet cleaner. Many other non- or less-toxic alternatives to harsh cleansers exist. A listing of these alternatives can be found at www.healthdept.co.pierce.wa.us/sourceprotection/alter.html. 57
Motor Oil. Re-refined motor oil should be used. Doing so will spur the market for recycled motor oil and decrease reliance on new oil supplies. Pesticides. Keeping homes and gardens free from food and breeding areas for insect pests prevents the need for pesticides. Onion, garlic, and marigold plants help keep garden pests at bay.
Implementation One of the best ways to encourage homeowners to switch to alternatives to potentially harmful products is to educate them (see Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Wastes fact sheet). Municipalities can compile a list of alternative products and post it on their web site, publish it in a newsletter, include it as an insert in a utility bill, or produce magnets or other household products with a select list of nonhazardous alternatives. Municipalities might choose to include commercially available products that have been shown to be "green" alternatives to harsh chemicals. Limitations In some cases, alternative products may not be readily available. In addition, cost can be a limiting factor. For example, until recently, environmentally friendly de-icing materials for roads were significantly more expensive than traditional salt (Babcock 1998). Effectiveness of alternatives may be an issue. The biggest impediment to instituting widespread use of alternative products is public awareness. Municipal staff must convince people to change old habits or to try new products. Effectiveness The use of alternative products prevents their hazardous waste counterparts from being disposed of improperly and contaminating storm water. Cost Considerations The majority of the cost for this BMP is composed of staff hours. An alternative products campaign should be instituted in conjunction with other public awareness programs; therefore, municipalities should not experience significant cost increases.
58
References Babcock, Charles R. 1998, April 27. Slick Hill Work by De-Icer Entrepreneur. Washington Post, A15. Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department. 2001. Household Hazardous Wastes: Less Toxic Alternatives for Cleaning. Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department, Tacoma, WA. [http://www.healthdept.co.pierce.wa.us/sourceprotection/alter.html]. Last updated February 26, 2001. Accessed June 1, 2001. Washington State Department of Ecology. Turning the Tide on Toxics in the Home: A Guide to Safer Alternatives and Proper Disposal of Hazardous Household Products. Water Environment Federation (WEF)and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1998. Urban Runoff Quality Management. WEF Manual of Practice No. 23 and ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87. WEF Water Quality and Ecology Subcommittee of the Technical Practice Committee and The Urban Water Resources Research Council of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Alexandria and Reston, VA.
59
Hazardous Materials Storage Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Failure to properly store hazardous materials dramatically increases the probability that they will end up in local waterways. Many people have hazardous chemicals stored throughout their homes, especially in garages and storage sheds. Practices such as covering hazardous materials or even storing them properly, can have dramatic impacts. Applicability Hazardous material storage is relevant to both urban and rural settings and all geographic regions. The effects of hazardous material leakage may be more pronounced in areas with heavier rainfall, due to the greater volume of runoff. Siting and Design Considerations EPA (1992) has outlined some management considerations for hazardous materials. They are as follows:
Ensuring sufficient aisle space to provide access for inspections and to improve the ease of material transport. Storing materials well away from high-traffic areas to reduce the likelihood of accidents that might cause spills or damage to drums, bags, or containers. Stacking containers in accordance with the manufacturers' directions to avoid damaging the container or the product itself. Storing containers on pallets or equivalent structures. This facilitates inspection for leaks and prevents the containers from coming into contact with wet floors, which can cause corrosion. This consideration also reduces the incidence of damage by pests (insects, rodents, etc.). Delegating the responsibility for management of hazardous materials to personnel trained and experienced in hazardous substance management.
Covering hazardous materials and areas where such materials are handled reduces potential contact with storm water and wind. Storage areas, outdoor material deposits, loading and unloading areas, and raw materials should all be covered or enclosed. Priority should be given to locations of the most hazardous substances (USEPA 1992).
60
Residents waiting to dispose of their household hazardous waste should store it properly until their hazardous waste collection day (Kopel,1998). One storage technique requires a plastic container with a lid (e.g., a 5-gallon bucket). The container should be filled halfway with (unused) kitty litter. The hazardous substance in its own original container should be put into the kitty litter-filled plastic bucket. The bucket lid should be fastened, and the contained marked clearly, kept far away from children, and anyone else who might ingest it. Corrosion will be reduced if the container is stored on a shelf, rather than on a concrete or dirt floor. Limitations The lifespan of the cover or structure must be taken into account, depending on the hazardous nature of the stored materials. Tarpaulins and plastic sheets may not last in certain types of climatic conditions. If a roof or other structure is required, the lifespan will increase. Any storage facility must meet local fire and building codes (Ferguson, et al. 1997). Maintenance Considerations Maintenance of hazardous material storage areas consists mostly of inspection and employee training (Ferguson, et al. 1997). Storage spaces and containers should be routinely inspected for leaks, signs of cracks or deterioration, or any other signs of release. Effectiveness Improved storage of hazardous materials is effective at reducing contamination of storm water runoff and receiving waters if proper storage and maintenance techniques are used. Cost Considerations Estimates of costs for storing and covering materials vary depending on the substance and type of operation. Ferguson et al. (1997) estimated the costs of a pre-fabricated building at $6 to $11 per ft2, and the cost of a 6-inch thick concrete slab at $3.50 to $5.00 per ft2. All hazardous materials should be protected from exposure to storm water regardless of the expense. To offset the cost of covering or enclosing hazardous materials, consider changing procurement, inventory, and disposal practices to minimize the amount of materials stored onsite. References Ferguson, T., R. Gigac, M. Stoffan, A. Ibrahim, and H. Aldrich. 