Czara Chapter4 Urban

CHAPTER 4: MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR
URBAN AREAS
I. INTRODUCTION
A. What .. Management Measures .. Are

This chapter specifies management measures to protect coastal waters from urban sources of nonpoint pollution.
"Management measures" are defined in section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
(CZARA) as economically achievable measures to control the addition of pollutants to our coastal waters, which
reflect the greatest degree of pollutant reduction achievable through the application of the best available nonpoint
pollution control practices, technologies, processes, siting criteria, operating methods, or other alternatives.
These management measures will be incorporated by States into their coastal nonpoint programs, which under
CZARA are to provide for the implementation of management measures that are "in conformity" with this guidance.
Under CZARA, States are subject to a number of requirements as they develop and implement their Coastal Nonpoint
Pollution Control Programs in conformity with this guidance and will have some flexibility in doing so. The
application of these management measures by States to activities causing nonpoint pollution is described more fully
in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance, published jointly
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA).
B. What .. Management Practices .. Are

In addition to specifying management measures, this chapter also lists and describes management practices for
illustrative purposes only. While State programs are required to specify management measures in conformity with
this guidance, State programs need not specify or require the implementation of the particular management practices
described in this document. However, as a practical matter, EPA anticipates that the management measures generally
will be implemented by applying one or more management practices appropriate to the source, location, and climate.
The practices listed in this document have been found by EPA to be representative of the types of practices that can
be applied successfully to achieve the management measures. EPA has also used some of these practices, or
appropriate combinations of these practices, as a basis for estimating the effectiveness, costs, and economic impacts
of achieving the management measures. (Economic impacts of the management measures are addressed in a separate
document entitled Economic Impacts of EPA Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint
Pollution in Coastal Waters.)
EPA recognizes that there is often site-specific, regional, and national variability in the selection of appropriate
practices, as well as in the design constraints and pollution control effectiveness of practices. The list of practices
for each management measure is not all-inclusive and does not preclude States or local agencies from using other
technically sound practices. In all cases, however, the practice or set of practices chosen by a State needs to achieve
the management measure.
C. Scope of This Chapter

This chapter addresses six major categories of sources of urban nonpoint pollution that affect surface waters:
(1) Runoff from developing areas;

(2) Runoff from construction sites;
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-1

I. Introduction Chapter4
(3) Runoff from existing development;

(4) On-site disposal systems;
(5) General sources (households, commercial, and landscaping); and
(6) Roads, highways, and bridges.
Each category of sources is addressed in a separate section of this guidance. Each section contains (1) the
management measure; (2) an applicability statement that describes, when appropriate, specific activities and locations
for which the measure is suitable; (3) a description of the management measure's purpose; (4) the basis for the
management measure's selection; (5) information on management practices that are suitable, either alone or in
combination with other practices, to achieve the management measure; (6) information on the effectiveness of the
management measure and/or of practices to achieve the measure; and (7) information on costs of the measure and/or
practices to achieve the measure.
D. Relationship of This Chapter to Other Chapters and to Other EPA

Documents
1. Chapter 1 of this document contains detailed information on the legislative background for this guidance, the
process used by EPA to develop this guidance, and the technical approach used by EPA in the guidance.
2. Chapter 6 of this document contains information and management measures for addressing nonpoint source
impacts resulting from hydromodification, which often occurs to accommodate urban development
3. Chapter 7 of this document contains management measures to protect wetlands and riparian areas that provide
a nonpoint source pollution abatement function. These measures apply to a broad variety of sources, including
urban sources.
4. Chapter 8 of this document contains information on recommended monitoring techniques to (1) ensure proper
implementation, operation, and maintenance of the management measures and (2) assess over time the success
of the measures in reducing pollution loads and improving water quality.
5. EPA has separately published a document entitled Economic Impacts ofEPA Guidance Specifying Management
Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters.
6. NOAA and EPA have jointly published guidance entitled Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program:
Program Development and Approval Guidance. This guidance contains details on how State Coastal Nonpoint
Pollution Control Programs are to be developed by States and approved by NOAA and EPA. It includes
guidance on:
• The basis and process for EPA/NOAA approval of State Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs;
• How NOAA and EPA expect State programs to provide for the implementation of management measures
"in conformity" with this management measures guidance;
• How States may target sources in implementing their Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs;
• Changes in State coastal boundaries; and
• Requirements concerning how States are to implement their Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs.
4-2 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 I. Introduction
E. Overlap Between This Management Measure Guidance for

Control of Coastal Nonpoint Sources and Storm Water Permit
Requirements for Point Sources
Historically, overlaps and ambiguity have existed between programs designed to control urban nonpoint sources and
programs designed to control urban point sources. For example, runoff that originates as a nonpoint source may
ultimately may be channelized and become a point source. Potential confusion concerning coverage and
implementation of these two programs has been heightened by Congressional enactment of two important pieces of
legislation: section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act, which establishes permit requirements for certain municipal and
industrial storm water discharges, and section 6217 of CZARA, which requires EPA to promulgate and States to
provide for the implementation of management measures to control nonpoint pollution in coastal waters. The
discussion below is intended to clarify the relationship between these two programs and describe the scope of the
coastal nonpoint program and its applicability to storm water in coastal areas.
1. The Storm Water Permit Program

The storm water permit program is a two-phased program enacted by Congress in 1987 under section 402(p) of the
Clean Water Act. Under Phase I, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are required
to be issued for municipal separate storm sewers serving large or medium-sized populations (greater than 250,000
or 100,000 people, respectively) and for storm water discharges associated with industrial activity. Permits are also
to be issued, on a case-by-case basis, if EPA or a State determines that a storm water discharge contributes to the
violation of a water quality standard or is a significant contributor of pollutants to waters of the United States. EPA
published a rule implementing Phase I on November 16, 1990.
Under Phase II, EPA is to prepare two reports to Congress that assess remaining storm water discharges; determine,
to the maximum extent practicable, the nature and extent of pollutants in such discharges; and establish procedures
aud methods to control storm water discharges to the extent necessary to mitigate impacts on water quality. Then,
EPA is to issue regulations that designate storm water discharges, in addition to those addressed in Phase I, to be
regulated to protect water quality and is to establish a comprehensive program to regulate those designated sources.
The program is required to establish (1) priorities, (2) requirements for State storm water management programs,
and (3) expeditious deadlines.
These regulations were to have been issued by EPA not later than October 1, 1992. However, because of EPA's
emphasis on Phase I, the Agency has not yet been able to complete and issue appropriate regulations as required
under section 402(p). The completion of Phase II is now scheduled for October 1993.
2. Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs

As discussed more fully earlier, Congress enacted section 6217 of CZARA in late 1990 to require that States develop
Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs that are in conformity with the management measures guidance
published by EPA.
3. Scope and Coverage of This Guidance

EPA is excluding from coverage under this section 6217 (g) guidance all storm water discharges that are covered by
Phase I of the NPDES storm water permit program. Thus, EPA is excluding any discharge from a municipal
separate storm sewer system serving a population of 100,000 or more; any discharge of storm water associated with
industrial activity; any discharge that has already been permitted; and any discharge for which EPA or the State
makes a determination that the storm water discharge contributes to a violation of a water quality standard or is a
significant contributor of pollutants to waters of the United States. All of these activities are clearly addressed by
the storm water permit program and therefore are excluded from the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-3

I. Introduction Chapter 4
EPA is adopting a different approach with respect to other (Phase II) storm water discharges. At present, EPA has
not yet promulgated regulations that would designate additional storm water discharges, beyond those regulated in
Phase I, that will be required to be regulated in Phase II. It is therefore not possible to determine at this point which
additional storm water discharges will be regulated by the NPDES program and which will not. Furthermore,
because of the great number of such discharges, it is likely that it would take many years to permit all of these
discharges even if EPA allows for relatively expeditious State permitting approaches such as the use of general
permits.
Therefore, to give effect to the Congressional intent that coastal waters receive special and expeditious attention from
EPA, NOAA, and the States, storm water runoff that potentially may be ultimately covered by Phase II of the storm
water permits program is subject to this management measures guidance and will be addressed by the States' Coastal
Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs. Any storm water runoff that ultimately is regulated under an NPDES permit
will no longer be subject to this guidance once the permit is issued.
In addition, it should be noted that some other activities are not presently covered by the NPDES permit requirements
and thus would be subject to a State's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program. Most importantly, construction
activities on sites that result in the disturbance of less than 5 acres, which are not currently covered by Phase I storm
water application requirements, 1 are covered by the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program. Similarly, runoff
from wholesale, retail, service, or commercial activities, including gas stations, which are not covered by Phase I
of the NPDES storm water program, would be subject instead to a State's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control
Program. Further, onsite disposal systems (OSDS), which are generally not covered by the storm water permit
program, would be subject to a State's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program.
Finally, EPA emphasizes that while different legal authorities may apply to different situations, the goals of the
NPDES and CZARA programs are complementary. Many of the techniques and practices used to control storm
water are equally applicable to both programs. Yet, the programs do not work identically. In the interest of
consistency and comprehensiveness, States have the option to implement the CZARA section 6217(g) management
measures throughout the State's 6217 management area as long as the NPDES storm water requirements continue
to be met by Phase I sources in that area.
F. Background
The prevention and control of urban nonpoint source pollution in coastal areas pose a distinctive challenge to the
environmental manager. Increasing water quality problems and degraded coastal resources point to the need for
comprehensive solutions to protect and enhance coastal water quality. This chapter presents a framework for
preventing and controlling urban nonpoint sources of pollution.
Urban runoff management requires that a number of objectives be pursued simultaneously. These objectives include
the following:
• Protection and restoration of surface waters by the minimization of pollutant loadings and negative impacts
resulting from urbanization;
• Protection of environmental quality and social well-being;
• Protection of natural resources, e.g., wetlands and other important aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems;
1
On May 27, 1992, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit invalidated EPA's exemption of construction sites smaller
than 5 acres from the storm water permit program in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 965 F.2d 759 (9th Cir. 1992). EPA
is conducting further rulemaking proceedings on this ·issue and will not require permit applications for construction activities under 5
acres until further rulemaking has been completed.
4-4 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

• Minimization of soil erosion and sedimentation problems;
.. Maintenance of the predevelopment hydrologic conditions;
.. Protection of ground-water resources;
• Control and management of runoff to reduce/prevent flooding; and
• Management of aquatic and riparian resources for active and passive recreation (APWA, 1981).
1. Urbanization and Its Impacts

Urbanization first occurred in coastal areas and this historical trend continues. Approximately 80 percent of the
Nation's population lives in coastal areas. The negative impacts of urbanization on coastal and estuarine waters has
been well documented in a number of sources, including the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) and the
States' §305(b) and §319 reports.
During urbanization, pervious spaces, including vegetated and open forested areas, are converted to land uses that
usually have increased areas of impervious surface, resulting in increased runoff volumes and pollutant loadings.
While urbanization may enhance the use of property under a wide range of environmental conditions (USEPA, 1977),
urbanization typically results in changes to the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the watershed.
Vegetative cover is stripped from the land and cut-and-fill activities that enhance the development potential of the
land occur. For example, natural depressions that temporarily pond water are graded to a uniform slope, increasing
the volume of runoff during a storm event (Schueler, 1987). As population density increases, there is a
corresponding increase in pollutant loadings generated from human activities. These pollutants typically enter surface
waters via runoff without undergoing treatment.
a. Changes in Hydrology
As urbanization occurs, changes to the natural hydrology of an area are inevitable. Hydrologic and hydraulic changes
occur in response to site clearing, grading, and the addition of impervious surfaces and maintained landscapes
(Schueler, 1987). Most problematic are the greatly increased runoff volumes and the ensuing erosion and sediment
loadings to surface waters that accompany these changes to the landscape. Uncontrolled construction site sediment
loads have been reported to be on the order of 35 to 45 tons per acre per year (Novotny and Chesters, 1981; Wolman
and Schick, 1967; Yorke and Herb, 1976, 1978). Loadings from undisturbed woodlands are typically less than 1
ton per year (Leopold, 1968).
Hydrological changes to the watershed are magnified after construction is completed. Impervious surfaces, such as
rooftops, roads, parking lots, and sidewalks, decrease the infiltrative capacity of the ground and result in greatly
increased volumes of runoff. Elevated flows also necessitate the construction of runoff conveyances or the
modification of existing drainage systems to avoid erosion of streambanks and steep slopes. Changes in stream
hydrology resulting from urbanization include the following (Schueler, 1987):
• Increased peak discharges compared to predevelopment levels (Leopold, 1968; Anderson, 1970);
Increased volume of urban runoff produced by each storm in comparison to predevelopment conditions;
• Decreased time needed for runoff to reach the stream (Leopold, 1968), particularly if extensive drainage
improvements are made;
Increased frequency and severity of flooding;
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-5

I. Introduction Chapter 4
Reduced streamflow during prolonged periods of dry weather due to reduced level of infiltration in the
watershed; and
• Greater runoff velocity during storms due to the combined effects of higher peak discharges, rapid time of
concentration, and the smoother hydraulic surfaces that occur as a result of development.
In addition, greater runoff velocities occur during spring snowmelts and rain-on-snow events in suburban watersheds
than in less impervious rural areas (Buttle and Xu, 1988). Major snowmelt events can produce peak flows as large
as 20 times initial flow runoff rates for urban areas (Pitt and McLean, 1992).
Figures 4-1 and 4-2 illustrate the changes in runoff characteristics resulting from an increasing percentage of
impervious areas. Other physical characteristics of aquatic systems that are affected by urbanization include the total
volume of watershed runoff baseflow, flooding frequency and severity, channel erosion and sediment generation, and
temperature regime (Klein, 1985).
b. Water Quality Changes
Urban development also causes an increase in pollutants. The pollutants that occur in urban areas vary wide"Hy,
from common organic material to highly toxic metals. Some pollutants, such as insecticides, road salts, and
fertilizers, are intentionally placed in the urban environment. Other pollutants, including lead from automobile
exhaust and oil drippings from trucks and cars, are the indirect result of urban activities (USEPA, 1977).
Many researchers have linked urbanization to degradation of urban waterways (e.g., Klein, 1985, Livingston and
McCarron, 1992, Schueler, 1987). The major pollutants found in runoff from urban areas include sediment, nutrients,
oxygen-demanding substances, road salts, heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, pathogenic bacteria, and viruses.
Livingston and McCarron (1992) concluded that urban runoff was the major source of pollutants in pollutant loadings
to Florida's lakes and streams. Table 4-1 illustrates examples of pollutant loadings from urban areas. Table 4-2
describes potential sources of urban runoff pollutants.
DEEP
DEEP
Figure 4-1. Changes in runoff flow resulting from increased impervious area (NC Dept. of Nat. Res.
and Community Dev., in Livingston and McCarron, 1992).
4-6 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

-
----
I \
I
\
\
I
I
\
\ ,' \
I \
\
\
- __ \
Figure 4-2. Changes in stream hydrology as a result of urbanization (Schueler, 1992).
2. Nonpoint Source Pollutants and Their Impacts

The following discussion identifies the principal types of pollutants found in urban runoff and describes their
potential adverse effects (USEPA, 1990).
Sediment. Suspended sediments constitute the largest mass of pollutant loadings to surface waters. Sediment has
both short- and long-term impacts on surface waters. Among the immediate adverse impacts of high concentrations
of sediment are increased turbidity, reduced light penetration and decreases in submerged aquatic vegetation (SA V)
(Chesapeake Implementation Committee, 1988), reduced prey capture for sight-feeding predators, impaired respiration
of fish and aquatic invertebrates, reduced fecundity, and impairment of commercial and recreational fishing resources.
Heavy sediment deposition in low-velocity surface waters may result in smothered benthic communities/reef systems
Table 4-1. Estimated Mean Runoff Concentrations for Land Uses, Based on the
Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (Whalen and Cullum, 1989)
Parameter Residential Commercial Industrial
TKN (mg/1) 0.23 1.5 1.6

N03 + N02 (mg/1) 1.8 0.8 0.93
Total P (mg/1) 0.62 2.29 0.42
Copper (µg/l) 56 50 32
Zinc (µg/l) 254 418 1,063
Lead (mg/1) 293 203 115
COD (mg/1) 102 84 62
TSS (mg/1) 228 168 108
BOD (mg/1) 13 14 62
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-7

I. Introduction Chapter4
Table 4-2. Sources of Urban Runoff Pollutants

(Adapted from Woodward-Clyde, 1990)
Source Pollutants of Concern
Erosion Sediment and attached soil nutrients, organic matter, and other adsorbed
pollutants
Atmospheric deposition Hydrocarbons emitted from automobiles, dust, aromatic hydrocarbons, metals, and
other chemicals released from industrial and commercial activities
Construction materials Metals from flashing and shingles, gutters and downspouts, galvanized pipes and
metal plating, paint, and wood
Manufactured products Heavy metals, halogenated aliphatics, phthalate esters, PAHs, other volatiles, and
pesticides and phenols from automobile use, pesticide use, industrial use, and
other uses
Plants and animals Plant debris and animal excrement
Non-storm water Inadvertent or deliberate discharges of sanitary sewage and industrial wastewater
connections to storm drainage systems
Onsite disposal systems Nutrients and pathogens from failing or improperly sited systems
(CRS, 1991 ), increased sedimentation of waterways, changes in the composition of bottom substrate, and degradation
of aesthetic value. The primary cause of coral reef degradation in coastal areas is attributed to land disturbances and
dredging activities due to urban development (Rogers, 1990). Additional chronic effects may occur where sediments
rich in organic matter or clay are present. These enriched depositional sediments may present a continued risk to
aquatic and benthic life, especially where the sediments are disturbed and resuspended.
Nutrients. The problems resulting from elevated levels of phosphorus and nitrogen are well known and are
discussed in detail in Chapter 2 (agriculture). Excessive nutrient loading to marine ecosystems can result in
eutrophication and depressed dissolved oxygen (DO) levels due to elevated phytoplankton populations.
Eutrophication-induced hypoxia and anoxia have resulted in fish kills and widespread destruction of benthic habitats
(Harper and Gullient, 1989). Surface algal scum, water discoloration, and the release of toxins from sediment may
also occur. Species composition and size structure for primary producers may be altered by increased nutrient levels
(Reeky and Kilham, 1988; GESAMP, 1989; Thingstad and Sakshaug, 1990).
Occurrences of eutrophication have been frequent in several coastal embayments along the northeast coast
(Narragansett and Barnegat Bays), the Gulf Coast (Louisiana and Texas), and the West Coast (California and
Washington) (NOAA, 1991 ). High nitrate concentrations have also been implicated in blooms of nuisance algae in
Newport Bay, California (NRC, 1990b). Nutrient loadings in Louisiana coastal waters have decreased productivity,
increased hypoxic events, and decreased fisheries yields (NOAA, 1991).
Oxygen-Demanding Substances. Proper levels of DO are critical to maintaining water quality and aquatic life.
Decomposition of organic matter by microorganisms may deplete DO levels and result in the impairment of the
waterbody. Data have shown that urban runoff with high concentrations of decaying organic matter can severely
depress DO levels after storm events (USEPA, 1983). The NURP study found that oxygen-demanding substances
can be present in urban runoff at concentrations similar to secondary treatment discharges.
Pathogens. Urban runoff typically contains elevated levels of pathogenic organisms. The presence of pathogens
in runoff may result in waterbody impairments such as closed beaches, contaminated drinking water sources, and
shellfish bed closings. OSDS-related pathogen contamination has been implicated in a number of shellfish bed
closings. Table 4-3 shows the adverse impacts of septic systems and urban runoff on shellfish beds, resulting in
closure. This problem may be especially prevalent in areas with porous or sandy soils.
4-8 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-3. Percent of Limited or Restricted Classified Shellfish Waters

Affected by Types of Pollution {Leonard et al., 1991)
Septic Urban Ag.

Systems Runoff Runoff POTWs Boats Industry
North Atlantic 26 23 3 67 17 7
Mid-Atlantic 11 58 12 57 31 20
South Atlantic 34 34 28 44 17 21
Gulf 48 35 8 27 14 14
Pacific 19 36 13 25 15 42
Nationwide 37 38 11 37 18 17
Road Salts. In northern climates, road salts can be a major pollutant in urban areas. Klein (1985) reported on
several studies by various authors of road salt contamination in lakes and streams and cases where well
contamination had been attributed to road salts in New England. Snow runoff produces high salt/chlorine
concentrations at the bottom of ponds, lakes, and bays. Not only does this condition prove toxic to benthic
organisms, but it also prevents crucial vertical spring mixing (Bubeck et al., 1971; Hawkins and Judd, 1972).
Hydrocarbons. Petroleum hydrocarbons are derived from oil products, and the source of most such pollutants found
in urban runoff is vehicles-auto and truck engines that drip oil. Many do-it-yourself auto mechanics dump used oil
directly into storm drains (Klein, 1985). Concentrations of petroleum-based hydrocarbons are often high enough to
cause mortalities in aquatic organisms.
Oil and grease contain a wide variety of hydrocarbon .compounds. Some polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
are known to be toxic to aquatic life at low concentrations. Hydrocarbons have a high affinity for sediment, and they
collect in bottom sediments where they may persist for long periods of time and result in adverse impacts on benthic
communities. Lakes and estuaries are especially prone to this phenomenon.
Heavy Metals. Heavy metals are typically found in urban runoff. For example, Klein (1985) reported on a study
in the Chesapeake Bay that designated urban runoff as the source for 6 percent of the cadmium, 1 percent of the
chromium, 1 percent of the copper, 19 percent of the lead, and 2 percent of the zinc.
Heavy metals are of concern because of toxic effects on aquatic life and the potential for ground-water
contamination. Copper, lead, and zinc are the most prevalent NPS pollutants found in urban runoff. High metal
concentrations may bioaccumulate in fish and shellfish and impact beneficial uses of the affected waterbody.
Toxics. Many different toxic compounds (priority pollutants) have been associated with urban runoff. NURP studies
(USEPA, 1983) indicated that at least 10 percent of urban runoff samples contained toxic pollutants.
a. Pollutant Loading
Nonpoint source pollution has been associated with water quality standard violations and the impairment of
designated uses of surface waters (Davenport, 1990). The 1990 Report to Congress on §319 of the Clean Water Act
reported that:
• Siltation and nutrients are the pollutants most responsible for nonpoint source impacts to the Nation's
surface waters, and
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-9

f. Introduction Chapter4
• Wildlife and recreation, (in particular, swimming, fishing, and shellfishing) are the uses most affected by
nonpoint source pollution.
The pollutants described previously can have a variety of impacts on coastal resources. Examples of waterbodies
that have been adversely impacted by nonpoint source pollution are varied.
• The Miami River and Biscayne Bay in Florida have experienced loss of habitat, loss of recreational and
commercial fisheries, and decrease in productivity partly as the result of urban runoff (SFWMD, 1988).
• Shellfish beds in Port Susan, Puget Sound, Washington, have been declared unsafe for the commercial
harvest of shellfish in part because of bacterial contamination from onsite disposal systems (USEPA, 1991).
• Impairment due to toxic pollution from urban runoff continues to be a problem in the southern part of San
Francisco Bay (USEPA, 1992).
• Nonpoint sources of pollution have been implicated in degradation of water quality in Westport River,
Massachusetts, a tributary of Buzzards Bay. High concentrations of coliform bacteria have been observed
after rainfall events, and shellfish bed closures in the river have been attributed to loadings from surface
runoff and septic systems (USEPA, 1992).
• In Brenner Bay, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, populations of corals and shellfish and marine habitat have
been damaged due to increased nutrient and sediment loadings. After several years of rapid urban
development, less than 10 percent of original grass beds remain as a result of sediment shoaling,
eutrophication, and algae blooms (Nichols and Towle, 1977).
b. Other Impacts
Other impacts not related to a specific pollutant can also occur as a result of urbanization. Temperature changes
result from increased flows, removal of vegetative cover, and increases in impervious surfaces. Impervious surfaces
act as heat collectors, heating urban runoff as it passes over the impervious surface. Recent data indicate that
intensive urbanization can increase stream temperature as much as 5 to 10 degrees Celsius during storm events (Galli
and Dubose, 1990). Thermal loading disrupts aquatic organisms that have finely tuned temperature limits. Salinity
can also be affected by urbanization.
Freshwater inflows due to increased runoff can impact estuaries, especially if they occur in pulses, disrupting the
natural salinity of an area. Increased impervious surface area and the presence of storm water conveyance systems
commonly result in elevated peak flows in streams during and after storm events. These rapid pulses or influxes
of fresh water into the watershed may be 2 to 10 times greater than normal (ABAG, 1991) This may lead to a
decrease in the number of aquatic organisms living in the receiving waters (McLusky, 1989).
The alteration of natural hydrology due to urbanization and the accompanying runoff diversion, channelization, and
destruction of natural drainage systems have resulted in riparian and tidal wetland degradation or destruction. Deltaic
wetlands have also been impacted by changes in historic sediment deposition rates and patterns. Hydromodification
projects designed to prevent flooding may reduce sedimentation rates and decrease marsh aggradation, which would
normally offset erosion and apparent changes in sea level within the delta (Cahoon et al., 1983).
3. Opportunities
This chapter was organized to parallel the development process to address the prevention and treatment of nonpoint
source pollution loadings during all phases of urbanization. (NOTE: The control of nonpoint source pollution
requires the use of two primary strategies: the prevention of pollutant loadings and the treatment of unavoidable
loadings. The strategy in this chapter relies primarily on the watershed approach, which focuses on pollution
prevention or source reduction practices. While treatment options are an integral component of this chapter, a
4-10 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 I. Introduction
combination of pollution prevention and treatment practices is favored because planning, design, and education
practices are generally more effective; require less maintenance, and are more cost-effective in the long term.)
The major opportunities to control NPS loadings occur during the following three stages of development: the siting
and design phase, the construction phase, and the postdevelopment phase. Before development occurs, land in a
watershed is available for a number of pollution prevention and treatment options, such as setbacks, buffers, or open
space requirements, as well as wet ponds or constructed urban runoff wetlands that can provide treatment of the
inevitable runoff and associated pollutants. In addition, siting requirements/restrictions and other land use ordinances,
which can be highly effective, are more easily implemented during this period. After development occurs, these
options may no longer be practicable or cost-effective. Management Measures li.A through II.C address the
strategies and practices that can be used during the initial phase of the urbanization process.
The control of construction-related sediment loadings is critical to maintaining water quality. The implementation
of proper erosion and sediment control practices during the construction stage can significantly reduce sediment
loadings to surface waters. Management Measures II.A and II.B address construction-related practices.
After development has occurred, lack of available land severely limits the implementation of cost-effective treatment
options. Management Measure VI.A focuses on improving controls for existing surface water runoff through
pollution prevention to mitigate nonpoint sources of pollution generated from ongoing domestic and commercial
activities.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-11

II. Urban Runoff Chapter 4
II. URBAN RUNOFF
A. New Development Management Measure
(1) By design or performance:
(a) After construction has been completed and the site is permanently
stabilized, reduce the average annual total suspended solid (TSS) loadings
by 80 percent. For the purposes of this measure, an 80 percent TSS
reduction is to be determined on an average annual basis,* or
{b) Reduce the postdevelopment loadings of TSS so that the average annual
TSS loadings are no greater than predevelopment loadings, and
(2) To the extent practicable, maintain postdevelopment peak runoff rate and
average volume at levels that are similar to predevelopment levels.
Sound watershed management requires that both structural and nonstructural

measures be employed to mitigate the adverse impacts of storm water.
Nonstructural Management Measures II.B and II.C can be effectively used in
conjunction with Management Measure II.A to reduce both the short- and long-term
costs of meeting the treatment goals of this management measure.
* Based on the average annual TSS loadings from all storms less than or equal to the 2-year/24-
hour storm. TSS loadings from storms greater than the 2-year/24-hour storm are not expected
to be included in the calculation of the average annual TSS loadings.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to control urban runoff and treat associated pollutants
generated from new development, redevelopment, and new and relocated roads, highways, and bridges. Under the
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements as they
develop coastal nonpoint source (NPS) programs in conformity with this management measure and will have
flexibility in doing so. The application of management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal
Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance, published jointly by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the
U.S. Department of Commerce.
For design purposes, postdevelopment peak runoff rate and average volume should be based on the 2-year/24-hour
storm.
4-12 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 II. Urban Runoff
2. Description
This management measure is intended to accomplish the following: (1) decrease the erosive potential of increased
runoff volumes and velocities associated with development-induced changes in hydrology; (2) remove suspended
solids and associated pollutants entrained in runoff that result from activities occurring during and after development;
(3) retain hydrological conditions to closely resemble those of the predisturbance condition; and (4) preserve natural
systems including in-stream habitat. 2 For the purposes of this management measure, "similar" is defined as
"resembling though not completely identical."
During the development process, both the existing landscape and hydrology can be significantly altered. As
development occurs, the following changes to the land may occur (USEPA, 1977):
• Soil porosity decreases;

• Impermeable surfaces increase;
Channels and conveyances are constructed;
• Slopes increase;
Vegetative cover decreases; and
Surface roughness decreases.
These changes result in increased runoff volume and velocities, which may lead to increased erosion of streambanks,
steep slopes, and unvegetated areas (Novotny, 1991). In addition, destruction of in-stream and riparian habitat,
increases in water temperature (Schueler et al., 1992), streambed scouring, and downstream siltation of streambed
substrate, riparian areas, estuarine habitat, and reef systems may occur. An example of predicted effects of increased
levels of urbanization on runoff volumes is presented in Table 4-4 (USDA-SCS, 1986). Methods are also available
to compute peak runoff rates (USDA-SCS, 1986).
The annual TSS loadings can be calculated by adding the TSS loadings that can be expected to be generated during
an average 1-year period from precipitation events less than or equal to the 2-year/24-hour storm. The 80 percent
standard can be achieved by reducing, over the course of the year, 80 percent of these loadings. EPA recognizes
that 80 percent cannot be achieved for each storm event and understands that TSS removal efficiency will fluctuate
above and below 80 percent for individual storms.
Management Measures II.A, II.B. and ILC were selected as a system to be used to prevent and mitigate the problems
discussed above. In combination, these three management measures applied on-site and throughout watersheds can
be used to provide increased watershed protection and help prevent severe erosion, flooding, and increased pollutant
loads generally associated with poorly planned development. Implementation of Management Measures ILB and ILC
can help achieve the goals of Management Measure ILA.
Structural practices to control urban runoff rely on three basic mechanisms to treat runoff: infiltration, filtration,
and detention. Table 4-5 lists specific urban runoff control practices that relate to these and includes information
on advantages, disadvantages, and costs. Table 4-6 presents site-specific considerations, regional limitations,
operation and maintenance burdens, and longevity for these practices.
2
Several issues require clarification to fully understand the scope and intent of this management measure. First, this management
measure applies only to postdevelopment loadings and not to construction-related loadings. Management measure options II.A.(l)(a)
and (b) both apply only to the TSS loadings that are generated after construction has ceased and the site has been properly stabilized
using permanent vegetative and/or structural erosion and sediment control practices. Second, for the purposes ofthis guidance, the term
predevelopment refers to the sediment loadings and runoff volumes/velocities that exist onsite immediately before the planned land
disturbance and development activities occur. Predevelopment is not intended to be interpreted as that period before any human-induced
land disturbance activity has occurred. Third, management measure option II.A.(l)(b) is not intended to be used as an alternative to
achieving an adequate level of control in cases where high sediment loadings are the result of poor management of developed sites (not
"natural" sites), e.g., farmlands where the erosion control components of the USDA conservation management system are not used or
sites where land disturbed by previous development was not permanently stabilized.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-13

Table 4-4. Example Effects of Increased Urbanization on Runoff Volumes

(USDA-SCS, 1986)
Development Scenario Predicted Runoff
100 percent open space 2.81 inches (baseline)

70 percent of the total area divided into Y2-acre lots; each 3.28 inches (24 percent increase)
lot is 25 percent impervious; 30 percent of the total area is
open space
70 percent of the total area is divided into 1/2-acre lots; 3.48 inches (24 percent increase)
each lot is 35 percent impervious; 30 percent of the total
area is open space
30 percent of the total area is divided into 1/2-acre lots - 3.19 inches (14 percent increase)
each lot is 25 percent impervious and contiguous; 40
percent is divided into 1/2-acre lots - each lot is 50 percent
impervious and discontinuous; 30 percent of the total area
is open space
Infiltration devices, such as infiltration trenches, infiltration basins, filtration basins, and porous and concrete block
pavement, rely on absorption of runoff to treat urban runoff discharges. Water is percolated through soils, where
filtration and biological action remove pollutants. Systems that rely on soil absorption require deep permeable soils
at separation distances of at least 4 feet between the bottom of the structure and seasonal ground water levels. The
widespread use of infiltration in a watershed can be useful to maintain or restore predevelopment hydrology, increase
dry-weather baseflow, and reduce bankfull flooding frequency. However, infiltration systems may not be appropriate
where ground water requires protection. Restrictions may also apply to infiltration systems located above sole source
(drinking water) aquifers. Where such designs are selected, they should be incorporated with the recognition that
periodic maintenance is necessary for these areas. Long-term effectiveness in most cases will depend on proper
operation and maintenance of the entire system.
NOTE: Infiltration systems, some filtration devices, and sand filters should be installed after construction has been
completed and the site has been permanently stabilized. The State of Maryland has observed a high failure rate for
infiltration systems. Many of these failures can be attributed to clogging due to sediment loadings generated during
the construction process and/or the premature use of the device before proper stabilization of the site has occurred.
In cases where construction of the infiltration system is necessary before the cessation of land-disturbing activities,
diversions, covers, or other means to prevent sediment-laden runoff from entering and clogging the infiltration system
should be used (State of Maryland DNR, personal communication, 1991).
Filtration practices such as filter strips, grassed swales, and sand filters treat sheet flow by using vegetation or sand
to filter and settle pollutants. In some cases infiltration and treatment in the subsoil may also. occur. After passing
through the filtration media, the treated water can be routed into streams, drainage channels, or other waterbodies;
evaporated; or percolated into ground water. Sand filters are particularly useful for ground-water protection. The
influence of climatic factors must be considered in the process of selecting vegetative systems.
Detention practices temporarily impound runoff to control runoff rates, and settle and retain suspended solids and
associated pollutants. Extended detention ponds and wet ponds fall within this category. Constructed urban runoff
wetlands and multiple-pond systems also remove pollutants by detaining flows that lead to sedimentation
(gravitational settling of suspended solids). Properly designed ponds protect downstream channels by controlling
discharge velocities, thereby reducing the frequency of bankfull flooding and resultant bank-cutting erosion. If
landscaped and planted with appropriate vegetation, these systems can reduce nutrient loads and also provide
terrestrial and aquatic wildlife habitat. When considering the use of these devices, potential negative impacts such
as downstream warming, reduced baseflow, trophic shifts, bacterial contamination due to waterfowl, hazards to
4-14 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-5. Advantages and Disadvantages of Management Practicesa
Comparative
Management Cost (Schueler, Kumble,
Practice Advantages Disadvantages and Heraty, 1992)
Infiltration Basin • Provides ground-water recharge • Possible risk of contaminating Construction cost moderate but
• Can serve large developments ground water rehabilitation cost high
• High removal capability for particulate • Only feasible where soil is
pollutants and moderate removal for permeable and there is sufficient
soluble pollutants depth to rock and water table
• When basin works, it can replicate • Fairly high failure rate
predevelopment hydrology more closely • If not adequately maintained, can
than other BMP options be an eyesore, breed mosquitoes,
• Basins provide more habitat value than and create undesirable odors
other infiltration systems • Regular maintenance activities
cannot prevent rapid clogging of
infiltration basins
Infiltration Trench • Provides ground-water recharge • Possible risk of contaminating Cost-effective on smaller sites.
• Can serve small drainage areas ground water Rehabilitation costs can be
• Can fit into medians, perimeters, and • Only feasible where soil is considerable.
other unused areas of a development permeable and there is sufficient
site depth to rock and water table
• Helps replicate predevelopment • Since not as visible as other BMPs,
hydrology, increases dry weather less likely to be maintained by
baseflow, and reduces bankfull flooding residents
frequency • Requires significant maintenance
Vegetated Filter Strip (VFS) • Low maintenance requirements • Often concentrates water, which Low
• Can be used as part of the runoff significantly reduces effectiveness
conveyance system to provide • Ability to remove soluble pollutants
pretreatment highly variable
• Can effectively reduce particulate • Limited feasibility in highly
pollutant levels in areas where runoff urbanized areas where runoff
velocity is low to moderate velocities are high and flow is
• Provides excellent urban wildlife habitat concentrated
• Requires periodic repair, regrading,
• Economical and sediment removal to prevent
channelization
§
Table 4-5. (Continued)
Comparative
Practice Advantages Disadvantages and Heraty, 1992}
Grassed Swale • Requires minimal land area • Low pollutant removal rates Low compared to curb and gutter
• Can be used as part of the runoff • Leaching from culverts and
conveyance system to provide fertilized lawns may actually
pretreatment increase the presence of trace
• Can provide sufficient runoff control to metals and nutrients
replace curb and gutter in single-family
residential subdivisions and on highway
medians
• Economical
Porous Pavement • Provides ground-water recharge • Requires regular maintenance Cost-effective compared to
• Provides water quality control without • Possible risk of contaminating conventional asphalt when working
additional consumption of land ground water properly
• Can provide peak flow control • Only feasible where soil is
• High removal rates for sediment, permeable, there is sufficient depth
nutrients, organic matter, and trace to rock and water table, and there
metals are gentle slopes
• When operating properly can replicate • Not suitable for areas with high
predevelopment hydrology traffic volume
• Eliminates the need for stormwater • Need extensive feasibility tests,
drainage, conveyance, and treatment inspections, and very high level of
systems off-site construction workmanship
(Schueler, 1987}
• High failure rate due to clogging
• Not suitable to serve large off-site
. pervious areas
. Concrete Grid Pavement •

•
Can provide peak flow control
Provides ground-water recharge
•
•
Requires regular maintenance
Not suitable for area with high
Information not available
. • Provides water quality control without

additional consumption of land •
traffic volume
Possible risk of contaminating
ground water
• Only feasible where soil is
permeable, there is sufficient depth
to rock and water table, and there
are gentle slopes
...,
Comparative
Filtration Basin • Ability to accommodate medium-size • Requires pretreatment of storm Information not available
development (3-80 acres) water through sedimentation to
• Flexibility to provide or not provide prevent filter media from
ground-water recharge prematurely clogging
• Can provide peak volume control
Water Quality Inlets • Provide high degree of removal • Not feasible for drainage area Information not available
Catch Basins efficiencies for larger particles and greater than 1 acre
debris as pretreatment • Marginal removal of small particles,
• Require minimal land area heavy metals, and organic
• Flexibility to retrofit existing small pollutants
drainage areas and applicable to most • Not effective as water quality
urban areas control for intense storms
• Minimal nutrient removal
Water Quality Inlet • Provide high removal efficiencies of • Not feasible for drainage area Information not available
Catch Basins with Sand Filter particulates greater than 5 acres
• Require minimal land area • Only feasible for areas that are
• Flexibility to retrofit existing small stabilized and highly impervious
drainage areas • Not effective as water quality
• Higher removal of nutrient as compared control for intense storms
to catch basins and oil/grid separator
Water Quality Inlet • Captures coarse-grained sediments and • Not feasible for drainage area High, compared to trenches and
Oil/Grit Separator some hydrocarbons greater than 1 acre sand filters
• Requires minimal land area • Minimal nutrient and organic matter
• Flexibility to retrofit existing small removal
drainage areas and applicable to most • Not effective as water quality
urban areas control for intense storms
• Shows some capacity to trap trash, • Concern exists over the pollutant
debris, and other floatables toxicity of trapped residuals
• Can be adapted to all regions of the • Require high maintenance
country c::
§
.
Comparative
Extended Detention • Can provide peak flow control o Removal rates for soluble pollutants Lowest cost alternative in size
Dry Pond o Possible to provide good particulate are quite low range
removal • Not economical for drainage area
• Can serve large development less than 10 acres
• Requires less capital cost and land area o If not adequately maintained, can
when compared to wet pond be an eyesore, breed mosquitoes,
• Does not generally release warm or and create undesirable odors
anoxic water downstream
• Provides excellent protection for
downstream channel erosion
o Can create valuable wetland and
meadow habitat when properly
landscaped
Wet Pond • Can provide peak flow control • Not economical for drainage area Moderate to high compared to
• Can serve large developments; most less than 10 acres conventional storm water detention
cost-effective for larger, more • Potential safety hazards if not
intensively developed sites properly maintained
• Enhances aesthetics and provides • If not adequately maintained, can
recreational benefits be an eyesore, breed mosquitoes,
o Little ground-water discharge and create undesirable odors
• Permanent pool in wet ponds helps to • Requires considerable space,
prevent scour and resuspension of which limits use in densely
sediments urbanized areas with expensive
• Provides moderate to high removal of land and property values
both particulate and soluble urban o Not suitable for hydrologic soil
stormwater pollutants groups "A" and "B" (SCS
classification)
• With possible thermal discharge
and oxygen depletion, may
severely impact downstream
-
aquatic life
Comparative
Extended Detention • Can provide peak flow control • Not economical for drainage area
Wet Pond • Can serve large developments; most less than 10 acres
cost-effective for larger, more • Potential safety hazards if not
intensively developed sites properly maintained
• Enhances aesthetic and provide • If not adequately maintained, can
recreational benefits be an eyesore, breed mosquitoes,
• Permanent pool in wet ponds helps to and create undesirable odors
prevent scour and resuspension of • Requires considerable space,
sediments which limits use in densely
• Provides better nutrient removal when urbanized areas with expensive
compared to wet pond land and property values
• Not suitable for hydrologic soil
groups "A" and "B"(SCS
classification)
• With possible thermal discharge
aquatic life
c::
;::::::
Table 4-5. (Continued) c:
Comparative
\Management Cost (Schueler, Kumble,
Constructed Stormwater Wetland • Can serve large developments; most • Not economical for drainage area Marginally higher than wet ponds
cost-effective for larger, more less than 10 acres
intensively developed sites • Potential safety hazards if not
• Provides peak flow control properly maintained
• Enhances aesthetics and provides • If not adequately maintained can be
recreational benefits an eyesore, breed mosquitoes, and
• The marsh fringe also protects shoreline create undesirable odors
from erosion • Requires considerable space,
• Permanent pool in wet ponds helps to which limits use in densely
prevent scour and resuspension of urbanized areas with expensive
sediments land and property values
• Has high pollutant removal capability • With possible thermal discharge
aquatic life
• May contribute to nutrient loadings
during die-down periods of
vegetation
aMuch of this information has been taken from Schueler et al., 1992.
Table 4-6. Regional, Site-Specific, and Maintenance Considerations for Structural

Practices to Control Sediments in Storm Water Runoff (Schueler et al., 1992)
Size of Regional Maintenance

BMP Option Drainage Area Site Requirements Restrictions Burdens Longevity
Infiltration basins Moderate to Deep permeable Arid and cold High Low
large soils regions
Infiltration trenches Moderate Same as for infiltration basins
Vegetated filter strips Small Low-density areas Arid and cold Low Low if poorly
with low slopes regions maintained
Grassed swales Small Low-density areas Arid and cold Low High if
with <15% slope regions maintained
Porous pavement Small Deep permeable Arid and cold High Low
soils, low slopes, regions or high
and restricted traffic wind erosion
rates
Concrete grid Small Same as for porous pavement Moderate to High

pavement high
Filtration basins and Widely Widely applicable Arid and cold Moderate Low to
sand filters applicable regions moderate
Water quality inlets Small Impervious Few restrictions Cleaned twice High
catchments a year
Extended detention Moderate to Deep soils Few restrictions Dry ponds High
ponds large have relatively
high burdens
Wet ponds Moderate to Deep soils Arid regions Low High

large
Constructed storm Moderate to Poorly drained soils, Arid regions Annual High
water wetlands large space may be harvesting of
limiting vegetation
nearby residents, and nuisance factors such as mosquitoes and odor should be considered. Siting development in
wetlands and floodplains should be avoided. Where drainage areas are greater than 250 acres and ponds are being
considered, inundation of upstream channels may be of concern.
Constructed wetlands and multiple-pond systems also treat runoff through the processes of adsorption, plant uptake,
filtration, volatilization, precipitation, and microbial decomposition (Livingston and McCarron, 1992; Schueler et al.,
1992). Multiple-pond systems in particular have shown potential to provide much higher levels of treatment
(Schueler et al., 1992). In general, the potential concerns and drawbacks applicable to wet ponds apply to these
systems. Many of these systems are currently being designed to include vegetated buffers and deep-water areas to
provide habitat for wildlife and aesthetic benefits. Where such designs are selected, they should be incorporated with
the recognition that periodic maintenance is necessary. Long-term effectiveness in most cases will depend on proper
operation and maintenance of the entire system. Refer to Chapter 7 for additional information on constructed
wetlands.
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-21

Water quality inlets, like ponds, rely on gravity settling to remove pollutants before ponds discharge water to the
storm sewer or other collection system. Water quality inlets are designed to trap floatable trash and debris. When
inlets are coupled with oil/grit separators, hydrocarbon loadings from areas with high traffic/parking volumes can
be reduced. However, experience has shown that these devices have limited pollutant-removal effectiveness and
should not be used unless coupled with frequent and effective clean-out methods (Schueler et al., 1992). Although
no costs are currently available, proper maintenance of water quality inlets must include proper disposal of trapped
coarse-grained sediments and hydrocarbons. The costs of clean-out and disposal may be significant when
contaminated sediments require proper disposal.
Inadequate maintenance is often cited as one of the major factors influencing the poor effectiveness of structural
practices. The cost of long-term maintenance should be evaluated during the selection process. In addition,
responsibility for maintenance should be clearly assigned for the life of the system. Typical maintenance
requirements include:
• Inspection of basins and ponds after every major storm for the first few months after construction and
annually thereafter;
Mowing of grass filter strips and swales at a frequency to prevent woody growth and promote dense
vegetation;
Removal of litter and debris from dry ponds, forebays, and water quality inlets;
Revegetation of eroded areas;
• Periodic removal and replacement of filter media from infiltration trenches and filtration ponds;
• Deep tilling of infiltration basins to maintain infiltrative capability;
Frequent (at least quarterly) vacuuming or jet hosing of porous pavements or concrete grid pavements;
Quarterly clean-outs of water quality inlets;
• Periodic removal of floatables and debris from catch basins, water quality inlets, and other collection-type
controls; and
• Periodic removal and proper disposal of accumulated sediment (applicable to all practices). Sediments in
infiltration devices need to be removed frequently enough to prevent premature failure due to clogging.
Operation and Maintenance
Proper operation and maintenance of structural treatment facilities is critical to their effectiveness in mitigating
adverse impacts of urban runoff. The proper installation and maintenance of various BMPs often determines their
success or failure (Reinalt, 1992).
During a field study of 51 urban runoff treatment facilities, the Ocean County, New Jersey, planning and engineering
departments determined that the major source of urban runoff problems was a failure of the responsible party to
provide adequate facility maintenance. The causes of this failure are complex and include factors such as lack of
funding, manpower, and equipment; uncertain or irresponsible ownership; unassigned maintenance responsibility; and
ignorance or disregard of potential consequences of maintenance neglect (Ocean County, 1989). The analysis of the
field data collected during the study indicated the following trends:
• Bottoms, side slopes, trash racks, and low-flow structures were the primary sources of maintenance
problems.
4-22 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Infiltration facilities seemed to be more prone to maintenance neglect and were generally in the poorest
condition overall.
• Retention facilities appeared to receive the greatest amount of maintenance and generally were in the best
condition overall.
Publicly owned facilities were usually better maintained than those that were privately maintained.
• Facilities located at office development sites were better maintained than those at commercial or institutional
sites; facilities in residential areas received average maintenance.
Highly visible urban runoff facilities were generally better maintained that those in more remote, less visible
locations (Ocean County, 1989).
The following program elements should be considered to ensure the proper design, implementation, and operation
and maintenance of runoff treatment and control devices (adapted from The State of New Jersey Ocean County
Demonstration Study's Storm Water Management Facilities Maintenance Manual):
Adoption, promulgation, and implementation of planning and design standards that eliminate, reduce, and/or
facilitate facility maintenance; coordination with other regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over runoff
facilities;
Establishment of a comprehensive design review program, which includes training and education to ensure
adequate staff competency and expertise;
• Design standards published in a readily understandable format for all permittees and responsible parties
including regulatory authorities; the provision of clear requirements to promote the adoption of planning and
standards and expedite facility review and approval;
• Publication of specific obligations and responsibilities of the runoff facility owner/operator including
procedures for the identification of owners/operators who will have long-term responsibility for the facility;
• Development of a procedure for addressing maintenance default by negligent owner/operators;
Periodic review and evaluation of the runoff management program to ensure continued program
effectiveness and efficiency;
Runoff facility construction inspection program; and
Provisions for public assumption of runoff control facilities.
3. Management Measure Selection

This management measure was selected because of the following factors.
(1) Removal of 80 percent of total suspended solids (TSS) is assumed to control heavy metals, phosphorus,
and other pollutants.
(2) A number of coastal States, including Delaware and Florida, and the Lower Colorado River Authority
(Texas) require and have implemented a TSS removal treatment standard of at least 80 percent for new
development.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-23

(3) Analysis has shown that constructed wetlands, wet ponds, and infiltration basins can remove 80 percent
of TSS, provided they are designed and maintained properly. Other practices or combinations of practices
can be also used to achieve the goal.
(4) The control of postdevelopment volume and peak runoff rates to reduce or prevent streambank erosion
and stream scouring and to maintain predevelopment hydrological conditions can be accomplished using
a number of water quality and flood control practices. Many States and local governments have
implemented requirements that stipulate that, at a minimum, the 2-year/24-hour storm be controlled.
Management Measure II.A.(l)(b) was selected to provide a descriptive alternative to Management Measure
II.A.(l)(a). Where preexisting conditions do not already present a water quality problem, preservation of
predevelopment TSS loading levels is intended to promote TSS loading reductions that adequately protect surface
waters and are equivalent to or greater than the levels achieved by Management Measure option Il.A.(l)(a). In some
cases, local conditions (e.g., mountainous areas with arid, steep slopes) may preclude the implementation of
Management Measure II.A.(l)(a). Where local conditions do not allow the implementation of BMPs such as grassed
swales or detention basins, and preconstructionlpredevelopment (existing conditions) TSS loadings from the site are
significant, it may not be cost-effective or beneficial to require 80 percent TSS postdevelopment loading reductions.
Management Measure option Il.A.(l)(b) was provided to allow flexibility where such conditions exist. This
flexibility will be especially important in cases where loadings from surrounding undeveloped areas dwarf the TSS
loadings generated from the new development. (NOTE: Predevelopment is defined, in the context of Management
Measure II.A.(l)(b), as the sediment loadings and runoff volumes/velocities that exist onsite immediately before the
planned land disturbance and development occur.)
4. Practices
As discussed more fully at the beginning of this chapter and in Chapter 1, the following practices are described for
illustrative purposes only. State programs need not require implementation of these practices. However, as a
practical matter, EPA anticipates that the management measure set forth above generally will be implemented by
applying one or more management practices appropriate to the source, location, and climate. The practices set forth
below have been found by EPA to be representative of the types of practices that can be applied successfully to
achieve the management measure described above.
Cost and effectiveness information for these practices is shown in Tables 4-7 and 4-8. Many of these practices can
be used during site development, but the focus of this section is the abatement of postdevelopment impacts.
a. Develop training and education programs and materials for public officials, contractors, and others
involved with the design, installation, operation, inspection, and maintenance of urban runoff
facilities.
Training programs and educational materials for public officials, contractors, and the public are crucial to
implementing effective urban runoff management programs. Contractor certification, inspector training, and
competent design review staff are important for program implementation and continuing effectiveness. The State
of New Jersey Ocean County Demonstration Study's Stann Water Management Facilities Maintenance Manual
addresses many of these issues and provides guidance on programmatic elements necessary for the proper operation
and maintenance of urban runofffacilities. Several other States and local governments, including Virginia, Maryland,
Washington, Delaware, Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, and the City of Alexandria, Virginia, have
developed manuals and training materials to assist in implementation of urban runoff requirements and regulations.
The State of Delaware passed legislation requiring that "all responsible personnel involved in a construction project
will have a certificate of attendance at a Departmental sponsored or approved training course for the control of
sediment and storm water before initiation of land disturbing activity." The State provides personnel training and
educational opportunities for contractors to meet this requirement and has delegated program elements to conservation
4-24 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-7. Effectiveness of Management Practices for Control of Runoff From Newly Developed Areas
Removal Efficiency (%)
. Management Practice TSS TP TN COD Pb Zn Factors References
INFILTRATION BASIN Average: 75 65 60 65 65 65 • Soil percolation NVPDC, 1979; EPA,

rates 1977; Schueler, 1987;
Reported Range: 45-100 45-100 45-100 45-100 45-100 45-100 • Basin surface area Griffin, et al, 1980; EPA,
• Storage volume 1983; Woodward-Clyde,
Probable Range:a 1986
SCS Soil Group A 60-100 60-100 60-100 60-100 60-100 60-100

SCS Soil Group B 50-80 50-80 50-80 50-80 50-80 50-80
No. Values Considered: 7 7 7 4 4 4
INFILTRATION TRENCH Average: 75 60 55 65 65 65 • Soil percolation NVPDC, 1979; EPA,

rates 1977; Schueler, 1987;
Reported Range: 45-100 40-100 (-10)-100 45-100 45-100 45-100 • Trench surface Griffin, et al, 1980; EPA,
area 1983; Woodward-Clyde,
Probable Range:b • Storage volume 1986; Kuo et al., 1988;
Lugbill, 1990
SCS Soil Group A 60-100 60-100 60-100 60-100 60-100 60-100
SCS Soil Group B 50-90 50-90 50-90 50-90 50-90 50-90
VEGETATED FILTER STRIP Average: 65 40 40 40 45 60 • Runoff volume IEP, 1991; Casman,

• Slope 1990; Glick et al., 1991;
Reported Range: 20-80 0-95 0-70 0-80 20-90H 30-90I • Soil infiltration VADC, 1987; Minnesota
rates PCA, 1989; Schueler,
Probable Range:c 40-90 30-80 20-60 -- 30-80 20-50 • Vegetative cover 1987; Hartigan et al.,
• Buffer length 1989
GRASS SWALE Average: 60 20 10 25 70 60 • Runoff volume Yousef et al., 1985;

3-100H • Slope Dupuis, 1985;
Reported Range: 0-100 0-100 0-40 25 50-60H • Soil infiltration Washington State, 1988;
10-20 rates Schueler, 1987; British
Probable Range:d 20-40 20-40 10-30 -- 10-20 • Vegetative cover Columbia Res. Corp .,
10 • Swale length 1991; EPA, 1983;
No. Values Considered: 10 8 4 1 7 • Swale geometry Whalen, et al., 1988; Pitt,
1986; Casman, 1990
--
Management Practice TSS TP TN COD Pb Zn Factors References
POROUS PAVEMENT Average: 90 65 85 80 100 100 • Percolation rates Schueler, 1987

• Storage volume
Reported Range: 80-95 65 80-85 80 100 100
Probable Range: 60-90 60-90 60-90 60-90 60-90 60-90
CONCRETE GRID Average: 90 90 90 90 90 90 • Percolation rates Day, 1981; Smith, et al,

PAVEMENT 1981; Schueler, 1987
Reported Range: 65-100 65-100 65-100 65-100 65-100 65-100
Probable Range: 60-90 60-90 60-90 60-90 60-90 60-90
SAND FILTER/FILTRATION Average: 80 50 35 55 60 65 • Treatment volume City of Austin, 1988;

BASIN • Filtration media Environmental and
Reported Range: 60-95 0-90 20-40 45-70 30-90 50-80 Conservation Service
Department. 1990
Probable Range: 60-90 0-80 20-40 40-70 40-80 40-80
WATER QUALITY INLETg Average: 35 5 20 5 15 5 • Maintenance Pitt, 1896; Field, 1985;

• Sedimentation Schueler, 1987
Reported Range: 0-95 5-10 5-55 5-10 10-25 5-10 storage volume
Probable Range: 10-25 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-25 5-10
No. Values Considered: 3 1 2 1 2

WATER QUALITY INLET Average: 80 NA 35 55 80 65 • Sedimentation Shaver, 1991

WITH SAND FILTER9 storage volume
Reported Range: 75-85 NA 30·45 45-70 70-90 50-80
• Depth of filter
Probable Range: 70-90 -- 30-40 40-70 70-90 50-80 media
No. Values Considered: 1 0
OIUGRIT SEPARATOR9 Average: 15 5 5 5 15 5 • Sedimentation Pitt, 1985; Schueler,

storage volume 1987
Reported Range: 0-25 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-25 5-10
• Outlet
Probable Range: 10-25 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-25 5-10 configurations
Number of References 2
EXTENDED DETENTION Average: 45 25 30 20 50 20 • Storage volume MWCOG, 1983; City of

DRY POND • Detention time Austin, 1990; Schueler
Reported Range: 5-90 10-55 20-60 0-40 25-65 (-40)-65 • Pond shape and Helfrich, 1988; Pope
and Hess, 1989; OWML,
Probable Range:e 70-90 10-60 20-60 30-40 20-60 40-60 1987; Wolinski and
Stack, 1990
WET POND Average: 60 45 35 40 75 60 • Pool volume Wotzka and Oberta,

• Pond shape 1988; Yousef et al.,
Reported Range: (-30)-91 10-85 5-85 5-90 10-95 10-95 1986; Cullum, 1985;
Driscoll, 1983; Driscoll,
Probable Range: 50-90 20-90 10-90 10-90 10-95 20-95 1986; MWCOG, 1983;
OWML, 1983; Yu and
No. Values Considered: 18 18 9 7 13 13 Benemouffok, 1988;
Holler, 1989; Martin,
1988; Dorman et al., c::
1989; OWML, 1982; City
of Austin, 1990
§
Removal Efficiency(%)
EXTENDED DETENTION Average: 80 65 55 NA 40 20 • Pool volume Ontario Ministry of the

WET POND • Pond shape Environment, 1991 , cited
Reported Range: 50-100 50-80 55 NA 40 20 • Detention time in Schueler et al., 1992
Probable Range: 50-95 50-90 10-90 10-90 10-95 20-95
No. Values Considered: 3 3 0
CONSTRUCTED Average: 65 25 20 50 65 35 • Storage volume Harper et al., 1986;

STORMWATER WETLANDS • Detention time Brown, 1985; Wotzka
Reported Range: (-20)-100 (-120)-100 (-15)-40 20-80 30-95 (-30)-80 • Pool shape and Obert, 1988; Hickock
• Wetland's biota et al., 1977; Barten,
Probable Range': 50-90 (-5)-80 0-40 30-95 • Seasonal variation 1987; Melorin, 1986;
Morris et al., 1981;
No. Values Considered: 23 24 8 2 10 8 Sherberger and Davis,
1982; ABAG, 1979;
Oberts et al., 1989;
Rushton and Dye, 1990;
Hey and Barrett, 1991;
Martin and Smoot, 1986,
Reinelt et al., 1990, cited
in Woodward-Clyde,
1991
NA - Not available.
a Design criteria: storage volume equals 90% avg runoff volume, which completely drains in 72 hours; maximum depth = 8 ft; minimum depth = 2 ft.
b Design criteria: storage volume equals 90% avg runoff volume, which completely drains in 72 hours; maximum depth = 8 ft; minimum depth = 3 ft; storage volume = 40% excavated
trench volume.
c Design criteria: flow depth < 0.3 ft, travel time > 5 min.
d Design criteria: low slope and adequate length.
e Design criteria: min. ED time 12 hours.
f
Design criteria: minimum area of wetland equal 1% of drainage area.
g
No information was available on the effectiveness of removing grease or oil.
h Also reported as 90% TSS removed.
i
Also reported as 50% TSS removed.
Table 4-6. Cost of Management Practices for Control of Runoff from Newly Developed Areas
Land
require- Construction Useful Annual
Practice ment cost life O&M Total annual cost References
Infiltration Basin High Average: $0.5/ ft3

storage 25a Average: 7% of capital cost $0.03 - $0.05/ ft 3 Wiegand, et al, 1986;
Probable Cost: $0.4- $0.7/ft3 Reported Range: 3% - 13% of SWRPC, 1991
Reported Range: $0.2 - $1.2/ ft3 capital cost
Infiltration Trench Low Average: $4.0/ ft3

storage 1oa Average: 9% of capital cost $0.3 - $0.9/ft3 Wiegand, et al, 1986;
Probable Cost: $2.5 - $7.5/ft3 Reported Range: 5% - 15% of Macal, et al, 1987;
Reported Range: $0.9- $9.21 ft3 capital cost SWRPC, 1991; Kuo, et
al, 1988
Vegetative Filter Varies Established from existing 50b Natural succession allowed to Natural succession Schueler, 1987;
Strip vegetation- occur- allowed to occur- SWRPC, 1991
Average: $0 Average: $100/ acre
Reported Range: $0 Reported Range: $50 - $200/ Established from-
acre Natural vegetation:
Established from seed- $100/ acre
Average: $400/ acre Natural succession not allowed Seed: $125/ acre
Reported Range: $200- $1,000/ to occur- Seed & mulch:
acre Average: $800/ acre $200/ acre
Reported Range: $700 - $900/ Sod: $700/ acre
Established from seed and acre
mulch- Natural succession
Average: $1,500/ acre not allowed to occur-
Reported Range: $800 - $3,500/
acre Established from:
natural vegetation:
Established from sod- $800/acre
Average: $11,300/ acre Seed: $825/acre
Reported Range: $4,500 - Seed & mulch:
$48,000/ acre $900/acre c::
Sod: $1 ,400/acre
Table 4-8 (continued)
Land
require- Construction Useful Annual
Practice ment cost life O&M Total annual cost References
Extended High Average $0.5/ ft3 storage 50 Average: 4% of capital cost $o.oo1- $0.3/ft3 APWA Res.
Detention Dry Probable Cost: $0.09 - $5//ft3 Reported Range: 3% - 5% of Foundation
Pond Reported Range: $0.05 - $3.2/ capital cost
ft3
Wet Pond and High Storage Volume < 1,000,000 ft3 : 50 Average: 3% of capital cost $0.008 - $0.07/ft3 APWA Res.
Extended Average: $0.5/ ft 3 storage Probable Cost: Foundation; Wiegand,
Detention Wet Probable Cost: $0.5 - $1/ft3 <1 00,000 ft 3 = 5% of capital et al, 1986; Schueler,
Pond Reported Range: $0.05- $1.0/ cost 1987; SWRPC, 1991
ft3 > 100,000 & <1,000,000 ft3 =
3% of capital cost
Storage Volume > 1,000,000 ft3 : >1,000,000 ft3 = 1% of capital
Average: $0.25/ ft3 storage cost
Probable Cost: $0.1 - $0.5/ft3 Reported Range: 0.1% - 5% of
Reported Range: $0.05 - $0.5/ft3 capital cost
Stormwater High Average: Not available 50b Average: Not Available Not available
Wetlands Reported Range: Not available Reported Range: Not Available
a References indicate the useful life for infiltration basins and infiltration trenches at 25-50 and 10-15 years, respectively. Because of the high failure rate, infiltration basins are
assumed to have useful life span of 25 years and infiltration trenches are assumed to have useful life span of 10 years.
b Useful life taken as life of project, assumed to be 50 years.
c Incremental cost, i.e., cost beyond that required for conventional asphalt pavement.
d Since no information was available for useful life of porous pavement, it was assumed to be similar to that of infiltration trenches.
e Since no information was available for useful life of filtration basins it was assumed to be similar to that of infiltration basins.
f
Frequency of cleaning assumed 2 times per year.
c:
0
districts, counties. and other agencies. The program has been well received and from February 1991 to July 1991,
over 1,100 individuals from 300 companies and organizations participated in the program (Shaver and Piorko, 1992).
• b. Ensure that all urban runoff facilities are operated and maintained properly.
Once an urban runoff facility is installed, it should receive thorough maintenance in order to function properly and
not pose a health or safety threat. Maintenance should occur at regular intervals, be performed by one or more
individuals trained in proper inspection and maintenance of urban runoff facilities, and be performed in accordance
with the adopted standards of the State or local government (Ocean County, undated). It is more effective and
efficient to perform preventative maintenance on a regular basis than to undertake major remedial or corrective action
on an as needed basis (Ocean County, undated).
• c. Infiltration Basins
Infiltration basins are impoundments in which incoming urban runoff is temporarily stored until it gradually infiltrates
into the soil surrounding the basin. Infiltration basins should drain within 72 hours to maintain aerobic conditions,
which favor bacteria that aid in pollutant removal, and to ensure that the basin is ready to receive the next storm
(Schueler, 1987). The runoff entering the basin is pretreated to remove coarse sediment that may clog the surface
soil pore on the basin floor. Concentrated runoff should flow through a sediment trap, or a vegetated filter strip may
be used for sheet flow.
d. Infiltration Trenches
Infiltration trenches are shallow excavated ditches that have been backfilled with stone to form an underground
reservoir. Urban runoff diverted into the trench gradually infiltrates from the bottom of the trench into the subsoil
and eventually into the ground water. Variations in the design of infiltration trenches include dry wells, pits designed
to control small volumes of runoff (such as the runoff from a rooftop), and enhanced infiltration trenches, which are
equipped with extensive pretreatment systems to remove sediment and oil. Depending on the quality of the runoff,
pretreatment will generally be necessary to lower the failure rate of the trench. More costly than pond systems in
terms of cost per unit of runoff treated, infiltration trenches are suited best for drainage areas of less than 5 to 10
acres or where ponds cannot be applied (Schueler et al., 1992).
e. Vegetated Filter Strips
Vegetated filter strips are areas of land with vegetative cover that are designed to accept runoff as overland sheet
flow from upstream development. They may closely resemble many natural ecotones, such as grassy meadows or
riparian forests. Dense vegetative cover facilitates sediment attenuation and pollutant removal. Vegetated filter strips
do not effectively treat high-velocity flows and are therefore generally recommended for use in agriculture and low-
density development and other situations where runoff does not tend to be concentrated. Unlike grassed swales,
vegetated filter strips are effective only for overland sheet flow and provide little treatment for concentrated flows.
Grading and level spreaders can be used to create a uniformly sloping area that distributes the runoff evenly across
the filter strip (Dillaha et al., 1987). Vegetated filter strips are often used as pretreatment for other structural
practices, such as infiltration basins and infiltration trenches. Refer to Chapter 7 of this guidance for additional
information.
Filter strips are less effective on slopes of over 15 percent. Periodic inspection, repair, and regrading are required
to prevent channelization (Schueler et al., 1992). Inspection is especially important following major storm events.
Excessive use of pesticides, fertilizers, and other chemicals should be avoided. To minimize soil compaction,
vehicular traffic and excessive pedestrian traffic should be avoided.
A berm of sediment that must be periodically removed may form at the upper edge of grassed filter strips. Mowing
of grassed filter strips at a minimum of two to three times per year will maintain a thicker vegetative cover,
4-32 EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993

providing better sediment retention. To avoid impacts on ground-nesting birds, mowing should be limited to spring
or fall (USEPA, undated). Harvesting of mowed vegetation will allow for thicker growth and promotes the retention
of nutrients that are released during decomposition (Dillaha et al., 1989).
Forested areas directly adjacent to waterbodies should be left undisturbed except for the removal of trees presenting
unusual hazards and the removal of small debris near the stream that may be refloated by high water. Periodic
harvesting of some trees not directly adjacent to waterbodies removes sequestered nutrients (Lowrance, Leonard, and
Sheridan, 1985) and maintains an efficient filter through vigorous vegetation (USEPA, undated). Exposure of
forested filter strip soil to direct radiation should be avoided to keep the temperature of water entering waterbodies
low, and moist conditions conducive to microbial activities in filter strip soil should be maintained (Nutter and
Gaskin, 1989).
f. Grassed Swales
A grassed swale is an infiltration/filtration method that is usually used to provide pretreatment before runoff is
discharged to treatment systems. Grassed swales are typically shallow, vegetated, man-made ditches designed so
that the bottom elevation is above the water table to allow runoff to infiltrate into ground water. The vegetation or
turf prevents erosion, filters sediment, and provides some nutrient uptake (USDA-SCS, 1988). Grassed swales can
also serve as conveyance systems for urban runoff and provide similar benefits.
The swale should be mowed at least twice each year to stimulate vegetative growth, control weeds, and maintain the
capacity of the system. It should never be mowed shorter than 3 to 4 inches. The established width should be
maintained to ensure the continued effectiveness and capacity of the system (Bassler, undated).
g. Porous Pavement and Permeable Surfaces
Porous pavement, an alternative to conventional pavement, reduces much of the need for urban runoff drainage
conveyance and treatment off-site. Instead, runoff is diverted through a porous asphalt layer into an underground
stone reservoir. The stored runoff gradually exfiltrates out of the stone reservoir into the subsoil. Many States no
longer promote the use of porous pavement because it tends to clog with fine sediments (W ashington Department
of Ecology, 1991). A vacuum-type street sweeper should be used to maintain porous pavement.
Permeable paving surfaces such as modular pavers, grassed parking areas, and permeable pavements may also be
employed to reduce runoff volumes and trap vehicle-generated pollutants (Pitt, 1990; Smith, 1981); however, care
should be taken when selecting such alternatives. The potential for ground-water contamination, compaction, or
clogging due to sedimentation should be evaluated during the selection process. (NOTE: These practices should
be selected only in cases where proper operation and maintenance can be guaranteed due to high failure rates without
proper upkeep.)
h. Concrete Grid Pavement
Concrete grid pavement consists of concrete blocks with regularly interdispersed void areas that are filled with
pervious materials, such as gravel, sand, or grass. The blocks are typically placed on a sand or gravel base and
designed to provide a load-bearing surface that is adequate to support vehicles, while allowing infiltration of surface
water into the underlying soil.
i. Water Quality Inlets
Water quality inlets are underground retention systems designed to remove settleable solids. Several designs of water
quality inlets exist In their simplest form, catch basins are single-chambered urban runoff inlets in which the bottom
has been lowered to provide 2 to 4 feet of additional space between the outlet pipe and the structure bottom for
collection of sediment. Some water quality inlets include a second chamber with a sand filter to provide additional
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-33

removal of finer suspended solids by filtration. The first chamber provides effective removal of coarse particles and
helps prevent premature clogging of the filter media. Other water quality inlets include an oil/grit separator. Typical
oil/grit separators consist of three chambers. The first chamber removes coarse material and debris; the second
chamber provides separation of oil, grease, and gasoline; and the third chamber provides safety relief should blockage
occur (NVPDC, 1980). While water quality inlets have the potential to perform effectively, they are not
recommended. Maintenance and disposal of trapped residuals and hydrocarbons must occur regularly for these
devices to work. No acceptable clean-out and disposal techniques currently exist (Schueler et al., 1992).
Extended Detention Ponds
Extended detention (ED) ponds temporarily detain a portion of urban runoff for up to 24 hours after a storm, using
a fixed orifice to regulate outflow at a specified rate, allowing solids and associated pollutants the required time to
settle out. The ED ponds are normally "dry" between storm events and do not have any permanent standing water.
These basins are typically composed of two stages: an upper stage, which remains dry except for larger storms, and
a lower stage, which is designed for typical storms. Enhanced ponds are equipped with plunge pools near the inlet,
a micropool at the outlet, and an adjustable reverse-sloped pipe as the ED control device (orifice) (NVPDC, 1980;
Schueler et al., 1992). Temporary and most permanent ED ponds use a riser with an antivortex trash rack on top
to control trash.
k. Wet Ponds
Wet ponds are basins designed to maintain a permanent pool of water and temporarily store urban runoff until it is
released at a controlled rate. Enhanced designs include a forebay to trap incoming sediment where it can easily be
removed. A fringe wetland can also be established around the perimeter of the pond.
I. Constructed Wetlands
Constructed wetlands are engineered systems designed to simulate the water quality improvement functions of natural
wetlands to treat and contain surface water runoff pollutants and decrease loadings to surface waters. Where site-
specific conditions allow, constructed wetlands or sediment retention basins should be located to have a minimal
impact on the surrounding areas. (The State of Washington requires that constructed wetlands be located in uplands
(Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).) In addition, constructed urban runoff wetlands differ from artificial
wetlands created to comply with mitigation requirements in that they do not replicate all of the ecological functions
of natural wetlands. Enhanced designs may include a forebay, complex microtopography, and pondscaping with
multiple species of wetland trees, shrubs, and plants. Additional information on constructed wetlands is provided
in Chapter 7.
m. Filtration Basins and Sand Filters
Filtration basins are impoundments lined with filter media, such as sand or gravel. Urban runoff drains through the
filter media and perforated pipes into the subsoil. Detention time is typically 4 to 6 hours. Sediment-trapping
structures are typically used to prevent premature clogging of the filter media (NVPDC, 1980; Schueler et al., 1992).
Sand filters are a self-contained bed of sand to which the first flush of runoff water is diverted. The runoff
percolates through the sand, where colloidal and particulate materials are strained out by the cake of solids that
forms, or is placed, on the surface of the media. Water leaving the filter is collected in underground pipes and
returned to the stream or channel. A layer of peat, limestone, and/or topsoil may be added to improve removal
efficiency.
4-34 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

•n. Educate the public about the importance of runoff management facilities.
"... the value of a comprehensive public information and education program cannot be overemphasized. Such a
program must explain the basis, purpose, and details of the proposal and must convince the public and their elected
officials that it is both necessary to implement and beneficial to their interests. It must also explain the fundamentals
of storm water management facilities, the vital role they play in our lives, and their need for regular maintenance.
This information can be presented through flyers, brochures, posters, and other educational aids. Work sessions and
field trips can also be conducted. Signs at facility sites can also be erected. Finally, presentations to planning
boards, municipal councils and committees, and county freeholders by storm water management experts can also be
of great assistance" (New Jersey, undated).
5. Effectiveness and Cost Information
The box and whisker plot in Figure 4-3 summarizes efficiencies for selected structural TSS removal practices, as
reported by Schueler et al., 1992. The whiskers of each box represent the range of reported TSS removal
efficiencies. The box ends delimit the 25th and 75th percentiles. The horizontal line represents the median, or 50th
percentile. Circles represent outliers. Figure 4-3 and Table 4-7 illustrate the range of removal efficiencies, based
on monitoring and modeling studies, for total suspended solids for several of the structural practices. The reviewed
literature reported a median TSS removal efficiency above 80 percent for three practices--constructed wetlands, wet
ponds, and filtration basins. However, it has been reported that the other practices are capable of achieving 80
percent TSS removal efficiency when properly designed, sited, operated, and maintained. More detailed information
on the removal efficiencies of the practices and factors influencing the removal efficiencies is presented in Table 4-7.
Costs of the practices are shown in Table 4-8.
In many cases, a systems approach to best management practice (BMP) design and implementation may be more
effective. By applying multiple practices, enhanced runoff attenuation, conveyance, pretreatment, and treatment may
be attained (Schueler et al., 1992). In addition, regionalization of systems (installing and maintaining a BMP or
BMPs for more than one development site) may prove more efficient and cost-effective due to the economies of scale
of operating one large system versus several smaller systems.
Control Practice:
DED =Dry ED
=Constructed Wetland
>
m= Infiltration Basin
VFS = Vegetative
= Grass
FB = Basin
WQI =Water Quality Inlet
(Numbers in boxes represent
number of data points.)
IB FB WQI
Figure Removal efficiencies of selected urban runoff controls for TSS (adapted from Schueler et al., 1992).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-35

B. Watershed Protection Management Measure
Develop a watershed protection program to:
(1) Avoid conversion, to the extent practicable, of areas that are particularly
susceptible to erosion and sediment loss;
(2) Preserve areas that provide important water quality benefits and/or are
necessary to maintain riparian and aquatic biota; and
(3) Site development, including roads, highways, and bridges, to protect to the
extent practicable the natural integrity of waterbodies and natural drainage
systems.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to new development or redevelopment including
construction of new and relocated roads, highways, and bridges that generate nonpoint source pollutants. Under the
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements as they
develop coastal nonpoint source programs in conformity with this management measure and will have flexibility in
doing so. The application of management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution
Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance, published by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of
Commerce.
2. Description
The purpose of this management measure is to reduce the generation of nonpoint source pollutants and to mitigate
the impacts of urban runoff and associated pollutants that result from new development or redevelopment, including
the construction of new and relocated roads, highways, and bridges. The measure is intended to provide general
goals for States and local governments to use in developing comprehensive programs for guiding future development
and land use activities in a manner that will prevent and mitigate the effects of nonpoint source pollution.
A watershed is a geographic region where water drains into a particular receiving waterbody. As discussed in the
introduction, comprehensive planning is an effective nonstructural tool available to control nonpoint source pollution.
Where possible, growth should be directed toward areas where it can be sustained with a minimal impact on the
natural environment (Meeks, 1990). Poorly planned growth and development have the potential to degrade and
destroy entire natural drainage systems and surface waters (Mantel et al., 1990). Defined land use designations and
zoning direct development away from areas where land disturbance activities or pollutant loadings from subsequent
development would severely impact surface waters. Defined land use designations and zoning also protect
environmentally sensitive areas such as riparian areas, wetlands, and vegetative buffers that serve as filters and trap
sediments, nutrients, and chemical pollutants. Refer to Chapter 7 for a thorough description of the benefits of
wetlands and vegetative buffers.
4-36 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Areas such as streamside buffers and wetlands may also have the added benefit of providing long-term pollutant
removal capabilities without the comparatively high costs usually associated with structural controls. Conservation
or preservation of these areas is important to water quality protection. Land acquisition programs help to preserve
areas critical to maintaining surface water quality. Buffer strips along streambanks provide protection for stream
ecosystems and help to stabilize the stream and prevent streambank erosion (Holler, 1989). Buffer strips protect and
maintain hear-stream vegetation that attenuates the release of sediment into stream channels and prevent excessive
loadings. Levels of suspended solids increase at a slower rate in stream channel sections with well-developed
riparian vegetation (Holler, 1989).
The availability of infrastructure specifically sewage treatment facilities, is also a factor in watershed planning. If
centralized sewage treatment is not available, onsite disposal systems (OSDS) most likely will be used for sewage
treatment. Because of potential ground-water and surface water contamination from OSDS, density restrictions may
be needed in areas where OSDS will be used for sewage treatment. Section VI of this chapter contains a more
detailed discussion of siting densities for OSDS.
3. Management Measure Selection and Effectiveness Information
This measure was selected for the following reasons:
(1) Watershed protection is a technique to provide long-term water quality benefits, and many States and local
communities already use this practice. Numerous State and local governments have already legislated and
implemented detailed watershed planning controls that are consistent with this management measure. For
example, Oregon, New Jersey, Delaware, and Florida have passed legislation that requires county and
municipal governments to adopt comprehensive plans, including requirements to direct future development
away from sensitive areas. Several municipalities and regions, in addition to those in these States, have
adopted land use and growth controls, including Amherst, Massachusetts, the Cape Cod region, Norwood,
Massachusetts, and Narragansett, Rhode Island.
(2) Setting general water quality objectives oriented toward protection of environmentally sensitive areas and
areas that provide water quality benefits allows States flexibility in the pursuit of widely differing water
quality priorities and reduces potential conflicts that may arise due to existing State or local program goals
and requirements. Although public comments on the May 1991 draft guidance suggested that much more
specific criteria should be required, such as minimum setbacks from waterbodies, prohibitions on
development on slopes in excess of 45 degrees, and bans on development in floodplains, such prescriptive
measures are deemed unreasonable given the need for State and local determination of priorities and
program direction.
(3) This measure is effective in producing long-term water quality benefits and lacks the high operation and
maintenance costs associated with structural controls.
By protecting those areas necessary for maintaining surface water quality in a natural or near natural state, adverse
impacts can be reduced. To illustrate the effectiveness of this management measure, two case studies are presented.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-37

II. Urban Runoff Chapter4
CASE STUDY 1 - RHODE RIVER ESTUARY, CHESAPEAKE BAY, MARYLAND
An evaluation of the impact of the Maryland Critical Area Act on nonpoint source pollution (nutrients and
sediment) in surface runoff was completed by modeling three land use scenarios and determining the
relative change in nonpoint loadings from the Rhode River Critical Area. Research findings suggest that
the implementation of the Act will reduce nonpoint source nutrient and sediment loading by mandating
agricultural and urban best management practices (BMPs) and limiting development in forested lands.
Figure 4-4 illustrates the predicted nitrogen and phosphorus loadings from various land uses within the
watershed under various development scenarios. These predictions are based on the assumption that no
structural BMPs are in place.
New development allowed by the Critical Area Act is required to minimize impervious surfaces and reduce
nonpoint source pollution through urban BMPs. Results from this study indicate that by limiting the
impervious portion of a building site to 15 percent in the Rhode River Estuary, nutrient loadings could be
reduced by one-third when compared to similar development without this practice (Houlihan, 1990).
CASE STUDY 2- ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Pollutant loading estimates can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of land planning on controlling
nonpoint source pollution. For example, Alameda County, California, has estimated seven pollutant
loadings for seven parameters by type of land use, as shown in Table 4-9. By leaving larger areas in
open space-through easements, buffers, clustering, or preserves-the potential pollutant loading to
San Francisco Bay can be reduced. For example, it is estimated that if 50 percent of a 100-acre parcel
designated for residential development is preserved in open space, pollutant loadings for zinc and total
suspended solids can be reduced by 50.24 percent and 49.76 percent, respectively, when compared to
residential development of the entire 100-acre parcel.
Table 4-9. Load Estimates for Six Land Uses in Alameda County, California
(based on average wet weather load, lb/acre; adapted from Woodward-Clyde, 1991)
Total
Suspended
Land Use Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Nickel Zinc Solids
Open NJA N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.002 0.75
Residential 0.002 0.026 0.056 0.134 0.037 0.424 52.16
Commercial 0.002 0.038 0.084 0.094 0.053 0.655 511.76
Transportation 0.003 0.050 0.112 0.259 0.071 0.274 683.23
Industrial 0.003 0.044 0.097 0.171 0.028 251.43
Industrial Park 0.002 0.026 0.057 0.101 0.017 0.479 148.88
4-38 EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 II. Urban Runoff
SCENARIO DESCRIPTIONS
1: 1984 Land use.
2: Maximum development allowed by the Critical
Area Act; growth allocation taken from
agricultural land.
3: Maximum development allowed by the Critical
Area Act; growth allocation taken from
forest areas.
4: percent conversion to urban areas.
4849
2855 2177 2216
518
1 2 3
Scenario
NitrogenLoading. Average Loading
Figure 4-4. Predicted total nitrogen and phosphorus loadings in surface water after runoff from the Rhode River Critical
Area under different land use scenarios (Houlihan, 1990).
Considerable uncertainty is associated with the ability to quantify load reductions from various nonstructural practices
for controlling nonpoint source pollution (USEPA, 1990). Table 4-10 illustrates the general effectiveness of various
planning and site design practices. Many are described in the practices section of this management measure and the
Site Development Management Measure.
EPA-840-B-92·002 January 1993 4-39

- 0
-
E U!
...........
c..
-
...........
- 0
z
o 0
LU o os 0
4-40 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

-------- --
m
::r
c:: m
m
z
o
0
Estuarine
Habi1at
Sediment
.....
-
-
-
Community
i.
Environman1al
.. to
to
. Local
. in Local
Da1a
water
Usa
·11 4 Chapter
4. Watershed Protection Practices and Cost Information
The most effective way to achieve this management measure is to develop a comprehensive program that
incorporates protection of surface waters with programs and plans for guiding growth and development. Planning
is an orderly process, and each step builds upon preceding steps. The following practices are part of the process and
can be modified to meet the needs of the community. Many of the practices can be incorporated into existing
activities being carried out by a local government, such as land planning, zoning, and site plan review. Other
activities, such as land acquisition programs, may have to be developed. Where cost and effectiveness information
was available, it was included in the discussion of the examples. The general cost and effectiveness of planning
programs are described after the practices.
a. Resource Inventory and Information Analysis
Before a comprehensive program can be developed, define the watershed boundaries, target areas, and pollutants of
concern, and conduct resource inventory and information analysis. These activities can be done by using best
available information or collecting primary data, depending on funding availability and the quality of available data.
Activities pursued under this process include: assessment of ground-water and surface water hydrology; evaluation
of soil type and ground cover; identification of areas with water quality impairments; and identification of
environmentally sensitive areas, such as steep or erodible uplands, wetlands, riparian areas, floodplains, aquifer
recharge areas, drainage ways, and unique geologic formations. Once environmentally sensitive areas are identified,
areas that are integral to the protection of surface waters and the prevention of nonpoint source pollution can be
protected.
The following are examples of resource inventory and information analysis programs:
LOCATION PROGRAM COST

City of Virginia Three-phase natural areas Phase I (data collection) $13,867;
Beach, Virginia inventory to help planners and Phase II (field inventory) $54,624;
public officials develop practices and Phase Ill (final report) $15,225
for resource protection (Jenkins, 1991 ).
Richmond County, The Richmond County Resource In 1990, the program was supported
Virginia Information System (RIS) was by a $39,000 Federal Coastal Zone
developed to provide a basis for Management Grant, $45,000 from
responsible planning and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation
development of shoreline areas. through a Virginia Environmental
The compilation and mapping of Endowment Grant, and $96,000 from
resource information are part of the county's comprehensive plan
the county's planning and zoning budget (Jenkins, 1991 ).
program.
b. Development of Watershed Management Plan
The resource inventory and information analysis component provides the basis for a watershed management plan.
A watershed management plan is a comprehensive approach to addressing the needs of a watershed, including land
use, urban runoff control practices, pollutant reduction strategies, and pollution prevention techniques.
4-42 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

For a watershed management plan to be effective, it should have measurable goals describing desired outcomes and
methods for achieving the goals. Goals, such as reducing pollutant loads to surface water by 25 percent, can be
articulated in a watershed management plan. Development and implementation of urban runoff practices, both
structural and nonstructural, can be incorporated as methods for achieving the goal. Table 4-11 describes the general
steps for developing a watershed management plan.
Table 4-11. Watershed Management: A Step-by-Step Guide

(Livingston and McCarron, 1992)
1. Delineate and map watershed boundary and 10. Analysis.

sub-basins within the watershed. Determine infrastructure and natural resources
management needs within each watershed.
2. Inventory and map natural storm water
conveyance and storage systems. 11. Set resource management goals and
objectives.
3. Inventory and map man-made storm water Before corrective actions can be taken, a
conveyance and storage system. resource management target must be set. The
This includes all ditches, swales, storm sewers, target can be defined in terms of water quality
detention ponds, and retention areas and standards; attainment and preservation of
includes information such as size, storage beneficial uses; or other local resource.
capacity, and age. management objectives.
4. Inventory and map land use by sub-basin. 12. Determine pollutant reduction (for existing and
future land uses) needed to achieve water
5. Inventory and map detailed soils by sub-basin. quality goals.
6. Establish a clear understanding of water 13. Select appropriate management practices

resources in the watershed. (point source, nonpoint source) that can be
Analyze water quality, sediment, and biological used to achieve the goal.
data. Analyze subjective information on problems Evaluate pollutant removal effectiveness, land
(such as citizen complaints). Evaluate waterbody ·owner acceptance, financial incentives and
use impairment-frequency, timing, seasonality of costs, availability of land operation and
problem. Conduct water quantity assessment-low maintenance needs, feasibility, and availability of
flows, seasonality. technical assistance.
7. Inventory pollution source.s in the watershed. 14. Develop watershed management Plan.
Point sources-location, pollutants, loadings, flow, Since the problems in each watershed will be
capacity, etc. Nonpoint sources-type, location, unique, each watershed management plan will
pollutants, loading, etc. be specific. However, all watershed plans will
- land use/loading rate analysis for storm water; include elements such as:
- sanitary survey for septic tanks; - existing and future land use plan;
- dry flow monitoring to locate illicit discharges - master storm water management plan that
addresses existing and future needs;
8. Identify and map future land use by sub-basin. - wastewater management plan including septic
Conduct land use loading rate analyses to assess tank maintenance programs;
potential effects of various land use scenarios. - infrastructure and capital improvements plan
9. Identify planned infrastructure improvernants-

5-year, 20-year.
Stormwater management deficiencies should be
coordinated and scheduled with other
infrastructure or development projects.
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-43

Development of a watershed management plan may involve establishing general land use designations that define
allowable activities on a parcel of land. For example, land designated for low-density residential use would be
limited to a density of two houses per acre, provided that all other regulations and requirements are met. All
development activities allowed in a use category should be defined. By guiding uses within the planning areas,
impacts to surface waters from urban runoff can be controlled. Those areas identified in the resource inventory and
information analysis phase as environmentally sensitive and important to maintaining water quality can be preserved
through various measures supported by State or local goals, objectives, and policies.
The following are examples of plan development:

Florida • Local governments (counties and Cost information specific
incorporated municipalities) were required to those parts of the
to develop comprehensive plans based on plans relating to NPS
existing information to guide growth and pollution was not
development in the short term (5 years) available.
and long term (20 to 25 years).
• Local plans must be consistent with the
State plan and the State Growth
Management law.
• Each plan must identify environmentally
sensitive areas and areas with water
quality problems.
Fairfax County, • The Environmental Quality Corridor (EQC) The cost of implementing
Virginia System was established to preserve the program is part of the
floodplains, wetlands, shoreline areas, and operating budget of the
steep valley slopes. County Planning
• EQCs are defined in the county's Department (Fairfax
comprehensive plan and identified on the County Planning
county land use map. Department, personal
• If a parcel of land subject to a zoning or communication, 1991 ).
land use designation change contains an
EQC, it is set aside by the developer as
part of development approval. Since its
initiation, tens of thousands of acres have
been set aside through the EQC program.
Howard County, • A Land Preservation and Recreation Plan The annual cost to
Maryland was developed as part of the county update the plan, $25,000,
comprehensive plan. is funded by the State.
• Open space resources are purchased for In FY 1990, the county
preservation and recreation. received $1.14 million in
State funds to update the
plan and to acquire land
(Jenkins, 1991 ).
c. Plan Implementation
Once critical areas have been identified, land use designations have been defined, and goals have been established
to guide activities in the watershed, implementation strategies can be developed. At this point, the requirements of
future development are defined. These requirements include, but are not limited to, permitted uses, construction
techniques, and protective maintenance measures. Land development regulations may also prescribe natural
performance standards; for example, "rates of runoff or soil loss should be no greater than predevelopment
4-44 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

conditions" (USEPA, 1977). Listed below are examples of the types of development regulations and other
implementation tools that have been successful at controlling nonpoint source pollution.
Development of ordinances or regulations requiring NPS pollution controls for new development and
redevelopment.
These ordinances or regulations should address, at a minimum:
(1) Control of off-site urban runoff discharges (to control potential impacts of flooding);
(2) The use of source control BMPs and treatment BMPs;
(3) The performance expectations of BMPs, specifying design storm size, frequency, and minimum
removal effectiveness, as specified by the State or local government;
(4) The protection of stream channels, natural drainage ways, and wetlands;
(5) Erosion and sediment control requirements for new construction and redevelopment; and
(6) Treatment BMP operation and maintenance requirements and designation of responsible parties.
Infrastructure planning
Infrastructure planning is the multiyear scheduling and implementation of public physical improvements
(infrastructure), such as roads, sewers, potable water delivery, landfills, public transportation, and urban
runoff management facilities. Infrastructure planning can be an effective practice to help guide development
patterns away from areas that provide water quality benefits, are susceptible to erosion, or are sensitive to
disturbance or pollutant loadings. Where possible, long-term comprehensive plans to prevent the conversion
of these areas to more intensive land uses should be drafted and adopted. Infrastructure should be planned
for and sited in areas that have the capacity to sustain environmentally sound development. Development
tends to occur in response to infrastructure availability, both existing and planned. New development should
be targeted for areas that have adequate infrastructure to support growth in order to promote infill
development, prevent urban sprawl, and discourage the use of septic tanks where they are inappropriate
(International City Management Association, 1979). Infill development may have the added advantage of
municipal cost savings.
To discourage development in the environmentally sensitive East Everglades area, Dade County, Florida,
has developed an urban services boundary (USB). In areas outside the USB, the county will not provide
infrastructure and has kept land use densities very low. This strategy was selected to prevent urban sprawl,
protect the Everglades wetlands (outside of Everglades National Park), and minimize the costs of providing
services countywide. The area is defined in the county comprehensive plan, and restrictions have been
implemented through the land development regulations (Metro-Dade Comprehensive Development Master
Plan, 1988).
Congress has enacted similar legislation for the protection of coastal barrier islands. In 1981, the
availability of Federal flood insurance for new construction on barrier islands was discontinued. In 1982,
Congress passed the Coastal Barriers Resources Act, establishing the Coastal Barrier Resource System
(CBRS), and terminated a variety of Federal assistance programs for designated coastal barriers, including
grants for new water, sewage, and transportation systems. In 1988, similar legislation was passed for the
Great Lakes area, adding 112 Great Lakes barrier islands. Additions to the CBRS in 1990 included parts
of the Florida Keys, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Great Lakes (Simmons, 1991).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-45

The result of the legislation and subsequent additions to the CBRS has been the establishment of 1,394,059
acres of barriers that are ineligible for Federal assistance for infrastructure and flood insurance (Simmons,
1991). This Act has helped to guide development away from these sensitive coastal areas to more suitable
locations.
• Local ordinances
Zoning is the division of a municipality or county into districts for the purpose of regulating land use.
Usually defined on a map, the allowable uses within each zone are described in an official document, such
as a zoning ordinance. Zoning is enacted for a variety of reasons, including preservation of environmentally
sensitive areas and areas necessary to maintain the environmental integrity of an area (International City
Management Association, 1979).
Within zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations govern the process by which individual lots of land are
created out of larger tracts. Subdivision regulations are intended to ensure that subdivisions are
appropriately related to their surroundings. General site design standards, such as preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas, are one example of subdivision regulations (International City Management
Association, 1979).
Farmland preservation ordinances are another measure that can be implemented to provide open space
retention, habitat protection, and watershed protection. Farmland protection may be a less costly means of
controlling pollutant loadings than the implementation of urban runoff structural control practices. Much
of the farmland currently being converted has soils that are stable and not highly erodible. Conversion of
these farmlands often displaces farming activities to less productive, more erodible areas that may require
increased nutrient and pesticide applications.
• Limits on impervious surfaces, encouragement of open space, and promotion of cluster development
As described earlier, urban runoff contains high concentrations of pollutants washed off impervious surfaces
(roadways, parking lots, loading docks, etc.). By retaining the greatest area of pervious surface and
maximizing open space, nonpoint source pollution due to runoff from impervious surfaces can be kept to
a minimum.
The following are examples of open space requirements and cluster development:
Brunswick, • Recently adopted an allowable impervious Accomplished with a $28,000

Maine area threshold of 5 percent of the site to be grant (Brunswick Planning
developed in the defined Coastal Protection Department, .personal
Zone. communication, 1991 ).
• The remaining 95 percent must be left
natural or landscaped.
Commonwealth • Provides general guidance with regard to Cost information specific to

of Virginia minimum open space/maximum impervious those parts of the guidance
areas to local governments within the relating to NPS pollution was
Chesapeake Bay watershed. not available.
• While specific requirements are not
associated with the guidance, local
government plans must contain criteria and
must be approved by the Chesapeake Bay
Local Assistance Board.
4-46 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Carroll County, • Amended its zoning ordinance to encourage Developed using existing
Maryland cluster development and preserve open county staff and funding.
space.
• This requirement has been applied to three
subdivisions in the county and has resulted
in the protection of more than 200 acres of
wetlands (Carroll County Planning
Department, personal communication,
1991).
State of • Adopted the Forest Conservation Act of

Maryland 1991. Not available.
• Requires all public agency and private
landowner submitting a subdivision plan or
application for a sediment control permit for
an area greater than 40,000 square feet to
develop a forest conservation plan for
retention of existing forest cover on the site.
• Clearing essential to site development is
allowed.
• The Act also established a forest
conservation fund for reforestation projects.
Broward • Implements an open space program and Developed using existing

County, Florida encourages cluster development to reduce county staff and funding.
the amount of impervious surface, to protect
water quality, and to enhance aquifer
recharge (Broward County, Florida, Land
Development Code, 1990).
New Hampshire • Model shoreland protection ordinance. Not available.