1997. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project. Wayne County, MI. Kopel, D. 1998. Household Hazardous Waste. Independence Institute, Golden CO. [i2i.org/SuptDocs/Enviro/enhhw.htm] accessed on 10/5/99. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
61
Road Salt Application and Storage Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description The application and storage of deicing materials, most commonly salts such as sodium chloride, can lead to water quality problems for surrounding areas (Koppelman et al., 1984). Salts, gravel, sand, and other materials are applied to highways and roads to reduce the amount of ice during winter storm events. Salts lower the melting point of ice, allowing roadways to stay free of ice buildup during cold winters. Sand and gravel increase traction on the road, making travel safer. Applicability This practice is applicable to areas that receive snowfall in winter months and require deicing materials. Municipalities in these areas must ensure proper storage and application for equipment and materials. Siting and Design Considerations Many of the problems associated with contamination of local waterways stem from the improper storage of deicing materials (Koppelman et al., 1984). Salts are very soluble when they come into contact with storm water. They can migrate into ground water used for public water supplies and also contaminate surface waters. More information about road deicing materials can be found at the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials web page at www.transportation.org/aashto/home.nsf/FrontPage. Limitations Road salt is the least expensive material for deicing operations; however, once the full social costs are taken into account, alternative products and better management and application of salts become increasingly attractive options. Maintenance Considerations Covering stored road salts may be costly; however, the benefits are greater than the perceived costs. Storing road salts correctly prevents the salt from lumping together, which makes it easier to load and apply. In addition, covering salt storage piles reduces salt loss from storm water runoff and potential contamination to streams, aquifers, and estuarine areas. Salt storage piles should be located outside the 100-year floodplain for further protection against surface water contamination.
62
During road salt application, certain best management practices can produce significant environmental benefits. The amount of road salt applied should be regulated to prevent oversalting of motorways and increasing runoff concentrations. The amount of salt applied should be varied to reflect site-specific characteristics, such as road width and design, traffic concentration, and proximity to surface waters. Calibration devices for spreaders in trucks aid maintenance workers in the proper application of road salts. Alternative materials, such as sand or gravel, should be used in especially sensitive areas. References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 2000. AASHTO: Transportation Center of Excellence. [www.transportation.org/aashto/home.nsf/FrontPage]. Accessed April 10, 2001. USEPA. 1995. Planning Considerations for Roads, Highways and Bridges. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. [www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/education/planroad.html]. Koppelman, L.E., E. Tanenbaum, and C. Swick. 1984. Nonpoint Source Management Handbook. Long Island Regional Planning Board, Hauppauge, NY.
63
Spill Response and Prevention Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Spill response and prevention plans should clearly state measures to stop the source of a spill, contain the spill, clean up the spill, dispose of contaminated materials, and train personnel to prevent and control future spills. Applicability Spill prevention and control plans are applicable to construction sites where hazardous wastes are stored or used. Hazardous wastes include pesticides, paints, cleaners, petroleum products, fertilizers, and solvents. Siting and Design Considerations Identify potential spill or source areas, such as loading and unloading, storage, and processing areas, places where dust or particulate matter is generated, and areas designated for waste disposal. Also, spill potential should be evaluated for stationary facilities, including manufacturing areas, warehouses, service stations, parking lots, and access roads. Material handling procedures and storage requirements should be defined and actions taken to reduce spill potential and impacts on storm water quality. This can be achieved by
Recycling, reclaiming, or reusing process materials, thereby reducing the amount of process materials that are brought into the facility Installing leak detection devices, overflow controls, and diversion berms Disconnecting any drains from processing areas that lead to the storm sewer Performing preventative maintenance on storm tanks, valves, pumps, pipes, and other equipment Using material transfer procedures or filling procedures for tanks and other equipment that minimize spills Substituting less- or non-toxic materials for toxic materials.
Provide documentation of spill response equipment and procedures to be used, ensuring that procedures are clear and concise. Give step-by-step instructions for the response to spills at a particular facility. This spill response plan can be presented as a procedural handbook or a sign.
64
The spill response plan should

Identify individuals responsible for implementing the plan Define safety measures to be taken with each kind of waste Specify how to notify appropriate authorities, such as police and fire departments, hospitals, or publicly-owned treatment works for assistance State procedures for containing, diverting, isolating, and cleaning up the spill Describe spill response equipment to be used, including safety and cleanup equipment.
Education is essential for reducing spills. By informing people of actions they can take to reduce spill potential, spills will be reduced and/or prevented. Some municipalities have set up 1-800 numbers for citizens to call in the event of spills. This is helpful for ensuring that spills are cleaned up in a safe, proper, and timely manner. Limitations A spill prevention and control plan must be well planned and clearly defined so that the likelihood of accidental spills can be reduced and any spills that do occur can be dealt with quickly and effectively. Training might be necessary to ensure that all workers are knowledgeable enough to follow procedures. Equipment and materials for cleanup must be readily accessible and clearly marked for workers to be able to follow procedures. Maintenance Considerations Update the spill prevention and control plan to accommodate any changes in the site or procedures. Regularly inspect areas where spills might occur to ensure that procedures are posted and cleanup equipment is readily available. Effectiveness A spill prevention and control plan can be highly effective at reducing the risk of surface and ground water contamination. However, the plan's effectiveness is enhanced by worker training, availability of materials and equipment for cleanup, and extra time spent by management to ensure that procedures are followed. Cost Considerations Spill prevention and control plans are inexpensive to implement. However, extra time is needed to properly handle and dispose of spills, which results in increased labor costs.
65
References DAWG. 2000. Flexible SpillBerm For Quick Spill Containment. http://www.dawginc.com/cgi-bin/public/director.cgi?CODE= 9791556921446&LINK=/products/prod_16.htm. Accessed January 2001. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
66
Used Oil Recycling Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Used motor oil is a hazardous waste because it contains heavy metals picked up from the engine during use. Fortunately, it is recyclable because it becomes dirty from use, rather than actually wearing out. However, as motor oil is toxic to humans, wildlife, and plants, it should be disposed of at a local recycling or disposal facility. Before disposal, used motor oil should be stored in a plastic or metal container with a secure lid, rather than dumped in a landfill or down the drain. Containers that previously stored household chemicals, such as bleach, gasoline, paint, or solvents should not be used. Used motor oil should also never be mixed with other substances such as antifreeze, pesticides, or paint stripper. Used motor oil is recycled in a number of different ways. It can be reprocessed into fuel for heating and cooling homes. Reprocessing is the most common method of recycling used oil in the United States. Approximately 750 million gallons of used oil are reprocessed every year and marketed to asphalt plants, steel mills, boilers, pulp and paper mills, cement/lime kilns, and a number of other places. Motor oil can also be burned in furnaces for heat or in power plants to generate electricity for homes, businesses, or schools. It can also be blended for marine fuels, mixed with asphalts for paving, or be used in industrial burners. Used motor oil can also be used in specially designed municipal garages, space heaters, and automotive bays. Finally, used motor oil can be re-refined into lubricating oils that meet the same standards as virgin/new oil. All of these methods of recycling help to conserve valuable energy resources. When establishing oil recycling programs, municipalities should provide the public with the proper informational resources. Programs should encourage the public to contact local service stations, municipal governments, the county government office, or the local environmental or health departments, if they are unsure where to safely dispose of their oil. The public can also call 1-800-RECYCLE or contact Earth's 911 at www.1800cleanup.org/ for more information. Finally, state government contacts, who might be able to provide information about oil recycling, can be obtained by the public at www.noraoil.com/Contact/contact.html.
67
Municipalities also need to address oil filter recycling in their recycling programs. Programs should encourage the public to check with local collection facilities to determine whether oil filters are recycled locally. The Filter Manufacturers Council, which was established in 1971 to monitor regulatory and technological developments that affect the oil industry, can also be used as a resource for the public. The Council operates a hotline (1-800-99-FILTER) and a web site (www.filtercouncil.org/) to provide information about state regulations and companies that transport, recycle, and process used oil filters. If oil filters are not recycled locally, empty filters should be wrapped in newspaper and disposed of with regular household waste. Oil filters must always be drained of oil, whether recycling or disposing of the filter. The public should also check with trash collectors to determine