• Encourages grouping of residential units
provided a minimum of 50 percent of the
total parcel remains as open space.
One way to increase open space while allowing reasonable development of land is to encourage cluster
development. Clustering entails decreasing the allowable lot size while maintaining the number of allowable
units on a site. Such policies provide planners the flexibility to site buildings on more suitable areas of the
property and leave environmentally sensitive areas undeveloped. Criteria can be varied.
Setback (buffer zone) standards
In coastal areas, setbacks or buffer zones adjacent to surface waterbodies, such as rivers, estuaries, or
wetlands, provide a transition between upland development and waterbodies. The use of setbacks or buffer
zones may prevent direct flow of urban runoff from impervious areas into adjoining surface waters and
provide pollutant removal, sediment attenuation, and infiltration. Riparian forest buffers function as filters
to remove sediment and attached pollutants, as transformers that alter the chemical composition of
compounds, as sinks that store nutrients for an extended period of time, and as a source of energy for
aquatic life (USEPA, 1992). Setbacks or buffer zones are commonly used to protect coastal vegetation and
wildlife corridors, reduce exposure to flood hazards, and protect surface waters by reducing and cleansing
urban runoff (Mantell et al., 1990). The types of development allowed in these areas are usually limited
to nonhabitable structures and those necessary to allow reasonable use of the property (docks, nonenclosed
gazebos, etc.).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-47

Factors for delineating setbacks and buffer zones vary with location and environment and include seasonal
water levels, the nature and extent of wetlands and floodplains, the steepness of adjacent topography, the
type of riparian vegetation, and wildlife values.
EPA recommends that no habitat-disturbing activities should occur within tidal or nontidal wetlands. In
addition, a buffer area should be established that is adequate to protect the identified wetland values.
Minimum widths for buffers should be 50 feet for low-order headwater streams with expansion to as much
as 200 feet or more for larger streams. In coastal areas, a 100-foot minimum buffer of natural vegetation
landward from the mean high tide line helps to remove or reduce sediment, nutrients, and toxic substances
entering surface waters (MWCOG, 1991).
Examples of setback or buffer requirements include the following:
Monroe County, • Requires a setback of 20 feet from high water Developed using existing
Florida on man-made or lawfully altered shorelines for county staff and funding.
all enclosed structures and 50 feet from the
landward extent of mangroves or mean high
tide line for natural waterbodies with unaltered
shorelines (Monroe County, Florida, Code,
Section 9.5·286).
Town of • Requires a buffer of 125 to 300 feet from Developed using a $28,000
Brunswick, mean high water within the Coastal Protection grant (Brunswick Planning
Maine Zone (Section 315 of the Brunswick Zoning Department, personal
Ordinance), depending on the slope of the communication, 1991 ).
buffer, as designated on the land use map.
Queen Annes • Established a standard shore buffer of 300 Developed using existing
County, feet from the edge of tidal water or wetland, county staff and funding; a
Maryland 50 percent of which must be forested. bond of surety to cover the
cost of implementation is
required prior to development
(Jenkins, 1991 ).
Maryland Critical • Requires a 25-foot buffer around nontidal Developed as part of the
Areas wetlands and 100 feet landward of mean high Chesapeake Bay Critical
Regulations water in tidal areas. Areas program.
• Allowable uses within the setback area are
defined in the regulations (Chesapeake Bay
Critical Areas Commission, 1988).
City of • Buffers are required as part of the city's Not available.

Alexandria, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance.
Virginia • Applies to all designated Resource Protection
Areas (RPAs).
• The buffer must achieve
75 percent reduction of sediments and 40
percent reduction of nutrients (100-foot-wide
buffer is considered adequate to achieve this
standard; smaller widths may be allowed if
they are proven to meet the sediment and
nutrient removal requirements).
• Indigenous vegetation removal is limited to
that necessary to provide reasonable sight
lines, access paths, general woodlot
management, and BMP implementation.
4-48 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Northeastern • Model ordinance Not available

Illinois Planning • Suggests 75-foot setback from the ordinary
Commission high watermark of streams, lakes, ponds, and
edge of wetlands or the boundary of the 100-
year floodplain (as defined by FEMA),
whichever is greater.
• Suggests a minimum 25-foot-wide natural
vegetation strip from the ordinary highwater
mark of perennial and intermittent streams,
lakes, ponds, and the edge of wetlands.
Slope restrictions
Slope restrictions can be effective tools to control erosion and sediment transport. Erosion rates depend on
several site-specific factors including soil type, vegetative cover, and rainfall intensity. In general, as slope
increases, there is a corresponding increase in runoff water velocity, which may result in increased erosion
and sediment transport to surface waters (Schwab et al., 1981; Dunn and Leopold, 1978). The Maryland
Chesapeake Bay Critical Areas Program prohibits clearing on slopes greater than 25 percent (Chesapeake
Bay Critical Areas Commission, 1988).
Site plan reviews and approval
A site plan review involves review of specific development proposals for consistency with the laws and
regulations of the local government of jurisdiction. To ensure that natural resources necessary for protecting
surface water quality are preserved, inspection of a potential development site should occur. Inspection
ensures that the information presented in any application for development approval is accurate and that
sensitive areas are noted for preservation. Inspections should also be conducted during and after
development to ensure compliance with development conditions. Depending on the size of the local
government and the amount of new development occurring, this inspection could be incorporated into the
duties of existing staff at minimal additional cost to the local government or could require the addition of
staff to conduct onsite inspections and monitoring. The effectiveness of such a program depends on the
ability of the inspectors to evaluate property for its natural resource value and the practices used to protect
areas necessary for the preservation of water quality.
Development approvals should contain conditions requiring steps to be taken to maintain the environmental
integrity of the area and prevent degradation due to nonpoint source pollution, consistent with the goals,
objectives, and policies of the comprehensive program and the requirements of the land development
regulations. The criteria for new development are outlined as part of a development permit. Examples
include the following:
- Areas for preservation or mitigation may be identified, similar to the Fairfax County Environmental
Quality Corridor System (page 44).
The use of nonstructural and structural best management practices described in this chapter for
controlling nonpoint source pollution may be a condition of development approval.
- Setbacks and limits on impervious areas may be clearly defined in a condition for development approval,
as is being done in the programs discussed earlier such as Monroe County, Florida, Queen Annes
County, Maryland, State of Maryland Critical Areas Program, Town of Brunswick, Maine, and the
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (pages 48 and 49).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-49

- Reduce the use of pesticides and fertilizers on landscaped areas by encouraging the use of vegetation that
is adaptable to the environment and requires minimal maintenance. (Xeriscaping is described later in
this chapter.)
• Designation of an entity or individual who is responsible for maintaining the infrastructure, including the
urban runoff management systems
The responsible party should be trained in the maintenance and management of urban runoff management
systems. If desired, the local government could be designated to maintain urban runoff systems, with
financial compensation from the developer. Because they are not usually trained in infrastructure
maintenance, homeowners groups are not the best entity for monitoring infrastructure for adequacy,
especially urban runoff management systems. This responsibility should belong to a responsible party who
understands the complexity of urban runoff management systems, can determine when such systems are not
functioning properly, and has the resources to correct the problem. Again, this is a duty that the local
government can assume, with either existing staff or additional staff, depending on the size of the local
government and the amount of new development occurring. The amount of funding needed depends on the
size of the local government.
Official mapping
Official maps can be used to designate and/or protect environmentally sensitive areas, zoning districts,
identified land uses, or other areas that provide water quality benefits. When approved by the local
governing body, these maps can be used as legal instruments to make land use decisions related to nonpoint
source pollution.
• Environmental impact assessment statements
To evaluate the impact that proposed development may have on the natural resources of an area, some
counties and municipalities require an environmental assessment as part of the development approval
processes. These assessments can be incorporated into the land development regulation process. Areas to
be covered include geology, slopes, vegetation, historical features, wildlife, and infrastructure needs
(International City Management Association, 1979).
d. Cost of Planning Programs
Cost information was provided for several of the practices discussed in this section. The cost of planning programs
depends on a variety of factors, including the level of effort needed to complete and implement a program. As
discussed earlier, many of the practices described in this section can be incorporated into ongoing activities of a
State or local government.
The Florida legislature funded the development of comprehensive programs and land development regulations
required by the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (1985).
Distribution of funds was based on population according to formulas used for determining funding for the plan and
land development regulations. A base amount was given to all counties that requested it. The balance of the monies
was allocated to each county in an amount proportionate to its share of the total unincorporated population of all the
counties. A similar distribution process was used for local governments. A total of $2.1 million was allocated for
plan development; however, not all components of the plans address NPS issues.
The effect of planning programs depends on many variables, including implementation of programs and monitoring
of conformance with conditions of development approval.
4-50 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

5. land or Development Rights Acquisition Practices and Cost Information
An effective way to preserve land necessary for protecting the environmental integrity of an area is to acquire it
outright or to limit development rights. The following practices can be used to protect beneficial uses.
• a. Fee Simple Acquisition/Conservation Easements
The most direct way to protect land for preservation purposes and associated nonpoint source control functions is
fee simple acquisition, through either purchase or donation. Once a suitable area is identified for preservation, the
area may be acquired along with the development rights. The more development rights that are associated with a
piece of property, the more expensive the property. Many State and local governments and private organizations
have programs for purchasing land.
Conservation easements are restrictions put on property that legally restrict the present and future use of the land.
For preservation purposes, the easement holder is usually not the owner of the property and is able to control
property rights that a landowner could use that might cause adverse impacts to resources on the property. In effect,
the property owner gives up development rights within the easement while retaining fee ownership of the property
(Mantell et al., 1990; Barrett and Livermore, 1983).
•Bb. Transfer of Development Rights
The principle of transfer of development rights (TDR) is based on the concept that ownership of real property
includes the ownership of a bundle of rights that goes with it. These rights may include densities granted by a
certain use designation, environmental permits, zoning approvals, and others. Certain properties have a bigger bundle
of rights than others, depending on what approvals have been received by the owner. The TDR system takes all or
some of the rights on one piece of property and moves them to another parcel. The purpose of TORs is to shift
future development potential from an area that is determined to be unsuitable for development (sending site) to an
area deemed more suitable (receiving site). The development potential can be measured in a variety of ways,
including number of dwelling units, square footage, acres, or number of parking spaces. Most TDR systems require
a legal restriction for future development on the sending site. TOR programs can be either fixed so that there are
only a certain number of sending and receiving sites in an area or flexible so that a sender and receiver can be
matched as the situation allows (Mantell et al., 1990; Barrett and Livermore, 1983).
This system is useful for the preservation of those areas thought necessary for maintaining the quality of surface
waters in that development rights associated with the environmentally sensitive areas can be transferred to less
sensitive areas. There are several examples in the United States where TORs have been used. Some of the more
successful projects involve preservation of the New Jersey Pine Barrens and the Santa Monica Mountains in
California. For the TDR concept to work, receiving and sending sites should be identified and evaluated, a program
that is simple and flexible should be developed, and the use of the program should be promoted and facilitated
(Mantell et al., 1990).
• c. Purchase of Development Rights
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-51

In this process, the rights of development are purchased while the remaining rights remain with the fee title holder.
Restrictions in the deed make it clear that the land cannot be developed based on the rights that have been purchased
(Mantell eta!., 1990).
Howard County, Maryland, has the goal of preserving 20,000 acres of farmland. Development rights are acquired
in perpetuity with one-fourth of one percent of the local land transfer tax used as funding. There is no cap on the
percent of assessed value that may be considered development value, and payment for development rights may be
spread over·30 years to ease the capital gains tax burden on the landowner (Jenkins, 1991).
•d.d. Land Trusts
Land trusts may be established as publicly or privately sponsored nonprofit organizations with the goal of holding
lands or conservation easements for the protection of habitat, water quality, recreation, or scenic value or for
agricultural preservation. A land trust may also preacquire properties that are conservation priorities if the land trust
enters the development market when government funds are not immediately available by acquiring bank funding with
the government as guarantor (Jenkins, 1991).
•e.e. Agricultural and Forest Districts
Agricultural or forest districting is an alternative to acquisition of land or development rights. Jurisdictions may
choose to allow landowners to apply for designation of land as an Agricultural or Forest District. Tax benefits are
received in exchange for a commitment to maintain the land in agriculture, forest, or open space.
Fairfax County, Virginia, taxes land designated as Agricultural or Forest District based on the present use valuation
rather than the usual potential use valuation. A commitment to agricultural or forestry activities must be shown, and
sound land management practices must be used. The districts are established and renewed for 8-year periods (Jenkins,
1991).
• f. Cost and Effectiveness of Land Acquisition Programs
The cost associated with land acquisition programs varies, depending on the desired outcome. If land is to be
purchased, the cost will vary depending on the value of the land. An additional cost to be considered is the
maintenance of the property once it is in public ownership. Easements and development rights are less expensive,
and maintenance of the property is retained by the owner. Depending on the size of the local government,
implementation of these programs is usually part of the operating budget of the appropriate agency (planning
department or parks and recreation department, for example) and additional operational funding for implementation
is dependent on the size of the local government.
The effectiveness of a land acquisition program is determined by the size of the parcel and the difference between
predevelopment and potential postdevelopment pollutant loading rates. In addition, wetlands and riparian areas have
been shown to reduce pollutant loadings. The acquisition and preservation of these areas can be extremely important
to water quality protection and decrease the cost of implementing structural BMPs. However, the use of wetlands
for urban runoff treatment, in general, should be discouraged. Where no other alternative exists, States and local
governments can target upland areas for acquisition to minimize the impacts to wetlands and preserve the function
of wetlands. One option for acquiring land is a public/private partnership. Several examples of such partnerships
exist throughout the country. Harford County, Maryland, has targeted areas for purchase of conservation easements.
The county staff is working jointly with a local land trust to acquire conservation easements and to educate people
in environmentally sound land use practices. The estimated cost for the program is $60,000 per year (Jenkins, 1991).
To aid in the establishment of two local land trusts, Anne Arundel County, Maryland, provided $350,000 in seed
money for capital expenditures such as land and easement procurement. The county also gives staff assistance to
volunteers; additional support comes from contributions of money or land, grants, and fundraisers (Jenkins 1991).
4-52 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

C. Site Development Management Measure
Plan, design, and develop sites to:
(1) Protect areas that provide important water quality benefits and/or are particularly
susceptible to erosion and sediment loss;
(2) Limit increases of impervious areas, except where necessary;
(3) Limit land disturbance activities such as clearing and grading, and cut and fill
to reduce erosion and sediment loss; and
(4) Limit disturbance of natural drainage features and vegetation.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to all site development activities including those
associated with roads, highways, and bridges. Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990,
States are subject to a number of requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this
management measure and will have flexibility in doing so. The application of management measures by States is
described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval
Guidance, published jointly by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
2. Description
The goal of this management measure is to reduce the generation of nonpoint source pollution and to mitigate the
impacts of urban runoff and associated pollutants from all site development, including activities associated with roads,
highways, and bridges. Management Measure II.C is intended to provide guidance for controlling nonpoint source
pollution through the proper design and development of individual sites. This management measures differs from
Management Measure II.A, which applies to postdevelopment runoff, in that Management Measure II.C is intended
to provide controls and policies that are to be applied during the site planning and review process. These controls
and policies are necessary to ensure that development occurs so that nonpoint source concerns are incorporated
during the site selection and the project design and review phases. While the goals of the Watershed Protection
Management Measure (II.B) are similar, Management Measure II.C is intended to apply to individual sites rather
than watershed basins or regional drainage basins. The goals of both the Site Development and Watershed Protection
Management Measures are, however, intended to be complementary and the measures should be used within a
comprehensive framework to reduce nonpoint source pollution.
Programs designed to control nonpoint source pollution resulting from site development, both during and after
construction, should be developed to include provisions for:
Site plan review and conditioned approval to ensure that the integrity of environmentally sensitive areas and
areas necessary for maintaining surface water quality will not be lost;
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-53

Requirements for erosion and sediment control plan review and approval prior to issuance of appropriate
development permits; and
• Guidance on appropriate pollution prevention practices to be incorporated into site development and use.
In addition to the preceding provisions, where applicable, the following objectives should be incorporated into the
site development process:
• During site development, disturb the smallest area necessary to perform current activities to reduce erosion
and offsite transport of sediment;
Avoid disturbance of unstable soils or soils particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss, and favor
sites where development will minimize erosion and sediment loss;
• Where appropriate, protect and retain indigenous vegetation to decrease concentrated flows and to maintain
site hydrology;
Minimize, to the extent practicable, the percentage of impervious area on-site;
Properly manage all maintained landscapes to avoid water quality impacts;
• Avoid alteration, modification, or destruction of natural drainage features on-site; and
• Design sites so that natural buffers adjacent to coastal waterbodies and their tributaries are preserved.
The use of site planning and evaluation can significantly reduce the cost of providing structural controls to retain
sediment on the development site. Long-term maintenance burdens may also be reduced. Good site planning not
only can attenuate runoff from development, but also can improve the effectiveness of the conveyance and treatment
components of an urban runoff management system (MWCOG, 1991).
During the site design process, planners should further identify sensitive areas and land forms that may provide water
quality protection. These areas should be targeted for preservation or conservation and incorporated into site design.
Highly erodible soils should be avoided. By siting development away from erodible soils, it is possible to
significantly reduce the amount of erosion, although soil type, topography, vegetation, and climatological conditions
affect the degree of erosion resulting from land disturbance activities both during and after construction. In the
United States, it has been estimated that human activity causes the transport of nearly 4 billion tons of sediment
annually, one-fourth of which eventually reaches the ocean. Sediment loads from developing areas where new
construction is occurring can be 5 to 500 times greater than loadings from undeveloped rural areas (Gray, 1972).
Natural erosion rates from forested areas or well-sodded prairies are in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 ton of soil per acre
per year (Washington Department of Ecology, 1989). Because many nonpoint source pollutants, including heavy
metals and nutrients, adsorb to sediments, it is important to limit the volume of sediment leaving a site and entering
surface waters.
The Maryland State Highway Administration has developed initiatives to protect sensitive habitats as part of the
governor's program to clean up and preserve the Chesapeake Bay. A selection of these initiatives include the
following:
• Use of turbidity curtains to protect sensitive sections of a waterway during construction;
• Inspection and maintenance of runoff controls after every storm event;
• Immediate notification of noncompliance and follow-up inspection, when noncompliance occurs;
4-54 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 II. Urban Runoff
• A 72-hour stabilization requirement;
• Oversizing of sediment traps and basins depending on right-of-way constraints;
• Innovative scheduling for paving versus vegetative stabilization and implementation of infiltration practices
to reduce thermal impacts;
• Minimal clearing of forest areas; and
Installation of traps and basins prior to grading (Maryland State Highway Administration, 1990).

This management measure was selected because the components of the measure have already been implemented, to
varying degrees, by State and local governments. For example, the States of California, Maryland, Delaware, and
Florida and the local governments of Montgomery, Prince Georges, and Anne Arundel counties in Maryland have
implemented these concepts in State or local ordinances and in erosion and sediment control regulations. This
measure is intended to provide States and local governments with general guidance on nonpoint source pollution
objectives that can be integrated into the site planning process. The components of the management measure were
selected to represent the minimum provisions that State and local governments must implement.
This approach was adopted to use existing programs and staff, thereby reducing administrative burdens and
implementation costs as much as possible. A significant number of local governments have programs to oversee and
review the site development process. In many communities, the costs of implementing this measure within the scope
of existing programs may be nominal.
4. Practices and Cost Information for Control of Erosion During Site

Development
a. Erosion and Sediment Control Plans and Programs
Structural control measures for reducing impacts from erosion during site construction are discussed in the
Construction Management Measure. These practices can be implemented as part of plans established in erosion and
sediment control ordinances by local government or State laws. A well-thought-out plan for urban runoff
management on construction sites can control erosion, retain sediments on the site, and reduce the environmental
effects of runoff. In addition to a plan for BMP use, contractors should develop schedules that minimize the area
of exposed soil at any given time, particularly during times of heavy or frequent rains. Table 4-12 lists items that
should be considered in an erosion and sediment control (ESC) plan. Table 4-13 contains examples of sediment and
erosion control requirements implemented at the State and local levels. All temporary erosion and sediment control
practices that will be used during the construction phase should be detailed in architectural or engineering drawings
to ensure that they are properly implemented. Inclusion of temporary pollution control practices on construction
drawings also ensures that their costs are included in the pricing and bidding process (USEPA, 1973).
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-55

Table 4-12. Items to Consider in Developing an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan c:
(Adapted from Goldman, 1986)
-
Item Description
Schedule grading and • Schedule projects so clearing and grading are done during the dry season or the time of minimum erosion potential. Many parts
construction to of the country have a time of year when erosion potential is relatively low and carefully planned construction scheduling could be
minimize soil very effective.
exposure. • Stage construction so that one area can be stabilized before another is disturbed. This practice reduces the time that an area is
left unstabilized.
Retain existing • Clear only those areas that are essential for completing site construction .
vegetation wherever • Avoid disturbing vegetation on steep slopes or other critical areas and locate material stockpiles, borrow areas, and access
feasible. roads away from critical areas.
• Route construction traffic to avoid existing or newly planted vegetation .
• Physically mark off limits of land disturbance with tape, signs, or barriers. This ensures that the bulldozer operator knows the
proposed limits of clearing.
• Protect natural vegetation with fencing, tree armoring, retaining walls, or tree walls .
Stabilize all denuded • During favorable seeding dates and in areas where vegetation can be established, the following should be implemented:
areas within 15 - Use seeding and fertilizing in very flat, nonsensitive areas with favorable soils.
calendar days after - Use seeding and mulching for less erosive soil or on moderately steep slopes with moderately erosive soils in relatively
final grading. sensitive areas.
Disturbed areas that - Use seeding with multiple mulching treatments or sodding for highly erosive soil, very steep slopes, or sensitive areas with
are inactive and will highly erosive soils.
be exposed to rain " If stabilization is required during the time of year that vegetation cannot be established, implement the following practices:
for 30 days or more - On moderate slopes or soil that is not highly erodible, mulching should be employed.
should also be - On steep slopes or highly erodible soils, multiple mulching treatments should be used.
temporarily stabilized. • If in high elevation or desert site where grasses cannot survive due to harsh environment, at a minimum, plant native shrubs.
• Before stabilizing an area, make sure necessary controls (e.g., diversion of runoff) are in place.
• Where practical, stockpile topsoil and reapply to revegetate site .
• Cover or stabilize topsoil stockpiles .
• For high potential for wind-blown sediment transport, prior to stabilization protect with dust controls such as wind barriers,
mulching, tillage, or sprinkling.
Divert runoff away • Above disturbed areas, construct dike or swale or install pipe slope drain to intercept runoff and convey it to a permanent
from denuded areas channel or storm drain.
or newly seeded
slopes.
Minimize length and • On long or steep disturbed or man-made slopes, construct benches, terraces, or ditches at regular intervals to intercept runoff.
steepness of slopes.
Item Description
Prepare • Provide lining for any existing or newly constructed channel on-site or off-site so the 2-year storm channel velocity does not
drainageways and cause erosion.
outlets to handle • Check dams should be installed on temporary swales that have erosive velocity but due to their short service life cannot support
concentrated or a vegetative lining.
increased runoff.
<o Trap sediment onsite • In areas where greater than 5 acres drain to a point, sediment basin should be installed.
(sediment controls). • In areas where less than 5 acres of concentrated flow leaves the site, silt traps should be installed.
• In areas where sheet flow leaves the site and the drainage area is less than 0.5 ac/1 00 ft of flow, filter fabric fence should be
installed.
• In areas where sheet flow leaves the site and the drainage area is greater than 0.5 ac/1 00 ft of flow, perimeter dikes should be
installed and flow should be diverted to a sediment trap or sediment basin.
• Install inlet protection around all storm drain inlets.
• Install construction entrance (gravel pad to collect mud and sediment from wheels) and route all traffic leaving the site to the
construction entrance.
• Install all sediment controls prior to grading.
Inspect and maintain • Remove sediment from sediment traps and filter fence when silted to half capacity.
control measures. • Inspect and repair, as needed, all controls after each storm event.
NOTE: These are recommendations only and are not intended to be all-inclusive.
c:
Table 4-13. State and Local Construction Site Erosion and

Sediment Control Plan Requirements
State or Local Government General Requirements
Delaware State law requires erosion and sediment control plans as part of site
development approval on construction sites over 5,000 square feet. The State
has adopted an ESC handbook. Temporary or permanent stabilization must
occur within 14 calendar days of disturbance.
Florida State law requires erosion and sediment control plans on all construction sites
requiring a storm water management permit.
Maine State law requires ESC plans for construction sites adjacent to a wetland or
waterbody. Measures should ensure that soil is stabilized to prevent erosion of
shoreline and siltation of the waterbody. The ESC must prevent the wash of
materials into surface waters. Sites must be stabilized at completion of
construction or if there is no activity for 7 calendar days. If temporary
stabilization is used, permanent stabilization must occur within 30 calendar days;
if not, permanent stabilization is required upon completion of construction.
Maryland State law requires ESC plans for all construction sites over 5,000 square feet. If
there is no activity on a construction site for 14 calendar days, the site must be
seeded. Permanent stabilization must occur within 7 calendar days.
Michigan State law requires ESC plans for sites over 1 acre or within 500 feet of a
waterbody. Permanent stabilization must occur within 15 calendar days of final
grading. Temporary stabilization is required within 30 days if construction activity
ceases.
New Jersey State law requires ESC plans for sites over 5,000 square feet.
North Carolina State law requires ESC plans on construction sites over 1 acre. Controls must
be sufficient to retain the sediment generated by land disturbance activities.
Stabilization must occur within 30 working days of completion of any phase of
development.
Ohio State law requires ESC plans for sites larger than 5 acres. Permanent
stabilization must occur within 7 calendar days of final grading or when there has
been no construction activity on the site for 45 days.
Pennsylvania State law requires ESC plans for all development; however, the State reviews
only plans for sites greater than 25 acres. Sites must be stabilized as soon as
possible after grading. Temporary stabilization is required within 70 days if the
site will be inactive for more than 30 days. Permanent stabilization is required if
the site will be inactive for more than 1 year.
South Carolina State law requires an ESC plan for all residential, commercial, industrial, or
institutional land use, unless specifically exempted. Perimeter controls must be
installed, and temporary or permanent stabilization is required for topsoil
stockpiles and all other disturbed areas within 7 calendar days of site
disturbance.
Virginia For areas within the jurisdiction of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, no
more land is to be disturbed than is necessary to provide for the allowed
development. Indigenous vegetation must be preserved to the greatest extent
possible.
Washington State law mandated development of a State storm water management plan,
including erosion control provisions. In response, the Department of Ecology is
to develop construction activity regulations.
4-58 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

State or Local Government General Requirements
King County, WA King County Code requires submission of a comprehensive plan in accordance
with BMPs in King County Conservation District's publication, Construction and
Water Quality: A Guide to Recommended Construction Practices for the Control
of Erosion and Sedimentation in King County.
City of Bellevue, WA A Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan is required for any construction
requiring a storm water detention facility or a Clearing and Grading Permit.
Puget Sound Basin, WA Program Implementation Guidance requires all exposed and unworked soils to
be stabilized by suitable application of BMPs. From October 1 to April 30, no
soils shall remain unstabilized for more than 2 days. From May 1 to September
30, no soils shall remain unstabilized for more than 7 days. Prior to leaving the
site, stormwater runoff shall pass through a sediment pond or sediment trap, or
other appropriate BMPs.
Wisconsin State law requires ESC plans for sites over 4,000 square feet. Permanent or
temporary stabilization is required within 7 days.
Colleton County, SC The county Development Standards Ordinance requires that BMPs be used
during development or land-disturbing activity affecting greater than 1 acre. The
State's guidelines for BMPs are adopted by reference.
Birmingham, AL Through the city's Soil and Erosion Sediment Control Code, a clearing and
earthwork permit is required for most construction sites over 10,000 square feet.
The disturbed area must be stabilized as quickly as practicable.
b. Phasing and Limiting Areas of Disturbance
This practice reduces the potential for erosion and can be accomplished by prohibiting clearing and grading from
all postdevelopment buffer zones, configuring the site plan to retain high amounts of open space, and using phased
construction sequencing to limit the amount of disturbed area at any given time.
• c. Require vegetative stabilization.
Rapid establishment of a grass or mulch cover on a cleared or graded area at construction sites can reduce suspended
sediment levels to surface waters by up to sixfold. Mandatory temporary stabilization of areas left undisturbed for
7 to 14 days is recommended, unless conditions indicate otherwise. Section liLA contains detailed information
regarding vegetative stabilization practices.
• d. Minimum Disturbance/Minimum Maintenance
Minimum disturbance/minimum maintenance is an approach to site development in which clearing and site grading
are allowed only within a carefully prescribed building area, preserving and protecting the existing natural vegetation.
Landscapes that demand significant amounts of chemical treatment should be avoided. Minimum distur-
bance/minimum maintenance strategies help minimize nonpoint source impacts associated with the application of
fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides that result from new land development The retention of existing vegetation
may also help maintain predevelopment runoff volumes and peak rates of discharge and thus reduce erosion.
Translation of a concept such as minimum disturbance/minimum maintenance into straightforward numerical

standards and criteria is difficult. A certain level of interpretation and judgment is often necessary. Nevertheless,
basic standards can be established. Assuming that land use categories have been established through the local land
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-59

use plans or zoning ordinances; vegetation mapping can be used to illustrate where the proposed development can
be constructed with minimal impact on existing vegetation. The area to be disturbed should be identified for all
buildings, structures, roads, walkways, and activity areas. The exact dimensions of this disturbance will be subjective
and will depend on factors such as lot size and site-specific conditions. For example, a single-family residential
development can be constructed with a narrower zone of disturbance than a mall or office park that may require
larger construction equipment with greater maneuverability. In general, an extremely conservative zone width would
be 10 feet beyond the roof line of a structure or dwelling unit; a more moderate criterion might be 25 feet. Mall
sites and large residential developments are typically mass-graded. Limits of Disturbance (LOD) are usually required
on all erosion and sediment control plans and are always a function of grading requirements.
Program Implementation Costs
The annual costs of establishing and implementing a minimum disturbance/minimum maintenance (MD/MM)
program are estimated below. In some cases, the MD/MM tasks can be incorporated within the framework of the
existing land development review process and implementation costs would only be additive. A new program,
however, would need trained staff responsible for ensuring that developers properly integrate the requirements for
the MD/MM into their respective site plans. The need to inspect sites during construction would also result in
additional costs. The annual operating costs of implementing such a program will vary depending on the size of the
community and the degree of new development. For a typical program, estimated costs may be approximately
$110,000 for one professional staffperson and can be divided as follows:
Professional staff $60,000

Support staff $ 30,000
Office space $ 15,000
Office expenses $ 5,000
Total $110,000 per year
These figures are based on approximate average salaries and expenses for similar programs.
The manner by which a turf management or landscape control ordinance is developed or implemented varies to some
extent, county by county, State by State. The process would reflect county size, the framework of existing
government agencies, techniques of governance, and numerous other factors. Costs would vary as well. These
specific aspects of the program would be established by any initial studies and establishment of program
requirements, as discussed above. Also, as experience is gained by the staff and the minimum disturbance/minimum
maintenance concept is better understood by the development community, the need for services might be expected
to decrease as the result of increased program operation efficiency.
5. Site Planning Practices
illustrative purposes only. State programs need not require implementation of these practices.· However, as a
a. Clustering
Clustering development is used to concentrate development and construction activity on a limited portion of a site,
leaving the remaining portion undisturbed. This allows for the design of more effective erosion and sediment control
and urban runoff management plans for the sites, as described in Section II.A. It also provides a mechanism for
preserving environmentally sensitive areas and ·reducing road lengths and impervious parking areas.
4-60 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

NOTE: A common belief is that low-density development is more environmentally sound because it results in
increased open space. Minimum lot size requirements can result in suburban sprawl. Many of these areas are
heavily landscaped and therefore have the potential to contribute significant loadings of nutrients and pesticides to
surface waters. In many cases, clustering and infill development may be more environmentally sound strategies.
They may also result in a cost savings for municipalities because clustering and infill development usually require
less infrastructure, including urban runoff treatment systems. The imposition of density controls may preclude
clustering. While minimum lot size requirements are useful in some instances, such as farmland preservation, zoning
ordinances should not preclude the implementation of clustered development as an alternative to traditional suburban
development.
b. Performance Criteria
Performance criteria for site development contain certain built-in safeguards to protect natural features. Performance
criteria often apply not to individual zoning districts but to the site being regulated or protected and set fixed
protection levels for specific resources that are not based on general zoning definitions.
c. Site Fingerprinting
The total amount of disturbed area within a site can be reduced by fingerprinting development. Fingerprinting places
development away from environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands, steep slopes, etc.), future open spaces, tree save
areas, future restoration areas, and temporary and permanent vegetative forest buffer zones. At a subdivision or lot
level, ground disturbance is confined to areas where structures, roads, and rights of way will exist after construction
is complete.
d. Preserving Natural Drainage Features and Natural Depressional Storage Areas
As discussed in the Watershed Protection Management Measure, natural drainage features should be preserved as
development occurs. This can be done at the site planning stage as well as the watershed planning stage and is
desirable because of the ability of natural drainage features to infiltrate and attenuate flows and filter pollutants.
Depressional storage areas, commonly found as ponded areas in fields during the wet season or large runoff events,
serve the purpose of reducing runoff volumes and trapping pollutants. These areas are usually filled and graded as
a site is developed. Cluster development can be used to preserve natural drainage features and depressional storage
areas and allow for incorporation of these features into a site design (Dreher and Price, 1992).
• e.e. Minimizing Imperviousness
Through the use of various incentives, such as those found in the Maryland Chesapeake Bay Critical Areas 10
Percent Rule, a general strategy of minimizing paved areas can be implemented at the site planning level. Methods
used to meet this goal include:
• Reduced sidewalk widths, especially in low-traffic neighborhoods;

Use of permeable materials for sidewalk construction;
Mandatory open space requirements;
Use of porous, permeable, or gritted pavement, where appropriate;
• Reduced building setbacks, which reduces the lengths of driveways and entry walks; and
• Reduced street widths by elimination of onstreet parking (where such action does not pose a safety hazard).
f. Reducing the Hydraulic Connectivity of Impervious Surfaces
Pollutant loading from impervious surfaces may be reduced if the impervious area does not connect directly to an
impervious conveyance system. This can be done in at least four ways:
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-61

Route runoff over lawn areas to increase infiltration;
• Discourage the direct connection of downspouts to storm sewers or the discharge of downspouts to
driveways or parking lots;
• Substitute swale and pond systems to increase infiltration; and
• Reduce the use of storm sewers to drain streets, parking lots, and back yards (NIPC, 1992)
•g.g. Xeriscape Programs
Xeriscaping is a landscaping concept that maximizes the conservation of water by the use of site-appropriate plants
and an efficient watering system and involves the use of landscaping plants that need minimal watering, fertilization,
and pesticide application. Xeriscaping can reduce the contribution of landscaped areas to coastal nonpoint source
pollution. Xeriscape designs can reduce landscape maintenance by as much as 50 percent, primarily as a result of
the following:
• Reduction of water loss and soil erosion through careful planning, design, and implementation;
• Reduction of mowing by limiting lawn areas and using proper fertilization techniques; and
• Reduction of fertilization through soil preparation (Clemson University, 1991).
In 1991, the Florida Legislature adopted a xeriscape law that requires State agencies to adopt and implement
xeriscaping programs. The law requires that rules and guidelines for implementation of xeriscaping along highway
rights-of-way and on public property associated with publicly owned buildings constructed after July 1, 1992, be
adopted. Local governments are to determine whether xeriscaping is a cost-effective measure for conserving water.
If so, local governments are to work with the water management districts in developing their xeriscape guidelines.
Water management districts will provide financial incentives to local governments for developing xeriscape plans
and ordinances. These plans must include:
• Landscape design, installation, and maintenance standards;

• Identification of prohibited plant species (invasive exotic plants);
• Identification of controlled plant species and conditions for their use;
• Specifications for maximum percentage of turf and impervious surfaces allowed in a xeriscaped area;
• Specifications for land clearing and requirements for the conservation of existing native vegetation; and
Monitoring programs for ordinance implementation and compliance.
There is also a provision in the law requiring local governments and water management districts to promote the use
of xeriscape practices in already developed areas through public education programs. California has passed a law
requiring all municipalities to consider enacting water-efficient landscape requirements.
4-62 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 Ill. Construction Activities i
III. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
A. Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Management Measure
(1) Reduce erosion and, to the extent practicable, retain sediment on site during and
after construction, and
(2) Prior to land disturbance, prepare and implement an approved erosion and
sediment control plan or similar administrative document that contains erosion
and sediment control provisions.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to all construction activities on sites less than 5 acres
in areas that do not have an NPDES permit3 in order to control erosion and sediment loss from those sites. This
management measure does not apply to: (1) construction of a detached single family home on a site of 1/2 acre or
more or (2) construction that does not disturb over 5,000 sqtiare feet of land on a site. (NOTE: All construction
activities, including clearing, grading, and excavation, that result in the disturbance of areas greater than or equal to
5 acres or are a part of a larger development plan are covered by the NPDES regulations and are thus excluded from
these requirements.) Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a
number of requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this management measure and
will have flexibility in doing so. The application of management measures by States is described more fully in
Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance, published jointly by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
2. Description
The goal of this management measure is to reduce the sediment loadings from construction sites in coastal areas that
enter surface waterbodies. This measure requires that coastal States establish new or enhance existing State erosion
and sediment control (ESC) programs and/or require ESC programs at the local level. It is intended to be part of
a comprehensive land use or watershed management program, as previously detailed in the Watershed and Site
Development Management Measures. It is expected that State and local programs will establish criteria determined
by local conditions (e.g., soil types, climate, meteorology) that reduce erosion and sediment transport from
construction sites.
Runoff from construction sites is by far the largest source of sediment in urban areas under development (York
County Soil and Water Conservation District, 1990). Soil erosion removes over 90 percent of sediment by tonnage
in urbanizing areas where most construction activities occur (Canning, 1988). Table 4-14 illustrates some of the
3
On May 27, 1992, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit invalidated EPA's exemption of construction sites
smaller than 5 acres from the storm water permit program in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 965 F.2d 759 (9th Cir.
1992). EPA is conducting further rulemaking proceedings on this issue and will not require permit applications for construction
activities under 5 acres until further rulemaking has been completed.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-63

Ill. Construction Activities Chapter4
measured sediment loading rates associated with construction activities found across the United States. As seen in
Table 4-14, erosion rates from natural areas such as undisturbed forested lands are typically less than one
ton/acre/year, while erosion from construction sites ranges from 7.2 to over 1,000 tons/acre/year.
Table 4-14. Erosion and Sediment Problems Associated With Construction
Location Problem Reference
United States Sediment loading rates vary from York County Soil and Water
36.5 to 1,000 ton/ac/yr. These are 5 Conservation District, 1990
to 500 times greater than those from
undeveloped land.
Approximately 600 million tons of
soil erodes from developed sites
each year. Construction site
sediment in runoff can be 10 to 20
times greater than that from
agricultural lands.
Franklin County, FL Sediment yield (ton/ac/yr): Franklin County, FL

forest< 0.5
rangeland < 0.5
tilled 1.4
construction site 30
established urban < 0.5
Wisconsin Erosion rates range from 30 to 200 Wisconsin Legislative Council, 1991
ton/ac/yr ( 10 to 20 times those of
cropland).
Washington, DC Erosion rates range from 35 to 45 MWCOG, 1987

ton/ac/yr ( 10 to 100 times greater
than agriculture and stabilized urban
land uses).
Anacostia River Basin, VA, MD, DC Sediment yields from portions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1990
Anacostia Basin have been
estimated at 75,000 to 132,000
ton/yr.
Washington Erosion rates range from 50 to 500 Washington Department of Ecology,

ton/ac/yr. Natural erosion rates from 1989
forests. or well-sodded prairies are
0.01 to 1.0 ton/ac/yr.
Anacostia River Basin, VA, MD, DC Erosion rates range from 7.2 to USGS, 1978
100.8 ton/ac/yr.
Alabama 1.4 million tons eroded per year. Woodward-Clyde, 1991

North Carolina 6.7 million tons eroded per year.
Louisiana 5.1 million tons eroded per year.
Oklahoma 4.2 million tons eroded per year.
Georgia 3.8 million tons eroded per year.
Texas 3.5 million tons eroded per year.
Tennessee 3.3 million tons eroded per year.
Pennsylvania 3.1 million tons eroded per year.
Ohio 3.0 million tons eroded per year.
Kentucky 3.0 million tons eroded per year.
4-64 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 Ill. Construction Activities
Eroded sediment from construction sites creates many problems in coastal areas including adverse impacts on water
quality, critical habitats, submerged aquatic vegetation (SA V) beds, recreational activities, and navigation (APWA,
1991). For example, the Miami River in Florida has been severely affected by pollution associated with upland
erosion. This watershed has undergone extensive urbanization, which has included the construction of many
commercial and residential buildings over the past 50 years. Sediment deposited in the Miami River channel
contributes to the severe water quality and navigation problems of this once-thriving waterway, as well as Biscayne
Bay (SFWMD, 1988).
ESC plans are important for controlling the adverse impacts of construction and land development and have been
required by many State and local governments, as shown in Table 4-13 (in the Site Development section of this
chapter). An ESC plan is a document that explains and illustrates the measures to be taken to control erosion and
sediment problems on construction sites (Connecticut Council on Soil and Water Conservation, 1988). It is intended
that existing State and local erosion and sediment control plans may be used to fulfill the requirements of this
management measure. Where existing ESC plans do not meet the management measure criteria, inadequate plans
may be enhanced to meet the management measure guidelines.
Typically, an ESC plan is part of a larger site plan and includes the following elements:
• Description of predominant soil types;

• Details of site grading including existing and proposed contours;
Design details and locations for structural controls;
Provisions to preserve topsoil and limit disturbance;
• Details of temporary and permanent stabilization measures; and
Description of the sequence of construction.
ESC plans ensure that provisions for control measures are incorporated into the site planning stage of development
and provide for the reduction of erosion and sediment problems and accountability if a problem occurs (York County
Soil and Water Conservation District, 1990). An effective plan for urban runoff management on construction sites
will control erosion, retain sediments on site, to the extent practicable, and reduce the adverse effects of runoff.
Climate, topography, soils, drainage patterns, and vegetation will affect how erosion and sediment should be
controlled on a site (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1989). An effective ESC plan includes both structural
and nonstructural controls. Nonstructural controls address erosion control by decreasing erosion potential, whereas
structural controls are both preventive and mitigative because they control both erosion and sediment movement.
Typical nonstructural erosion controls include (APWA, 1991; York County Soil and Water Conservation District,
1990):
• Planning and designing the development within the natural constraints of the site;
• Minimizing the area of bare soil exposed at one time (phased grading);
• Providing for stream crossing areas for natural and man-made areas; and
• Stabilizing cut-and-fill slopes caused by construction activities.
Structural controls include:
Perimeter controls;
• Mulching and seeding exposed areas;
• Sediment basins and traps; and
• Filter fabric, or silt fences.
Some erosion and soil loss are unavoidable during land-disturbing activities. While proper siting and design will
help prevent areas prone to erosion from being developed, construction activities will invariably produce conditions
where erosion may occur. To reduce the adverse impacts associated with construction, the construction management
measure suggests a system of nonstructural and structural erosion and sediment controls for incorporation into an
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-65

Ill. Construction Activities Chapter 4
ESC plan. Erosion controls have distinct advantages over sediment controls. Erosion controls reduce the amount
of sediment transported off-site, thereby reducing the need for sediment controls. When erosion controls are used
in conjunction with sediment controls, the size of the sediment control structures and associated maintenance may
be reduced, decreasing the overall treatment costs (SWRPC, 1991).