if their state permits disposal of oil filters in landfills. Applicability Motorists that have their oil changed can be classified as a do-it-yourselfer or a do-it-for-me. Doit-yourselfers change their own oil because they want to save money, they enjoy it, or they take pride in the quality of their own workmanship. According to a recent survey, more than 30 percent of motorists change their own oil. Between 43 and 62 million gallons of used oil were collected and recycled by do-it-yourselfers in 1997 (API, 2000). Therefore, it is important that do-it-yourselfers recycle their used oil. Do-it-for-mes have their oil changed at places such as service stations or quick lubes; they should be sure to check if their mechanic recycles motor oil. To make recycling motor oil more convenient for the do-it-yourselfers, oil recycling programs should be located throughout all communities. Although oil recycling programs are appropriate in any community, urban areas are in particular need of programs, as more motor oil is used in these areas to maintain a larger number of vehicles. Therefore, oil recycling programs should more heavily target urban areas and provide a greater number of facilities for recycling oil in these areas. Implementation Oil recycling programs can be implemented easily throughout the country. Two types of programs currently in use are drop-off locations and curbside collection. Drop-off locations include service stations, recycling centers, auto parts retail stores, quick lubes, and landfills. These locations are effective because they are familiar, convenient, permanent, and well located. Additionally, sites that are permanent allow for effective publicity for recycling programs. Curbside collection programs allow consumers to put their oil out on the curb for collection, as they already do with their other recycling and trash. While this program is more convenient for the user, it requires a hauler to come and collect the oil. Oil recycling programs that use drop-off locations for collection are implemented by local governments, state governments, service stations, quick lubes, auto parts retailers, oil processors, or any combination of the above. Curbside collection programs are implemented by municipal or private waste haulers, municipal or private recycling haulers, or a combination of any of the above. Local Recycling Programs. Many states, cities, and communities have developed their own recycling programs. For example, the California Integrated Waste Management Board sponsors a used oil recycling program that develops and promotes alternatives to illegal oil disposal. This is accomplished through a statewide network of collection opportunities and outreach efforts that publicize and encourage used oil recycling. 68
The program provides useful information for the public, including collection locations, certification information, proposed regulations, used oil facts, and a number of other resources. More information about this program can be found at www.ciwmb.ca.gov/usedoil/Default.htm. Other cities with used oil programs are King County, Washington; Kansas City, Missouri; Clark County, Ohio; and New Carollton, Maryland. All of these programs can be used as models for other communities to develop their own programs. National Recycling Programs. In 1991, the American Petroleum Institute (API) established a used oil collection and recycling program. This program works to educate the public about collecting and recycling used oil, making oil collection more convenient, and ensuring that this valuable resource is handled appropriately. Information about API's Used Motor Oil Program is available at www.recycleoil.org. API has also developed model legislation, based on Florida's program, to encourage collection and recycling of used oil. Florida's legislation specifically requires states to create a special fund to help cities and towns establish used oil collection facilities. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of educating the public about oil recycling. Guidance for developing collection programs, in the form of API's model legislation as well as guidebooks and publications, can be found at www.recycleoil.org/legislative.htm. Benefits Recycling used motor oil is beneficial to the environment, the public health, and the economy. If oil is improperly disposed of in landfills, ditches, or waterways or dumped on the ground or down storm sewers, it can migrate into surface and ground water. It takes only one gallon of oil to contaminate one million gallons of drinking water (USEPA, 2000). This same oil can also seriously harm aquatic plants and animals. Submerged vegetation is especially affected by oil because the oil blocks sunlight from entering the water and hinders photosynthesis. As motor oil causes 40 percent of the pollution in America's waterways (Mississippi DEQ), water pollution could dramatically decrease if that same oil was recycled. It is also beneficial to recycle motor oil because one gallon of re-refined oil produces 2.5 quarts of lubricating oil, while 42 gallons of crude oil are necessary to produce this same amount. It also takes three times as much energy used to refine crude oil to lubricating oil than it does to rerefine used motor oil. If the 180 million gallons of recoverable motor oil that are thrown away each year were recycled, this would produce enough energy to power 360,000 homes annually. Finally, if the 1.3 billion gallons of oil wasted each year by the United