This management measure was selected to minimize sediment being transported outside the perimeter of a
construction site through two broad performance goals: (1) reduce erosion and (2) retain sediment onsite, to the
extent practicable. These performance goals were chosen to allow States and local governments flexibility in
specifying practices appropriate for local conditions.
While several commentors responding to the draft (May 1991) guidance expressed the need to defme "more
measurable, enforceable ways" to control sediment loadings, other commentors stressed the need to draft management
measures that do not conflict with existing State programs and allow States and local governments to determine
appropriate practices and design standards for their communities. These management measures were selected because
virtually all coastal States control construction activities to prevent erosion and sediment loss.
The measures were specifically written for the following reasons:
(1) Predevelopment loadings may vary greatly, and some sediment loss is usually inevitable;
(2) Current practice is built on the use of systems of practices selected based on site-specific conditions; and
(3) The combined effectiveness of erosion and sediment controls in systems is not easily quantified.
4. Erosion Control Practices

Erosion controls are used to reduce the amount of sediment that is detached during construction and to prevent
sediment from entering runoff. Erosion control is based on two main concepts: (1) disturb the smallest area of land
possible for the shortest period of time, and (2) stabilize disturbed soils to prevent erosion from occurring.
a. Schedule projects so clearing and grading are done during the time of minimum erosion potential.
Often a project can be scheduled during the time of year that the erosion potential of the site is relatively low. In
many parts of the country, there is a certain period of the year when erosion potential is relatively low and
construction scheduling could be very effective. For example, in the Pacific region if construction can be completed
during the 6-month dry season (May 1 -October 31), temporary erosion and sediment controls may not be needed.
In addition, in some parts of the country erosion potential is very high during certain parts of the year such as the
spring thaw in northern areas. During this time of year, melting snowfall generates a constant runoff that can erode
soil. In addition, construction vehicles can easily turn the soft, wet ground into mud, which is more easily washed
offsite. Therefore, in the north, limitations should be placed on grading during the spring thaw (Goldman et al.,
1986).
4-66 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 Ill. Construction Activities
b. Stage construction.
Avoid areawide clearance of construction sites. Plan and stage land disturbance activities so that only the area
currently under construction is exposed. As soon as the grading and construction in an area are complete, the area
should be stabilized.
By clearing only those areas immediately essential for completing site construction, buffer zones are preserved and
soil remains undisturbed until construction begins. Physical markers, such as tape, signs, or barriers, indicating the
limits of land disturbance, can ensure that equipment operators know the proposed limits of clearing. The area of
the watershed that is exposed to construction is important for determining the net amount of erosion. Reducing the
extent of the disturbed area will ultimately reduce sediment loads to surface waters. Existing or newly planted
vegetation that has been planted to stabilize disturbed areas should be protected by routing construction traffic around
and protecting natural vegetation with fencing, tree armoring, retaining walls, or tree wells.
• c. Clear only areas essential for construction.
Often areas of a construction site are unnecessarily cleared. Only those areas essential for completing construction
activities should be cleared, and other areas should remain undisturbed. Additionally, the proposed limits of land
disturbance should be physically marked off to ensure that only the required land area is cleared. Avoid disturbing
vegetation on steep slopes or other critical areas.
• d. Locate potential nonpoint pollutant sources away from steep slopes, waterbodies, and critical areas.
Material stockpiles, borrow areas, access roads, and other land-disturbing activities can often be located away from
critical areas such as steep slopes, highly erodible soils, and areas that drain directly into sensitive waterbodies.
• e. Route construction traffic to avoid existing or newly planted vegetation.
Where possible, construction traffic should travel over areas that must be disturbed for other construction activity.
This practice will reduce the area that is cleared and susceptible to erosion.
• f. Protect natural vegetation with fencing, tree armoring, and retaining walls or tree wells.
Tree armoring protects tree trunks from being damaged by construction equipment. Fencing can also protect tree
trunks, but should be placed at the tree's drip line so that construction equipment is kept away from the tree. The
tree drip line is the minimum area around a tree in which the tree's root system should not be disturbed by cut, fill,
or soil compaction caused by heavy equipment. When cutting or filling must be done near a tree, a retaining wall
or tree well should be used to minimize the cutting of the tree's roots or the quantity of fill placed over the tree's
roots.
• g. Stockpile topsoil and reapply to revegetate site.
Because of the high organic content of topsoil, it cannot be used as fill material or under pavement. After a site is
cleared, the topsoil is typically removed. Since topsoil is essential to establish· new vegetation, it should be
stockpiled and then reapplied to the site for revegetation, if appropriate. Although topsoil salvaged from the existing
site can often be used, it must meet certain standards and topsoil may need to be imported onto the site if the existing
topsoil is not adequate for establishing new vegetation.
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-67

h. Cover or stabilize topsoil stockpiles.
Unprotected stockpiles are very prone to erosion and therefore stockpiles must be protected. Small stockpiles can
be covered with a tarp to prevent erosion. Large stockpiles should be stabilized by erosion blankets, seeding, and/or
mulching.
i. Use wind erosion controls.
Wind erosion controls limit the movement of dust from disturbed soil surfaces and include many different practices.
Wind barriers block air currents and are effective in controlling soil blowing. Many different materials can be used
as wind barriers, including solid board fence, snow fences, and bales of hay. Sprinkling moistens the soil surface
with water and must be repeated as needed to be effective for preventing wind erosion (Delaware DNREC, 1989);
however, applications must be monitored to prevent excessive runoff and erosion.
Intercept runoff above disturbed slopes and convey it to a permanent channel or storm drain.
Earth dikes, perimeter dikes or swales, or diversions can be used to intercept and convey runoff above disturbed
areas. An earth dike is a temporary berm or ridge of compacted soil that channels water to a desired location. A
perimeter dike/swale or diversion is a swale with a supporting ridge on the lower side that is constructed from the
soil excavated from the adjoining swale (Delaware DNREC, 1989). These practices should be used to intercept flow
from denuded areas or newly seeded areas to keep the disturbed areas from being eroded from the uphill runoff.
The structures should be stabilized within 14 days of installation. A pipe slope drain, also known as a pipe drop
structure, is a temporary pipe placed from the top of a slope to the bottom of the slope to convey concentrated runoff
down the slope without causing erosion (Delaware DNREC, 1989).
k. On long or steep, disturbed, or man-made slopes, construct benches, terraces, or ditches at regular
intervals to intercept runoff.
Benches, terraces, or ditches break up a slope by providing areas of low slope in the reverse direction. This keeps
water from proceeding down the slope at increasing volume and velocity. Instead, the flow is directed to a suitable
outlet, such as a sediment basin or trap. The frequency of benches, terraces, or ditches will depend on the erodibility
of the soils, steepness and length of the slope, and rock outcrops. This practice should be used if there is a potential
for erosion along the slope.
I. Use retaining walls.
Often retaining walls can be used to decrease the steepness of a slope. If the steepness of a slope is reduced, the
runoff velocity is decreased and, therefore, the erosion potential is decreased.
m. Provide linings for urban runoff conveyance channels.
Often construction increases the velocity and volume of runoff, which causes erosion in newly constructed or existing
urban runoff conveyance channels. If the runoff during or after construction will cause erosion in a channel, the
channel should be lined or flow control BMPs installed. The first choice of lining should be grass or sod since this
reduces runoff velocities and provides water quality benefits through filtration and infiltration. If the velocity in the
channel would erode the grass or sod, then riprap, concrete, or gabions can be used.
n. Use check dams.
Check dams are small, temporary dams constructed across a swale or channel. They can be constructed using gravel
or straw bales. They are used to reduce the velocity of concentrated flow and, therefore, to reduce the erosion in
4-68 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

a swale or channel. Check dams should be used when a swale or channel will be used for a short time and therefore
it is not feasible or practical to line the channel or implement flow control BMPs (Delaware DNREC, 1989).
o. Seed and fertilize.
Seeding establishes a vegetative cover on disturbed areas. Seeding is very effective in controlling soil erosion once
a dense vegetative cover has been established. However, often seeding and fertilizing do not produce as thick a
vegetative cover as do seed and mulch or netting. Newly established vegetation does not have as extensive a root
system as existing vegetation and therefore is more prone to erosion, especially on steep slopes. Care should be
taken when fertilizing to avoid untimely or excessive application. Since the practice of seeding and fertilizing does
not provide any protection during the time of vegetative establishment, it should be used only on favorable soils in
very flat areas and not in sensitive areas.
p. Use seeding and mulch/mats.
Seeding establishes a vegetative cover on disturbed areas. Seeding is very effective in controlling soil erosion once
the vegetative cover has been established. The mulching/mats protect the disturbed area while the vegetation
becomes established.
The management of land by using ground cover reduces erosion by reducing the flow rate of runoff and the raindrop
impact. Bare soils should be seeded or otherwise stabilized within 15 calendar days after fmal grading. Denuded
areas that are inactive and will be exposed to rain for 30 days or more should also be temporarily stabilized, usually
by planting seeds and establishing vegetation during favorable seasons in areas where vegetation can be established.
In very flat, non-sensitive areas with favorable soils, stabilization may involve simply seeding and fertilizing.
Mulching and/or sodding may be necessary as slopes become moderate to steep, as soils become more erosive, and
as areas become more sensitive.
q. Use mulch/mats.
Mulching involves applying plant residues or other suitable materials on disturbed soil surfaces. Mulchs/mats used
include tacked straw, wood chips, and jute netting and are often covered by blankets or netting. Mulching alone
should be used only for temporary protection of the soil surface or when permanent seeding is not feasible. The
useful life of mulch varies with the material used and the amount of precipitation, but is approximately 2 to 6
months. Figure 4-5 shows water velocity reductions that could be expected using various mulching techniques.
Similarly, Figure 4-6 shows reductions in soil loss achievable using various mulching techniques. During times of
year when vegetation cannot be established, soil mulching should be applied to moderate slopes and soils that are
not highly erodible. On steep slopes or highly erodible soils, multiple mulching treatments should be used On a
high-elevation or desert site where grasses cannot survive the harsh environment, native shrubs may be planted.
Interlocking ceramic materials, filter fabric, and netting are available for this purpose. Before stabilizing an area,
it is important to have installed all sediment controls and diverted runoff away from the area to be planted. Runoff
may be diverted away from denuded areas or newly planted areas using dikes, swales, or pipe slope drains to
intercept runoff and convey it to a permanent channel or storm drain. Reserved topsoil may be used to revegetate
a site if the stockpile has been covered and stabilized.
Consideration should be given to maintenance when designing mulching and matting schemes. Plastic nets are often
used to cover the mulch or mats; however, they can foul lawn mower blades if the area requires mowing.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-69

78 77
74 73
' 71
-u 59 59 59
56
53
47
45
32
24
4 5 6 3 11 14 2 12 9 13 8 7
Mulching Material Number
Mulch Material
1 straw/top net
2 nets
3
4
s
6 Nylon nets
7 Nylon
8 Vinyl
9 Curled net
Curled nets
11 netting (jute)
12 Interwoven paper and
13 straw - 2,242
14 straw -
Figure 4-5. Water velocity reductions for different mulch treatments (adapted from Harding, 1990).
4-70 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

99.8 98.7 99.5 98.4

100
Mulching Material Number
Mulch Material Characteristics
1 100% wheat straw/top net

2 100% wheat straw/two nets
3 70% wheat straw/30% coconut fiber
4 70% wheat straw/30% coconut fiber
5 100% coconut fiber
6 Nylon monofilament/two nets
7 Nylon monofilament/rigid/bonded
8 Vinyl monofilament/flexible/bonded
9 Curled wood fibers/top net
10 Curled wood fibers/two nets
11 Antiwash netting (jute)
12 Interwoven paper and thread
13 Uncrimped wheat straw - 2,242 kg/ha
14 Uncrimped wheat straw - 4,484 kg/ha
Figure 4-6. Actual soil loss reductions for different mulch treatments (adapted from Harding, 1990).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-71

r. Use sodding.
Sodding permanently stabilizes an area. Sodding provides immediate stabilization of an area and should be used in
critical areas or where establishment of permanent vegetation by seeding and mulching would be difficult. Sodding
is also a preferred option when there is a high erosion potential during the period of vegetative establishment from
seeding.
• s. Use wildflower cover.
Because of the hardy drought-resistant nature of wildflowers, they may be more beneficial as an erosion control
practice than turf grass. While not as dense as turfgrass, wildflower thatches and associated grasses are expected
to be as effective in erosion control and contaminant absorption. Because thatches of wildflowers do not need
fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides, and watering is minimal, implementation of this practice may result in a cost
savings (Brash et al., undated). In 1987, Howard County, Maryland, spent $690.00 per acre to maintain turfgrass
areas, compared to only $31.00 per acre for wildflower meadows (Wilson, 1990).
A wildflower stand requires several years to become established; maintenance requirements are minimal once the
area is established (Brash et al., undated).
5. Sediment Control Practices4
Sediment controls capture sediment that is transported in runoff. Filtration and detention (gravitational settling) are
the main processes used to remove sediment from urban runoff.
a. Sediment Basins
Sediment basins, also known as silt basins, are engineered impoundment structures that allow sediment to settle out
of the urban runoff. They are installed prior to full-scale grading and remain in place until the disturbed portions
of the drainage area are fully stabilized. They are generally located at the low point of sites, away from construction
traffic, where they will be able to trap sediment-laden runoff.
Sediment basins are typically used for drainage areas between 5 and 100 acres. They can be classified as either
temporary or permanent structures, depending on the length of service of the structure. If they are designed to
function for less than 36 months, they are classified as "temporary"; otherwise, they are considered permanent
structures. Temporary sediment basins can also be converted into permanent urban runoff management ponds. When
sediment basins are designed as permanent structures, they must meet all standards for wet ponds.
b. Sediment Trap
Sediment traps are small impoundments that allow sediment to settle out of runoff water. Sediment traps are
typically installed in a drainageway or other point of discharge from a disturbed area. Temporary diversions can be
4
Adapted from Goldman (1986).
4-72 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

used to direct runoff to the sediment trap. Sediment traps should not be used for drainage areas greater than 5 acres
and typically have a useful life of approximately 18 to 24 months.
c. Filter Fabric Fence
Filter fabric fence is available from many manufacturers and in several mesh sizes. Sediment is filtered out as urban
runoff flows through the fabric. Such fences should be used only where there is sheet flow (i.e., no concentrated
flow), and the maximum drainage area to the fence should be 0.5 acre or less per 100 feet of fence. Filter fabric
fences have a useful life of approximately 6 to 12 months.
d. Straw Bale Barrier
A straw bale barrier is a row of anchored straw bales that detain and filter urban runoff. Straw bales are less
effective than filter fabric, which can usually be used in place of straw bales. However, straw bales have been
effectively used as temporary check darns in channels. As with filter fabric fences, straw bale barriers should be
used only where there is sheet flow. The maximum drainage area to the barrier should be 0.25 acre or less per 100
feet of barrier. The useful life of straw bales is approximately 3 months.
e. Inlet Protection
Inlet protection consists of a barrier placed around a storm drain drop inlet, which traps sediment before it enters
the storm sewer system. Filter fabric, straw bales, gravel, or sand bags are often used for inlet protection.
f. Construction Entrance
A construction entrance is a pad of gravel over filter cloth located where traffic leaves a construction site. As
vehicles drive over the gravel, mud, and sediment are collected from the vehicles' wheels and offsite transport of
sediment is reduced.
g. Vegetated Filter Strips
Vegetated filter strips are low-gradient vegetated areas that filter overland sheet flow. Runoff must be evenly
distributed across the filter strip. Channelized flows decrease the effectiveness of filter strips. Level spreading
devices are often used to distribute the runoff evenly across the strip (Dillaha et al., 1989).
Vegetated filter strips should have relatively low slopes and adequate length and should be planted with erosion-
resistant plant species. The main factors that influence the removal efficiency are the vegetation type, soil infiltration
rate, and flow depth and travel time. These factors are dependent on the contributing drainage area, slope of strip,
degree and type of vegetative cover, and strip length. Maintenance requirements for vegetated filter strips include
sediment removal and inspections to ensure that dense, vigorous vegetation is established and concentrated flows do
not occur. Maintenance of these structures is discussed in Section II.A of this chapter.
6. Effectiveness and Cost Information
a. Erosion Control Practices
The effectiveness of erosion control practices can vary based on land slope, the size of the disturbed area, rainfall
frequency and intensity, wind conditions, soil type, use of heavy machinery, length of time soils are exposed and
unprotected, and other factors. In general, a system of erosion and sediment control practices can more effectively
reduce offsite sediment transport than can a single system. Numerous nonstructural measures such as protecting
natural or newly planted vegetation, minimizing the disturbance of vegetation on steep slopes and other highly
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-73

erodible areas, maximizing the distance eroded material must travel before reaching the drainage system, and locating
roads away from sensitive areas may be used to reduce erosion.
Table 4-15 contains the available cost and effectiveness data for some of the erosion controls listed above.
Information on the effectiveness of individual nonstructural controls was not available. All reported effectiveness
data assume that controls are properly designed, constructed, and maintained. Costs have been broken down into
annual capital costs, annual maintenance costs, and total annual costs (including annualization of the capital costs).
b. Sediment Control Practices
Regular inspection and maintenance are needed for most erosion control practices to remain effective. The
effectiveness of sediment controls will depend on the size of the construction site and the nature of the runoff flows.
Sediment basins are most appropriate for drainage areas of 5 acres or greater. In smaller areas with concentrated
flows, silt traps may suffice. Where concentrated flow leaves the site and the drainage area is less than 0.5 ac/100
ft of flow, filter fabric fences may be effective. In areas where sheet flow leaves the site and the drainage area is
greater than 0.5 acre/100ft of flow, perimeter dikes may be used to divert the flow to a sediment trap or sediment
basin. Urban runoff inlets may be protected using straw bales or diversions to filter or route runoff away from the
inlets.
Table 4-16 describes the general cost and effectiveness of some common sediment control practices.
c. Comparisons
Figure 4-7 illustrates the estimated TSS loading reductions from Maryland construction sites possible using a
combination of erosion and sediment controls in contrast to using only sediment controls. Figure 4-8 shows a
comparison of the cost and effectiveness of various erosion control practices. As can be seen in Figure 4-8, seeding
or seeding and mulching provide the highest levels of control at the lowest cost.
4-74 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-15. ESC Quantitative Effectiveness and Cost Summary
Annual
Design Useful Maintenance Cost
Constraints or Life (as % construction Total Annual
Practice Purpose Percent Removal of TSS (years)a Construction Cost cost) Cost
Sod Immediate Average: 99% Average: $0.2 per ft2 Average: 5% $0.20 per ft 2
erosion Observed range: 98% - 99% 2 [$11,300 per acre] Range: 5% $7,500 per
protection References: Minnesota Pollution Control Range: $0.1 - $1.1 Reference: acre
where there is Agency, 1989; Pennsylvania, 1983 cited in References: SWRPC, 1991; SWRPC, 1991
high erosion USEPA, 1991 Schueler, 1987; Virginia, 1980
potential
during
vegetative
establishment.
Seed Establish After vegetation established- Average: $400 per acre Average: 20% $300 per acre
vegetation on Average: 90% 2 Range: $200 - $1000 per acre Range: 15% - 25%
disturbed area. Observed range: 50% - 100% References: Wisconsin DOT References:
References: SCS, 1985 cited in EPA, 1991; cited in SWRPC, 1991; Wisconsin DOT
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1989; SWRPC, 1991; Goldman, 1986; cited in SWRPC,
Oberts, 1984 cited in City of Austin, 1988; Virginia, 1980 1991; SWRPC,
Delaware Department of Natural Resources, 1991
1989
Seed Establish After vegetation established- Average: $1 ,500 per acre Average: NAb $1,100 per
and vegetation on Average: 90% 2 Range: $800 - $3,500 per acre Range: NA acre
Mulch disturbed area. Observed range: 50% - 100% References: Goldman, 1986; References: None
References: SCS, 1985 cited in EPA, 1991; Washington DOT, 1990; NC
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1989; State, 1990; Schueler, 1987;
Oberts, 1984 cited in City of Austin, 1988; Virginia, 1980; SWRPC, 1991
Delaware Department of Natural Resources,
1989
Annual
Constraints or Life (as % construction Total Annual
Mulch Temporary Observed range: Straw Straw mulch: Average: NAb Straw mulch:
stabilization of mulch: Average: $1,700 per acre Range: NA $7,500 per
disturbed area. sand: 0.25 Range: $500 - $5,000 per acre References: None acre
20% slope 50% slope References: Wisconsin DOT
wood fiber @ 1500 lb/ac 50-60% 0-20% cited in SWRPC, 1991;
wood fiber @ 3000 lb/ac 50-85% 50-70% Washington DOT, 1990;
straw @ 3000 lb/ac 90-1 00% 95% Virginia, 1980
Silt-loam: Wood Wood fiber mulch: Wood fiber

20% slope 50% slope fiber Average: $1,000 per acre mulch:
wood fiber @ 1500 lb/ac 20-60% 40-60% mulch: Range: $100 - $2,300 per acre $3,500 per
wood fiber @ 3000 lb/ac 60-90% 60-70% 0.33 References: Washington DOT, acre
straw @ 3000 lb/ac 80-95% 70-90% 1990; Virginia, 1980
Silt -clay-loam: Jute netting: Jute netting:

10-30% 30-50% Average: $3,700 per acre $12,500 per
slope slope Jute Range: $3,500-$4,1 00 per acre acre
wood fiber @ 1500 lb/ac 5% -- netting: References: Washington DOT,
wood fiber @ 3000 lb/ac 40% -- 0.33 1990; Virginia, 1980
jute netting 30-60% 30%
straw @ 3000 lb/ac 40-70% 20-40% Straw and jute: Straw and
wood chips 60-80% 50-60% Average: $5,400 per acre jute:
@ 10,000 lb/ac Range: $4,000-$9,1 00 per acre $18,000 per
mulch blanket 60-80% 50-60% Straw References: Washington DOT, acre
excelsior blanket 60-80% 50-60% and 1990; Virginia, 1980
multiple treatment 90% 90% jute: 0.33
(straw and jute)
References: Minnesota Pollution Control

Agency, 1989; Kay, 1983 cited in Goldman,
1986
Annual
Constraints or Life (as% construction Total Annual
Terraces Break up long Observed range: Average: $5 per lin ft Average: 20% $4 per lin ft
or steep 2 Range: $1 - $12 Range: 20%
slopes. Land Slope Reduction in Erosion References: SWRPC, 1991; Reference:
1-12% 70% Goldman, 1986; Virginia, 1991 SWRPC, 1991
12-18% 60%
18-24% 55%
Additionally, if the slope steepness is halved,

while other factors are held constant, the soil
loss potential decreases 2-1/2 times. If both
the slope and length are halved, the soil loss
potential is decreased 4 times.
References: Goldman, 1986; Beasley, 1972
All Reduce Average: 85% -- Varies but typically low Varies but typically Varies but
Erosion amount of Observed range: 85% low typically low
Controls sediment Reference: Schueler, 1990
entering runoff.
NA - Not available.
a Useful life estimated as length of construction project (assumed to be 2 years).
b For Total Annual Cost, assume Annual Maintenance Cost= 2% of construction cost.
Table 4-16. ESC Quantitative Effectiveness and Cost Summary for Sediment Control Practices
Design Useful Annual Maintenance

Constraints or Life Cost (as%
Practice Purpose Percent Removal of TSS (years)a Construction Cost construction cost) Total Annual Cost
Sediment Minimum drainage Average: 70% Less than 50,000 tt3 storage Average: 25% Less than 50,000 tt3
basin area= Observed range: 55% - 100% 2 Average: $0.60 per tt3 Range: 25% storage
5 acres, References: Schueler, 1990; storage References: Denver $0.40 per ft 3 storage
maximum Engle, BW and Jarrett, AR, ($1, 100 per drainage acrec) COG cited in SWRPC, $700 per drainage
drainage area = 1990; Baumann, 1990 Range: $0.20 - $1.30 per tt3 1991; SWRPC, 1991 acreb
100 acres
Greater than 50,000 tt3 Greater than 50,000
storage ft 3 storage
Average: $0.3 per tt3 $0.20 per ft 3 storage
storage $900 per drainage
($550 per drainage acrec) acrec
Range: $0.1 0 - $0.40 per tt3
References: SWRPC, 1991
Sediment Maximum Average: 60% Average: $0.60 per ft3 Average: 20% $0.70 per ft 3 storage
trap drainage area = Observed range: (-7%)- 1.5 storage Range: 20% $1,300 per drainage
5 acres 100% ($1, 100 per drainage acrec) References: Denver acrec
References: Schueler, et at., Range: $0.20 - $2.00 per tt3 COG cited in SWRPC,
1990; Tahoe Regional References: Denver COG 1991; SWRPC, 1991
Planning Agency, 1989; cited in SWRPC, 1991;
Baumann, 1990 SWRPC, 1991; Goldman,
1986
Filter Fabric Maximum Average: 70% Average: $3 per lin ft Average: 100% $7 per lin ft
Fence drainage area = Observed range: 0% - 100% 0.5 ($700 per drainage acrec Range: 100% $850 per drainage
0.5 acre per 100 sand: 80% - 99% Range: $1 - $8 per lin ft References: SWRPC, acrec
feet of fence. Not silt-loam: 50% - 80% References: Wisconsin DOT 1991
to be used in silt-clay-loam: 0% - cited in SWRPC, 1991;
concentrated flow 20% SWRPC, 1991; Goldman,
areas. References: Munson, 1991; 1986; Virginia, 1991; NC
Fisher et at., 1984; Minnesota State, 1990
Pollution Control Agency,
1989
......

Straw Bale Maximum Average: 70% Average: $4 per lin ft Average: 100% $17 per lin ft
Barrier drainage area = Observed Range: 70% 0.25 ($1 ,600 per drainage acred Range: 100% $6,800 per drainage
0.25 acre per 100 References: Virginia, 1980 Range: $2 - $6 per lin ft References: SWRPC, acred
feet of barrier. cited in EPA, 1991 References: Goldman, 1986; 1991
Not to be used in Virginia, 1991
concentrated flow
areas.
Inlet Protect storm Average: NA Average: $100 per inlet Average: 60% $150 per inlet
Protection drain inlet. Observed Range: NA 1 Range: $50 - $150 Range: 20% - 100%
References: None References: SWRPC, 1991; References: SWRPC,
Denver COG cited in 1991; Denver COG
SWRPC, 1991; Virginia, cited in SWRPC, 1991
1991; EPA cited in SWRPC,
1991
Construction Removes Average: NA Average: $2,000 each Average: NAe

Entrance sediment from Observed Range: NA 2 Range: $1 ,000 - $4,000 Range: NA $1,500 each
vehicles wheels. References: None References: Goldman, 1986; References: None
NC State, 1990
With washrack:
Average: $3,000 each $2,200 each
Range: $1,000 - $5,000
References: Virginia, 1991

Vegetative Must have sheet Average: 70% Established from existing Average: NA NA
Filter Strip flow. Observed Range: 20% - 80% 2 vegetation- Range: NA
References: Hayes and Average: $0 References: None
Hairston, 1983 cited in Range:$0
Casman, 1990; Dillaha et al., References: Schueler, 1987
1989, cited in Glick et al.,
1991; Virginia Department of Established from sod-
Conservation, 1987; Nonpoint Average: $11 ,300 per acre
Source Control Task Force, Range: $4,500 - $48,000
1983 cited in Minnesota PCA, per acre
1989; Schueler, 1987 References: Schueler, 1987;
SWRPC, 1991
NA - Not available.
a Useful life estimated as length of construction project (assumed to be 2 years)
e For Total Annual Cost, assume Annual Maintenance Cost=20% of construction cost.
b Assumes trap volume= 1800 cf/ac (0.5 inches runoff per acre).
c Assumes drainage area of 0.5 acre per 100 feet of fence (maximum allowed).
d Assumes drainage area of 0.25 acre per 100 feet of barrier (maximum allowed).
.
Chapter4 Ill. Construction Activities
NATURAL
25 mg/L
DISTURBED
SITE
UNCONTROLLED
DISTURBED
4,150 mg/L
CONTROL EROSION
60% EFF CONTROL
[80% EFF] 65% EFF
SEDIMENT
EROSION
CONTROL
CONTROL
ONLY
ONLY
1,650 mg/L*
700 mg/L
[800 mg/L]*
SEDIMENT
CONTROL
60% EFF
[80% EFF]
EROSION &
SEDIMENT
CONTROL
300 mg/L
[150 mg/LJ*
OPTION A OPTION B
SEDIMENT CONTROL EROSION AND

SEDIMENT CONTROLS
•Estimated
=
EFF Efficiency
Figure 4-7. TSS concentrations from Maryland construction sites (Schueler, 1987).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-81

III. Construction Activities Chapter 4
15
0
u
Mulch 1 2
Erosion Control
Effectiveness Cost
Figure 4-8. Comparison of cost and effectiveness for erosion control practices (based on information in
Tables 4-15 and 4-16).
4-82 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

B. Construction Site Chemical Control Management Measure
(1) Limit application, generation, and migration of toxic substances;
(2) Ensure the proper storage and disposal of toxic materials; and
(3) Apply nutrients at rates necessary to establish and maintain vegetation without
causing significant nutrient runoff to surface waters.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to all construction sites less than 5 acres in area and
to new, resurfaced, restored, and reconstructed road, highway, and bridge construction projects. This management
measure does not apply to: (l) construction of a detached single family home on a site of 1/2 acre or more or (2)
construction that does not disturb over 5,000 square feet of land on a site. (NOTE: All construction activities,
including clearing, grading, and excavation, that result in the disturbance of areas greater than or equal to 5 acres
a
or are a part of larger development plan are covered by the NPDES regulations and are thus excluded from these
requirements.) Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number
of requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformance with this management measure and will have
2. Description
The purpose of this management measure is to prevent the generation of nonpoint source pollution from construction
sites due to improper handling and usage of nutrients and toxic substances, and to prevent the movement of toxic
substances from the construction site.
Many potential pollutants other than sediment are associated with construction activities. These pollutants include
pesticides (insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, and rodenticides); fertilizers used for vegetative stabilization;
petrochemicals (oils, gasoline, and asphalt degreasers); construction chemicals such as concrete products, sealers, and
paints; wash water associated with these products; paper; wood; garbage; and sanitary wastes (Washington State
Department of Ecology, 1991).
The variety of pollutants present and the severity of their effects are dependent on a number of factors:
(1) The nature of the construction activity. For example, potential pollution associated with fertilizer usage
may be greater along a highway or at a housing development than it would be at a shopping center
development because highways and housing developments usually have greater landscaping requirements.
(2) The physical characteristics of the construction site. The majority of all pollutants generated at
construction sites are carried to surface waters via runoff. Therefore, the factors affecting runoff volume,
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-83

such as the amount, intensity, and frequency of rainfall; soil infiltration rates; surface roughness; slope
length and steepness; and area denuded, all contribute to pollutant loadings.
(3) The proximity of surface waters to the nonpoint pollutant source. As the distance separating
pollutant-generating activities from surface waters decreases, the likelihood of water quality impacts
increases.
a. Pesticides
Insecticides, rodenticides, and herbicides are used on construction sites to provide safe and healthy conditions, reduce
maintenance and fire hazards, and curb weeds and woody plants. Rodenticides are also used to control rodents
attracted to construction sites. Common insecticides employed include synthetic, relatively water-insoluble
chlorinated hydrocarbons, organophosphates, carbamates, and pyrethrins.
b. Petroleum Products
Petroleum products used during construction include fuels and lubricants for vehicles, for power tools, and for
general equipment maintenance. Specific petroleum pollutants include gasoline, diesel oil, kerosene, lubricating oils,
and grease. Asphalt paving also can be particularly harmful since it releases various oils for a considerable time
period after application. Asphalt overloads might be dumped and covered without inspection. However, many of
these pollutants adhere to soil particles and other surfaces and can therefore be more easily controlled.
c. Nutrients
Fertilizers are used on construction sites when revegetating graded or disturbed areas. Fertilizers contain nitrogen
and phosphorus, which in large doses can adversely affect surface waters, causing eutrophication.
d. Solid Wastes
Solid wastes on construction sites are generated from trees and shrubs removed during land clearing and structure
installation. Other wastes include wood and paper from packaging and building materials, scrap metals, sanitary
wastes, rubber, plastic and glass, and masonry and asphalt products. Food containers, cigarette packages, leftover
food, and aluminum foil also contribute solid wastes to the construction site.
e. Construction Chemicals
Chemical pollutants, such as paints, acids for cleaning masonry surfaces, cleaning solvents, asphalt products, soil
additives used for stabilization, and concrete-curing compounds, may also be used on construction sites and carried
in runoff.
f. Other Pollutants
Other pollutants, such as wash water from concrete mixers, acid and alkaline solutions from exposed soil or rock,
and alkaline-forming natural elements, may also be present and contribute to nonpoint source pollution.
Revegetation of disturbed areas may require the use of fertilizers and pesticides, which, if not applied properly, may
become nonpoint source pollutants. Many pesticides are restricted by Federal and/or State regulations.
Hydroseeding operations, in which seed, fertilizers, and lime are applied to the ground surface in a one-step
operation, are more conducive to nutrient pollution than are the conventional seedbed-preparation operations, in which
fertilizers and lime are tilled into the soil. Use of fertilizers containing little or no phosphorus may be required by
4-84 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

local authorities if the development is near sensitive waterbodies. The addition of lime can also affect the pH of
sensitive waters, making them more alkaline.
Improper fueling and servicing of vehicles can lead to significant quantities of petroleum products being dumped onto
the ground. These pollutants can then be washed off site in urban runoff, even when proper erosion and sediment
controls are in place. Pollutants carried in solution in runoff water, or fixed with sediment crystalline structures, may
not be adequately controlled by erosion and sediment control practices (Washington Department of Ecology, 1991).
Oils, waxes, and water-insoluble pesticides can form surface films on water and solid particles. Oil films can also
concentrate water-soluble insecticides. These pollutants can be nearly impossible to control once present in runoff
other than by the use of very costly water-treatment facilities (Washington Department of Ecology, 1991).
After spill prevention, one of the best methods to control petroleum pollutants is to retain sediments containing oil
on the construction site through use of erosion and sediment control practices. Improved maintenance and safe
storage facilities will reduce the chance of contaminating a construction site. One of the greatest concerns related
to use of petroleum products is the method for waste disposal. The dumping of petroleum product wastes into sewers
and other drainage channels is illegal and could result in fines or job shutdown.
The primary control method for solid wastes is to provide adequate disposal facilities. Erosion and sediment control
structures usually capture much of the solid waste from construction sites. Periodic removal of litter from these
structures will reduce solid waste accumulations. Collected solid waste should be removed and disposed of at
authorized disposal areas.
Improperly stored construction materials, such as pressure-treated lumber or solvents, may lead to leaching of toxics
to surface water and ground water. Disposal of construction chemicals should follow all applicable State and local
laws that may require disposal by a licensed waste management firm.
This management measure was selected based on the potential for many construction activities to contribute to
nutrient and toxic NPS pollution.
This management measure was selected because (l) construction activities have the potential to contribute to
increased loadings of toxic substances and nutrients to waterbodies; (2) various States and local governments regulate
the control of chemicals on construction sites through spill prevention plans, erosion and sediment control plans, or
other administrative devices; (3) the practices described are commonly used and presented in a number of best
management practice handbooks and guidance manuals for construction sites; and (4) the practices selected are the
most economical and effective.
4. Practices
• a. Properly store, handle, apply, and dispose of pesticides.
Pesticide storage areas on construction sites should be protected from the elements. Warning signs should be placed
in areas recently sprayed or treated. Persons mixing and applying these chemicals should wear suitable protective
clothing, in accordance with the law.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-85

Application rates should conform to registered label directions. Disposal of excess pesticides and pesticide-related
wastes should conform to registered label directions for the disposal and storage of pesticides and pesticide containers
set forth in applicable Federal, State, and local regulations that govern their usage, handling, storage, and disposal.
Pesticides and herbicides should be used only in conjunction with Integrated Pest Management (IPM) (see Chapter
2). Pesticides should be the tool of last resort; methods that are the least disruptive to the environment and human
health should be used first.
Pesticides should be disposed of through either a licensed waste management firm or a treatment, storage, and
disposal (TSD) facility. Containers should be triple-rinsed before disposal, and rinse waters should be reused as
product.
Other practices include setting aside a locked storage area, tightly closing lids, storing in a cool, dry place, checking
containers periodically for leaks or deterioration, maintaining a list of products in storage, using plastic sheetin·g to
line the storage area, and notifying neighboring property owners prior to spraying.
• b. Properly store, handle, use, and dispose of petroleum products.
When storing petroleum products, follow these guidelines:
• Create a shelter around the area with cover and wind protection;
• Line the storage area with a double layer of plastic sheeting or similar material;
• Create an impervious berm around the perimeter with a capacity 110 percent greater than that of the largest
container;
• Clearly label all products;
• Keep tanks off the ground; and
• Keep lids securely fastened.
Oil and oily wastes such as crankcase oil, cans, rags, and paper dropped into oils and lubricants should be disposed
of in proper receptacles or recycled. Waste oil for recycling should not be mixed with degreasers, solvents,
antifreeze, or brake fluid.
• c. Establish fuel and vehicle maintenance staging areas located away from all drainage courses, and
design these areas to control runoff.
Proper maintenance of equipment and installation of proper stream crossings will further reduce pollution of water
by these sources. Stream crossings should be minimized through proper planning of access roads. Refer to
Chapter 3 for additional information on stream crossings.
• d. Provide sanitary facilities tor constructions workers.
• e. Store, cover, and isolate construction materials, including topsoil and chemicals, to prevent runoff
of pollutants and contamination of ground water.
• f. Develop and implement a spill prevention and control plan. Agencies, contractors, and other
commercial entities that store, handle, or transport fuel, oil, or hazardous materials should develop
a spill response plan.
4-86 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Post spill procedure information and·have persons trained in spill handling on site or on call at all times. Materials
for cleaning up spills should be kept on site and easily available. Spills should be cleaned up immediately and the
contaminated material properly disposed of. Spill control plan components should include:
• Stop the source of the spill.
• Contain any liquid.
• Cover the spill with absorbent material such as kitty litter or sawdust, but do not use straw. Dispose of the
used absorbent properly.
g. Maintain and wash equipment and machinery in confined areas specifically designed to control
runoff.
Thinners or solvents should not be discharged into sanitary or storm sewer systems when cleaning machinery. Use
alternative methods for cleaning larger equipment parts, such as high-pressure, high-temperature water washes, or
steam cleaning. Equipment-washing detergents can be used, and wash water may be discharged into sanitary sewers
if solids are removed from the solution first. (This practice should be verified with the local sewer authority.) Small
parts can be cleaned with degreasing solvents, which can then be reused or recycled. Do not discharge any solvents
into sewers.
Washout from concrete trucks should be disposed of into:
A designated area that will later be backfilled;
An area where the concrete wash can harden, can be broken up, and then can be placed in a dumpster; or
• A location not subject to urban runoff and more than 50 feet away from a storm drain, open ditch, or
surface water.
Never dump washout into a sanitary sewer or storm drain, or onto soil or pavement that carries urban runoff.
h. Develop and implement nutrient management plans.
Properly time applications, and work fertilizers and liming materials into the soil to depths of 4 to 6 inches. Using
soil tests to determine specific nutrient needs at the site can greatly decrease the amount of nutrients applied.
i. Provide adequate disposal facilities for solid waste, including excess asphalt, produced during
construction.
Educate construction workers about proper materials handling and spill response procedures.
Distribute or post informational material regarding chemical control.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-87

IV. Existing Development Chapter4
IV. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
A. Existing Development Management Measure
Develop and implement watershed management programs to reduce runoff pollutant

concentrations and volumes from existing development:
(1) Identify priority local and/or regional watershed pollutant reduction

opportunities, e.g., improvements to existing urban runoff control structures;
(2) Contain a schedule for implementing appropriate controls;
(3) Limit destruction of natural conveyance systems; and
(4) Where appropriate, preserve, enhance, or establish buffers along surface

waterbodies and their tributaries.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to all urban areas and existing development in order
to reduce surface water runoff pollutant loadings from such areas. Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization
Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in
conformity with this management measure and will have flexibility in doing so. The application of management
measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development
and Approval Guidance, published jointly by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
2. Description
The purpose of this management measure is to protect or improve surface water quality by the development and
implementation of watershed management programs that pursue the following objectives:
(1) Reduce surface water runoff pollution loadings from areas where development has already occurred;
(2) Limit surface water runoff volumes in order to minimize sediment loadings resulting from the erosion of
streambanks and other natural conveyance systems; and
(3) Preserve, enhance, or establish buffers that provide water quality benefits along waterbodies and their
tributaries.
Maintenance of water quality becomes increasingly difficult as areas of impervious surface increase and urbanization
occurs. For the purpose of this guidance, urbanized areas are those areas where the presence of "man-made"
impervious surfaces results in increased peak runoff volumes and pollutant loadings that permanently alter one or
4-88 EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 IV. Existing Development
more of the following: 5 stream channels, natural drainageways, and in-stream and adjacent riparian habitat so that
predevelopment aquatic flora and fauna are eliminated or reduced to unsustainable levels and predevelopment water
quality has been degraded. Increased bank cutting, streambed scouring, siltation damaging to aquatic flora and fauna,
increases in water temperature, decreases in dissolved oxygen, changes to the natural structure and flow of the stream
or river, and the presence of anthropogenic pollutants that are not generated from agricultural activities, in general,
are indications of urbanization.
The effects of urbanization have been well described in the introduction to this chapter. Protection of water quality
in urbanized areas is difficult because of a range of factors. These factors include diverse pollutant loadings, large
runoff volumes, limited areas suitable for surface water runoff treatment systems, high implementation costs
associated with structural controls, and the destruction or absence of buffer zones that can filter pollutants and
prevent the destabilization of streambanks and shorelines.
As discussed in Section II.B of this chapter, comprehensive watershed planning facilitates integration of source
reduction activities and treatment strategies to mitigate the effects of urban runoff. Through the use of watershed
management, States and local governments can identify local water quality objectives and focus resources on control
of specific pollutants and sources. Watershed plans typically incorporate a combination of nonstructural and
structural practices.
An important nonstructural component of many watershed management plans is the identification and preservation
of buffers and natural systems. These areas help to maintain and improve surface water quality by filtering and
infiltrating urban runoff. In areas of existing development, natural buffers and conveyance systems may have been
altered as urbanization occurred. Where possible and appropriate, additional impacts to these areas should be
minimized and if degraded, the functions of these areas restored. The preservation, enhancement, or establishment
of buffers along waterbodies is generally recommended throughout the section 6217 management area as an
important tool for reducing NPS impacts. The establishment and protection of buffers, however, is most appropriate
along surface waterbodies and their tributaries where water quality and the biological integrity of the waterbody is
dependent on the presence of an adequate buffer/riparian area. Buffers may be necessary where the buffer/riparian
area (l) reduces significant NPS pollutant loadings, (2) provides habitat necessary to maintain the biological integrity
of the receiving water, and (3) reduces undesirable thermal impacts to the waterbody. For a discussion of protection
and restoration of wetlands and riparian areas, refer to Chapter 7.
Institutional controls, such as permits, inspection, and operation and maintenance requirements, are also essential
components of a watershed management program. The effectiveness of many of the practices described in this
chapter is dependent on administrative controls such as inspections. Without effective compliance mechanisms and
operation and maintenance requirements, many of these practices will not perform satisfactorily.
Where existing development precludes the use of effective nonstructural controls, structural practices may be the only
suitable option to decrease the NPS pollution loads generated from developed areas. In such situations, a watershed
plan can be used to integrate the construction of new surface water runoff treatment structures and the retrofit of
existing surface water runoff management systems.
Retrofitting is a process that involves the modification of existing surface water runoff control structures or surface
water runoff conveyance systems, which were initially designed to control flooding, not to serve a water quality
improvement function. By enlarging existing surface water runoff structures, changing the inflow and outflow
characteristics of the device, and increasing detention times of the runoff, sediment and associated pollutants can be
removed from the runoff. Retrofit of structural controls, however, is often the only feasible alternative for improving
water quality in developed areas. Where the presence of existing development or financial constraints limits
treatment options, targeting may be necessary to identify priority pollutants and select the most appropriate retrofits.
5
Changes resulting from dam building and "acts of God" such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and unusual natural events (e.g., a 100-year
storm), as well as natural predevelopment riverine behavior that results in stream meander and deposition of sediments in sandbars or
similar formations, are excluded from consideration in this definition. For additional information, refer to Chapter 6.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-89

IV. Existing Development Chapter 4
Once key pollutants have been identified, an achievable water quality target for the receiving water should be set
to improve current levels based on an identified objective or to prevent degradation of current water quality.
Extensive site evaluations should then be performed to assess the performance of existing surface water runoff
management systems and to pinpoint low-cost structural changes or maintenance programs for improving pollutant-
removal efficiency. Where flooding problems exist, water quality controls should be incorporated into the design
of surface water runoff controls. Available land area is often limited in urban areas, and the lack of suitable areas
will frequently restrict the use of conventional pond systems. In heavily urbanized areas, sand filters or water quality
inlets with oiUgrit separators may be appropriate for retrofits because they do not limit land usage.

Components (1) and (2) of this management measure were selected so that local communities develop and implement
watershed management programs. Watershed management programs are used throughout the 6217 management area
although coverage is inconsistent among States and local governments (Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1986).
Local conditions, availability of funding, and problem pollutants vary widely in developed communities. Watershed
management programs allow these communities to select and implement practices that best address local needs. The
identification of priority and/or local regional pollutant reduction opportunities and schedules for implementing
appropriate controls were selected as logical starting points in the process of instituting an institutional framework
to address nonpoint source pollutant reductions.
Cost was also a major factor in the selection of this management measure. EPA acknowledges the high costs and
other limitations inherent in treating existing sources to levels consistent with the standards set for developing areas.
Suitable areas are often unavailable for structural treatment systems that can adequately protect receiving waters.
The lack of universal cost-effective treatment options was a major factor in the selection of this management
measure. EPA was also influenced by the frequent lack of funding for mandatory retrofitting and the extraordinarily
high costs associated with the implementation of retention ponds and exfiltration systems in developed areas.
The use of retrofits has been encouraged because of proven water quality benefits. (Table 4-17 illustrates the
effectiveness of structural runoff controls for developed areas and retrofitted structures.) Retrofits are currently being
used by a number of States and local governments in the 6217 management area, including Maryland, Delaware, and
South Carolina.
Management measure components (3) and (4) were selected to preserve, enhance, and establish areas within existing
development that provide positive water quality benefits. Refer to the New Development and Site Planning
Management Measures for the rationale used in selecting components (3) and (4) of this management measure.
4. Practices
a. Priority NPS pollutants should be targeted, and implementation strategies for mitigating the effects
of NPS pollutants should be developed.
b. Policies, plans, and organizational structures that ensure that all surface water runoff management
facilities are properly operated and maintained should be developed. Periodic monitoring and
maintenance may be necessary to ensure proper operation and maintenance.
4-90 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-17. Existing Development Management Practices Effectiveness Summary
....,
% Removal
Management Main Removal
Practice TSS TP TN COD Pb Zn Efficiency Factors References
Water Quality Inlet - Average: 15 5 5 5 15 5 • Maintenance Pitt, 1986; Field, 1985;

Catch Basin (1) Schueler, 1987
Reported Range: 10-95 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-55 5-10 • Sedimentation
storage volume
Probable Range: 10-25 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-25 5-10
No. Values 2 1 1 1 3
Considered:
Water Quality Inlet - Average: 80 NA 35 55 80 65 • Sedimentation Shaver, 1991

Catch Basins With storage volume
Sand Filter (1) Reported Range: 75-85 NA 30-45 45-70 70-90 50-80
• Depth of filter
Probable Range: 70-90 -- 30-40 40-70 70-90 50-80 media
No. Values 1 0
Considered:
Water Quality Inlet - Average: 15 5 5 5 15 5 • Sedimentation Pitt, 1986; Schueler, 1987

Oil/Grid Separator storage volume
(1) Reported Range: 10-25 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-25 5-10
• Outlet
Probable Range: 10-25 5-10 5-10 5-10 10-25 5-10 configurations
Number of
References
Dry Pond Modified

into Ed Dry Pond
Average: 45 25 35 20 45 20 • Storage volume
• Detention time
MWCOG, 1983; City of
Austin, 1990; Schueler and -
Reported Range: 5-90 10-55 20-60 0-40 25-65 (-40)-65 • Pond shape Helfrich, 1988; Pope and
Hess, 1989; OWML, 1987;
Probable Range (2): 70-90 10-60 20-60 30-40 20-60 40-60 Welinski and Stack, 1990
No. Values 6 6 4 5 4 5
Considered:
3
% Removal
Dry Pond Modified Average: 60 45 35 40 70 60 • Pool volume Wetzka and Oberta, 1988;
•
-
into Wet Pond Pond shape Yoosef et al., 1986; Collum,
Reported Range: (-30)-91 10-85 5-85 5-90 10-95 10-95 1985; Driscoll, 1983; Driscoll,
1986; MWCOG, 1983;
Probable Range: 50-90 20-90 10-90 10-90 10-95 20-95 OWML, 1983; Wu et al.,
1988; Holter, 1987; Martin,
No. Values 11 10 7 4 8 7 1988; Darmay et al., 1989;
Considered: OWML, 1982; City of Austin
,1990
Dry Pond or Wet Average: 80 65 55 NA 40 20 • Pool volume Ontario Ministry of the

Pond Modified • Pond shape Environment, 1991
into ED Wet Pond Reported Range: 50-100 50-80 55 NA 40 20 • Detention time
Probable Range: 50-95 50-80
No. Values 1 1 1 0
Considered:
Streambank Average: NA NA NA NA NA NA MWCOG, 1990

Stabilization
Reported Range: NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probable Range:
. No. Values
Considered:
0 0 0 0 0 0
•
.
Riparian Forest Average: 70 50 60 70 20 50 Runoff volume IEP, 1991; Casman, 1990;
' Glick et al., 1991; VADC,
(assumed same as • Slope
Vegetated Filter Reported Range: 20-80 30-95 40-70 60-80 20 50 • Soil infiltration 1987; Minnesota CA, 1989;
Strip) rates Schueler, 1987; Hartigan et
Probable Range (3): 40-90 30-80 20-60 -- 30-80 20-50 • Vegetative cover al., 1989
• Buffer length
No. Values 6 3 2 1 2 2
Considered:
% Removal
Wetland Average: 65 25 20 50 65 35 • Storage volume Harper et al., 1986; Brown,

(assumed same as • Detention time 1985; Wotzka and Obert,
Constructed Storm Reported Range: (-20)-1 00 (-120)-100 (-15)-40 20-80 30-95 (-30)-80 • Pool shape 1988; Hickack et al., 1977;
Water Wetlands) o Wetland's biota Barten, 1987; Meloria, 1986;
Probable Range (6): 50-90 (-5)-80 0-40 --- 30-95 --- • Seasonal Morris et al., 1981;
Variation Sherberger and Davis, 1982;
No. Values 14 14 6 2 6 4 ABAG, 1979; Oberts et al.,
Considered: 1989; Rushton and Dye,
1990; Hey and Barrett, 1991
-
IV. Existing Development Chapter4
c. Remnant pervious areas in already-built areas should be subject to enforceable preservation

requirements. For example, set green space goals to promote tree plantings and pavement
reclamation projects.
d. Developed areas in need of local or regional structural solutions should be identified and put in
priority order.
e. Regional structural solutions, retrofit opportunities, and nonstructural alternatives should be

identified, inventoried, and put in priority order.
f. Where possible, modify existing surface water runoff management structures to address water
quality.
g. As capital resources allow, implement practices such as those in Table 4-17.
5. Effectiveness Information and Cost Information

The following is a general description of various retrofit options and their effectiveness. Since each retrofit situation
is different, the costs will depend on site-specific factors such as climate, drainage area, or pollutants. Table 4-17
discusses the effectiveness of several practices often implemented when correcting existing NPS pollution problems
in urban areas.
a. Construction or Modification of Pollutant Removal Facilities
Many of the management practices described in Section II of this chapter cannot be used in already urbanized areas
because they require space that is typically not available in urbanized areas. However, two types of pollutant
removal retrofits can be used to treat runoff: new treatment facilities can be built in limited land space, and existing
facilities can be modified to obtain increased water quality benefits.
New Facilities. If there is space available, the management practices described in Section II can be applied to
provide water quality benefits. Typically, however, there are space constraints in urbanized areas that will not allow
construction of these facilities. Water quality inlets may be appropriate in areas where space is limited and runoff
from highly impervious areas such as parking lots must be treated. The effectiveness and costs of these facilities
would be similar to those previously discussed. There are several types of water quality inlets-catch basins, catch
basins with sand filters, and oil/grit separators. These are described in detail in Section II.
Retrofit of Existing Facilities. In the past, many surface water runoff management facilities were constructed to
provide peak volume control; however, no provisions for pollutant removal were provided. These existing facilities
can be modified to provide water quality benefits. Two common modifications are dry pond conversion and fringe
marsh creation.
• Dry Pond Conversion. Many dry ponds for surface water runoff management that provide peak volume
control, but no water quality benefits, have been constructed. Many of these ponds can be modified to
provide water quality control. These modifications can include decreasing the size of the outlet to increase
the detention of the dry pond A dry pond's outlet may also be modified to detain a permanent pool of
water and thus create a wet pond or extended detention wet pond. Prince George's County, Maryland, has
a successful program for urban retrofits. They are usually off-line facilities with forebays, vegetative
benches, and deeper portions for storage.
• Fringe Marsh Creation. Aquatic vegetation can be planted along the perimeter of constructed wet ponds
or other open water systems to enhance sediment control and provide some biological pollutant uptake.
4-94 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 IV. Existing Development
b. Stabilization of Shorelines, Stream Banks, and Channels
Urbanization can significantly increase the volume and velocity of surface water runoff that has the potential to erode
streambanks and channels. This erosion can create high sediment loads in surface water. Streambanks can be
stabilized by providing plantings along the streambank or by placing boulders, riprap, retaining walls, or other
structural controls in eroding areas. Where feasible, vegetation and other soft practices should be used instead of
hard, structural practices. See the Shoreline and Streambank Protection section of Chapter 6 for additional
information.
c. Protection and Restoration of Riparian Forest and Wetland Areas
Riparian forests and wetlands are very effective water quality controls. They should be protected and restored
wherever possible. Riparian forests can be restored by replanting the banks and floodplains of a stream-with native
species to stabilize erodible soils and improve surface water and ground water quality. Refer to Chapter 7 for
additional information.
Some examples of urban watershed retrofit programs are presented below. The first case study, the Anacostia
watershed, involves a developed urban area suffering from multiple NPS pollution impacts. As with many of the
examples given, the project has advanced only through the planning and early implementation stages. Therefore,
performance data are not currently available.
CASE STUDY 1 - ANACOSTIA WATERSHED, MARYLAND
Opportunities for urban retrofitting are limited in developed watersheds, but they can be implemented through
extensive onsite evaluations. For example, between 1989 and 1991 over 125 sites in the 179-square-mile
Anacostia watershed in Montgomery County, Maryland, were identified as candidates for retrofitting after
extensive on-site evaluation (Schueler et al., 1991 ). Retrofit options developed in the watershed included
source reduction, extended detention (ED) marsh ponds or ED ponds to handle the first flush, additional storage
capacity in the open channel, routing of surface water runoff away from sensitive channels, diversion of the first
flush to sand-peat filters, and installation of oil/grit separators in the drain network itself. The most commonly
used retrofit technique in the Anacostia watershed is the retrofit of existing dry surface water runoff detention or
flood control structures to improve their runoff storage and treatment capacity. Existing detention ponds are
maintained by excavation, adding to the elevation of the embankment, or by construction of low-flow orifices.
The newly created storage is used to provide a permanent pool, extended detention storage, or a shallow
wetland. Nearly 20 such retrofits are in some stage of design or construction in the Anacostia watershed.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-95

IV. Existing Development Chapter 4
CASE STUDY 2- LOCH RAVEN RESERVOIR, MARYLAND

(Stack and Belt, 1989)
Loch Raven Reservoir, a water supply reservoir serving Baltimore, Maryland, had a eutrophication problem due
to excessive phosphorus loads. To address this problem, the city examined the effectiveness of its existing
phosphorus controls. They found that the more than 24 extended detention dry ponds that had been originally
constructed for surface water runoff management had been designed to treat the once-in-1 0-year or once-in-
100-year flood. The extended detention ponds were thus inefficient at treating runoff from frequent storm
events, and the city was receiving few water quality benefits from these structures. Modifications, or retrofits,
allowed the basins to collect runoff from smaller events and reduce pollutant loadings without affecting their
capacity to contain runoff from larger storms:
Difficulties in obtaining permission from private pond owners restricted the number of ponds with planned
retrofits to six ponds owned by the county and one privately owned pond. Private owners were concerned
about the maintenance costs associated with the retrofits. Changes to the ponds usually involved alteration of
the size of the orifice of the low-flow release structure. Computer modeling was used to determine the minimum
size that would not interfere with the pond's design criteria (i.e., containing the 2-, 10- and 100-year storms)
while providing sufficient detention time to settle the majority of the solids in urban runoff from the more frequent
storms. Each retrofit was tailored to the basin's unique outlet and site characteristics, and costs reflect the
differences in approach. For example, one of the ponds was modified as a urban runoff wetland for an
estimated cost of $27,800. Retrofits of dry ponds were the least expensive, with costs of less than about
$2,000. Draining and dredging boosted the cost of retrofitting a wet pond with a clogged low-flow release
structure to approximately $13,000.
Monitoring of the performance of the retrofits during 12 storm events measured removal efficiencies for
particulate matter of over 90 percent and removal efficiencies for total phosphorus of between 30 and 40
percent. All of the storms monitored were less than the 1-year storm, and detention times ranged from 1 to 5
hours. Trash debris collectors were effective at reducing clogging; thus no maintenance was necessary in the
first year of operation.
CASE STUDY 3- INDIAN RIVER LAGOON, FLORIDA

(Bennett and Heaney, 1991)
Improper surface water runoff drainage practices have degraded the quality of Florida's Indian River Lagoon by
increasing the volume of freshwater runoff to the estuarine receiving water, as well as increasing the loading of
suspended solids. Draining of wetlands for urban and agricultural development has led to nutrient loading in the
lagoon.
The study area, typical of most Florida flatwood watersheds, was selected as a representative drainage
catchment. EPA's Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) was used to summarize the relationship between
catchment hydrology, channel hydraulics, and pollutant loads. The model, calibrated for the study region, was
used to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed watershed control program and to project performance levels
expected after the study region becomes fully developed. The retrofit of multiple structural measures was
undertaken as a demonstration-scale project. An existing trunk channel was modified to act as a wet detention
basin. Flow from the trunk channel enters a partially disturbed, interdunal, freshwater wetland. The wetland
system provides nutrient assimilation, additional water storage capacity, sediment attenuation, and enhanced
evapotranspiration. SWMM predicted that the project will remove between 80 percent and 85 percent of the
total suspended solids, depending on the level of future development. The cost of the project in 1989 dollars,
including operation and monitoring costs over a 10-year period, was $198,960.
4-96 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 V. Onsite Disposal Systems
V. ON SITE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
A. New Onsite Disposal System Management Measures
(1) Ensure that new Onsite Disposal Systems (OSDS) are located, designed,
installed, operated, inspected, and maintained to prevent the discharge of
pollutants to the surface of the ground and to the extent practicable reduce the
discharge of pollutants into ground waters that are closely hydrologically
connected to surface waters. Where necessary to meet these objectives: (a)
discourage the installation of garbage disposals to reduce hydraulic and
nutrient loadings; and (b) where low-volume plumbing fixtures have not been
installed in new developments or redevelopments, reduce total hydraulic
loadings to the OSDS by 25 percent. Implement OSDS inspection schedules
for preconstruction, construction, and postconstruction.
(2) Direct placement of OSDS away from unsuitable areas. Where OSDS
placement in unsuitable areas is not practicable, ensure that the OSDS is
designed or sited at a density so as not to adversely affect surface waters or
ground water that is closely hydrologically connected to surface water.
Unsuitable areas include, but are not limited to, areas with poorly or
excessively drained soils; areas with shallow water tables or areas with high
seasonal water tables; areas overlaying fractured bedrock that drain directly
to ground water; areas within floodplains; or areas where nutrient and/or
pathogen concentrations in the effluent cannot be sufficiently treated or
reduced before the effluent reaches sensitive waterbodies;
(3) Establish protective setbacks from surface waters, wetlands, and floodplains
for conventional as well as alternative OSDS. The lateral setbacks should be
based on soil type, slope, hydrologic factors, and type of OSDS. Where
uniform protective setbacks cannot be achieved, site development with OSDS
so as not to adversely affect waterbodies and/or contribute to a public health
nuisance;
(4) Establish protective separation distances between OSDS system components

and groundwater which is closely hydrologically connected to surface waters.
The separation distances should be based on soil type, distance to ground
water, hydrologic factors, and type of OSDS;
(5) Where conditions indicate that nitrogen-limited surface waters may be

adversely affected by excess nitrogen loadings from ground water, require the
installation of OSDS that reduce total nitrogen loadings by 50 percent to
ground water that is closely hydrologically connected to surface water.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to all new OSDS including package plants and small-
scale or regional treatment facilities not covered by NPDES regulations in order to manage the siting, design,
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-97

V. Onsite Disposal Systems Chapter4
installation, and operation and maintenance of all such OSDS. Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization
Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in
conformity with this management measure and will have flexibility in doing so. The application of management
measure by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development
and Approval Guidance, published jointly by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
2. Description
The purpose of this management measure is to protect the 6217 management area from pollutants discharged by
OSDS. The measure requires that OSDS be sited, designed, and installed so that impacts to waterbodies will be
reduced, to the extent practicable. Factors such as soil type, soil depth, depth to water table, rate of sea level rise,
and topography must be considered in siting and installing conventional OSDS.
The objective of the management measure is to prevent the installation of conventional OSDS in areas where soil
absorption systems will not provide adequate treatment of effluents containing solids, phosphorus, pathogens,
nitrogen, and nonconventional pollutants prior to entry into surface waters and ground water (e.g., highly permeable
soils, areas with shallow water tables or confining layers, or poorly drained soils). In addition to soil criteria,
setbacks, separation distances, and management and maintenance requirements need to be established to fulfill the
requirements of this management measure. Guidance on design factors to consider in the installation of OSDS is
available in EPA's Design Manual for Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems (1980), currently under
revision. This measure also requires that in areas experiencing pollution problems due to OSDS-generated nitrogen
loadings, OSDS designs should employ denitrification systems or some other nitrogen removal process that reduces
total nitrogen loadings by at least 50 percent. Additionally, hydraulic loadings to OSDS can be reduced by up to
25 percent by installing low-volume plumbing fixtures and enforcing water conservation measures. Garbage
disposals are to be discouraged in all new development or redevelopment where conventional OSDS are employed
as another means of reducing overloading and ensure proper operation of the OSDS. Regularly scheduled
maintenance and pumpout of OSDS will prolong the life of the system and prevent degradation of surface waters.
States need not conduct new monitoring programs or collect new monitoring data to determine whether ground water
is closely hydrologically connected to surface water, nor are States expected to determine exactly where the resulting
water quality problems are significant. Rather, States are encouraged to make reasonable determinations based upon
existing information and data sources.

This management measure was selected to address the proper siting, design, and installation of new OSDS in the
6217 management area. OSDS have been identified as contributors of pathogens, nutrients, and other pollutants to
ground water and surface waters. Nearly all coastal States have siting regulations establishing criteria for setbacks,
separation distances, and percolation rates (Myers, 1991; WCFS, 1992). However, these programs often do not
adequately protect surface waters from pollutants generated by OSDS. This management measure was selected to
ensure that States comprehensively control new OSDS siting, design, and installation in order to protect surface
waters.
The management measure components were selected to address problems known to be associated with OSDS. These
management measure components were selected because proper siting of OSDS and the use of setbacks have been
identified as effective methods for reducing nutrient and pathogen loadings to ground water and surface waters. All
components of this management measure were selected to direct the placement of OSDS away from areas where site
conditions are inadequate to allow proper treatment to occur and areas where there is a high potential for subsequent
system failures that may cause contamination of waterbodies. In addition, this management measure was selected
because siting and density controls can be effective complements to denitrifying systems. However, these
requirements alone are often not adequate to protect surface waters, particularly in situations where installation and
4-98 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

replacement of OSDS are allowed without thorough consideration of OSDS-related impacts. Periodic reevaluation
of these requirements is necessary to ensure protection of surface waters.
Management measure components (1) (a) and (b) were selected to reduce occurrences of hydraulic overloading of
conventional OSDS, which may result in inadequate treatment of septic system effluent and contamination of ground
water or surface water. When excessive wastewater volumes are delivered to the soil absorption field, failure can
occur. In addition, soil saturated with wastewater will not allow oxygen to pass into the soil. Hydraulic overloading
often results from changes in water use habits, such as increased family size, the addition of new water-using
appliances that require increased water consumption, or high seasonal use. New systems may fail within a few
months if water use exceeds the system's capacity to absorb effluent (Mancl, 1985). Water conservation reduces
the amount of water an absorption field must accept.
Since numerous States have responded to this concern by adopting low-flow plumbing fixture regulations
(Table 4-18), requiring such fixtures is not unreasonable. In addition, a number of States have regulations prohibiting
the installation of garbage disposals where OSDS are used. If low-flow plumbing fixtures are used, it is important
that OSDS design not be modified to decrease the required septic tank size. The use of smaller septic tanks will
negate the advantages of using low-flow plumbing fixtures.
For absorption fields to operate properly, they must have aerobic conditions. Jarrett et al. (1985) stated that 75
percent of the total number of soil absorption field failures could be attributed to hydraulic overloading. High-
efficiency plumbing fixtures can reduce the total water load by as much as 60 percent (Jarrett et al., 1985) and reduce
the chance of absorption field failure. Table 4-19 illustrates daily water use and pollutant loadings.
Management measure component (5) was selected to abate OSDS nitrogen loadings to surface waters where nitrogen
is a cause of surface water degradation. The Chesapeake Bay Program (1990) found that 55 to 85 percent of the
nitrogen entering a conventional OSDS can be discharged into ground water. Conventional septic systems account
for 74 percent of the nitrogen entering Buttermilk Bay (at the northern end of Buzzard's Bay) in Massachusetts
(Horsely Witten Hegeman, 1991). A study of nitrogen entering the Delaware Inland Bays found that a significant
ponion of the total pollutant load could be attributed to septic systems. The study determined that septic systems
accounted for 15 percent, 16 percent, and 11 percent of the. nitrogen inputs to Assawoman, Indian River, and
Rehoboth Bays, respectively (Reneau, 1977; Ritter, 1986). Alternatives to conventional OSDS that can substantially
reduce nitrogen loadings are available.
In 1980, EPA developed a design manual for onsite wastewater treatment and disposal systems. An update of this
document is being prepared.
4. Practices
Many of the following practices involve siting and locating OSDS within the 6217 management area. They address
issues such as minimum lot size, depth to water table, and site-specific characteristics such as soil percolation rate.
Table 4-20 illustrates the variability in State and local requirements for siting of OSDS. The practices were
developed to address the issue of siting OSDS given the variable nature of this activity.
• a. Develop setback guidelines and official maps showing areas where conditions are suitable for
conventional septic OSDS installation.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-99

V. Onsite Disposal Systems Chapter 4
Table 4-18. States That Have Adopted Low-Flow Plumbing Fixture Regulations
(In gallons per flush for toilets and gallons per minute for other fixtures)
(Small Flows Clearinghouse, 1991 )a
Water Lavatory
State Effective Date Closets Urinal Shower Heads Faucets Kitchen Faucets
California 01/01/92 1.6 1.0 2.5@ 80 psi 2.2@ 60 psi 2.2@ 60 psi
Colorado 01/01/90 3.5 3.0@ 80 psi 2.5@ 80 psi 2.5@ 80 psi
Connecticut 10/01/90 1.0 2.5 2.5 2.5

01/01/92 1.6
Delaware 07/01/91 1.6 1.5 3.0 @ 80 psi 3.0 @ 80 psi 3.0 @ 80 psi
Georgia
Residential 04/01/92 1.6 1.0 2.5@ 60 psi 2.0 2.5
Commercial 07/01/92 1.6 1.0 2.5@ 60 psi 2.0 2.5
Massachusetts 03/02/89 1.6 (1-piece) 1.5

01/01/88 3.0
09/01/91 1.6 (all
others)
New Jersey 07/01/91 1.6 1.5 3.0 3.0 3.0
New York 1980 3.0 @ psi 3.0

01/26/88 1.0
01/01/91 2.0
01/01/92 1.6
Oregon 07/01/93 1.6 1.0 2.5 2.5 2.5
Rhode Island 09/01/90 1.6 (2-piece) 2.5@ 80 psi 2.0 @ 80 psi 2.0 @ 80 psi
03/01/91 1.6 (all 1.0
others)
Texas 01/01/92 1.6b 1.0 2.75@ 80 psi 2.2@ 60 psi 2.2@ 60 psi
Washington 07/01/93 1.6 1.0 2.5@ 80 psi 2.5@ 80 psi 2.5@ 80 psi
psi = pounds per square inch.

a Information provided by Judith L. Ranton, City of Portland, Oregon, Bureau of Water Works.
b 2.0 gallons or flow rate for ANSI ultra-low flush toilets, whichever is lowest for wall-mounted with flushometers.
Table 4-19. Daily Water Use and Pollutant Loadings by Source (USEPA, 1980)
Volume BOD ss Total N Total P

Water Use (Ucapita) (g/capita) (g/capita) (g/capita) (g/capita)
Garbage Disposal 4.54 10.8 15.9 0.4 0.6
Toilet 61.3 17.2 27.6 8.6 1.2
Basins and Sinks 84.8 22.0 13.6 1.4 2.2
Misc. 25.0 0 0 0 0
Total 175.6 50.0 57.0 10.4 3.5
L = liters
g =grams
4-100 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Both conventional and alternative OSDS usually include a soil absorption field. These absorption fields require a
certain minimum area of soil surrounding the system to effectively remove pathogens and other pollutants. Setbacks
from wells, surface waters, building foundations, and property boundaries are necessary to minimize the threat to
public health and the environment. The setback should be based on soil type, slope, presence and character of the
water table (as defined on a map developed by the implementing agency), and the type of OSDS. Setback guidelines
should be set for both traditional and alternative OSDS. The Design Manual for Onsite Wastewater Treatment and
Disposal Systems (USEPA, 1980) recommends the following setbacks for soil absorption systems, although other
increased setbacks may be necessary to protect ground water and surface waters from viral and bacteria transport
to account for tidal influences and accommodate sea level rise. (NOTE: Setback distance requirements may vary
considerably based on local soil conditions and aquifer properties):
Water supply wells 50 to 100 feet

Surface waters, springs 50 to 100 feet
Escarpments 10 to 20 feet
Boundary of property 5 to 10 feet
Building foundations 10 to 20 feet
(30 feet when located up-slope from a
building in slowly permeable soils)
For mound systems, the mound perimeter requires down-slope setbacks to make certain that the basal area of the
mound is sufficient to absorb the wastewater before it reaches the perimeter of the mound to avoid surface seepage.
The Design Manual for Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems (USEPA, 1980) provides guidance on
setbacks for mound systems.
• b. OSDS should be sited, designed, and constructed so that there is sufficient separation between
the soil absorption field and the seasonal high water table or limiting layer, depending on site
characteristics, including but not limited to hydrology, soils, and topography.
Studies have shown that at least 4 feet of unsaturated soil below the ponded liquid in a soil absorption field is
necessary to (1) remove bacteria and viruses to an acceptable level, (2) remove most organics and phosphorus, and
(3) nitrify a large portion of the ammonia (University of Wisconsin, 1978). The majority of coastal States already
require a minimum separation distance of at least 2 feet (Woodward-Clyde, 1992). Massachusetts requires a
minimum separation of 4 feet; 5 feet is required by towns with sensitive surface waters. Several towns on Cape Cod
have adopted 5 feet as the minimum. A prescribed minimum distance is necessary to prevent contaminants from
directly entering ground water and surface waters. Areas with rapid soil permeabilities (e.g., a percolation rate of
less than 5 minutes/inch) may require a greater separation distance. However, because of local variation, these
numbers are provided only as guidance.
A study on a barrier island of North Carolina (Carlile et al., 1981) found high concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus,
and pathogens in shallow ground-water wells located beneath septic system soil absorption fields. These high
concentrations were suspected to be the result of inadequate separation distance to the water table. Further analysis
revealed that, at the design loading rate, a greater separation distance reduced the ground-water concentration of
indicator organisms from 4.6 to 2.3 logs, and phosphorus by 93 percent. Nitrogen levels were also reduced, but this
improvement (10 percent) was not as dramatic as that observed for bacteria and phosphorus.
c. Require assessments of site suitability prior to issuing permits for OSDS.
Site assessments should be performed to determine the soil infiltration rate, soil pollutant removal capacity,
acceptable hydraulic loading rate, and depth to the water table prior to issuing permits for OSDS. Percolation tests
are usually performed to determine the soil infiltration rate. However, Hill and Frink (1974) stated that percolation
tests are often performed improperly and system failures have resulted from improper siting and inadequate
percolation rates. In addition, regulatory values based on acceptable percolation rates vary considerably (e.g.,
Delaware - 6 to 60 min/in; Georgia - 50 to 90 min/in; Michigan - 3 to 60 min/in; and Virginia - 5 to 120 min/in
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-101

Table 4-20. Example Onsite Sewage Disposal System Siting Requirements
State OSDS Siting Requirement
Florida With respect to ground-water movement, the State requires that onsite systems
must be placed no closer than 75ft from a private potable water well, 100 ft from a
public drinking water well, and 200 ft from a public drinking water well serving a
facility with an estimated sewage flow of more than 2,000 gallons per day. Systems
must not be located within 5 ft of building foundations or laterally within 75 ft of the
mean high water line. Subdivisions and lots where each lot has a minimum area of
at least 1/2 acre and either a minimum dimension of 100 ft or a mean of at least
100 ft from the street may be developed with private potable wells or wells serving
water systems and onsite sewage disposal systems.
Massachusetts The State requires that no septic tank shall be closer than 10 ft and no leaching
facility shall be closer than 20 ft to surface water supplies; no septic tank shall be
closer than 25 ft and no leaching facility shall be closer than 50 ft to watercourses.
Onsite systems must be at least 4ft above ground water.
South Carolina No State requirement. County requirements vary. For example, the County of
Charleston recommends a miniumum lot size of 12,500 ft 2 with a 70-ft front on lots
with public water supplies and 30,000 ft 2 with a 100-ft front for lots with private
water supplies.
Virginia The Chesapeake Bay Act requires that no sewage system shall be placed within
25 ft of a Resource Preservation Watercourse or within 100 ft of a Resource
Management Watercourse. In the event that these requirements cannot be met,
the State requires minimum setbacks of 70 ft for shellfish waters, 50 ft for
impounded surface waters, and 50 ft for streams.
Washington The State requires a 1/2- to 1-acre minimum lot size, dependent upon soil type, for
areas served by public water supplies and a 1- to 2-acre minimum lot size for
septic tank siting, dependent upon soil type, for individual areas served by water
supplies and private wells.
Wisconsin The State requirements of lot areas and widths vary according to percolation rate
(measured as time required to percolate 1 inch). For example, for a lot with a
private water supply system and a percolation rate of under 10 minutes, a
minimum lot area of 20,000 ft 2 , a minimum average lot width of 100 ft, and a
minimum continuous suitable soil area of 10,000 ft2 arerequired before an OSDS
can be sited. For areas served by a community water supply system, a lot with a
percolation rate of under 10 minutes requires a minimum lot area of 12,000 ft2, a
minimum average lot width of 75 ft, and a minimum continuous suitable soil area of
6,000 ft.
(Woodward-Clyde, 1992). States such as Florida and Mississippi require soil evaluations to determine the suitability
of an absorption field. A soil evaluation should also be used in conjunction with percolation test results to determine
whether a site is acceptable, and soil percolation requirements should be phased out, if appropriate. These
evaluations should examine the organic content of the soil, the grain size distribution, and the structure of the soil.
In addition, hydraulic loading should be evaluated to determine the suitability of a site for septic tank use.
A system such as DRASTIC methodology (USEPA, 1987) can also be used to map areas where aquifers may be
vulnerable to pollution from OSDS. DRASTIC considers soil permeability, depth to ground water, and aquifer
characteristics.
4-102 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 V. Onsite Disposal Systems
• d. If OSDS are sited in areas where conditions indicate that nitrogen-limited waters may be adversely
affected by excessive nitrogen loading, minimize densities of development in those areas and
require the use of denitrification systems.
In areas where nitrogen is a problem pollutant, it is important to consider the density of OSDS. As the density of
residences increases, lot sizes decrease and impacts (especially from nitrogen) on underlying ground water may
intensify. One-half to 5-acre lots are generally the minimal requirement for siting OSDS, but the lot size may need
to be larger if nitrogen is a problem pollutant. Limits on the density of absorption fields should also reflect
variations in climate (Rutledge et al., undated). In Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, a minimum lot size of 70,000
square feet was recommended as necessary to avoid nitrogen-induced degradation (Horsely Witten Hegeman, 1991).
However, this practice should not preclude implementation of the use of cluster development to retain open areas
necessary for controlling NPS pollution.
A number of treatment systems are known to remove nitrogen using denitrification. Such systems include sand and
anaerobic upflow filters, and constructed wetlands. These systems are described in practice "f." Most of these
systems require nitrification of septic tank effluent as an initial stage of the treatment process. When properly
operated, these systems have been shown to have the potential to remove over 50 percent of the total nitrogen from
septic tank effluent.
• e. Develop and implement local plumbing codes that require practices that are compatible with OSDS
use.
As stated previously, the majority of OSDS soil absorption field failures are attributed to hydraulic overload. Solids
loads from garbage disposals can also lead to clogging and failure of an absorption field. To address these problems,
plumbing codes that minimize the potential for soil absorption field failure should be implemented.
Plumbing codes that require the use of high-efficiency plumbing fixtures in new development can reduce these water
loads considerably. Such high-efficiency fixtures include toilets of 1.5 gallons or less per flush, shower heads of
2.0 gallons per minute (gpm), faucets of 1.5 gpm or less, and front-loading washing machines of up to 27 gallons
per 10- to 12-pound load. Implementing these fixtures can reduce total in-house water use by 30 percent to 70
percent (Consumer Reports July 1990, February 1991).
• f. In areas suitable for OSDS, select, design, and construct the appropriate OSDS that will protect
surface waters and ground water.
Selection of an OSDS should consider site soil and ground-water characteristics and the sensitivity of the receiving
water(s) to OSDS effluent. Descriptions and design considerations for systems have been provided below.
Table 4-21 contains available cost and effectiveness data for some of these systems. Design and operation and
maintenance information on these devices can be found in Design Manual for Onsite Wastewater Treatment and
Disposal Systems (USEPA, 1980).
Conventional Septic System. A conventional septic system consists of a settling or septic tank and a soil absorption
field. The traditional system accepts both greywater (wastewater from showers, sinks, and laundry) and blackwater
(wastewater from toilets). These systems are typically restricted in that the bottom invert of the absorption field must
be at least 2 feet above the seasonally high water table or impermeable layer (separation distance) and the percolation
rate of the soil must be between 1 and 60 minutes per inch. Also, to ensure proper operation, the tank should be
pumped every 3 to 5 years. Nitrogen removal of these systems is minimal and somewhat dependent on temperature.
The most common type of failure of these systems is from clogging of the absorption field, insufficient separation
distance to the water table, insufficient percolation capacity of the soil, and overloading of water.
Mound Systems. Mound systems are an alternative to conventional OSDS and are used on sites where insufficient
separation distance or percolation conditions exist. Mound systems are typically designed so the effluent from the
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-103

Table 4-21. OSDS Effectiveness and Cost Summary
Effectivenessa Cost
Capital Maintenance
Water TSS BOD TN TP Path. Costb Costb
Practice (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (Logs) ($/House) ($/Year) References
Conventional Septic System USEPA, 1977, 1980, 1989,

Average NA 72 45 28 57 3.5 $4,500 $70 1991; Sandy et al., 1988.;
Probable Range NA 60-70 40-55 10-45 30-80 3-4 $2,000-$8,000 $50-$100 Lamb et al., 1988; Rhode
Observed Range NA 54-83 30-60 0-58 0-95 3-4 $2,000-$10,000 $25-$110 Island, 1989; Degen et al.,
No. Values Considered 0 7 7 13 12 2 8 4 1991; Healy, 1982;
Hanson et al., 1988; Dix,
1986; Fulhage and Day,
1988.
Mound Systems USEPA, 1977, 1980, 1991;

Average NA NA NA 44 NA NA $8,300 $180 Small Flows
Probable Range NA 60-70 40-55 10-45 30-80 3-4 $7,000-$10,000 $100-$300 Clearinghouse, undated.;
Observed Range NA NA NA 44-44 NA NA $6,800-$11,000 $90-$310 Hanson et al., 1988;
No. Values Considered 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 4 Degen et al., 1991.
Low Pressure Systems Fulhage and Day, 1988;

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA $5,100 $150 USEPA, 1980.
Probable Range NA 60-70 40-55 10-45 30-80 3-4 $4,000-$6000 $100-$200
Observed Range NA NA NA NA NA NA $2,800-$7,400 $150-$150
No. Values Considered 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1
Anaerobic Upflow Filter USEPA, 1991; Venhuizen,

Average NA 44 62 59 NA NA $5,550 NA 1991; Mitchell, undated.
Probable Range NA 30-60 50-75 40-75 60-80 3-4 $3,000-$8,000 $150-$400
. Observed Range
No. Values Considered
NA
0
24-89
6
46-84
6
20-75
6
NA
0
NA
0
$3,000-$8,000
2
NA
0
Intermittent Sand Filter USEPA, 1977, 1980, 1991;

Average NA 92 92 55 80 3.2 $5,400 . $275 Small Flows
Probable Range NA 80-95 90-95 50-65 70-90 3-4 $4,000-$8,000 $250-$400 Clearinghouse, undated.;
Observed Range NA 70-99 80-99 40-75 70-90 2-4 $2,300-$10,000 $100-$440 Venhuizen, 1991.
Effectivenessa Cost
Capital Maintenance
Practice (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (Logs) ($/House) ($Near) References
Recirculating Sand Filter Hoxie et al., 1988; Small

Average NA 90 92 64 80 2.9 $3,900 $145 Flows Clearinghouse,
Probable Range NA 85-95 85-95 60-85 70-90 2-4 $5,000-$8,000 $250-$400 undated.; Fulhage and
Observed Range NA 70-98 75-98 1-94 70-90 2-4 $1 ,850-$9,200 $15-$410 Day, 1988; USEPA, 1991;
No. Values Considered 0 12 15 13 2 8 5 7 Venhuizen, 1991;
Swanson and Dix, 1988;
Lamb et al., 1988; Laak,
1986; USEPA, 1980;
Sandy et al., 1988.
Water Separation System USEPA, 1991; USEPA,

Average NA 60 42 83 30 3 $8,000 $300 1986; USEPA, 1980;
Probable Range NA 55-70 35-55 70-90 30-55 2-4 $5,000-$11,000 $300-$750 USEPA, 1977.
Observed Range NA 36-75 22-55 68-99 14-42 NA $5,000-$11,000 $300-$300
Constructed Wetlands Reed, 1991; Small Flows

Average NA 80 81 90 NA 4 $710 $25 Clearinghouse, undated.;
Probable Range NA 60-90 70-90 60-90 30-70 3-4 $1,000-$3,000 $25-$100 USEPA, 1980; Amberg,
Observed Range NA 50-983 65-97 90-90 NA 4-4 $50-$350 $25-$25 1990; Dwyer et al., 1989.
No. Values Considered 0 4 2 0 NA 19 1
Cluster Systems Decker, 1987; Small Flows

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA $4,950 $370 Clearinghouse, undated.
Probable Range NA NA NA NA NA NA $5,000-$7,000 $300-$400
Observed Range NA NA NA NA NA NA $3,000-$6,900 $370-$370
No. Values Considered 0 NA NA NA NA NA 3 1
Effectivenessa Cost
Capital Maintenance
Practice (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (Logs) ($/House) ($/Year) References
Eliminating Garbage USEPA, 1980, 1986, 1991.

Disposals
Average NA 37 28 5 2.5 NA NA NA
Probable Range NA 35-40 25-30 5-10 2-3 NA Negligible Negligible
Observed Range NA 37-37 28-28 5-5 2-3 NA NA NA
No. Values Considered 0 3 2 2 2 NA NA NA
Low Phosphate Detergents USEPA, 1980, 1991.