States were re-refined, it would save 1.3 million barrels of oil a day (Mississippi DEQ). Recycling used motor oil is also beneficial in protecting public health. As oil circulates through a car's engine, it collects rust, dirt, metal particles, and a variety of contaminants. Engine heat can also break down oil additives, producing acids and a number of other substances. Exhaust gases and antifreeze can also leak into oil when the engine is in use. When any of these substances mix with oil, the toxicity of oil is greatly increased. Then, if oil is disposed of improperly and enters the water or air, public health can be seriously threatened. Recycling used motor oil is also beneficial to the economy. Oil is a valuable resource that can be re-refined and reused in combustion engines. As oil is a non-renewable resource, it will become increasingly more difficult to find new reserves in the future. Therefore, recycling will provide time to develop alternative fuels and lessen dependence on foreign oil suppliers. 69
Limitations One limitation to recycling oil is the possibility of contamination during collection. If oil is mixed with other substances or if storage containers have residues of other substances, this can contaminate oil and make it a hazardous waste. In these cases, collection facilities are responsible for disposing of this hazardous waste and abiding by appropriate rules. Another limitation is educating the public. While oil recycling programs can be effective, it is often difficult to effectively educate the public and convince them of the importance of recycling oil. This limitation can be addressed if municipalities include recycling information in utility bill inserts, newspaper ads, and mailings. A last limitation is that some might find it inconvenient to take their oil to a recycling facility. People may not have time to drive their oil to a facility or the facility may be difficult to find. When this happens, people are more likely to dispose of their oil improperly. Effectiveness According to a 1998 survey, 30 percent of motorists change their oil themselves. Of those people, 12 to 15 percent report that they improperly dispose of their oil. While most people claim that they put the oil in the trash, 3 to 5 percent say that they dispose of their oil in a storm drain system. Based on this survey, more than half of do-it-yourselfers improperly dispose of used motor oil. A 1994 survey reports that of the 28 percent who are do-it yourselfers, 17 percent report improper disposal. These statistics can be improved through better advertisement of recycling facilities and by making recycling more convenient for the public. Costs Costs for used motor oil recycling programs vary depending on whether a community has already established similar types of recycling programs. Major costs associated with oil recycling programs include advertisement costs and oil collection costs. While service stations and collection facilities often allow the public to drop off their oil free of charge, these facilities must pay a recovery service to collect and dispose of their accumulated oil. One such recovery service, US Filter, charges an annual fee of $179 for unlimited waste oil removal, or a $79 fee for onetime oil removal, from service stations, small garage owners, and other types of collection facilities. Costs for programs also vary, depending on whether oil is collected by curbside pickup or at drop-off facilities. As fees will vary, check with a local recovery service for more specific information about oil collection fees. References API. 2000. Used Motor Oil Collection and Recycling: Benefits of Recycling. American Petroleum Institute. [www.recycleoil.org/benefits_of_recycling.htm]. Accessed July 2000. API. 2000. Used Motor Oil Collection and Recycling: Overview of Drop-off and Curbside Used Oil Collection Programs. American Petroleum Institute. [www.recycleoil.org/usedoil_overview.htm]. Accessed July 2000. API. 2000. Used Motor Oil Collection and Recycling: Starting a Collection Program. American Petroleum Institute. [www.recycleoil.org/legislative.htm]. Accessed July 2000. CIWMB. 2000. Used Oil Recycling Program. California Integrated Waste Management Board. [www.ciwmb.ca.gov/usedoil/Default.htm]. Last updated April 25, 2000. Accessed July 2000. 70
References (Continued). FMC. 1998. How to Recycle Your Filters. Filter Manufacturers Council. [www.filtercouncil.org/index.html]. Accessed July 2000. Gressel, A. Technologies and Methods Available for Recycling Used Oils. National Oil Recyclers Association. [http://www.noraoil.com/educationalresources/Tech/tech.html]. Accessed June 1, 2001. Mississippi DEQ. No date. Proper Disposal of Motor Oil. Mississippi Department of Environmental Qaulity. Pollution Prevention Program, Jackson, MS. Nebraska Cooperative Extension. 1997. Handling Wastes: Used Oil and Antifreeze. Nebraska Cooperative Extension NF94-196. [www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/wastemgt/nf196.htm]. Accessed July 2000. NORA. 2000. Where Can I Take My Used Oil? National Oil Recyclers Association. [www.noraoil.com/Contact/contact.html]. Accessed July 2000. NORA. 2000. Why Recycle? National Oil Recyclers Association. [http://www.noraoil.com/educationalresources/educationalresources.html]. Accessed June 1, 2001. Schueler, T., and C. Swann. 2000. Understanding Watershed Behavior. Watershed Protection Techniques 3(3): 671679. USEPA. 1994. Collecting Used Oil for Recycling/Reuse: Tips for Consumers Who Change Their Own Motor Oil and Oil Filters. EPA 530-F-94-008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC. USEPA. 1996. Managing Used Oil: Advice for Small Businesses. EPA530-F-96-004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. [www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/usedoil/usedoil.htm]. Accessed July 2000. USEPA. 2000. Used Oil Management Program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. [www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/usedoil/index.htm]. Last updated July 12, 2000. Accessed July 2000. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1991. Automotive Waste and the Do-It-Yourselfer: How to Reduce, Recycle and Dispose of Automotive Wasters Properly and Avoid Toxic Releases. Publication #91-BR-12. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
71
Materials Management Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Description Responsibly managing common chemicals, such as fertilizers, solvents, paints, cleaners, and automotive products, can significantly reduce polluted runoff (WEF and ASCE, 1998). Such products must be handled properly in all stages of their useful lives. Materials management entails the selection of the individual product, the correct use and storage of the product, and the responsible disposal of associated waste(s). Applicability In many cases, industries can implement simple housekeeping practices in order to manage materials more effectively. Proper management reduces the likelihood of accidental spills or releases of hazardous materials during storm events. In addition, health and safety conditions at the facility will improve. Some simple practices for managing materials are improving maintenance of industrial machinery, establishing material storage and inventory controls, improving routine cleaning and inspection of facilities where materials are stored or processed, maintaining organized workplaces, and educating employees about the benefits of the above practices (USEPA, 1992). Maintenance Considerations Maintenance associated with materials management should be designed to minimize the amounts of materials used and the wastes generated by industrial processes. Procedures for operation and maintenance can easily be integrated into an industry's management plan. Simple processes, such as routine cleaning of work spaces, proper collection and disposal of wastes, maintenance of machinery, regular inspections of equipment and facilities, and training employees to respond to spills or leaks, have significant effects on reducing storm water runoff. Another consideration is regular material inventories. Such inventories reduce the occurrence of overstocking hazardous materials, increase knowledge about what hazardous materials are present and how they are stored, and provide documentation of proper handling of hazardous materials. An inventory of hazardous materials present at a particular site consists of three major steps (USEPA, 1992):
Identify all hazardous and nonhazardous substances present in a facility. This can be accomplished by reviewing all purchase orders for the facility and walking through the facility itself. Compile a list of all chemicals present in a facility and obtain a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for each one. Label all containers with the name of the chemical, unit number, expiration date, handling instructions, and health or environmental hazards. Much of this information will be found on the MSDS. Often, insufficient labeling leads to improper handling or disposal of hazardous substances. Make special note on the inventory of hazardous chemicals that require special handling, storage, or disposal. 72
Cost Considerations The major costs of these BMPs can be attributed to additional labor. Depending on the extent of the program, varying amounts of staff hours will be required for the necessary education of municipal employees, local businesses, and the public. In addition, posters and bulletin boards that encourage the proper management of materials should be displayed throughout the facility. References WEF and the ASCE. 1998. Urban Runoff Quality Management. WEF Manual of Practice No. 23 and ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87. Water Environment Federation, Technical Practice Committee, Water Quality and Ecology Subcommittee, Alexandria, VA, and American Society of Civil Engineers, Urban Water Resources Research Council, Reston, VA. USEPA. 1992. Storm Water Management for Industrial Activities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
73

Epa National B Mps

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Epa National B Mps

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Welcome to EPA's Storm Water Phase II Menu of Best Management Practices (BMPs).

Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

Public outreach/education for homeowners

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

Targeting public outreach/education

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

Public outreach programs for new development

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

National Menu of Best Management Practices

TSSa 80-100 80-100 20-100

Total Pa 81 40-60 40-60 0-60 10-25 65 20 NA NA

Total Na 43 40-60 40-60 0-60 0-15 50 40 NA NA

BODa 60-80 60-80 0-80 NA NA

Bacteria 60-80 60-80 Neg. NA NA

Vegetated Swales 30-65 90 80 NA NA

H=high; M=medium; L=low; N=none

National Menu of Best Management Practices