Average NA NA NA NA 50 NA NA NA
Probable Range NA NA NA NA 40-50 NA Negligible Negligible
Observed Range NA NA NA NA 50-50 NA NA NA
Water Conservation Fixtures USEPA, 1977, 1980, 1991;

Average Small Flows
Probable Range 45 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Clearinghouse, undated.;
Observed Range 25-80 NA NA NA NA NA Varies Negligible Jarrett et al., 1985.
No. Values Considered 4-90 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Holding Tanks Small Flows

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA $3,900 $1,300 Clearinghouse, undated.;
Probable Range NA 95-100 95-100 95-100 95-100 3-4 $4,000-$6,000 $1,000-$2,000 Dix, 1986; Hanson et al.,
Observed Range NA NA NA NA NA NA $1,220-$6,670 $100-$2,400 1988.
NA - Not available.
a Effectiveness values reflect total system reductions including soil absorption fields.
b Costs are in 1988 equivalent dollars, and an average household with four occupants was assumed.
septic tank is routed to a dosing tank and then pumped to a soil absorption field that is located in elevated sand fill
above the natural soil surface. There is evidence suggesting that pressure dosing provides more uniform distribution
of effluent throughout the absorption field and may result in marginally better performance. A major limitation to
the use of mounds is slope. In Pennsylvania, elevated sand mound beds are permitted only in areas with slopes less
than 8 percent (Mancl, 1985).
Where adequate area is available for subsurface effluent discharge, and permanent or seasonal high ground water
is at least 2 feet below the surface, the elevated sand mound may be used in coastal areas. This system can treat
septic tank effluent to a level that usually approaches primary drinking water standards for BOD5, suspended solids,
and pathogens by the time the effluent plume passes the property line for single-family dwellings. A mound system
will not normally produce significant reductions in levels of total nitrogen discharged, but should achieve high levels
of nitrification.
Intermittent Sand Filter. Intermittent sand filters are used in conjunction with pretreatment methods such as septic
tanks and soil absorption fields. An intermittent sand filter receives and treats effluent from the septic tank before
it is distributed to the leaching field. The sand filter consists of a bed (either open or buried) of granular material
from 24 to 36 inches deep. The material is usually from 0.35 to 1.0 mm in diameter. The bed of granular material
is underlain with graded gravel and collector drains. These systems have been shown to be effective for nitrogen
removal; however, this process is dependent on temperature. Water loading recommendations for intermittent sand
filters are typically between 1 and 5 gallons per day/square foot (gpd/ft2) but can be higher depending on wastewater
characteristics. Primary failure of sand filters is from clogging, and the following maintenance is recommended to
keep the system performing properly: resting the bed, raking the surface layer, or removing the top surface medium
and replacing it with clean medium. In general, the filters should be inspected every 3 to 4 months to ensure that
they are operating properly (Otis, undated).
Intermittent sand filters are used for small commercial and institutional developments and individual homes. The
size of the facility is limited by land availability. The filters should be buried in the ground, but may be constructed
above ground in areas of shallow bedrock or high water tables. Covered filters are required in areas with extended
periods of subfreezing weather. Excessive long-term rainfall and runoff may be detrimental to filter performance,
requiring measures to divert water away from the system (USEPA, 1980).
Recirculating Sand Filter. A recirculating sand filter is a modified intermittent sand filter in which effluent from
the filter is recirculated through the septic tank and/or the sand filter before it is discharged to the soil absorption
field. The addition of the recirculation loop in the system may enhance removal effectiveness and allows media size
to be increased to as much as 1.5 mm in diameter and allows water loading rates in the range of 3 to 10 gpd/ft2 to
be used. Recirculation rates of 3:1 to 5:1 are generally recommended.
Buried or recirculating sand filters can achieve a very high level of treatment of septic tank effluent before discharge
to surface water or soil. This usually means single-digit figures for BOD5 and suspended solids and secondary body
contact standards for pathogens (in practice, 100-900 per 100 ml). Dosed recycling between sand filter and septic
tank or similar devices can result in significant levels of nitrification/denitrification, equivalent to between 50 and
75 percent overall nitrogen removal, depending on the recycling ratio. Regular buried or recirculating sand fllters
may require as much as 1 square foot of filter per gallon of septic tank effluent.
Anaerobic Upflow Filter. An anaerobic upflow filter (AUF) resembles a septic tank filled with 3/8-inch gravel with
a deep inlet tee and a shallow outlet tee. An AUF system includes a septic tank, an AUF, a sand filter, and a soil
absorption field. As with the sand filter, dose recycling can be used to enhance this system's performance.
Hydraulic loading for an AUF is generally in the range of 3 to 15 gpd. An AUF resembles a septic tank or the
second chamber of a dual-chambered tank. It should be sized to allow retention times between 16 and 24 hours.
There is a high degree of removal of suspended solids and insoluble BOD. Dosed recycling between sand filter and
AUF can result in 60 to 75 percent overall nitrogen removal.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-107

A growing body of data at the University of Arkansas and elsewhere suggests that an AUF can provide further
treatment of septic tank effluent before discharge to a sand filter. This treatment allows a drastic reduction (by a
factor of 8 to 20) in the size of sand filter needed to attain the performance described above, with major reductions
in cost (Krause, 1991).
Trenches and Beds. Trenches are typically 1 to 3 feet wide and can be greater than 100 feet long. Infiltration
occurs through the bottom and sides of the trench. Each trench contains one distribution pipe, and there may be
multiple trenches in a single system. Like conventional septic systems, they require 2 to 4 feet between the bottom
of the system and the seasonally high water table or bedrock, and are best suited in sandy to loamy soils where the
infiltration rate is 1 to 60 minutes per inch. Gravelly soils or poor-permeability soils (60 to 90 minutes per inch)
are not suitable for trench systems. However, where the infiltration rate is greater than 1 minute per inch, 6 inches
of loamy soil can be added around the system to create the proper infiltration rate (Otis, undated).
Beds are similar to trenches except that infiltration occurs only through the bottom of the bed. Beds are usually
greater than 3 feet wide and contain one distribution pipe per bed. Single beds are commonly used; however, dual
beds may be installed and used alternately. The same soil suitability conditions that apply to trenches apply to bed
systems.
Trenches are often preferred to beds for a few reasons. First, with equal bottom areas, trenches have five times the
sidewall area for effluent absorption; second, there is less soil damage during the construction of trenches; and third,
trenches are more easily used on sloped sites.
The effluent from trenches or beds can be distributed by gravity, dosing, or uniform application. Dosing refers to
periodically releasing the effluent using a siphon or pump after a small quantity of effluent has accumulated.
Uniform application similarly stores the effluent for a short time, after which it is released through a pressurized
system to achieve uniform distribution over the bed or trench. Uniform application~results in the least amount of
clogging.
Maintenance of trenches and beds is minimal. Dual trench or bed systems are especially effective because they allow
the use of one system while the other rests for 6 months to a year to restore its effectiveness (Otis, undated).
Water Separation System. A water separation system separates greywater and blackwater. The greywater is treated
using a conventional septic system, and the blackwater is contained in a vault/holding tank. The blackwater is later
hauled off site for disposal.
For extreme situations or for seasonal residents, some form of separation of toilet wastes from bath and kitchen
wastes may be helpful. Most nitrogen discharges in residential wastewater come from human urine. A very efficient
toilet (0.8 gallon per flush), if routed to a separate holding tank, would need pumping only three or four times per
year even for a family of four permanent residents.
Constructed Wetlands. Constructed wetlands are usually used for polishing of septage effluent that has already
had some degree of treatment (processing through a septic tank or other aggregated system). The performance of
constructed wetlands will be degraded in colder climates during winter months because of plant die-off and reduction
in the metabolic rate of aquatic organisms.
Cluster Systems. For the purposes of this guidance, a cluster system can be defined as a collection of individual
septic systems where primary treatment of septage occurs on each site and the resulting effluent is collected and
treated to further reduce pollutants. Additional treatment may involve the use of sand filters or AUF, constructed
wetlands, chemical treatment, or aerobic treatment. The use of cluster systems may provide advantages due to
increased treatment capability and economy of scale.
Evapotranspiration (ET) and Evapotranspiration/Absorption (ETA) Systems. ET and ETA systems combine
the process of evaporation from the surface of a bed and transpiration from plants to dispose of wastewater. The
4-108 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

wastewater would require some form of pretreatment such as a septic tank. An ET bed usually consists of a liner,
drainfield tile, and gravel and sand layers. ET and ETA systems are useful where soils are unsuitable for subsurface
disposal, where the climate is favorable to evaporation, and where ground-water protection is essential. In both types
of systems, distribution piping is laid in gravel, overlain by sand, and planted with suitable vegetation. Plants can
transpire up to 10 times the amount of water evaporated during the daytime. For an ET system to be effective,
evaporation must be equal to or greater than the total water input to the system because it requires an impermeable
seal around the system. In the United States, this limits use of ET systems to the Southwest. The size of the system
depends on the quantity of effluent inflow, precipitation, the local evapotranspiration rate, and soil permeability (Otis,
undated). Data were unavailable on this BMP, so its cost and effectiveness were not evaluated.
Vaults or Holding Tanks. Vaults or holding tanks are used to containerize wastewater in emergency situations or
other temporary functions. This technology should be discouraged because of high anticipated overloads due to
difficult pumping logistics. Such systems require frequent pumping, which can be expensive.
Fixed Film Systems. A fixed film system employs media to which microorganisms may become attached. Fixed
film systems include trickling filters, upflow filters, and rotating biological filters. These systems require
pretreatment of sewage in a septic tank; final effluent can be discharged to a soil absorption field. Cost and
effectiveness data for this BMP were not available.
Aerobic Treatment Units. Aerobic treatment units can be employed on site. A few systems are available
commercially that employ various types of aerobic technology. However, these systems require regular supervision
and maintenance to be effective. They require pretreatment by a septic tank, and effluent can be discharged to a soil
absorption field. Power requirements can be significant for certain types of these packages. Cost and effectiveness
data for this BMP were not available.
Sequencing Batch Reactor. A sequencing batch reactor is a modified conventional continuous-flow activated sludge
treatment system. Conventional activated sludge systems treat wastewater in a series of separate tanks. Sequencing
batch reactors carry out aeration and sedimentation/clarification simultaneously in the same tank. They are designed
for the removal of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) from typical municipal and
industrial wastewater at flow rates of less than 5 MGD. Modification to the design of the basic system allows for
nitrification and denitrification and for the removal of biological phosphorus to occur.
The sequencing batch reactor is particularly suitable for small flows and for nutrient removal. Sequencing batch
reactors can be either used for new developments or connected to existing septic systems. Small reactors can be
sited in areas of only a few hundred square feet. While sequencing batch reactor cost and operation and maintenance
requirements are greater than those for conventional OSDS, sequencing batch reactors may be suitable alternatives
for sites where high-density development and/or unsuitable soils may preclude adequate treatment of effluent
Sequencing batch reactors can also be used where municipal and industrial wastes require conventional or extended
aeration activated sludge treatment They are most applicable at flow rates of 3000 gpd to 5 MGD but lose their
cost-effectiveness at design rates exceeding 10 MGD (USEPA, 1992). Sequencing batch reactors are very useful
for the pretreatment of industrial waste and for small flow applications. They are also optimally useful where
wastewater is generated for less than 12 hours per day.
Disinfection Devices. In some areas, pathogen contamination from OSDS is a major concern. Disinfection devices
may be used in conjunction with the above systems to treat effluent for pathogens before it is discharged to a soil
absorption field. Disinfection devices include halogen applicators (for chlorine and iodine), ozonators, and UV
applicators. Of these three types, halogen applicators are usually the most practical (USEPA, 1980). Installation
of these devices in an OSDS increases the system's cost and adds to the system's operation and maintenance
requirements. However, it may be necessary in some areas to install these devices to control pathogen contamination
of surface waters and ground water.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-109

(NOTE: The use of disinfection systems should be evaluated to determine the potential impacts of chlorine or iodine
loadings. Some States, such as Maryland, have additional requirements or prohibit the use of these processes.)
Massachusetts has adopted a provision of its State Environmental Code that allows for "approval of innovative
disposal systems if it can be demonstrated that their impact on the environment and hazard to public health is not
greater than that of other approved systems" (310 CMR 15.18). Commonly referred to as Title 5, this legislation
requires evaluation of pollutant loadings as well as management requirements prior to approval of alternative systems
(Venhuizen, 1992).
g. Design sites so that an area for a backup soil absorption field is planned for in case of failure of
the first field.
In preparation of site plans and designs for OSDS, it is recommended that a suitable area be identified and reserved
fer construction of a second or replacement soil absorption field, in the event that the first fails or expansion is
necessary. Oliveri and others (1981) determined that continuously loaded soil absorption fields have a finite life span
and that 50 percent of all fields fail within 25 years. Consequently, dual systems or a plan for a backup system is
necessary. The area for the backup soil absorption field should be located to facilitate simultaneous or alternate
loading of the old and new systems. With trench systems, the area between the original trenches can serve as the
replacement area as long as sufficient vertical spacing exists between the trenches.
h. During construction of OSDS, soils should not be compacted in the primary or the backup soil
absorption field area.
Care must be taken during the construction of OSDS so that the soil in the absorption field area is not compacted.
Compaction could severely decrease the infiltration capacity of the soil and lead to failure of the absorption field.
i. Perform postconstruction inspection of OSDS.
A postconstruction inspection program should be implemented to ensure that OSDS were installed properly. The
inspection should ensure that design specifications were followed and that soil absorption field areas were not
compacted during construction. Many local governments in Massachusetts require postconstruction inspection for
OSDS (Myers, 1991).

Cost and effectiveness data on alternative OSDS systems are presented in Table 4-21.
The availability of high-quality, water-efficient plumbing fixtures (1.6-gallon toilets, 1.5-gpm showerheads, etc.) can
provide a reduction of 50 percent in residential water use and wastewater volume, at an incremental cost of only
about $20 to $100 for new homes. For on-site treatment, the higher influent concentrations are counterbalanced by
longer septic tank retention time. This water conservation can allow further reductions in the size of sand filters or
other forms of treatment (Krause, 1991).
The elimination of garbage disposals will reduce hydraulic loadings to OSDS and decrease the potential for solids
to clog the absorption field, as shown in Table 4-22.
Performance data on sequencing batch reactors show that typical designs can achieve BOD and TSS concentrations
of less than 10 mg/L and that modified systems can denitrify to limits of 1 to 2 mg/L NH3-N (EPA, 1992). Some
modified sequencing batch reactors have been shown to exhibit denitrification. Biological phosphorus removal to
less than 1.0 mg/L has also been achieved (EPA, 1992).
4-110 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-22. Reduction in Pollutant Loading by Elimination of Garbage Disposals
Parameter Reduction in Pollutant Loading (%)
Suspended Solids 25-40
Biohemical Oxygen Demand 2Q-28
Total Nitrogen 3.6

Total Phosphorus 1.7
The costs for sequencing batch reactors, adjusted to 1991 dollars, for constructing and operating sequencing batch
reactors were determined for several existing systems. The capital costs for six treatment systems were found to
range from $1.93 to $30.69/gpd of design flow (USEPA, 1992). The operating costs for three existing systems,
based on 1990 average flow rates, ranged from $0.17/gpd to $2.88/gpd (USEPA, 1992).
Costs for a complete mound system, including a septic tank, in the rural Midwest are typically $7,000 installed
(Krause, 1991). The cost for a residential septic tank/AUF/sand filter combination in the rural Midwest normally
ranges from $3,000 to $4,000 (Krause, 1991). Costs for buried or recirculatng sand filters depend on the filter size
and the availability of sand of the proper texture. Costs for a complete system in the rural Midwest may range
between $5,000 and $10,000 (Krause, 1991).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-111

B. Operating Onsite Disposal Systems Management Measure
(1) Establish and implement policies and systems to ensure that existing OSDS are
operated and maintained to prevent the discharge of pollutants to the surface
of the ground and to the extent practicable reduce the discharge of pollutants
into ground waters that are closely hydrologically connected to surface waters.
Where necessary to meet these objectives, encourage the reduced use of
garbage disposals, encourage the use of low-volume plumbing fixtures, and
reduce total phosphorus loadings to the OSDS by 15 percent (if the use of low-
level phosphate detergents has not been required or widely adopted by OSDS
users). Establish and implement policies that require an OSDS to be repaired,
replaced, or modified where the OSDS fails, or threatens or impairs surface
waters;
(2) Inspect OSDS at a frequency adequate to ascertain whether OSDS are failing;
(3) Consider replacing or upgrading OSDS to treat influent so that total nitrogen
loadings in the effluent are reduced by 50 percent. This provision applies only:
(a) where conditions indicate that nitrogen-limited surface waters may be

adversely affected by significant ground water nitrogen loadings from OSDS,
and
(b) where nitrogen loadings from OSDS are delivered to ground water that is
closely hydrologically connected to surface water.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to all operating OSDS. Under the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements as they develop coastal NPS
programs in conformity with this management measure and will have flexibility in doing so. The application of
management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program
Development and Approval Guidance, published jointly by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. This
management measure does not apply to existing conventional OSDS that meet all of the following criteria: (1) treat
wastewater from a single family home; (2) are sited where OSDS density is less than or equal to one OSDS per 20
acres; and (3) the OSDS is sited at least 1,250 feet away from surface waters.
2. Description
The purpose of this management measure is to minimize pollutant loadings from operating OSDS. This management
measure requires that OSDS be modified, operated, repaired, and maintained to reduce nutrient and pathogen loadings
in order to protect and enhance surface waters. In the past, it has been a common practice to site conventional OSDS
4-112 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

in coastal areas that have inadequate separation distances to ground water, fractured bedrock, sandy soils, or other
conditions that prevent or do not allow adequate treatment of OSDS-generated pollutants. Eutrophication in surface
waters has also been attributed to the low nitrogen reductions provided by conventional OSDS designs.
Poorly designed or operating systems can cause ponding of partially treated sewage on the ground that can reach
surface waters through runoff. In addition to oxygen-demanding organics and nutrients, these surface sources contain
bacteria and viruses that present problems to human health. Viral organisms can persist in temperatures as low as
-20 °F, suggesting that they may survive over winter in contaminated ice, later becoming available to ground water
in the form of snowmelt (Hurst et al., undated). Although ground-water contamination from toxic substances is more
often life-threatening, the majority of ground-water-related health complaints are associated with pathogens from
septic tank systems (Yates, 1985).
Where development utilizing OSDS has already occurred, States and local governments have a limited capability to
reduce OSDS pollutant loadings. One way to reduce the possibility of failed systems is to required scheduled
pumpouts and regular maintenance of OSDS. Frequent inspections and proper operation and maintenance are the
keys to achieving the most cost-effective OSDS pollutant reductions. Inspections upon resale or change of ownership
of properties are also a cost-effective solution to ensure that OSDS are operating properly and meet current standards
necessary to protect surface waters from OSDS-generated pollutants. Where phosphorus is a problem, phosphate
bans can reduce phosphorus loadings by 14 to 17 percent (USEPA, 1992). Garbage disposal restrictions and low-
volume plumbing fixtures can help ensure that conventional systems continue to operate properly. Low-volume
plumbing fixtures have been shown to reduce hydraulic loadings to OSDS by 25 percent.
An option for managing and maintaining OSDS is through wastewater management utilities or districts. From a
regulatory standpoint, a wastewater management program can reduce water quality degradation and save the time
and money a local government or homeowner may spend maintaining and repairing systems. A variety of agencies
are taking on the responsibilities of managing OSDS. Water utilities are the leading decentralized wastewater
management agency (Dix, 1992). The following case studies illustrate successful wastewater management programs
used where there are OSDS.
CASE STUDY 1 - GEORGETOWN DIVIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES, CALIFORNIA
The Georgetown Divide Public Utility District in California manages water reservoirs, two water treatment plants,
an irrigation canal system, and two hydroelectric plants. Approximately 10 percent of the agency's resources are
allocated to managing onsite systems in a large subdivision. The utility provides a comprehensive site evaluation
program, designs the onsite system for each lot, lays out the system for the contractor, and makes numerous
inspections during construction. There is also continued communication between the homeowners and the utility
after construction, including scheduled inspections. For the service homeowners pay $12.50 per month for
management of single-family systems. Owners of undeveloped lots pay $6.25 per month (Dix, 1992).
CASE STUDY 2- STINSON BEACH COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
In addition to monitoring the operation of septic tank systems, the Stinson Beach County Water District in
California monitors ground water, streams, and sensitive aquatic systems that surround the coastal community to
detect contamination from OSDS. Routine monitoring has identified people who use straight pipes and failures
due to residents using overloaded systems. Homeowners pay a monthly fee of $12.90, in addition to the cost of
construction or repair.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-113


This management measure was selected to control OSDS-related pollutant loadings to surface waters. Numerous
States have implemented inspection requirements at title transfer, low-volume plumbing fixture regulations, garbage
disposal prohibitions, and other requirements. Conventional systems are designed to operate over a specified period
of time. At the end of the expected life span, replacement is generally necessary. Because failures of conventional
systems may occur if systems are not properly designed and maintained, it is essential that programs are established
to inspect and correct failing systems and to reduce pollutant loadings, public health problems, and inconveniences.
Low-flow plumbing fixture installations and garbage disposal restrictions should be encouraged because as many as
75 percent of all system failures can be attributed to hydraulic overloading (Jarrett et al., 1985). Failure occurs when
a system does not provide the level of treatment that is expected from the specific OSDS design.
National and local studies have indicated that conventional OSDS experience a significant rate of failure. Failure
rates typically range between 1 and 5 percent per year (De Walle, 1981). In the State of Washington, high failure
rates were observed in coastal regions (failure rates in 1971: King County- 6.1 percent; Gray's Harbor- 3.3 percent;
and Skasit County - 2.6 percent). It has also been estimated in various soils of Connecticut that 4 percent of
conventional OSDS fail per year. The failure rate in coastal areas may be greater because many systems (such as
those in North Carolina) are approved for unsuitable soil conditions (Duda and Cromartie, 1982). Jarrett and others
(1985) presented suggestions from several researchers describing the possible causes of high OSDS failure rates.
These suggestions include:
• Smearing of trench bottoms during construction;

Inadequate absorption areas;
• Improperly performed percolation tests;
• Inadequate design;
• Flooding and high water tables;
• Improper construction and installation;
• Inadequate soil permeability; and
• Use of cleaners and additives.
As stated previously, conventional OSDS do not remove nitrogen effectively and OSDS nitrogen loadings have been
linked to degraded surface waters and ground water (Chesapeake Bay Program, 1990).
States should consider replacement with denitrifying OSDS in areas with nitrogen-limited waters. While all OSDS
should be inspected periodically (at a recommended interval of once every 3 years) and corrected if failing, requiring
that denitrifying systems be installed in all cases where existing systems fail to adequately treat nitrogen was deemed
unduly burdensome and impractical.
Refer to the selection statement in the New OSDS Management Measure for additional rationale for selections
relating to denitrification, garbage disposals, and low-flow plumbing fixtures.
Phosphorus reductions have been implemented in a number of States (see Table 4-23). Significant reductions in
phosphorus loadings (14 to 17 percent) have resulted from such phosphate reductions, with nominal increases in costs
for phosphate-free detergents.
4. Practices
4-114 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-23. Phosphate Umits in Detergents

(The Soap and Detergent Association, 1992)
Phosphorus (P) Phosphorus (P) Industrial and Effective

State .Laundry Detergents Dishwashing Detergents Institutional Date
Connecticut 7 grams recommended 2/1/72

use level
Florida 8.7% by weight as 12/31/72

elemental P
Georgia 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 1/1/91

elemental P elemental P
Indiana 0.5% by weight as 1/1/73

elemental P
Maine 0.5% by weight as 7/1/93

elemental P
Maryland 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 12/1/85

elemental P elemental P elemental P
Michigan 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 28% by weight as 10/1/77

elemental P elemental P elemental P
Minnesota 0.5% by weight as 11% by weight as 8/30/79

New York 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 6/1/73

North Carolina 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 1/1/88

Oregon 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 7/1/92

Pennsylvania 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 3/1/91

South Carolina 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 1/1/92

Virginia 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 1/1/88

Wisconsin 0.5% by weight as 8.7% by weight as 1/1/84

• a. Perform regular inspections of OSDS.
As previously stated, the high degree of failure of OSDS necessitates that systems be inspected regularly. This can
be accomplished in several ways. Homeowners can serve as monitors if they are educated on how to inspect their
own systems. Brochures can be made available to instruct individuals on how to inspect their systems and the steps
they need to take if they determine that their OSDS is not functioning properly. Trained inspectors, such as those
in Maine, also can aid in identifying failing systems.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-115

State or local officialS' should also develop a program for regular inspection. By using utilities and wastewater
management programs or agencies, the costs can be kept minimal. At a minimum, systems should be inspected when
the ownership of a property is changed. If, prior to the transfer of ownership, the system is found to be deficient,
corrective action should be taken. States and localities can also indirectly assess whether OSDS are failing through
surface water and ground-water monitoring. If indicator pollutants (e.g., pathogens) are found during the course of
monitoring, nearby OSDS should be inspected to determine whether they are the primary source of the indicators.
USEPA (1991) has presented a method for tracing effluent from failing septic systems. This method could be
followed as part of an indirect inspection program to locate failing systems.
• b. Perform regular maintenance of OSDS.
OSDS are not maintenance-free systems. Huang (1983) stated that half of OSDS failures are due to poor operation
and maintenance. Most septic tanks are designed so that wastewater is held for 24 hours to allow removal of solids,
greases, and fats. Up to 50 percent of the solids retained in the tank decompose naturally by bacterial and chemical
action (Mancl and Magette, 1991). However, during normal use, sludge accumulates on the bottom of the tank,
leaving less time for the solids in the influent to settle. When little or no settling occurs, the solids move directly
to the soil absorption system and may clog (Mancl and Magette, 1991). Consequently, periodic removal of the solids
from the tank is necessary to protect the soil absorption system.
Management options for OSDS maintenance include (NSFCH, 1989):
• Maintenance via contract;

• Operating permits;
• Private management systems; and
• Local ordinances/utility management.
Most tanks need to be pumped out every 3 to 5 years; however, several factors need to be considered when
determining the frequency of pumping required. These factors include (Mancl and Magette, 1991):
• Capacity of the tank;

• Flow of wastewater (based on family size); and
• Volume of solids in the wastewater (more solids are produced if a garbage disposal is used).
Failure will not occur immediately if a septic system is not pumped regularly; however, continued neglect will cause
the system to fail because the soil absorption system is no longer protected from solids and may need to be replaced
(at considerable expense).
Table 4-24 shows an estimate of how often a septic tank should be pumped based on tank and household size. The
Arlington County, Virginia, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance requires that all septic tanks be pumped at least
once every 5 years.
Alternative OSDS may have maintenance requirements in addition to septic tank pumping. These maintenance
requirements are discussed in the descriptions of the systems presented in Management Measure V.A.
• c. Retrofit or upgrade improperly functioning systems.
Improperly functioning systems are usually the result of failure of the soil absorption field. Several practices are
available to retrofit these failing systems so that they operate properly. The most common reason for failure of the
absorption field is hydraulic overload. Jarrett and others (1985) and other researchers have had good success in
retrofitting failing systems by combining the construction of backup soil absorption fields with water conservation
measures. A backup absorption system is constructed so that water can be diverted from the primary absorption
system. The primary system is rested, and in many cases biological activity will unclog the system and aerobic
conditions will be restored in the soil. Scheduling is then done to alternate the use of the primary and backup
4-116 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-24. Suggested Septic Tank Pumping Frequency (Years)

(Cooperative Extension Service -University of Maryland, 1991)
Household Size (number of people)

Tank Size
(gal) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
500 5.8 2.6 1.5 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1
750 9.1 4.2 2.6 1.8 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3
1,000 12.4 5.9 3.7 2.6 2.0 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.7
1,250 15.6 7.5 4.8 3.4 2.6 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.0
1,500 18.9 9.1 5.9 4.2 3.3 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.3
1,750 22.1 10.7 6.9 5.0 3.9 3.1 2.6 2.2 1.9 1.6
2,000 25.4 12.4 8.0 5.9 4.5 3.7 3.1 2.6 2.2 2.0
2,250 28.6 14.0 9.1 6.7 5.2 4.2 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.3
2,500 31.9 15.6 10.2 7.5 5.9 4.8 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.6
systems (e.g., use of each system 6 months of the year), so that systems in marginally permeable soils can continue
to operate properly. Garbage disposals should be eliminated, and low-volume plumbing fixtures should be installed
in cases where the absorption field has failed in order to reduce total pollutant and water loads to the field. (Refer
to discussion in Management Measure V.A.)
In some cases, either because of improper siting (e.g., inadequate separation distance, proximity to surface water,
poor soil conditions, or lack of land available for a backup absorption system) or the inadequacy of conventional
OSDS to remove pollutants of concern, the above retrofit practice may riot be feasible. In these cases, alternative
OSDS, constructed wetlands, filters, or holding tanks may be necessary to adequately protect surface waters or
ground water. Descriptions of these systems and their respective effectiveness and cost are provided in Management
Meausre V .A.
• d. Use denitrification systems where conditions indicate that nitrogen-limited surface waters may be
adversely impacted by excessive nitrogen loading.
As stated previously, even properly functioning conventional OSDS are not effective at removing nitrogen. In areas
where nitrogen is a problem pollutant, existing conventional systems should be retrofitted to denitrification OSDS
to provide adequate nitrogen removal. Several systems such as sand filters and constructed wetlands have been
shown to remove over 50 percent of the total nitrogen from septic tank effluent (see Table 4-21). Descriptions of
these types of systems and their effectiveness and cost are presented in Management Measure V.A.
e. Discourage the use of phosphate in detergents.
Conventional OSDS are usually very effective at removing phosphorus. However, certain soil conditions, combined
with close proximity to sensitive surface waters, can result in phosphorus pollution problems from OSDS. In such
cases the use of detergents containing phosphates may need to be discouraged or banned. Low-phosphate detergents
are commercially available from a variety of manufacturers with negligible increases in cost. Eliminating phosphates
from detergent can reduce phosphorus loads to OSDS by 40 to 50 percent (USEPA, 1980).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-117

f. Eliminate the use of garbage disposals.
As presented in Table 4-22, eliminating the use of garbage disposals can significantly reduce the loading of
suspended solids and BOD to OSDS. Total nitrogen and phosphorus loads may also be slightly reduced because
of decreased loadings of vegetative matter and foodstuffs. Eliminating garbage disposals can also reduce the buildup
of solids in the septic tank and reduce the frequency of pumping required. Reduction of the solids also provides
added protection against clogging of the soil absorption system.
g. Discourage or ban the use of acid and organic chemical solvent septic system additives.
Organic solvents used as septic system cleaners are frequently linked to pollution from septic systems. Many brands
of septic system cleaning solvents are currently on the market. Makers of these solvents, which often contain
halogenated and aromatic hydrocarbons, advertise that they reduce odors, clean, unclog, and generally enhance septic
system operations. Manufacturers also advertise that cleaning solvents provide an alternative to periodic pumping
of septage from septic tanks. However, there is little evidence indicating that these cleaners perform any of the
advertised functions. In fact, their use may actually hinder effective septic system operation by destroying useful
bacteria that aid in the degradation of waste, resulting in disrupted treatment activity and the discharge of
contaminants.
In addition, since the organic chemicals in the solvents are highly mobile in the soils and toxic (some are suspected
carcinogens), they can easily contaminate ground water and surface waters and threaten public health. Research on
the common septic system cleaner constituents (methylene chloride (MC) and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), which
are listed on EPA's priority pollutant list and for which EPA's Office of Drinking Water has issued health advisories)
has shown that application rates recommended by the manufacturer have resulted in high MC and moderate TCA
discharges to ground water.
This issue is discussed further in the pollution prevention section.
• h. Promote proper operation and maintenance of OSDS through public education and outreach
programs.
This practice is discussed in the pollution prevention section (Section VI).
4-118 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 VI. Pollution Prevention
VI. POLLUTION PREVENTION
A. Pollution Prevention Management Measure
Implement pollution prevention and education programs to reduce nonpoint source

pollutants generated from the following activities, where applicable:
• The improper storage, use, and disposal of household hazardous chemicals,

including automobile fluids, pesticides, paints, solvents, etc.;
• Lawn and garden activities, including the application and disposal of lawn and
garden care products, and the improper disposal of leaves and yard trimmings;
• Turf management on golf courses, parks, and recreational areas;
• Improper operation and maintenance of onsite disposal systems;
• Discharge of pollutants into storm drains including floatables, waste oil, and
litter;
• Commercial activities including parking lots, gas stations, and other entities not
under NPDES purview; and
• Improper disposal of pet excrement.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to reduce the generation of nonpoint source pollution
in all areas within the section 6217 management area. The adoption of the Pollution Prevention Management
Measure does not exclude applicability of other management measures to those sources covered by this management
measure. Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of
requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this management measure and will have
2. Description
This management measure is intended to prevent and reduce NPS pollutant loadings generated from a variety of
activities within urban areas not addressed by other management measures within Chapter 4. Source reduction is
considered preferable over waste recycling for pollution reduction (DOl, 1991; USEPA, 1991). Everyday activities
have the potential to contribute to nonpoint source pollutant loadings. Some of the major sources include households,
garden and lawn care activities, turf grass management, diesel and gasoline vehicles, OSDS, illegal discharges to
urban runoff conveyances, commercial activities, and pets and domesticated animals. These sources are described
below. By reducing pollutant generation, adverse water quality impacts from these sources can be decreased.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-119

VI. Pollution Prevention Chapter 4
a. Households
Everyday household activities generate numerous pollutants that may affect water quality. Common household NPS
pollutants include paints, solvents, lawn and garden care products, detergents and cleansers, and automotive products
such as antifreeze and oil. The use and disposal of these products are chronic sources of pollution (Puget Sound
Water Quality Authority, 1991). Table 4-25 summarizes estimated pollutant loadings from various household
chemicals that may contaminate runoff. These pollutants are typically introduced into the environment due to
ignorance on the part of the user or the lack of proper disposal options. Storm drains are commonly mistaken for
treatment systems, and significant loadings to waterbodies result from this misconception. Other wastes and
chemicals are dumped directly onto the ground (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1990).
b. Improper Disposal of Used Oil
The improper disposal of used oil and antifreeze can significantly degrade surface waters. The Washington
Department of Ecology estimated that over 4.5 million gallons of used oil are dumped in Washington State each year.
Of this total, 2 million gallons eventually are discharged into the Puget Sound (USEPA, 1988). Such loadings can
severely degrade surface waters. One quart of oil can contaminate up to 2 million gallons of drinking water;
4 quarts of oil can form an oil slick approximately 8 acres in size (University of Maryland Cooperative Extension
Service, 1987).
Table 4-25. Estimates of Improperly Disposed Used Oil

and Household Hazardous Waste
Reference Chemical and Estimated Amount
USEPA, 1989 Estimated that 40% of used oil from DIYsa is poured onto roads, driveways, or
yards or into storm sewers (80 million gallons per year).
Hoffman et al., 1980 Survey of Providence, Rl, residents revealed that 35% were DIYs. Of this
group, 42% used improper disposal methods (30% disposed of used oil by
backyard dumping, 7% by dumping into sewers or storm drains, and 5% by
pouring onto roads).
Stanek et al., 1987 Survey of Massachusetts households revealed that one-third changed their oil
(17% dumped used oil on the ground and 3% discharged used oil into the town
sewers); 17% changed their antifreeze (54% used ground disposal and 14%
discharged into the sewer). The majority of the 10% who disposed of oil-based
paints or pesticides annually used improper methods.
Voorhees and Temple, Baker Survey of studies estimated that between 52% and 64% of private vehicle
and Sloane, Inc., 1989 owners are DIYs. Nationally, DIYs have been estimated to generate 193 million
gallons of used oil per year. Of this amount, it was estimated that 61% (118
million gallons) was improperly disposed of.
King County Solid Waste Estimated that 15% to 20% of household hazardous wastes end up in storm
Division, 1990 drains or runoff. Estimated that one-third of DIYs dump used oil directly into
storm drains or onto the ground.
King County Solid Waste Estimated that 83% of DIYs that changed their antifreeze flushed their car
Division, 1990 radiators directly into a storm sewer or street.
a DIYs - Do-it-yourself oil changers.
4-120 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

c. Landscape Maintenance and Turf Management
The care of landscaped areas, including golf courses, can contribute significantly to nonpoint source pollutant
loadings. The application of fertilizers and pesticides in coastal areas can be detrimental to surface waters. After
a site is developed, a significant area of maintained landscape may be regularly treated with fertilizer and pesticides.
Heavily landscaped areas include residential yards, golf courses, and parks. In the coastal zone, much residential
development commonly is sited on unconsolidated coastal plain with sandy soils. Where such soils are present,
frequent fertilization, pesticide application, and watering must occur to maintain turf grasses. Turf management
programs and landscaping ordinances that require minimum maintenance and minimum disturbance or xeriscaping
can effectively reduce these loadings.
In areas where nitrogen is a problem pollutant, measures to control the introduction of nitrogen into runoff and
leachate are important. Several studies have been completed that demonstrate the leaching potential of nitrogen from
turf. Researchers at Cornell University found that 60 percent of nitrogen applied to turf leached to ground water
(Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1984). Shultz (1989) suggests that 50 percent of the nitrogen applications
are leached out and not used by plants. A study completed by Exner and others (1991) showed that as much as 95
percent of nitrate applied in late August on an urban lawn was leached below the turf grass root zone. In coastal
areas, where soils are highly permeable and ground water and surface waters are hydrologically connected, reduced
applications of nutrients may be necessary to control subsurface flow of nutrients into surface waters.
A recent nonpoint source loading analysis (Cahill and Associates, 1991) indicated that 10 percent of the nitrogen and
4 percent of the phosphorus applied annually in a 193-square-mile area (an area approximately 10 miles by 20 miles)
of maintained landscaped residential development end up in surface waters as the result of overapplication. A total
of 512.7 tons of nitrogen and 49.4 tons of phosphorus enter surface waters from this area These estimated pollutant
delivery rates are conservative. Delivery rates in coastal areas with sandy soils may be much higher. Schultz (1989)
found that over 50 percent of the nitrogen in fertilizer leaches from lawns when improperly applied. In addition,
the proximity of sources to waterbodies may result in increased loadings. Where waterbodies are nitrogen- or
phosphorus-limited, applications of fertilizers should be reduced or prohibited. Fertilizer control programs can
effectively reduce nitrogen and phosphorus loadings by encouraging the proper application of nutrients. Fertilizer
costs may also be reduced.
A study in Rhode Island concluded that medium-density residential development has the highest loading factor of
pesticides and fertilizers of all land uses in the State (RID EM, 1988). These results echoed the findings of research
conducted on the Chesapeake Bay watershed that identified medium- and high-density residential development as
having the highest loading factors for nitrogen and phosphorus in the Bay area (Chesapeake Bay Local Advisory
Committee, 1989). Table 4-26 shows a summary of results from various studies quantifying application rates of
household fertilizers. Table 4-27 summarizes recommended application rates.
Home use is estimated to account for 20 percent of pesticide use in the P.uget Sound area, and household users often
apply pesticides excessively or in too concentrated a formulation (PSWQA, 1991). The Puget Sound Water Quality
Table 4-26. Summary of Application Rates of Fertilizers from Various Studies
Estimated Application Rates Reference
3.3 lb/1 000 ft 2 (affluent areas) Cornell Water Resources Institute, 1985
1.1 lb/1 000 ft 2 (less affluent areas)
2.2 lb/1 000 ft 2/yr to 3.9 lb/1 000 ft 2/yr Long Island Planning Board, 1984
2
3.03 lb/ft /yr (Nitrogen) Cahill and Associates, 1992
0.77 lb/ft2/yr (Phosphorus)
(New Jersey)
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-121

Table 4-27. Recommended Fertilizer Application Rates
Recommended Rate Reference
Virginia - No more than 1 lb/1 000 ft 2 at any one time - Hall, personal communication, 1991;
not to exceed 3 lb/1 000 ft 2/yr No. VA Soil and Water Conservation District, 1991;
VA Cooperative Extension, 1991
Virginia- 1.5 to 2 lb/1000 ft 2/yr Bowling, personal communication, 1991
Long Island — 1 lb/1000 ft 2/yr Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1984
Long Island - no more than 1 lb/1 000 ft2/yron mature Myers, 1988
lawns
General - 2 lb/1 000 ft2/yr Shultz, 1989
Authority summarized available data in a 1990 issue paper on pesticides in the Puget Sound. This research revealed
that 50 to 80 percent of all household users apply some form of pesticides for lawn and garden use. EPA Region
10 and the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (PSWQA, 1990) reviewed data and surveyed pesticide use in 12
counties in the Puget Sound basin and concluded that household pesticide use in 1988 was greater than 213,000
pounds. Unnecessary pesticide loadings to surface waters may result from homeowner overapplication, poor
knowledge of proper application techniques, or applications during grass dormancy. Both the PSWQA and the
Virginia Cooperative Extension Survey (1991) have determined that such improper use commonly occurs.
Consideration of the potential for exposure and toxic effects of applied fertilizers and pesticides should be an
important component of golf course policy decisions. Some of the technical issues concerning intensive management
of turf grass include (1) extent of nutrient and pesticide applications, (2) chronic and acute toxicity to nontarget
organisms, (3) potential for exposure of nontarget organisms to applied chemicals, (4) use of increasingly scarce
water resources for irrigation, (5) potential off-site movement of fertilizers and pesticides, (6) effects of maintenance
and storage facilities on soil and water quality, and (7) potential loss of and effects on wetlands resulting from
construction and turf grass maintenance (Balogh and Walker, 1992).
While quantitative information is not currently available regarding the effectiveness of fertilizer and pesticide control
measures, it can be assumed that application reductions will result in corresponding decreases in pollutant loadings.
Table 4-28 provides guidance useful for reducing fertilizer and pesticide use. This guidance was developed by the
Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District, the Lake Barcroft Watershed Improvement District, the
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission, and the Virginia Cooperative Extension service for use by
commercial lawn care companies and households that choose to use commercial lawn care services. This advice,
however, is useful for all turf grass management.
d. Yard Trimmings Management

Improper disposal of yard trimmings can lead to increased nutrient levels in runoff. Yard trimmings deposited on
street comers may be washed down storm sewers and result in elevated nutrient loadings to surface waters. Proper
management of yard trimmings and home composting can reduce the level of nutrients in runoff and decrease overall
runoff volumes through the addition of humus to the soil. Increased levels of humus enhance soil permeability,
decrease erodibility, and provide nutrients in a less soluble form than commercial fertilizers.
e. Improper Installation and Maintenance of Onsite Disposal Systems

As discussed in Section V of this chapter, failing or improperly sited or designed OSDS may contribute both
pathogens and nutrients to surface waters. Many engineers, contractors, surveyors, drain-layers, sanitarians, OSDS
installers, waste haulers, building inspectors, local and State officials, and owners of OSDS are insufficiently
informed regarding the need for proper siting, design, and maintenance of onsite systems. While a number of States
4-122 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-28. Watershed Chemical Control Standards
Nutrient and Pesticide

Control Standard Estimated Savings and Impacts
Decrease fertilizer use. The average DIYa applies 2 to 4 times the desirable amount of fertilizer.
By reducing fertilizer amounts, costs can be reduced accordingly.
Use phosphorus-free or low- Cost increases $1.00 to $1.50 per household where phosphate-free
phophorus-content fertilizers. fertilizer are used. In the Lake Barcroft, Virginia, Water Management
District, Natural Lawn estimated a 7,000-pound reduction in fall
phosphorus loadings and an 8Q-85% decrease in spring loadings due to
the use of phosphaie-free fertilizers (Natural Lawn, personal
communication, 1991 ).
Use slow-release fertilizers. Organic fertilizers tend to be slow acting and less soluble than chemical
fertilizers (Shultz, 1989). Depending on the fertilizer source, conversion
to organic fertilizers would reduce costs to $0.00 where compost from a
municipal or county facility is used; costs would increase $1.00 per
100 ft2for the purchase of commercial organic fertilizer (Cook, 1991)
Test soils to determine appropriate Soil tests and fertilizer recommendations range in cost from $0.00 to
application rates. $5.00 if done by a Cooperative Extension Service. Private soil test labs
may charge $30.00 to $45.00 for the service (Carr et al., 1991).
Stagger fertilizer applications instead Excess fertilizer may leach into ground water if not utilized by plants.
of using one large application. Plants have a limited capacity to utilize fertilizer in any one application;
fertilizer costs can be reduced by staggered applications so that the bulk
of available nutrients are utilized and excess fertilizers are not applied.
Spot-apply pesticides to control broad- Natural Lawn Company reports that by switching from blanket
leafed weeds. applications to spot applications of herbicides, herbicide use can be
reduced 85% to 90% (Bonifant, personal communication, 1991 ). Volume
reductions will result in a comparable cost savings.
Mow lawn at the recommended height. Shultz (1989) and Carr (1991) suggest that proper mowing techniques
result in healthier lawns and can reduce pesticide and fertilizer use.
Retain grass clippings on lawns and Research conducted by Starr and DeRoo (1981) on grass grown in low-
other areas planted with turf grass. nitrogen sandy loam soils showed that grass clippings are beneficial as
fertilizer for continued grass growth. Use of clippings as fertilizer can
enhance grass growth, reduce the need for additional fertilizer, and
decrease total fertilizer costs. (This recommendation is promoted by the
Professional Lawn Care Association of America.)
a DIY - Do-it-yourself lawn caretaker.
currently license OSDS installers and waste haulers in accordance with State health standards, these licensing
procedures may be out-of-date. In addition, many of these standards address only limited health-related issues and
do not address the complex joint issues of water quality and public health (Myers, 1991).
Many homeowners are unaware of proper OSDS operation and maintenance principles. They often do not know how
frequently their septic tanks need to be pumped, what hydraulic load their systems can accommodate, and what
should or should not be disposed of in their systems (Huang, 1983). Some homeowners use septic system cleaners
containing substances that may contaminate ground water, may provide little to no benefit to the OSDS, and may
even be harmful to the system (RID EM, 1988). Public education programs can help homeowners to prepare, operate,
and maintain OSDS and thus help to ensure the continued pollutant removal effectiveness of the OSDS. A variety
of brochures and other educational materials regarding OSDS have already been developed, and these materials have
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-123

VI. Pollution Prevention Chapter4
been used in many areas to educate the general public about proper OSDS operation and maintenance (e.g., the
Chesapeake Bay Region, Puget Sound). State and local agencies should make use of these materials and implement
mailing and information dissemination programs. Brochures mailed to homeowners as part of general utility
correspondence or as special mailings are also effective. Posters and other materials distributed at libraries can help
disseminate this information to the public. Educational and outreach programs should target builders, buyers, system
installation contractors, inspectors, and enforcement personnel, in addition to homeowners, realtors, and pumpers.
f. Discharges Into Storm Drains
Significant loadings of NPS pollutants enter surface waters and tributaries via illegal discharges into storm drains.
The public unknowingly assumes that storm drains discharge into sanitary sewers, and materials are dumped into
storm drains under the assumption that treatment will occur at the sewage treatment plant. Illicit discharges may
also be a problem. Public education programs, such as storm drain stenciling, and identification of illicit discharges
can be effective tools to reduce pollutant loadings. Sanitary surveys are also a useful method to help managers
identify the presence and entry point(s) of illicit discharges or other sources of pollutants to storm sewer systems.
g. Litter
Litter along coastal waterways, estuaries, and inland shorelines has become a significant source of nonpoint source
pollution. Litter, debris, and dumped large solid items impair coastal water quality, as well as the aesthetic and
recreational value of coastal waters, and may also be a hazard to wildlife. Storm sewers have been identified as a
significant source of marine debris (Younger and Hodge, 1992).
Plastics are the major debris problem in the marine environment. Plastic accounts for 59 percent of the debris
collected in coastal cleanup efforts (Younger and Hodge, 1992). Other litter may also be a problem. The State
Adopt-a-Highway programs have revealed that beverage cans are the item most frequently removed from the side
of roads. These wastes commonly have entered surface waters via storm sewers or swale systems. During 1991-
1992, participants in the Virginia Adopt-a-Highway program removed 36,000 cubic yards of debris with volunteer
hours valued at $2 million (M. Komwolf, Virginia Dept. of Transportation, personal communication, 1992).
h. Commercial Activities
Nonpoint source runoff from commercial land areas such as shopping centers, business districts, and office parks,
and large parking lots or garages may contain high hydrocarbon loadings and metal concentrations that are twice
those found in the average urban area (Woodward-Clyde, 1991). These loadings can be attributed to heavy traffic
volumes and large areas of impervious surface on which these pollutants concentrate (Long Island Sound Regional
Planning Board, 1982). For example, contributions of lead to the Milwaukee River south watershed have been
estimated as 20 to 25 percent from commercial areas and 40 to 55 percent from industrial areas (Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, 1991). Where activities other than traffic, such as liquids storage and equipment
use and maintenance, are associated with specific commercial activities, other pollutants may also be present in
runoff. BMPs suited to the control of automotive-related pollutants and any other pollutants associated with specific
commercial uses should be used to control their entry into surface waters.
Gas stations, in most communities, are designated as a commercial land use and are subject to the same controls as
shopping centers and office parks. However, gas stations may generate high concentrations of heavy metals,
hydrocarbons, and other automobile-related pollutants that can enter runoff (Santa Clara Valley Water Control
District, 1992). Since gas stations have high potential loadings and pollutant profiles similar to those of industrial
sites, the good housekeeping controls used on industrial sites are usually necessary.
i. Pet Droppings
Pet droppings have been found to be important contributors of NPS pollution in estuaries and bays where there are
high populations of dogs. Fecal coliform and fecal streptococcal bacteria levels in runoff in several drainage basins
4-124 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 VI. Pollution Prevention
in Long Island, New York, can be attributed to the dog population (Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1982).
Although dogs cause the more common pet droppings problem, other urban animals, such as domestic or semi-wild
ducks, also contribute to NPS pollution where their populations are high enough. Eliminating or significantly
reducing the quantity of pet droppings washed into storm drains and hence into surface waters can improve the
quality of urban runoff. It has been estimated that for a small bay watershed (up to 20 square miles), 2 to 3 days
of droppings from a population of 100 dogs contribute enough bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorus to temporarily close
a bay to swimming and shellfishing (George Heufelder, personal communication, 1992).
The Soil Conservation Service in the Nassau-Suffolk region of New York collected data indicating that domestic
animals contribute BOD, COD, bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorus to ground water and surface waters (Nassau-
Suffolk Regional Planning Board, 1978). Runoff containing pet droppings has been found to be responsible for
numerous shellfish bed closures in Massachusetts (George Heufelder, personal communication, 1992; Nassau-Suffolk
Regional Planning Board, 1978). In New York the large populations of semi-wild White Pekin ducks contribute
heavily to runoff problems, while in a Massachusetts study, dog feces alone were found to be sufficient to account
for the closures.

This management measure was selected to ensure that communities implement solutions that may result in behavioral
changes to reduce nonpoint source pollutant loading from the sources listed in the management measure. A number
of States and local communities, including Washington, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, and Alameda County, California,
are using pollution prevention activities to protect or enhance coastal water quality. Such activities include public
education, promotion of alternative and public transportation, proper management of maintained landscapes, pollution
prevention, training and urban runoff control plans for commercial sources, and OSDS inspection and maintenance.
To allow flexibility, specific controls have not been specified in the management measure. Communities may select
practices that best fit local priorities and the availability of funding. In addition, flexibility is necessary to account
for community acceptance, which is often the major determinant affecting whether education and outreach activities
and administrative mechanisms such as certification and training requirements are practical or effective solutions.
CASE STUDY- ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Arlington County, Virginia, is drafting a source control plan for "minimizing impacts on its streams, a well as
impacts to the Potomac River and the Chesapeake Bay, from pollutants entering the streams from many diverse
sources. " The plan is aimed at implementing individual programs for controlling sources of non point pollution.
Projects include:
Storm drainage master plan;

Educational programs for lawn management;
Evaluation of street sweeping programs;
Stream valley stabilization and restoration;
Evaluation of parking lot and street design requirements;
Land use planning;
Leaf and debris collection;
Household hazardous waste disposal; and
Storm drain stenciling.
4. Practices, Effectiveness Information, and Cost Information

EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-125

• a. Promote public education programs regarding proper use and disposal of household hazardous
materials and chemicals.
Public education is an important component of this management measure. The provision of information regarding
the environmental impacts of common household activities can produce long-term shifts in behavior and may result
in significant reductions in household-generated pollutants. School curricula on watershed protection, including
nonpoint pollution control, have been developed for elementary and secondary school education programs. An
example is the program developed by the Washington State Office of Environmental Education (Puget Sound Water
Quality Authority, 1989). Incorporating such programs into regular school curricula is an effective way to educate
youth about the importance of environmentally conscious behavior, which in tum can help reduce the need for and
cost of technology-based pollution control.
Florida developed a comprehensive Statewide plan for environmental education coordinated by its Council on
Comprehensive Environmental Education to be implemented through formal and informal education programs and
State agency programs. All teachers receive the training, as well as State agency personnel and school children in
grades kindergarten through 12 (Florida Council on Comprehensive Environmental Education, 1987).
Public participation is an effective means of educating the public and is also necessary for successfully creating and
implementing a nonpoint pollution control plan. Public involvement should be encouraged during the planning
process through attendance at meetings, workshops, and private or group consultations, and by encouraging the public
to comment on planning documents. Support for the documents and the plans being developed is fostered through
public involvement. Newsletters are an effective means of keeping the public informed of what planning steps are
being taken and how the public can become and stay involved. Metropolitan Seattle has printed an educational
brochure concerning waste oil disposal in six languages in order to reach a wider audience (Washington State
• b. Establish programs such as Amnesty Days to encourage proper disposal of household hazardous
chemicals.
Recognizing the potential impacts for environmental degradation from the improper disposal of hazardous household
materials and chemicals, many communities have implemented programs to collect these chemicals. There has been
an exponential growth in the number of such collection programs since the early 1980s. Two programs were in place
in 1980; 822 were in place in 1990. The most common type of collection system is a 1-day event at a temporary
site (often referred to as an Amnesty Day). More local governments are beginning to sponsor these programs several
times a year, and many communities are establishing permanent programs, including retail store drop-off programs,
curbside collection, and mobile permanent facilities (Duxbury, 1990). Table 4-29 summarizes the cost and
effectiveness of some household chemical collection programs.
In spite of relatively low participation rates, collection programs can have a significant impact on the amount of
hazardous chemicals and materials entering the waste stream. It has been estimated that the amount of hazardous
chemicals collected in States having approved coastal management programs was approximately 51,000 drums, or
280,500 gallons, in 1990 (extrapolated from Duxbury, 1990).
• c. Develop used oil, used antifreeze, and hazardous chemical recycling programs and site collection
centers in convenient locations.
Household hazardous chemical (HHC) collection programs already exist in many counties throughout the United
States. Specific days are usually designated as drop-off days and are advertised through television, newspapers,
4-126 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-29. Waste Recycling Cost and Effectiveness Summary
Program Description Effectiveness Cost
University of Alabama - Project ROSEa Of the approximately 17 million Annual budget is $80,000
• Initiated in 1977 gallons of used oil generated ($45,000 is spent on public
• Focuses on used oil annually in Alabama, 8 million education).
• Includes curbside collection (as part of gallons (47 percent) was
regular garbage pick-up), collection centers reclaimed in 1990.
(primarily service stations), and drum
placement (in more rural areas)
• Involves public outreach program
Sunnyvale, CA, Curbside Used Oil 75 to 120 gallons of used oil from Exact breakdowns were not
Collectionb 28,000 homes collected daily. available. Costs are kept low by
• Curbside collection of used oil, along with incorporating the program into an
other recyclable products A 40 percent increase in existing recycling program; public
• Residents provided with gallon containers to participation was observed from information is distributed by such
hold the oil FY 87-88 to FY 90-91. means as flyers in utility bills and
• Involves large public outreach program brochures left by city employees
such as repair crews and street
sweepers.
Seattle, WA, Mobile Permanent Collection In the first 6 months of operation, The Waste mobile cost $110,000.
System 276.8 tons of material was King County has budgeted $1.5
• Established in 1989 by King County Solid collected; participation was twice million (including public outreach
Waste Department that expected (one site recorded and staff) over a 28-month period.
• 5,000 ft2mobile facility equipped to collect 875 cars in 6 days)
household hazardous materials
("Wastemobile") In the first quarter, 98.3 tons were
• Collected material is either recycled, collected with the following
detoxified, or taken to a secured hazardous breakdown:
waste facility • 44.3 tons (45%) paint
• Includes extensive public outreach program • 23.1 tons (23.5%) waste oil
• 8.6 tons (8.8%) solvents
• 5.9 tons (6%) pesticides.
The balance was miscellaneous
other household wastes.
San Francisco, CA, Permanent Collection 30,730 gallons of hazardous Operated by the private company
Facilityd wastes (excluding batteries) were that hauls the city's solid waste.
• A permanent household waste site that was collected the first year. The most Funds are obtained from the
initiated as a pilot project common type of waste was paint, residential rate mechanism.
• 65 percent of the collected material was which was recycled and used by
recycled or reused citizens groups to paint over The city is responsible for public
graffiti. education, waste disposal, and
facility inspection.
aUSEPA, 1989; Project ROSE Fact Sheet, 1991.

b USEPA, 1988.
c Johnston and Kehoe, 1989.

d Misner, 1990
flyers, and radio. In Arlington County, Virginia, collection during the week is by appointment with a water pollution
chemist employed by the county and on one Saturday a month. Other HHC collection programs have once-a-week
or once-a-month collection days, and some programs have a single day set aside each year for all HHC collection
for the county or region. The waste collected by these programs is usually disposed of by a licensed HHC
contractor. Table 4-29 presents program descriptions, effectiveness, and cost information for representative HHC
collection programs. Many service stations currently provide used oil and antifreeze recycling facilities for "do-it-
yourselfers" to encourage environmentally sound disposal.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-127

d. Encourage proper lawn management and landscaping.
The care of landscaped areas can contribute significantly to NPS pollutant loadings. Results of a telephone survey
conducted in 1982 by the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University showed that only 12 to 15 percent of
home lawns in Virginia were being managed properly. The majority of homeowners preferred to do their own lawn
work; only 8 to 10 percent of the households used commercial lawn care companies. A similar survey conducted
on Long Island concluded that in affluent neighborhoods, 72 percent of the respondents used a lawn care service;
in the least affluent neighborhoods, no one subscribed to commercial lawn care (Cornell Water Resources Institute,
1985). The extent of nonpoint source pollution from fertilizer application is site-specific and depends on a number
of factors, including soil type, application rate, type of fertilizer, precipitation and watering amount, and
socioeconomic status of residents. Because most people are not trained in proper fertilization and maintenance
application, homeowner lawn care may result in significant amounts of nonpoint source pollution.
To significantly decrease homeowners' pesticide and fertilizer loadings requires a broad-based educational effort.
The State Cooperative Extension Service (CES) is one educational vehicle; however, the CES reaches only a small
percentage of the population. Mass media approaches are generally the most effective way to reach a large part of
the population, though some other possibilities are discussed below (Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1991).
The following practices are part of proper lawn management and landscaping.
• Proper pesticide and herbicide use, and reduced applications
While few studies have been conducted to correlate pesticide and herbicide use with adverse effects on
marine water quality, the magnitude of potential impacts can be inferred from incidents such as the
extensive ground-water contamination in counties bordering the Puget Sound following widespread use of
the pesticide ethylene dibromide (EDB) (Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1989). Estimates of
pesticide use in the Puget Sound area reveal that 20 percent of the volume of pesticides applied is from
residential sources and that these applications are typically in excess of recommended amounts or are too
concentrated (Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1991).
Maintaining a buffer between surface water and areas treated with pesticides is one method to increase the
transport distance and reduce the potential for offsite movement of toxics. Selection of less toxic, mobile,
and persistent chemicals with greater selective control of pests is encouraged (Spectrum Research, 1990).
Reduced fertilizer applications and proper application timing
Lawn fertilization has been identified as a source of excess nitrogen and phosphorus loadings that may lead
to eutrophication. A modeling study of urban runoff pollution conducted in Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Washington, DC, and Virginia by Cohn-Lee and Cameron (1991) estimated that the nonpoint source
loadings of nutrients were equal to or greater than loadings discharged from POTWs and industries in the
Chesapeake Bay area.
Ground-water contamination also may be of concern especially where interflow exists between surface
waters and ground waters. Schultz (1989) found that over 50 percent of the nitrogen in fertilizer leaches
from a lawn when improperly applied. NVSWCD et al. (1991) found that up to two-thirds less fertilizer
can be applied than is typically recommended by manufacturers. The use of slow-release forms of nitrogen
and proper watering may also decrease nonpoint source pollution loadings (Nassau-Suffolk Regional
Planning Board, 1978).
• Limited lawn watering
Nonpoint source runoff from lawns can be reduced by employing efficient watering techniques.
Overwatering can increase nitrogen loss 5 to 11 times the amount lost when proper watering strategies are
used (Morton et al., 1988).
4-128 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Soaker hoses and trickle or drip irrigation systems are an alternative to sprinkler systems. These types of
systems deliver water at lower rates, which can increase the volume infiltrated, conserve water, and avoid
runoff that can be associated with improperly operated sprinkler systems.
• Use of minimum maintenance/minimum disturbance and IPM methods
Minimum maintenance/minimum disturbance policies and strategies can effectively reduce land disturbance
and associated soil loss and can reduce fertilizer, pesticide, and herbicide loadings. Where new development
is occurring, community standards that limit the use of fertilizers or require commercial lawn care
companies to use low-impact lawn care practices can decrease NPS loadings. Such practices can be
promoted through public education programs for both new and existing developments.
Effective use of IPM strategies can further reduce nonpoint source loadings. Regional soil conservation
services, agricultural extension offices, local conservation districts, or the U.S. Department of Agriculture
are good sources of information on IPM. A study in Maryland on IPM for street and landscape trees in
a planned suburban community demonstrated that pesticide use could be reduced by 79 to 87 percent when
spot application techniques were substituted for cover spray techniques. An average annual cost savings
of 22 percent also resulted from the program.
Effective IPM Strategies include (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992):
- Use of natural predators and pathogens;

- Mechanical control;
- Use of native and resistant plantings;
- Maintainenance of proper growing conditions;
- Removal of or substitutions for less-favored pest habitat;
- Timing annual crops to avoid pests;
- Localized use of appropriate chemicals as a last alternative.
• Xeriscaping
Xeriscaping, creative landscaping for decreased water, energy, and pesticide/fertilizer inputs, can be used
to reduce urban runoff and minimize the application of lawn care products that may adversely impact coastal
waters. The use of xeriscaping practices can reduce required lawn maintenance up to 50 percent and reduce
watering requirements by 60 percent (Clemson University, 1991). Florida has passed legislation requiring
xeriscaping on the grounds of all State buildings. Several other States, including New Jersey and California,
actively support xeriscaping efforts. A more detailed discussion of xeriscaping is in Section II.C of this
chapter.
• Reduced runoff potential
Rainwater from roofs can be infiltrated into the ground in gravel-filled trenches in well-drained soils or
collected in rain barrels for later irrigation. Wood decking or brick pavers allow greater infiltration than
do solid concrete structures. Landscape terracing reduces runoff and erosion when gardening on slopes
(Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992).
• Training, certification, and licensing programs for landscaping and lawn care professionals
Training, certification, and licensing programs are an effective method to educate lawn care professionals
about potential nonpoint pollution problems associated with fertilizer, pesticide, and herbicide applications.
The State Cooperative Extension Service commonly provides these services. Trained lawn care professional
can also help educate the general public about the advantages of low-input approaches.
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-129

e. Encourage proper onsite recycling of yard trimmings.
Home composting promotes onsite recycling of plant nutrients contained in yard trimmings and reduces the potential
for nutrients to enter surface waters. Unlike most commercial fertilizers, compost releases nutrients slowly and is
a source of trace metals (Hansen and Mancl, 1988). When added as an amendment to lawn or garden soils, compost
increases the organic content of the soil, which increases infiltration, reduces runoff, and decreases the need for
watering. Sediment and bound nutrients in soils with high organic content are less mobile and less likely to migrate
from the site. Compost applications may also result in increased plant health and vigor, allowing for the reduced
use of pesticides (Logsdon, 1990).
Home composting programs may result in municipal cost savings. An average suburban yard generates up to 1,500
pounds of yard trimmings per year, most of which is usually landfilled (McNelly, undated). Homeowners should
be encouraged to place compost piles or bins away from streams and roadways that may serve as conveyances of
leached nutrients. Recycling of grass clippings and mulched leaves should also be encouraged through education
programs. The retention of grass clippings and mulched leaves reduces the need for supplemental water and fertilizer
inputs.
Suggested backyard composting programs include the following:
• Provide compost bins free or at cost.
• Create pamphlets explaining benefits and methods.
• Start a "Master Composter" program in which graduates receive free equipment and conduct their own
w0rkshops.
• Provide credits on waste removal fees to people who compost yard wastes.
f. Encourage the use of biodegradable cleaners and other alternatives to hazardous chemicals.
Improperly disposed household cleaners containing nonbiodegradable chemicals have the potential to contaminate
surface waters and ground water. OSDS systems may also be adversely impacted by these substances (PSWQA,
1989). The use of nontoxic, biodegradable alternatives, which quickly break down, should be encouraged through
public education efforts (Reef Relief, 1992).
g. Manage pet excrement to minimize runoff into surface waters.
The Soil Conservation Service in the Nassau-Suffolk region of New York collected data indicating that domestic
animals contribute BOD, COD, bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorus to ground water and surface waters (Nassau-
Suffolk Regional Planning Board, 1978). Urban runoff containing pet excrement has been found to be responsible
for numerous shellfish bed ciosures in New York and has been implicated in shellfish bed closures in Massachusetts
(George Huefelder, personal communication, 1992; Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board, 1978). In New York,
the large populations of semi-wild Pekin ducks contribute heavily to water quality problems. A study in
Massachusetts found that dog droppings alone were significant enough to cause shellfish bed closures.
Curb laws, requiring that dogs be walked close to street curbs so they will defecate on the streets near curbs, are
intended to ensure that street sweeping operations collect the droppings and prevent them from entering runoff.
However, traditional street sweeping has been found to be an ineffective means for controlling fines and soluble NPS
pollution and the dog droppings are more often swept into sewers and delivered to bays and estuaries during rain
storms (Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1982; 1984; Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board, 1978). Curbing
ordinances should therefore be repealed where they are in effect, and laws requiring pet owners to clean up after their
pets when they are walked in public areas and to dispose of the droppings properly should be enacted.
4-130 EPA-84D-B-92-002 January 1993

Proper cleanup and disposal of canine fecal material and discouragement of public feeding of waterfowl are two ways
of potentially controlling the adverse impacts of animal droppings. The following examples from the Long Island
Regional Planning Board (1984) illustrate controls for NPS pollution from animal droppings.
Control of NPS pollution from dogs:
Enactment of "pooper-scooper" laws requiring the removal and proper disposal of dog feces on public
property.
Enforcement of existing "pooper-scooper" and leash laws should be improved in priority target areas where
animal feces are known to be an NPS pollution problem.
Control of NPS pollution from horses:
Instituting zoning ordinances to control the keeping of horses. These ordinances should include:
- Minimum acreage requirements per horse;

- Specifying areas where horse waste may be stored; and
- Designated areas where horses may be kept.
Limiting the density of horses in deep aquifer recharge areas, in selected shallow aquifer recharge areas,
in areas immediately adjacent to surface waters, and where slopes are greater than 5 percent.
Public education programs:
• The Cooperative Extension Service and similar agencies should be encouraged to develop and distribute
informational material on all aspects of animal waste problems.
Owners of large animals should use BMPs similar to those for pasture management, including the fencing of animals
away from surface waters, avoidance of "overgrazing," "grazing area" rotation, and limited "grazing" when soil is
wet. Manure is best stored away from waterbodies on an impervious surface with a cover or roof (Washington State
The following actions can be used to help control the problem of pet excrement:
• Pass regulations controlling the disposal of excrement from domestic animals;
• Enact domestic animal clean-up regulations; and
• Require commercial domestic animal operations (e.g., pet stores, kennels) to implement BMPs for the
control and proper disposal of animal excrement.
h. Use storm drain stenciling in appropriate areas.
Storm drain stenciling programs can be effective tools to reduce illegal dumping of litter, leaves, and toxic substances
down urban runoff drainage systems. These programs also serve as educational reminders to the public that such
storm drains often discharge untreated runoff directly to coastal waters.
A successful program was initiated in Anne Arundel County, Maryland The program was implemented by
volunteers to prevent dumping of harmful material into storm drains that ultimately discharge to the Chesapeake Bay.
The county's only involvement has been to publicize the program and provide stencils and painting materials.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-131

Approximately 60 to 70 percent of all communities in the county have participated. Several other counties around
the Chesapeake Bay have inquired about the program. Data on effectiveness in terms of pounds of pollutant removed
were not available; however, an informal survey that occurred after the program was implemented revealed that there
is increased public understanding that storm drains should not be used for disposal of hazardous materials and
dumping has decreased. Costs were nominal ($7.00 per stencil kit, including paint and brushes; the average
neighborhood cost was $40.00). There is a similar program in place in Puget Sound, Washington. The total cost
of implementing the stenciling program for the Sound was $2,644.39, including materials and labor. This practice
is currently being used in other States and localities, including the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, drainage basin.
i. Encourage alternative designs and maintenance strategies for impervious parking lots.
Parking lot runoff accounts for a significant percentage of nonpoint source pollution in commercial areas, depending
on the proportion of building size to parking lot size. Sweeping is a viable method of reducing this runoff from
paved areas. If a lot is rectangular and has no parking bumpers or medians dividing it, the job is easier and less
expensive. As indicated in the case study, a computer model proved to be a useful tool in evaluating the
effectiveness of pavement sweeping as a method to control one source of nonpoint pollution (Broward County
Planning Council, 1982).
CASE STUDY- FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA
Through an EPA Continuing Planning Process Grant, the Broward County Planning Council received funding to
conduct a study to determine the effectiveness of parking lot sweeping as a method to abate water pollution.
A computer model, utilizing simple and multiple regression equations, was used to simulate the conditions at the
study area and to predict the runoff loads from the area due to rainfall. Some results of the study are as
follows: for paved commercial parking lots, the 3-day to 28-day sweeping cycle produces a pollutant removal
range of 60 percent to 20 percent, respectively; as the quantity of residue increases, sweeper efficiency also
increases, and there is a point of diminishing return for pollutant removal by sweeping and for sweeper
efficiency in removing pollutant loadings (Broward County Planning Council, 1982).
Equipment types commonly used for street sweeping include abrasive brush and vacuum device sweepers. Both
abrasive brush and vacuum sweepers have been shown to be generally inefficient at picking up fine solids of less
than 43 microns. Although vacuum sweepers are more effective at removing fme particulates than brush sweepers,
they are still generally considered to be inefficient. A newly developed helical brush sweeper that incorporates a
steel brush with vacuum has been shown to be more effective at removing fine solids and is currently being
evaluated. Although currently used sweeper technologies have been shown to be inefficient at removing fine
particulates, their use in conjunction with other BMPs that are effective in trapping fine solids could improve
downstream water quality (NVPDC, 1987).
Another promising method of street cleaning that concentrates on oil and grease removal is wet-sweeping. By
spraying a small area with water containing biodegradable soaps or detergents that solubilize the oil and grease
deposited on pavement surfaces, increased removal can occur with a combination of sweeping and vacuum action.
This method, however, is a fairly new concept and requires further testing (Silverman et al., 1986).
Vegetated areas/grassed swales are another method commonly used to reduce pollutant loadings from pavement
runoff. These areas can be designed to accept runoff with relatively high oil and grease concentrations from parking
lots. Percolation through soil and underlying layers typically results in hydrocarbon filtration and adsorption, and
degradation by naturally occurring soil bacteria
4-132 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

j. Control commercial sources of NPS pollutants by promoting pollution prevention assessments and
developing NPS pollution reduction strategies or plans and training materials for the workplace.
The opportunities for and advantages of pollution prevention practices vary from industry to industry, location to
location, and activity to activity. Therefore, it is important to develop pollution prevention programs tailored
specifically to an activity or site. Pollution prevention assessments on a site-by-site basis reduce some wastes and
possibly eliminate the generation of other wastes. Such assessments are often necessary for successful pollution
prevention programs (DOl, 1991).
States should promote and/or provide pollution prevention training and on-site assessments of individual facilities
to help reduce the amount of hazardous wastes entering the environment from households and commercial facilities.
A typical assessment for a facility will identify the types of waste produced, appropriate disposal methods and sites,
and source reduction techniques. An education program to instruct personnel about proper materials handling and
waste reduction strategies is also recommended.
The Alachua County, Florida, Office of Environmental Protection produced a handbook of BMPs to be applied in
12 separate commercial operations. Many of the BMPs are common to more than one type of operation, though
specifics are mentioned for each category of activities. The 12 operations mentioned are small and large mechanical
repair, dry cleaning, junk yards, photo processing, print and silk screening, machine shops and airport maintenance,
boat manufacturing and repair, concrete and mining, agricultural, paint manufacturers and distributors, and plastic
manufacturers (Alachua County Office of Environmental Protection, 1991).
The Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program and the San Jose Office of Environmental
Management produced a handbook of BMPs for automobile service stations (Santa Clara Valley Water Control
District, 1992). The handbook describes 18 BMPs that can be used to control onsite nonpoint source pollutants.
Many of these BMPs require little or no investment for implementation. Most of the BMPs rely on education-
induced behavior changes to minimize spills and disposal of chemicals and wastewaters down storm drains.
Recycling, spill prevention and response plans, and proper material storage are also covered.
The City of Lacy, Washington, developed guidelines to control NPS pollution impacts from service stations and
automotive repair facilities on Puget Sound. These include:
• Straining used solvents and paint thinner for reuse;

• Recycling antifreeze, oil, metal chips, and batteries;
Properly disposing of wastes, including oils, machine-tool coolant, and batteries;
Using dry floor cleaners, such as kitty litter or vermiculite; and
Limiting use of water to clean driveways and walkways.
The city developed educational material for distribution that describes these guidelines, defines procedures for
potential hazardous materials problems, and provides the State Hazardous Substance Hotline.
The City of Bellevue, Washington, Storm and Surface Water Utility, in cooperation with local businesses, has
conducted a series of workshops aimed at the prevention of nonpoint pollution for automotive, construction,
landscaping, food, and building maintenance businesses. The city gives recognition to businesses that attend a
workshop and prepare a water quality action program. Videos of the workshops and accompanying manuals are also
produced by the City of Bellevue (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992).
k. Promote water conservation.
Excessive use of water contributes to numerous NPS pollution problems, including runoff from fertilized areas,
OSDS drainfield failures, and sewage leaks. Water overuse may also contribute indirectly to NPS pollution
problems: streams, rivers, and ground water may be excessively drawn down for water supply, decreasing their
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-133

capacity to absorb pollutant runoff and upsetting their natural flow (Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1982;
Maddaus, 1989). Additional information on water conservation is contained in the OSDS section of this chapter.
l. Discourage the use of septic system additives.
A 1980 EPA study identified 23 priority pollutants that are likely to be disposed of down household drains. Disposal
of these chemicals into OSDS may impair OSDS function and contaminate ground water. Septic system cleaners
are included in this category. There is little scientific evidence that septic system cleaners are effective in improving
the function of septic systems. Many of the septic system cleaners contain chemicals such as chlorinated
hydrocarbons, aromatic organic compounds, and acids and bases that may have an adverse affect on the biological
treatment system and that may also pollute ground water. Many of these chemicals are also highly persistent in the
ground water. Studies of ground-water contamination in New York and Connecticut have monitored these
compounds in ground water and have found that (1) the septic system additives are not effective in improving the
treatment systems and (2) the additives pass into ground water in relatively unaltered form (RIDEM, 1988).
Many States and local governments have adopted legislation prohibiting the use of septic system cleaning solvents,
including the States of Maine and Delaware, the New Jersey Pinelands Regional Planning Commission, and several
jurisdictions in Massachusetts. Rhode Island prohibits the disposal of acids or organic chemical solvents in septic
systems and specifically discourages the use of septic tank cleaners. The State of Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection has taken the process one step further by banning the sale and use of cleaning solvents and
also implementing the law through press releases, statewide surveys, direct manufacturer contact, and contact with
the State Retail Merchants Association.
m. Encourage litter control.
While street sweeping historically has been found to provide little benefit in reducing fines and pollutants associated
with small particulates because of outdated sweeping equipment and irregular sweeping frequencies, litter control
can be an effective means to improve the quality of urban runoff. Both the Baltimore and Long Island Nationwide
Urban Runoff Program (NURP) projects found that litter control substantially influenced the quality of runoff from
urban areas (Myers, 1989). Suggestions for controlling litter include:
• Encouraging businesses to keep the streets in front of their buildings free of litter;
• Developing local ordinances restricting or prohibiting food establishments from using disposable food
packaging, especially plastics, styrofoam, and other floatables;
Implementing "bottle bills" and mandatory recycling laws;
• Providing technical and financial assistance for establishing and maintaining community waste collection
programs;
• Distributing public education materials on the benefits of recycling; and
• Developing "user-friendly" ways for recycling, such as curbside pick-up, voluntary container buy-back
systems, and drop-off recycling centers.
n. Promote programs such as Adopt-a-Stream to assist in keeping waterways free of litter and other
debris.
Such programs can eliminate much of the floatable debris found in coastal waters and their tributaries. These
programs involve volunteers who pick up trash along designated streambeds. Several successful programs similar
to these are being implemented in Maryland, Alaska, Virginia, North Carolina, and Washington. The International
4-134 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Coastal Cleanup, the largest coastal cleanup effort in the country, is coordinated by the Center for Marine
Conservation (CMC). With the use of data cards, plastic gloves, and trash bags, 130,152 volunteers cleared 4,347
miles of beaches and waterways of 2,878,913 pounds of trash during the 1991 cleanup effort (Younger and Hodge,
1992).
In addition to the visible benefits of such clean-up efforts, these programs offer valuable educational opportunities
for volunteers and provide a significant amount of data on the amounts and types of debris being found in waterways.
The sources of various types of debris can be traced as well. Debris can be traced to a specific company or
organization based on labeling or marking. Where possible, CMC contacts these organizations about the finding of
their debris, informs them of the problems caused by marine debris, and asks them to join the battle against the
debris problem. From the 1990 CMC coastal clean-up effort, approximately 150 organizations were identified and
contacted. As a result, the majority of organizations responded positively by printing educational "Do not litter"
slogans on their products, and several launched internal investigations into current waste-handling procedures
(Younger and Hodge, 1992).
o. Promote proper operation and maintenance of OSDS through public education and outreach
programs.
Many of the problems associated with improper use of OSDS may be attributed to lack of knowledge on operation
and maintenance of onsite systems. Training courses for installers and inspectors and education materials for
homeowners on proper maintenance may reduce some of the incidences of OSDS failure.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-135

VII. Roads, Highways, and Bridges Chapter 4
VII. ROADS, HIGHWAYS, AND BRIDGES

NOTE: Management Measures II.A and II.B of this chapter also apply to planning, siting, and developing roads and
highways. 6
A. Management Measure for Planning, Siting, and Developing Roads and Highways
Plan, site, and develop roads and highways to:
(1) Protect areas that provide important water quality benefits or are particularly
susceptible to erosion or sediment loss;
(2) limit land disturbance such as clearing and grading and cut and fill to reduce
erosion and sediment loss; and
(3) limit disturbance of natural drainage features and vegetation.
1. Applicability
This measure is intended to be applied by States to site development and land disturbing activities for new, relocated,
and reconstructed (widened) roads (including residential streets) and highways in order to reduce the generation of
nonpoint source pollutants and to mitigate the impacts of urban runoff and associated pollutants from such activities.
Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements
as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this management measure and will have some flexibility
in doing so. The application of management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint
Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance, published jointly by the U.S.
2. Description
The best time to address control of NPS pollution from roads and highways is during the initial planning and design
phase. New roads and highways should be located with consideration of natural drainage patterns and planned to
avoid encroachment on surface waters and wet areas. Where this is not possible, appropriate controls will be needed
to minimize the impacts of NPS runoff on surface waters.
This management measure emphasizes the importance of planning to identify potential NPS problems early in the
design process. This process involves a detailed analysis of environmental features most associated with NPS
pollution, erosion and sediment problems such as topography, drainage patterns, soils, climate, existing land use,
estimated traffic volume, and sensitive land areas. Highway locations selected, planned, and designed with
consideration of these features will greatly minimize erosion and sedimentation and prevent NPS pollutants from
entering watercourses during and after construction. An important consideration in planning is the distance between
6
Management measure II.A applies only to runoff that emanates from the road, highway, and bridge right-of-way. This
management measure does not apply to runoff and total suspended solid loadings from upland areas outside the road, highway,
or bridge project.
4-136 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 VII. Roads, Highways, and Bridges
a highway and a watercourse that is needed to buffer the runoff flow and prevent potential contaminants from
entering surface waters. Other design elements such as project alignment, gradient, cross section, and the number
of stream crossings also must be taken into account to achieve successful control of erosion and nonpoint sources
of pollution. (Refer to Chapter 3 of this guidance for details on road designs for different terrains.)
The following case study illustrates some of the problems and associated costs that may occur due to poor road
construction and design. These issues should be addressed in the planning and design phase.
CASE STUDY- ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND
Poor road siting and design resulted in concentrated runoff flows and heavy erosion that threatened several
house foundations adjacent to the road. Sediment-laden runoff was also discharged into Herring Bay. To
protect the Chesapeake Bay and the nearby houses, the county corrected the problem by installing diversions,
a curb-and-drain urban runoff conveyance, and a rock wall filtration system, at a total cost of $100,000 (Munsey,
1992).

This management measure was selected because it follows the approach to highway development recommended by
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Federal Highway
Administration (FHW A) guidance, and highway location and design guidelines used by the States of Virginia,
Maryland, Washington, and others.
Additionally, AASHTO has location and design guidelines (AASHTO, 1990, 1991) available for State highway
agency use that describe the considerations necessary to control erosion and highway-related pollutants. Federal
Highway Administration policy (FHW A, 1991) requires that Federal-aid highway projects and highways constructed
under direct supervision of the FHWA be located, designed, constructed, and operated according to standards that
will minimize erosion and sediment damage to the highway and adjacent properties and abate pollution of surface
water and ground-water resources.
4. Practices
a. Consider type and location ofpermanent erosion and sediment controls (e.g., vegetated filter strips,
grassed swales, pond systems, infiltration systems, constructed urban runoff wetlands, and energy
dissipators and velocity controls) during the planning phase of roads, highway, and bridges.
(AASHTO, 1991; Hartigan eta/., 1989)
b. All wetlands that are within the highway corridor and that cannot be avoided should be mitigated.
These actions will be subject to Federal Clean Water Act section 404 requirements and State
regulations.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-137

VII. Roads, Highways, and Bridges Chapter4
c. Assess and establish adequate setback distances near wetlands, waterbodies, and riparian areas
to ensure protection from encroachment in the vicinity of these areas.
Setback distances should be determined on a site-specific basis since several variables may be involved such as
topography, soils, floodplains, cut-and-fill slopes, and design geometry. In level or gently sloping terrain, a general
rule of thumb is to establish a setback of 50 to 100 feet from the edge of the wetland or riparian area and the right-
of-way. In areas of steeply sloping terrain (20 percent or greater), setbacks of 100 feet or more are recommended.
Right-of-way setbacks from major waterbodies (oceans, lakes, estuaries, rivers) should be in excess of 100 to 1000
feet.
d. Avoid locations requiring excessive cut and fill. (AASHTO, 1991)
e. Avoid locations subject to subsidence, sink holes, landslides, rock outcroppings, and highly erodible
soils. (AASHTO, 1991; TRB, Campbell, 1988)
f. Size rights-of-way to include space for siting runoff pollution control structures as appropriate.
(AASHTO, 1991; Hartigan, et al., 1989)
Erosion and sediment control structures (extended detention dry ponds, permanent sediment traps, catchment basins,
etc.) should be planned and located during the design phase and included as part of the design specifications to
ensure that such structures, where needed, are provided within the highway right-of-way.
g. Plan residential roads and streets in accordance with local subdivision regulations, zoning
ordinances, and other local site planning requirements (International City Managers Association,
Model Zoning/Subdivision Codes). Residential road and street pavements should be designed with
minimum widths.
Local roads and streets should have right-of-way widths of 36 to 50 feet, with lane widths of 10 to 12 feet.
Minimum pavement widths for residential streets where street parking is permitted range from 24 to 28 feet between
curbs. In large-lot subdivisions (1 acre or more), grassed drainage swales can be used in lieu of curbs and gutters
and the width of paved road surface can be between 18 and 20 feet.
h. Select the most economic and environmentally sound route location. (FHWA, 1991)
i. Use appropriate computer models and methods to determine urban runoff impacts with all
proposed route corridors. (Driscoll, 1990)
Computer models to determine urban runoff from streets and highways include TR-55 (Soil Conservation Service
model for controlling peak runoff); the P-8 model to determine storage capacity (Palmstrom and Walker); the FHWA
highway runoff model (Driscoll et al., 1990); and others (e.g., SWMM, EPA's stormwater management model; HSP
continuous simulation model by Hydrocomp, Inc.) .
• j. Comply with National Environmental Policy Act requirements including other State and local
requirements. (FHWA, T6640.8A)
k. Coordinate the design of pollution controls with appropriate State and Federal environmental
agencies. (Maryland DOE, 1983)
4-138 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

l. Develop local official mapping to show location of proposed highway corridors.
Official mapping can be used to reserve land areas needed for public facilities such as roads, highways, bridges, and
urban runoff treatment devices. Areas that require protection, such as those which are sensitive to disturbance or
development-related nonpoint source pollution, can be reserved by planning and mapping necessary infrastructure
for location in suitable areas.
The most economical time to consider the type and location of erosion, sediment, and NPS pollution control is early
in the planning and design phase of roads and highways. It is much more costly to correct polluted runoff problems
after a road or highway has already been built. The most effective and often the most economical control is to
design roads and highways as close to existing grade as possible to minimize the area that must be cut or ftlled and
to avoid locations that encroach upon adjacent watercourses and wet areas. However, some portions of roads and
highways cannot always be located where NPS pollution does not pose a threat to surface waters. In these cases,
the impact from potential pollutant loadings should be mitigated. Interactive computer models designed to run on
a PC are available (e.g., FHW A's model, Driscoll et al., 1990) and can be used to examine and project the runoff
impacts of a proposed road or highway design on surface waters. Where controls are determined to be needed,
several cost-effective management practices, such as vegetated filter strips, grassed swales, and pond systems, can
be considered and used to treat the polluted runoff. These mitigating practices are described in detail in the
discussion on urban developments (Management Measure IV.A).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-139

B. Management Measure for Bridges
Site, design, and maintain bridge structures so that sensitive and valuable aquatic
ecosystems and areas providing important water quality benefits are protected from
adverse effects.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to new, relocated, and rehabilitated bridge structures
in order to control erosion, streambed scouring, and surface runoff from such activities. Under the Coastal Zone Act
programs in conformity with this management measure and will have some flexibility in doing so. The application
of management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
2. Description
This measure requires that NPS runoff impacts on surface waters from bridge decks be assessed and that appropriate
management and treatment be employed to protect critical habitats, wetlands, fisheries, shellfish beds, and domestic
water supplies. The siting of bridges should be a coordinated effort among the States, the FHW A, the U.S. Coast
Guard, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Locating bridges in coastal areas can cause significant erosion and
sedimentation, resulting in the loss of wetlands and riparian areas. Additionally, since bridge pavements are
extensions of the connecting highway, runoff waters from bridge decks also deliver loadings of heavy metals,
hydrocarbons, toxic substances, and deicing chemicals to surface waters as a result of discharge through scupper
drains with no overland buffering. Bridge maintenance can also contribute heavy loads of lead, rust particles, paint,
abrasive, solvents, and cleaners into surface waters. Protection against possible pollutant overloads can be afforded
by minimizing the use of scuppers on bridges traversing very sensitive waters and conveying deck drainage to land
for treatment. Whenever practical, bridge structures should be located to avoid crossing over sensitive fisheries and
shellfish-harvesting areas to prevent washing polluted runoff through scuppers into the waters below. Also, bridge
design should account for potential scour and erosion, which may affect shellfish beds and bottom sediments.

This management measure was selected because of its documented effectiveness and to protect against potential
pollution impacts from siting bridges over sensitive waters and tributaries in the coastal zone. There are several
examples of siting bridges to protect sensitive areas. The Isle of Palms Bridge near Charleston, South Carolina, was
designed without scupper drains to protect a local fishery from polluted runoff by preventing direct discharge into
the waters below. In another example, the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development specified
stringent requirements before allowing the construction of a bridge to protect destruction of fragile wetlands near
New Orleans. A similar requirement was specified for bridge construction in the Tampa Bay area in Florida (ENR,
1991).
4-140 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 VII. Roads, Highways, and Bridges
4. Practices
Additional erosion and sediment control management practices are listed in the construction section for urban sources
of pollution (Management Measure IV.A).
• a. Coordinate design with FHWA, USCG, COE, and other State and Federal agencies as appropriate.
• b. Review National Environmental Policy Act requirements to ensure that environmental concerns are
met (FHWA, T6640.8A and 23 CFR 771) .
• c. Avoid highway locations requiring numerous river crossings. (AASHTO, 1991)
• d. Direct pollutant loadings away from bridge decks by diverting runoff waters to land for treatment.
Bridge decks should be designed to keep runoff velocities low and control pollutant loadings. Runoff waters should
be conveyed away from contact with the watercourse and directed to a stable storm drainage, wetland, or detention
pond. Conveyance systems should be designed to withstand the velocities of projected peak discharge.
• e. Restrict the use of scupper drains on bridges less than 400 feet in length and on bridges crossing
very sensitive ecosystems.
Scupper drains allow direct discharge of runoff into surface waters below the bridge deck. Such discharges can be
of concern where the waterbody is highly susceptible to degradation or is an outstanding resource such as a spawning
area or shellfish bed. Other sensitive waters include water supply sources, recreational waters, and irrigation systems.
Care should be taken to protect these areas from contaminated runoff.
• f. Site and design new bridges to avoid sensitive ecosystems.
Pristine waters and sensitive ecosystems should be protected from degradation as much as possible. Bridge structures
should be located in alternative areas where only minimal environmental damage would result.
• g. On bridges with scupper drains, provide equivalent urban runoff treatment in terms ofpollutant load
reduction elsewhere on the project to compensate for the loading discharged off the bridge.
Effectively controlling NPS pollutants such as road contaminants, fugitive dirt, and debris and preventing accidental
spills from entering surface waters via bridge decks are necessary to protect wetlands and other sensitive ecosystems.
Therefore, management practices such as minimizing the use of scupper drains and diverting runoff waters to land
for treatment in detention ponds and infiltration systems are known to be effective in mitigating pollutant loadings.
Tables 4-7 and 4-8 in Section II provide cost and effectiveness data for ponds, constructed wetlands, and filtration
devices.
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-141

C. Management Measure for Construction Projects
(1) Reduce erosion and, to the extent practicable, retain sediment onsite during and
after construction and
(2) Prior to land disturbance, prepare and implement an approved erosion control
plan or similar administrative document that contains erosion and sediment
control provisions.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to new, replaced, restored, and rehabilitated road,
highway, and bridge construction projects in order to control erosion and offsite movement of sediment from such
project sites. Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of
requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this management measure and will have some
2. Description
Erosion and sedimentation from construction of roads, highways, and bridges, and from unstabilized cut-and-fill
areas, can significantly impact surface waters and wetlands with silt and other pollutants including heavy metals,
hydrocarbons, and toxic substances. Erosion and sediment control plans are effective in describing procedures for
mitigating erosion problems at construction sites before any land-disturbing activity begins. Additional relevant
practices are described in Management Measures liLA and III.B of this chapter.
Bridge construction projects include grade separations (bridges over roads) and waterbody crossings. Erosion
problems at grade separations result from water running off the bridge deck and runoff waters flowing onto the
bridge deck during construction. Controlling this runoff can prevent erosion of slope fills and the undermining
failure of the concrete slab at the bridge approach. Bridge construction over waterbodies requires careful planning
to limit the disturbance of streambanks. Soil materials excavated for footings in or near the water should be removed
and relocated to prevent the material from being washed back into the waterbody. Protective berms, diversion
ditches, and silt fences parallel to the waterway can be effective in preventing sediment from reaching the waterbody.
Wetland areas will need special consideration if affected by highway construction, particularly in areas where
construction involves adding fill, dredging, or installing pilings. Highway development is most disruptive in wetlands
since it may cause increased sediment loss, alteration of surface drainage patterns, changes in the subsurface water
table, and loss of wetland habitat Highway structures should not restrict tidal flows into salt marshes and other
coastal wetland areas because this might allow the intrusion of freshwater plants and reduce the growth of salt-
tolerant species. To safeguard these fragile areas, the best practice is to locate roads and highways with sufficient
setback distances between the highway right-of-way and any wetlands or riparian areas. Bridge construction also
can impact water circulation and quality in wetland areas, making special techniques necessary to accommodate
construction. The following case study provides an example of a construction project where special considerations
were given to wetlands.
4-142 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

CASE STUDY - BRIDGING WETLANDS IN LOUISIANA
To provide protection for an environmentally critical wetland outside New Orleans, the Louisiana Department of
Transportation and Development (DOTD) required a special construction technique to build almost 2 miles of
twin elevated structures for the Interstate 310 link between I-10 and U.S. Route 90. A technique known as "end-
on" construction was devised to work from the decks of the structures, building each section of the bridge from
the top of the last completed section and using heavy cranes to push each section forward one bay at a time.
The cranes were also used to position steel platforms, drive in support pilings, and lay deck slabs, alternating
this procedure between each bay. Without this technique, the Louisiana DOTD would not have been permitted
to build this structure. The twin 9,200-foot bridges took 485 days to complete at a cost of $25.3 million
(Engineering News Record, 1991).

This management measure was selected because it supports FHWA's erosion and sediment control policy for all
highway and bridge construction projects and is the administrative policy of several State highway departments and
local governmental agencies involved in land development activity. Examples of erosion and sediment controls and
NPS pollutant control practices are described in AASHTO guidelines and in several State erosion control manuals
(AASHTO, 1991; North Carolina DOT, 1991; Washington State DOT, 1988). A detailed discussion of cost-effective
management practices is available in the urban development section (Section II) of this chapter. These example
practices are also effective for highway construction projects.
4. Practices
Additional erosion and sediment control management practices are listed in the construction section (Section III) of
this chapter.
a. Write erosion and sediment control requirements into plans, specifications, and estimates for
Federal aid construction projects for highways and bridges (FHWA, 1991) and develop erosion
control plans for earth-disturbing activities.
Erosion and sediment control decisions made during the planning and location phase should be written into the
contract, plans, specifications, and special provisions provided to the construction contractor. This approach can
establish contractor responsibility to carry out the explicit contract plan recommendations for the project and the
erosion control practices needed.
b. Coordinate erosion and sediment controls with FHWA, AASHTO, and State guidelines.
Coordination and scheduling of the project work with State and local authorities are major considerations in
controlling anticipated erosion and sediment problems. In addition, the contractor should submit a general work
schedule and plan that indicates planned implementation of temporary and permanent erosion control practices,
including shutdown procedures for winter and other work interruptions. The plan also should include proposed
methods of control on restoring borrow pits and the disposal of waste and hazardous materials.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-143

c. Install permanent erosion and sediment control structures at the earliest practicable time in the
construction phase.
Permanent or temporary soil stabilization practices should be applied to cleared areas within 15 days after final grade
is reached on any portion of the site. Soil stabilization should also be applied within 15 days to denuded areas that
may not be at final grade but will remain exposed to rain for 30 days or more. Soil stabilization practices protect
soil from the erosive forces of raindrop impact and flowing water. Temporary erosion control practices usually
include seeding, mulching, establishing general vegetation, and early application of a gravel base on areas to be
paved. Permanent soil stabilization practices include vegetation, filter strips, and structural devices.
Sediment basins and traps, perimeter dikes, sediment barriers, and other practices intended to trap sediment on site
should be constructed as a first step in grading and should be functional before upslope land disturbance takes place.
Structural practices such as earthen darns, dikes, and diversions should be seeded and mulched within 15 days of
installation.
• d. Coordinate temporary erosion and sediment control structures with permanent practices.
All temporary erosion and sediment controls should be removed and disposed of within 30 days after final site
stabilization is achieved or after the temporary practices are no longer needed. Trapped sediment and other disturbed
soil areas resulting from the disposition of temporary controls should be permanently stabilized to prevent further
erosion and sedimentation (AASHTO, 1991).
e. Wash all vehicles prior to leaving the construction site to remove mud and other deposits. Vehicles
entering or leaving the site with trash or other loose materials should be covered to prevent
transport of dust, dirt, and debris. Install and maintain mud and silt traps.
f. Mitigate wetland areas destroyed during construction.
Marshes and some types of wetlands can often be developed in areas where fill material was extracted or in ponds
designed for sediment control during construction. Vegetated strips of native marsh grasses established along
highway embankments near wetlands or riparian areas can be effective to protect these areas from erosion and
sedimentation (FHWA, 1991 ).
g. Minimize the area that is cleared for construction.
h. Construct cut-and-fill slopes in a manner that will minimize erosion.
Cut-and-fill slopes should be constructed in a manner that will minimize erosion by taking into consideration the
length and steepness of slopes, soil types, upslope drainage areas, and ground-water conditions. Suggested
recommendations are as follows: reduce the length of long steep slopes by adding diversions or terraces; prevent
concentrated runoff from flowing down cut-and-fill slopes by containing these flows within flumes or slope drain
structures; and create roughened soil surfaces on cut-and-fill slopes to slow runoff flows. Wherever a slope face
crosses a water seepage plane, thereby endangering the stability of the slope, adequate subsurface drainage should
be provided. -
i. Minimize runoff entering and leaving the site through perimeter and onsite sediment controls.
• j. Inspect and maintain erosion and sediment control practices (both on-site and perimeter) until
disturbed areas are permanently stabilized.
4-144 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

• k. Divert and convey offsite runoff around disturbed soils and steep slopes to stable areas in order
to prevent transport of pollutants off site.
l. After construction, remove temporary control structures and restore the affected area. Dispose of
sediments in accordance with State and Federal regulations.
• m. All storm drain inlets that are made operable during construction should be protected so that
sediment-laden water will not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or otherwise
treated to remove sediment.
The detailed cost and effectiveness information presented under the construction measure for urban development is
also applicable to road, highway, and bridge construction. See Tables 4-15 and 4-16 in Section III.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-145

D. Management Measure for Construction Site Chemical Control
(1) limit the application, generation, and migration of toxic substances;
(2) Ensure the proper storage and disposal of toxic materials; and
(3) Apply nutrients at rates necessary to establish and maintain vegetation without
causing significant nutrient runoff to surface water.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to new, resurfaced, restored, and rehabilitated road,
highway, and bridge construction projects in order to reduce toxic and nutrient loadings from such project sites.
Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of requirements
as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this management measure and will have some flexibility
in doing so. The application of management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint
2. Description
The objective of this measure is to guard against toxic spills and hazardous loadings at construction sites from
equipment and fuel storage sites. Toxic substances tend to bind to fine soil particles; however, by controlling
sediment mobilization, it is possible to limit the loadings of these pollutants. Also, some substances such as fuels
and solvents are hazardous and excess applications or spills during construction can pose significant environmental
impacts. Proper management and control of toxic substances and hazardous materials should be the adopted
procedure for all construction projects and should be established by erosion and sediment control plans. Additional
relevant practices are described in Management Measure III.B of this chapter.

This management measure was selected because of existing practices that have been shown to be effective in
mitigating construction-generated NPS pollution at highway project sites and equipment storage yards. In addition,
maintenance areas containing road salt storage, fertilizers and pesticides, snowplows and trucks, and tractor mowers
have the potential to contribute NPS pollutants to adjacent watercourses if not properly managed (AASHTO, 1988,
1991a). This measure is intended to safeguard surface waters and ground water from toxic and hazardous pollutants
generated at construction sites. Examples of effective implementation of this measure are presented in the section
on construction in urban areas. Several State environmental agencies are using this approach to regulate toxic and
hazardous pollutants (Florida DER, 1988; Puget Sound Basin, .1991).
4-146 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

4. Practices
The practices that are applicable to this management measure are described in Section IILB.
The detailed cost and effectiveness data presented in the Section liLA of this chapter describing NPS controls for
construction projects in urban development areas are also applicable to highway construction projects.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-147

E. Management Measure for Operation and Maintenance
Incorporate pollution prevention procedures into the operation and maintenance of

roads, highways, and bridges to reduce pollutant loadings to surface waters.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to existing, restored, and rehabilitated roads, highways,
and bridges. Under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are subject to a number of
requirements as they develop coastal NPS programs in conformity with this management measures and will have
some flexibility in doing so. The application of measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint
2. Description
Substantial amounts of eroded material and other pollutants can be generated by operation and maintenance
procedures for roads, highways, and bridges, and from sparsely vegetated areas, cracked pavements, potholes, and
poorly operating urban runoff control structures. This measure is intended to ensure that pollutant loadings from
roads, highways, and bridges are minimized by the development and implementation of a program and associated
practices to ensure that sediment and toxic substance loadings from operation and maintenance activities do not
impair coastal surface waters. The program to be developed, using the practices described in this management
measure, should consist of and identify standard operating procedures for nutrient and pesticide management, road
salt use minimization, and maintenance guidelines (e.g., capture and contain paint chips and other particulates from
bridge maintenance operations, resurfacing, and pothole repairs).

This management measure for operation and maintenance was selected because (1) it is recommended by FHW A
as a cost-effective practice (FHWA, 1991); (2) it is protective of the human environment (Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority, 1989); (3) it is effective in controlling erosion by revegetating bare slopes (AASHTO, 1991b); (4) it is
helpful in minimizing polluted runoff from road pavements (Transportation Research Board, 1991); and (5) both
Federal (Richardson, 1974) and State highway agencies (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1989; Pitt, 1973)
advocate highway maintenance as an effective practice for minimizing pollutant loadings.
Maintenance of erosion and sediment control practices is of critical importance. Both temporary and permanent
controls require frequent and periodic cleanout of accumulated sediment. Any trapping or filtering device, such as
silt fences, sediment basins, buffers, inlets, and check dams, should be checked and cleaned out when approximately
50 percent of their capacity is reached, as determined by the erodible nature of the soil, flow velocity, and quantity
of runoff. Seasonal and climatic differences may require more frequent cleanout of these structures. The sediments
removed from these control devices should be deposited in permanently stabilized areas to prevent further erosion
and sediment from reaching drainages and receiving streams. After periods of use, control devices may require
replacement of deteriorated materials such as straw bales and silt fence fabrics, or restoration and reconstruction of
sediment basins and riprap installations.
4-148 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Permanent erosion controls such as vegetated filter strips, grassed swales, and velocity dissipaters should be inspected
periodically to determine their integrity and continued effectiveness. Continual deterioration or damage to these
controls may indicate a need for better design or construction.
4. Practices
below have been found by EPA to be representative of the types of practices that can be applied successfully apply
to achieve the management measure described above.
a. Seed and fertilize, seed and mulch, and/or sod damaged vegetated areas and slopes.
• b. Establish pesticide/herbicide use and nutrient management programs.
Refer to the Management Measure for Construction Site Chemical Control in this chapter.
c. Restrict herbicide and pesticide use in highway rights-of-way to applicators certified under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to ensure safe and effective
application.
d. The use of chemicals such as soil stabilizers, dust palliatives, sterilants, and growth inhibitors
should be limited to the best estimate of optimum application rates. All feasible measures should
be taken to avoid excess application and consequent intrusion of such chemicals into surface
runoff.
e. Sweep, vacuum, and wash residential/urban streets and parking Jots.
f. Collect and remove road debris.
g. Cover salt storage piles and other deicing materials to reduce contamination of surface waters.
Locate them outside the 100-year floodplain.
• h. Regulate the application of deicing salts to prevent oversalting of pavement.
• i. Use specially equipped salt application trucks.
• j. Use alternative deicing materials, such as sand or salt substitutes, where sensitive ecosystems
should be protected.
• k. Prevent dumping of accumulated snow into surface waters.
I. Maintain retaining walls and pavements to minimize cracks and leakage.
• m. Repair potholes.
n. Encourage litter and debris control management.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-149

VII. Roads, Highways, and Bridges Chapter 4
o. Develop an inspection program to ensure that general maintenance is performed on urban runoff
and NPS pollution control facilities.
To be effective, erosion and sediment control devices and practices must receive thorough and periodic inspection
checks. The following is a suggested checklist for the inspection of erosion and sediment controls (AASHTO
Operating Subcommittee on Design, 1990):
• Clean out sediment basins and traps; ensure that structures are stable.
• Inspect silt fences and replace deteriorated fabrics and wire connections; properly dispose of deteriorated
materials.
Renew riprapped areas and reapply supplemental rock as necessary.
• Repair/replace check dams and brush barriers; replace or stabilize straw bales as needed.
• Regrade and shape berms and drainage ditches to ensure that runoff is properly channeled.
• Apply seed and mulch where bare spots appear, and replace matting material if deteriorated.
• Ensure that culverts and inlets are protected from siltation.
• Inspect all permanent erosion and sediment controls on a scheduled, programmed basis.
p. Ensure that energy dissipators and velocity controls to minimize runoff velocity and erosion are
maintained.
q. Dispose of accumulated sediment collected from urban runoff management and pollution control
facilities, and any wastes generated during maintenance operations, in accordance with appropriate
local, State, and Federal regulations.
r. Use techniques such as suspended tarps, vacuums, or booms to reduce, to the extent practicable,
the delivery to surface waters of pollutants used or generated during bridge maintenance (e.g.,
paint, solvents, scrapings).
s. Develop education programs to promote the practices listed above.

Preventive maintenance is a time-proven, cost-effective management approach. Operation schedules and maintenance
procedures to restore vegetation, proper management of salt and fertilizer application, regular cleaning of urban
runoff structures, and frequent sweeping and vacuuming of urban streets have effective results in pollution control.
Litter control, clean-up, and fix-up practices are a low-cost means for eliminating causes of pollution, as is the proper
handling of fertilizers, pesticides, and other toxic materials including deicing salts and abrasives. Table 4-30 presents
summary information on the cost and effectiveness of operation and maintenance practices for roads, highways, and
bridges. Many States and communities are already implementing several of these practices within their budget
limitations. As shown in Table 4-30, the use of road salt alternatives such as calcium magnesium acetate (CMA)
can be very costly. Some researchers have indicated, however, that reductions in corrosion of infrastructure, damage
to roadside vegetation, and the quantity of material that needs to be applied may offset the higher cost of CMA.
Use of road salt minimization practices such as salt storage protection and special salt spreading equipment reduces
the amount of salt that a State or community must purchase. Consequently, implementation of these practices can
pay for itself through savings in salt purchasing costs. Similar programs such as nutrient and pesticide management
can also lead to decreased expenditures for materials.
4-150 EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993

CMA Eligible for Matching Funds
Calcium magnesium acetate (CMA) is now eligible for Federal matching funds under the Bridge Program of the
lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. The Act provides 80 percent funding for use
of CMA on salt-sensitive bridges in order to protect against corrosion and to extend their useful life. CMA can
also be used to protect vegetation from salt damage in environmentally sensitive areas.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-151

Table 4-30. Effectiveness and Cost Summary for Roads, Highways, and Bridges Operation and Maintenance Management Practices
%Removal
Management Practice TSS TP TN COD Pb Zn Cost
MAINTAIN VEGETATION
For Sediment Control Natural succession allowed to occur -
Average: 90 NA NA NA NA NA Avg: $1 00/ac/year
Reported Range: 50-100 NA NA NA NA NA Reported Range: $50-$200/ac/year
Probable Range: 80-100 - -
For Pollutant Removal Natural succession not allowed to occur -
Average: 60 40 40 50 50 50 Avg: $800/ac/year
Reported Range 0-100 0-100 0-70 20-80 0-100 50-60 Reported Range: $700-$900/ac/year
Probable Range: 0-100 0-100 0-100 0-100 0-100 0-100
PESTICIDE/HERBICIDE USE Generally accepted as an economical

MANAGEMENT program to control excessive use
Average: NA
Reported Range: NA
Probable Range:
STREET SWEEPING
Smooth Street, Frequent Cleaning Avg: $20/curb mile
(One or More Passes Per Week) Reported Range: $1 0-$30/curb mile
Average: 20 NA NA 5 25 NA
Reported Range: 20 NA NA 0-10 5-35 NA
Probable Range: 20-50 - 0-10 20-50 10-30
Infrequent Cleaning
(One Pass Per Month or Less)
Average: NA NA NA NA 5 NA
Reported Range: NA NA NA NA 0-10 NA
Probable Range: 0-20 - - - 0-20 0-10
LITTER CONTROL Generally accepted as an economical

Average: NA approach to control excessive use
Reported Range: NA
Probable Range:
Table 4-30. {Continued)
%Removal
Management Practice TSS TP TN COD Pb Zn Cost
GENERAL MAINTENANCE (e.g., Generally accepted as an economical

pothole and roadside repairs) preventive maintenance program by local
Average: NA and State agencies
Reported Range: NA
Probable Range:
PROTECTION OF SALT PILES For salt storage building -

Average: NA Ave: $30/ton salt
Reported Range: NA Reported Range: $1 0-$70/ton salt
Probable Range: 90-100a
MINIMIZATION OF APPLICATION Generally accepted as an economical

OF DEICING SALTS preventive maintenance program by local
Average: NA and State agencies
Reported Range: NA
Probable Range: Deicing salts that are not applied to roads will not enter runoff a
SPECIALLY EQUIPPED SALT For spread rate control on truck -

APPLICATION TRUCKS Ave: $6,000/truck
Average: NA Reported Range: $6,000/truck
Reported Range: NA
Probable Range: Deicing salts that are not applied to roads will not enter runoff a
USE OF ALTERNATIVE DEICING CMA-

MATERIALS Ave: $650/ton
Average: NA Reported Range: $650/ton
Reported Range: NA (note: cost of salt $30/ton)
Probable Range: Deicing salts that are not applied to roads will not enter runoffa
CONTAIN POLLUTANTS GENERATED Varies with method of containment use

DURING BRIDGE MAINTENANCE
Average: NA
Reported Range: NA
Probable Range: 50-100b
NA = Not applicable.
aMeasured as reduction in salt.
bMeasured as reduction of all pollutants.
F. Management Measure for Road, Highway, and Bridge Runoff Systems
Develop and implement runoff management systems for existing roads, highways,
and bridges to reduce runoff pollutant concentrations and volumes entering surface
waters.
(1) Identify priority and watershed pollutant reduction opportunities (e.g.,

improvements to existing urban runoff control structures; and
(2) Establish schedules for implementing appropriate controls.
1. Applicability
This management measure is intended to be applied by States to existing, resurfaced, restored, and rehabilitated
roads, highways, and bridges that contribute to adverse effects in surface waters. Under the Coastal Zone Act
programs in conformity with this management measure and will have some flexibility in doing so. The application
of management measures by States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
2. Description
This measure requires that operation and maintenance systems include the development of retrofit projects, where
needed, to collect NPS pollutant loadings from existing, reconstructed, and rehabilitated roads, highways, and bridges.
Poorly designed or maintained roads and bridges can generate significant erosion and pollution loads containing
heavy metals, hydrocarbons, sediment, and debris that run off into and threaten the quality of surface waters and their
tributaries. In areas where such adverse impacts to surface waters can be attributed to adjacent roads or bridges,
retrofit management projects to protect these waters may be needed (e.g., installation of structural or nonstructural
pollution controls). Retrofit projects can be located in existing rights-of-way, within interchange loops, or on
adjacent land areas. Areas with severe erosion and pollution runoff problems may require relocation or
reconstruction to mitigate these impacts.
Runoff management systems are a combination of nonstructural and structural practices selected to reduce nonpoint
source loadings from roads, highways, and bridges. These systems are expected to include structural improvements
to existing runoff control structures for water quality purposes; construction of new runoff control devices, where
necessary to protect water quality; and scheduled operation and maintenance activities for these runoff control
practices. Typical runoff controls for roads, highways, and bridges include vegetated filter strips, grassed swales,
detention basins, constructed wetlands, and infiltration trenches.
4-154 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993


This management measure was selected because of the demonstrated effectiveness of retrofit systems for existing
roads and highways that were constructed with inadequate nonpoint source pollution controls or without such
controls. Structural practices for mitigating polluted runoff from existing highways are described in the literature
(Silverman, 1988).
4. Practices
a. Locate runoff treatment facilities within existing rights-of-way or in medians and interchange loops.
b. Develop multiple-use treatment facilities on adjacent lands (e.g. parks and golf courses).
c. Acquire additional/and for locating treatment facilities.
d. Use underground storage where no alternative is available.
e. Maximize the length and width of vegetated filter strips to slow the travel time of sheet flow and
increase the infiltration rate of urban runoff.

Cost and effectiveness data for structural urban runoff management and pollution control facilities are outlined in
Tables 4-15 and 4-16 in Section III and discussed in Section IV of this chapter and are applicable to determine the
cost and effectiveness of retrofit projects. Retrofit projects can often be more costly to construct because of the need
to locate the required structures within existing space or the need to locate the structures within adjacent property
that requires purchase. However, the use of multiple-use facilities on adjacent lands, such as diverting runoff waters
to parkland or golf courses, can offset this cost. Nonstructural practices described in the urban section also can be
effective in achieving source control. As with other sections of this document, the costs of loss of habitat, fisheries,
and recreational areas must be weighed against the cost of retrofitting control structures within existing rights-of-way.
6. Pollutants of Concern
Table 4-31 lists the pollutants commonly found in urban runoff from roads, highways, and bridges and their sources.
The disposition and subsequent magnitude of pollutants found in highway runoff are site-specific and are affected
by traffic volume, road or highway design, surrounding land use, climate, and accidental spills.
The FHWA conducted an extensive field monitoring and laboratory analysis program to determine the pollutant
concentration in highway runoff from 31 sites in 11 States (Driscoll et al., 1990). The event mean concentrations
(EMCs) developed in the study for a number of pollutants are presented in Table 4-32. The study also indicated that
for highways discharging into lakes, the pollutants of major concern are phosphorus and heavy metals. For highways
discharging into streams, the pollutants of major concern are heavy metals—cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-155

Table 4-31. Highway Runoff Constituents and Their Primary Sources
Constituents Primary Sources
Particulates Pavement wear, vehicles, atmosphere, maintenance
Nitrogen, Phosphorus Atmosphere, roadside fertilizer application
Lead Leaded gasoline (auto exhaust), tire wear (lead oxide filler
material, lubricating oil and grease, bearing wear)
Zinc Tire wear (filler material), motor oil (stabilizing additive), grease
Iron Auto body rust, steel highway structures (guard rails, bridges,
etc.), moving engine parts
Copper Metal plating, bearing and bushing wear, moving engine parts,
brake lining wear, 'fungicides and insecticides
Cadmium Tire wear (filler material), insecticide application
Chromium Metal plating, moving engine parts, break lining wear
Nickel Diesel fuel and gasoline (exhaust), lubricating oil, metal plating,
bushing wear, brake lining wear, asphalt paving
Manganese Moving engine parts
Cyanide Anticake compound (ferric ferrocyanide, sodium ferrocyanide,

yellow prussiate of soda) used to keep deicing salt granular
Sodium, Calcium, Chloride Deicing salts
Sulphate Roadway beds, fuel, deicing salts
Petroleum Spills, leaks or blow-by of motor lubricants, antifreeze and

hydraulic fluids, asphalt surface leachate
In colder regions where deicing agents are used, deicing chemicals and abrasives are the largest source of pollutants during
winter months. Deicing salt (primarily sodium chloride, NaCI) is the most commonly used deicing agent. Potential pollutants
from deicing salt include sodium chloride, ferric ferrocyanide (used to keep the salt in granular form), and sulfates such as
gypsum. Table 4-33 summarizes potential environmental impacts caused by road salt. Other chemicals used as a salt
substitute include calcium magnesium acetate (CMA) and, less frequently, urea and glycol compounds. Researchers have
differing opinions on the environmental impacts of CMA compared to those of road salt (Chevron Chemical Company, 1991;
Salt Institute, undated; Transportation Research Board, 1991 ).
4-156 EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-32. Pollutant Concentrations in Highway Runoff (Driscoll et al., 1990)
Event Mean Concentration for Event Mean Concentration for

Highways With Fewer Than Highways With More Than
30,000 Vehicles/Daya 30,000 Vehicles/Daya
Pollutant (mg/L) (mg/L)
Total Suspended Solids 41 142

Volatile Suspended Solids 12 39
Total Organic Carbon 8 25
Chemical Oxygen Demand 49 114
Nitrite and Nitrate 0.46 0.76
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.87 1.83
Phosphate Phosphorus 0.16 0.40
Copper 0.022 0.054
Lead 0.080 0.400
Zinc 0.080 0.329
aEvent mean concentrations are for the 50% median site.
Table 4-33. Potential Environmental Impacts of Road Salts
Environmental Resource Potential Environmental Impact of Road Salt (NaCI)
Soils May accumulate in soil. Breaks down soil structure, increases erosion.
Causes soil compaction that results in decreased permeability.
Vegetation Osmotic stress and soil compaction harm root systems. Spray causes
foliage dehydration damage. Many plant species are salt-sensitive.
Ground Water Mobile Na and Cl ions readily reach ground water. Increases NaCI
concentration in well water, as well as alkalinity and hardness.
Surface Water Causes density stratification in ponds and lakes that can prevent
reoxygenation. Increases runoff of heavy metals and nutrients through
increased erosion.
Aquatic Life Monovalent Na and Cl ions stress osmotic balances. Toxic levels: Na-
500 ppm for strickleback; Cl - 400 ppm for trout.
Human/Mammalian Sodium is linked to heart disease and hypertension. Chlorine causes
unpleasant taste in drinking water. Mild skin and eye irritant. Acute oral
LD50 in rats is.approximately 3,000 mglkg (slightly toxic).
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-157

VIII. Glossary Chapter 4
VIII. GLOSSARY
Unless otherwise noted, the source of these definitions is Glossary of Environmental Terms and Acronym List
(USEPA, 1989).
Bankfull event (also bankfull discharge): A flow condition in which streamflow completely fills the steam channel
up to the top of the bank. In undisturbed watersheds, the discharge condition occurs on average every 1.5 to 2 years
and controls the shape and form of natural channels. (Schueler, 1987)
Berm: An earthen mound used to direct the flow of runoff around or through a best management practice (BMP)
(Schueler, 1987).
Constructed urban runoff wetlands: Those wetlands that are intentionally created on sites that are not wetlands for
the primary purpose of wastewater or urban runoff treatment and are managed as such. Constructed wetlands are
normally considered as part of the urban runoff collection and treatment system.
Conveyance system: The drainage facilities, both natural and human-made, which collect, contain, and provide for
the flow of surface water and urban runoff from the highest points on the land down to a receiving water. The
natural elements of the conveyance system include swales and small drainage courses, streams, rivers, lakes, and
wetlands. The human-made elements of the conveyance system include gutters, ditches, pipes, channels, and most
retention/detention facilities (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).
Denitrification: The anaerobic biological reduction of nitrate nitrogen to nitrogen gas.
Discharge: Outflow; the flow of a stream, canal, or aquifer. One may also speak of the discharge of a canal or
stream into a lake, river, or ocean. (Hydraulics) Rate of flow, specifically fluid flow; a volume of fluid passing a
point per unit of time, commonly expressed as cubic feet per second, cubic meters per second, gallons per minute,
gallons per day, or millions of gallons per day. (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992)
Drainage basin: A geographic and hydrologic subunit of a watershed (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).
Ecosystem: The interacting system of a biological community and its nonliving environmental surroundings.
Erosion: The wearing away of the land surface by wind or water. Erosion occurs naturally from weather or runoff
but can be intensified by land-clearing practices related to farming, residential or industrial development, road
building, or timber cutting.
Forebay: An extra storage space provided near an inlet of a BMP to trap incoming sediments before they
accumulate in a pond BMP (Schueler, 1987).
Heavy metals: Metallic elements with high atomic weights, e.g., mercury, chromium, cadmium, arsenic, and lead.
They can damage living things at low concentrations and tend to accumulate in the food chain.
Illicit discharge: All nonurban runoff discharges to urban runoff drainage systems that could cause or contribute
to a violation of State water quality, sediment quality, or ground-water quality standards, including but not limited
to sanitary sewer connections, industrial process water, interior floor drains, car washing, and greywater systems
(Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).
Impervious surface: A hard surface area that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil mantle as
under natural conditions prior to development and/or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in
greater quantities or at an increased rate of flow from the flow present under natural conditions prior to development.
Common impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to, rooftops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots,
4-158 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 VIII. Glossary
storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving, gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and oiled, macadam, or other
surfaces that similarly impede the natural infiltration of urban runoff. Open, uncovered retention/detention facilities
shall not be considered as impervious surfaces. (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992)
Invasive exotic plants: Non-native plants having the capacity to compete and proliferate in introduced environments
Land conversion: A change in land use, function, or purpose (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).
Land-disturbing activity: Any activity that results in a change in the existing soil cover (both vegetative and
nonvegetative) and/or the existing soil topography. Land-disturbing activities include, but are not limited to,
demolition, construction, clearing, grading, filling, and excavation. (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992)
Local government: Any county, city, or town having its own incorporated government for local affairs (Washington
Municipal separate storm sewer systems: Any conveyance or system of conveyance that is owned or operated by
the State or local government entity, is used for collecting and conveying storm water, and is not part of a publicly
owned treatment works (POTW), as defined in EPA 40 CFR Part III (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).
Onsite disposal system (OSDS): Sewage disposal system designed to treat wastewater at a particular site. Septic
tank systems are common OSDS. (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992)
Organophosphate: Pesticide chemical that contains phosphorus; used to control insects. Organophosphates are short-
lived, but some can be toxic when first applied.
Postdevelopment peak runoff: Maximum instantaneous rate of flow during a storm, after development is complete
Retrofit: The creation or modification of an urban runoff management system in a previously developed area. This
may include wet ponds, infiltration systems, wetland plantings, streambank stabilization, and other BMP techniques
for improving water quality and creating aquatic habitat. A retrofit can consist of the construction of a new BMP
in a developed area, the enhancement of an older urban runoff management structure, or a combination of
improvement and new constructiqn. (Schueler et al., 1992)
Soil absorption field: A subsurface area containing a trench or bed with clean stones and a system of distribution
piping through which treated sewage may seep into the surrounding soil. for further treatment and disposal.
Turbidity: A cloudy condition in water due to suspended silt or organic matter.
Urban runoff: That portion of precipitation that does not naturally percolate into the ground or evaporate, but flows
via overland flow, underflow, or channels or is piped into a defined surface water channel or a constructed infiltration
facility (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992).
Vegetated buffer: Strips of vegetation separating a waterbody from a land use with potential to act as a nonpoint
pollution source; vegetated buffers (or simply buffers) are variable in width and can range in function from a
vegetated filter strip to a wetland or riparian area.
Watershed: The land area that drains into a receiving waterbody.
Wetlands: Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration to support,
and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated
soil conditions; wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. (This definition is consistent
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-159

VIII. Glossary Chapter 4
with the Federal definition at 40 CFR 230.3; December 24, 1989. As amendments are made to the wetland
definition, they will be considered applicable to this guidance.)
Xeriscaping: A horticultural practice that combines water conservation techniques with landscaping; also known as
dry landscaping (Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service, 1991).
4-160 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter4 IX. References
IX. REFERENCES
AASHTO. 1987. AASHTO Manual for Bridge Maintenance. American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials.
AASHTO. 1988. Guide Specifications for Highway Construction (Sections 201 and 208). American Association
of State Highway Transportation Officials.
AASHTO. 1989. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (Section 1). American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials.
AASHTO. 1990. Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment Control in Highway Construction- 5th Draft. American
Association of State Highway Transportation Officials.
AASHTO. 1991a A Guide For Transportation Landscape and Environmental Design. American Association of
State Highway Transportation Officials.
AASHTO. 1991b. Model Drainage Manual (Chapter 16). American Association of State Highway Transportation
Officials.
ABAG. 1979. Treatment of Stormwater Runoff by a Marsh/Flood Basin: Interim Report. Association of Bay Area
Governments, in association with Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. and Ramlit Associates, Berkeley, CA.
ABAG. 1991. San Francisco Estuary Project: Status and Trends Report on Wetlands and Related Habitats in the
San Francisco Bay Estuary. Prepared under cooperative agreement with U.S. EPA. Agreement No. 815406-01-0.
Association of Bay Area Governments, Oakland, California.
Alachua County Office of Environmental Protection. 1991. Best Management Practices for the Use and Storage
of Hazardous Materials. Gainesville, Florida.
Amberg, L.W. 1990. Rock-Plant Filter an Alternative for Septic Tank Effluent Treatment. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
American Public Works Association Research Foundation. 1981. Costs of Stormwater Management Systems. In
Urban Stormwater Management. American Public Works Association, Chicago, IL.
American Public Works Association Research Foundation. 1991. Water Quality: Urban Runoff Solutions. The
American Public Works Association, Chicago, IL.
American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 1988. On-Site Wastewater Treatment Vol. 5. In Proceedings of the
Fifth National Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems. American Society of Engineers,
Chicago, Illinois, December 14-15, 1987. ASAE Publication No. 10-87.
Apogee Research, Inc. 1991. Nutrient Trading in the Dillon Reservoir. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, by Apogee Research, Inc.
August, L., and T. Graupensperger. 1989. Impacts of Highway Deicing Programs on Groundwater and Surface
Water Quality in Maryland. In Proceedings of the Groundwater Issues and Solutions in the Potomac River
Basin/Chesapeake Bay Region. National Water Well Association.
Balogh, J.C., and W.J. Walker. 1992. Golf Course Management and Construction: Environmental Issues. Lewis
Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 24, 244-245.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-161

IX. References Chapter 4
Barten, J.M. 1987. Stormwater Runoff Treatment in a Wetland Filter: Effects on the Water Quality of Clear Lake.
Lake and Reservoir Management, 2:297-305.
Barrett, T.S., and P. Livermore. 1983. The Conservation Easement in California. Island Press, Covelo, CA
Bassler, R.E., Jr. Undated. Grassed Waterway Maintenance. In Agricultural Engineering Fact Sheet No. 129,
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Baumann, J. 1990. Wisconsin Construction Site Best Management Practice Handbook. Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, Madison.
Bazemore, D.E., C.R. Hupp, and T.H. Diehl. 1991. Wetland Sedimentation and Vegetation Patterns Near Selected
Highway Crossings in West Tennessee. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Beasley, R. 1972. Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control. The Iowa State University Press.
Bennett, D.B., and J.P. Heaney. 1991. Retrofitting for Watershed Drainage. Water Environment Technology,
3(9):63-68.
Birkitt, B.F., et al. 1979. Effects of Bridging on Biological Productivity and Diversity. Florida Department of
Transportation, Tallahassee.
Borromeo, N.R. 1992. Leaching of Turfgrass Pesticides. A thesis presented to the faculty of the graduate school
of Cornell University.
British Columbia Research Corporation. 1991. Urban Runoff Quality and Treatment: A Comprehensive Review.
Greater Vancouver Regional District, Vancouver, Canada.
Broward County, Florida. 1990. Land Development Code. Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
Broward County Planning Council. 1982. Determining the Effectiveness of Sweeping Commercial Parking Areas to
Reduce Water Pollution. Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
Brunswick, Maine, Zoning Ordinance. 1991.
Bubeck, R.C., W.H. Diment, B.L. Deck, A.L. Baldwin, and S.D. Lipton. 1971. Runoff of Deicing Salt: Effect on
Irondequoit Bay, Rochester, New York. Science, 172:1128-1132.
Buck, E.H. 1991. CRS Report for Congress: Corals and Coral Reef Protection. Congressional Research Service,
Washington, DC.
Butch, G.K. Undated. Measurement of Scour at Selected Bridges in New York. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston,
VA.
Buttle, J.M. and F. Xu. 1988. Snowmelt Runoff in Suburban Environments. Nordic Hydrology, 19:19-40.
Cahill Associates. 1991. Limiting NPS Pollution from New Development in the New Jersey Coastal Zone. Prepared
for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton.
Cahill Associates. 1992.A Comparison: NPS Pollutant Removal Effectiveness for New Land Development Comparing
Nonstructural Best Management Practices (Minimum Disturbance/Minimum Maintenance) and Various Structural
BMP Techniques. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nonpoint Source Control Branch,
Washington, DC.
4-162 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Chapter 4 IX. References
Cahill, T.H., W.R. Homer, J. 'McGuire, and C. Smith. 1991. Interim Report: Infiltration Technologies - Draft.
Cahill and Associates. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nonpoint Source Control Branch,
Washington, DC.
Cahoon, D.R., D.R. Clark, D.G. Chambers, and J.L. Lindsey. 1983. Managing Louisiana's Coastal Zone: The
Ultimate Balancing Act. In Proceedings of the Water Quality and Wetland Management Conference. Louisiana
Environmental Professionals Association, New Orleans, LA.
Campbell, B. 1988. Methods of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Highway Projects. National Research Council,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Canning, D.J. 1988a. Construction erosion control: Shorelands Technical Advisory Paper No. 3. Shorelands and
Coastal Zone Management Program, Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Canning, D.J. 1988b. Urban Runoff Water Quality: Effects and Management Options (Shorelands Technical
Advisory Paper No.4). Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program, Washington Department of Ecology,
Olympia, WA.
Cape Cod Commission. 1991. Regional Policy Plan. Barnstable, MA.
Carlile, B.L., C.G. Cogger, M.D. Sobsey, J. Scandura, and S.J. Steinbeck. 1981. Movement and Fate of Septic Tank
Effluent in Soils of the North Carolina Coastal Plain.
Carr, A., M. Smith, L. Gilkeson, J. Smillie, and B. Wolf. 1991. Chemical-Free Yard and Garden. Rodale Press,
Emmaus, PA.
Casman, E. 1990. Selected BMP Efficiencies Wrenched from Empirical Studies. Interstate Commission on Potomac
River Basin.
Chesapeake Bay Local Government Advisory Committee. 1988. Recommendations of the Nonpoint Source Control
Subcommittee to the Local Government Advisory Committee Concerning Nonpoint Source Control Needs. A draft
white paper for discussion at the Local Government Advisory Committee's First Annual Conference.
Chesapeake Bay Program. 1990. Annual Progress Report for the Baywide Nutrient Strategy.
Chevron Chemical Company. 1991. Comments on Chapter 4, Sections Nand V of EPA's Proposed Guidance
Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. November 4, 1991.
Chevron Chemical Company and New York State Highway Administration. 1990. Proceedings on Environmental
Symposium on Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA).
City of Austin, Texas. 1988a. Environmental Criteria Manual. Sections 1.1 through 1.6.
City of Austin, Texas. 1988b. Inventory of Urban Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Practices.
City of Austin Environmental Resource Management Division, Environmental and Conservation Services Department.
1990. Removal Efficiencies ofStormwater Control Structures. Environmental Resource Management, Austin, Texas.
Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service. 1991. Xeriscape: Landscape Water Conservation in the
Southeast. Clemson University, Clemson, SC.
Cohn-Lee, R.G., and D.M. Cameron. 1991. Urban Stormwater Runoff Contamination ofthe Chesapeake Bay: Sources
and Mitigation. Natural Resources Defense Council, Water and Coastal Program, Washington, DC.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-163

Colleton Area Joint Planning Advisory Commission. 1988. Colleton County Development Standards Ordinance.
Walterboro, SC. September 1988.
Connecticut Council on Soil and Water Conservation. 1988. Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment
Control. Connecticut Council on Soil and Water Conservation, Hartford, CT.
Cook, A. Guidebook for the PC Gardener. Washington Post, September 26, 1991.
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Maryland. 1991. Maintaining Your Septic Tank. Water Resources
28, University of Maryland, Cooperative Extension Service, College Park, MD.
Dana Duxbury and Associates. 1990. The National Listing of Household Hazardous Waste Collection Programs
1990.
Davenport, T.E. 1988. Nonpoint Source Regulation - A Watershed Approach. In Nonpoint Pollution: 1988 -
Policy, Economy, Management, and Appropriate Technology. American Water Resources Association and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Day, G., D.R. Smith, and J. Bowers. 1981. Runoff and Pollution Abatement Characteristics of Concrete Grid
Pavements. Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, VA.
Delaware DNREC. 1989. Delaware Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control, Dover, DE.
Decker, R.W. 1987. Crystal Lake Life or Death. Board of Public Works, Benzie County, MI.
Defoe, J.H. 1989. Evaluation of Improved Calcium Magnesium Acetate as an Ice Control Agent. Michigan
Transportation Commission, Lansing, MI.
Degen, M.B., R.B. Renbeau, Jr., C. Hagedorn, and D.C. Martens. 1991. Denitrification in Onsite Wastewater
Treatment and Disposal Systems. Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, VA.
DeWalle, F.B. 1981. Failure Analysis of Large Septic Tank Systems. Journal of the Environmental Engineering
Division, 107:229-240. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Dillaha, T.A., R.B. Reneau, S. Mostaghimi, V.O. Shanholtz, and W.L. Magette. 1987. Evaluating Nutrient and
Sediment Losses from Agricultural Lands: Vegetative Filter Strips. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, MD.
Dillaha, T.A., J.H. Sherrard, and D. Lee. 1989. Long Term Effectiveness of Vegetative Filter Strips. Water
Environment and Technology, 1:418-421.
Dix, S.P. 1986. Case Study No.4 Crystal Lakes, Colorado. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Small
Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
Dorman, M.E., J. Hartigan, R.F. Steg, and T. Quasebarth. 1989. Retention, Detention and Overland Flow for
Pollutant Removal from Highway Stormwater Runoff. Volume I. Research report. Federal Highway Administration.
August 1989.
Dreher, D.W., and T.H. Price. 1992. Best Management Practice Handbook for Urban Development. Northeastern
Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL.
4-164 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Driscoll, E.D. 1986. Detention and Retention Controls for Urban Runoff. In Urban Runoff Quality -Impact and
Quality Enhancement Technology, ed. B. Urbonas and L.A. Roesner, American Society of Civil Engineers, pp.
381-393.
Driscoll, E., P. Shelley, and E. Strecker. 1989a. Pollutant Loadings and Impacts From Highway Stormwater
Runoff- Volume II. Federal Highway Administration. April 1989.
Driscoll, E., P. Shelley, and E. Strecker. 1989b. Pollutant Loadings and Impacts From Highway Stormwater
Runoff- Volume N. Federal Highway Administration. May 1989.
Driscoll, E., P. Shelley, and E. Strecker. 1990. Pollutant Loadings and Impacts From Highway Stormwater Runoff,
Volume I. Federal Highway Administration. Apri11990.
Duda, A.M., and K.D. Cromartie. 1982. Coastal Pollution from Septic Tank Drainfields. Journal of the
Environmental Engineering Division, 108:1265-1279. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Dunne, T., and L.B. Leopold. 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco,
CA.
Dupuis, T.V., et al. 1985. Effects of Highway Runoff on Receiving Waters. Volume Ill: Resource Document for
Environmental Assessments. Federal Highway Administration. March 1985. Report No. FHW A/RD-84/064.
Dupuis, T.V., and N.P. Kobriger. 1985. Effects of Highway Runoff on Receiving Waters. Volume N: Procedural
Guidelines for Environmental Assessments. Federal Highway Administration. July 1985. Report No. FHWA/RD-
84/065.
Duxbury, D. 1990. Emerging Prominence for HHW. Waste Age, 21:37.
Dwyer, T., and K. Sylvester. 1989. Natural Processes for Tertiary Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Coupled with
Shallow Ground-Water Discharge in a Saltwater Marsh Environment. In Proceedings of Groundwater Issues and
Solutions in the Potomac River Basin/Chesapeake Bay Region, March 14-16, 1989, National Water Well Association,
Washington, DC.
Enckson, P., G. Camougio, and N. Miner. 1980. Impact Assessment, Mitigation, and Enhancement Measures. In
Highways and Wetlands- Volume II. Federal Highway Administration. July, 1980.
Engle, B.W., and Jarrett, A.R. 1990. Improved Sediment Retention Efficiencies of Sedimentation Basins American
Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, IL. Paper No. 90-2629.
Exner, M.E., M.E. Burbach, D.G. Watts, R.C. Shearman, and R.F. Spalding. 1991. Deep Nitrate Movement in the
Unsaturated Zone of a Simulated Urban Lawn. Journal of Environmental Quality, 20:658-662.
FHWA. 1985. Construction Manual. Federal Highway Administration.
FHWA. 1987. Technical Summary, Sources and Migration of Highway Runoff Pollutants. Federal Highway
Administration. Report No. FHW A/RD-84/057-060-XX.
FHWA. 1991. Federal-Aid Policy Guide. Federal Highway Administration.
Field, R. 1985. Urban Runoff: Pollution Sources, Control, and Treatment. American Water Resource Association,
Water Resources Bulletin, 21(2).
EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-165

IX. References Chapter4
Field, R., et al. 1974. Water Pollution and Associated Effects from Street Salting. Journal of the Environmental
Engineering Division.
Finnemore, E.J. 1982. Stormwater Pollution Control: Best Management Practices. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, 108:706-721
Firehock, K. 1991. Virginia's Erosion and Sediment Control Law. Isaac Walton League.
Fisher, L.S., and Jarrett, A.R. 1984. Sediment Retention Efficiency of Synthetic Filter Fabrics. In Transactions
of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 27(2):429-436.
Florida Council on Comprehensive Environmental Education. 1987. Comprehensive Plan for Environmental
Education. Orlando, FL.
Florida DER. 1988. Florida Development Manual: A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management. Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee.
Foster, B. 1990. Alternative Technologies for Deicing Highways. National Conference of State Legislatures. State
Legislative Report, 15(10). April 1990.
Franklin County, Florida. 1987. Land Planning Regulations for the Appalachicola Bay Area of Critical State
Concern. Franklin County Administration Commission, Appalachicola, FL.
Fritzche, C. 1987. CMA in Winter Maintenance: Massachusetts Confronts Environmental Issues. Public Works.
Fritzche, C. 1992. Calcium Magnesium Acetate Deicer- An Effective Alternative for Salt-Sensitive Areas. Water
Environment and Technology.
Fulhage, C.D., and D. Day. 1988. Design, Installation and Operation of a Low Pressure Pipe Sewage Absorption
System in the Missouri Claypan Soil. On-Site Wastewater. Treatment Vol. 5. In Proceedings of the Fifth National
Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, American Society of Agricultural Engineers,
Chicago, Illinois, December 14-15, 1987. pp. 114-121. ASAE Publication No. 10-87.
Galli, J., and R. Dubose. 1990. Water Temperature and Freshwater Stream Biota: An Overview. Maryland
Department of the Environment, Sediment and Stormwater Administration, Baltimore.
GESAMP. 1990. The State of the Marine Environment, United Nations Environment Progrm (UNEP) Regional Seas
Reports and Studies no. 115. IMO/FAO/UNESCO/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on the
Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution, New York.
Glick, R., M.L. Wolfe, and T.L. Thurow. 1991. Urban Runoff Quality as Affected by Native Vegetation. Presented
at the 1991 International Summer Meeting sponsored by American Society of Engineers, Albuquerque, NM. ASAE
Paper No. 91-2067.
Gold, A.J., T.G. Morton, W.M. Sullivan, and J. McClory. 1987. Leaching of 2,4-D and Dicamba from Home Lawns.
Water, Air, and Soil, 37:121-129.
Goldman, C., and G. Maly. 1989. Environmental Impact of Highway Deicing. U.C. Dans. Inst.
Goldman, S.J., K. Jackson, and T.A. Borstztynksy. 1986. Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. McGraw-Hill,
Inc.
4-166 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Gray, D.H., and A.T. Leiser: 1982. Biotechnical Slope Protection and Erosion Control. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
Griffin, Jr, D.M., C. Randall, and T.J. Grizzard. 1980. Efficient Design of Stormwater Holdingf Basins Used for
Water Quality Protection. Water Research, 14:1549-1554.
Gupta, M.K. 1981. Constituents of Highway Runoff. Vol. 1. Federal Highway Administration.
Hansen, R.C., and K.M. Mancl. 1988. Modem Composting-A Natural Way to Recycle Wastes. Ohio State
University, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, Columbus. Bulletin #792.
Hanson, M.E., and H.M. Jacobs. 1987. Land Use and Cost Impacts of Private Sewage System Policy in Wisconsin.
On-Site Wastewater Treatment Vol. 5. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium on Individual and Small
Community Sewage Systems, Chicago, IL, December 14-15, 1987. pp. 26-39. ASAE Publication No. 10-87.
Harding, M.V. 1990. Erosion Control Effectiveness: Comparative Studies of Alternative Mulching Techniques.
Environmental Restoration, pp. 149-156.
Harper, H.H., M.P. Wanielista, B.M. Fries, and D.M. Baker. 1986. Stormwater Treatment by Natural Systems. STAR
project #84-026 - Final Report. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee.
Hartigen, J.P., T.S. George, T.F. Quasebarth, and M.E. Dorman. 1989. Retention, Detention, and Overland Flow
for Pollutant Removal from Highway Stormwater Runoff. Vol. II Design Guidelines. Federal Highway
Administration. Report No. FHWA/RD-89/203.
Hawkins, R.H., and J.H. Judd. 1972. Water Pollution as Affected by Street Salting. American Water Resources
Association. Water Resources Bulletin, 8 (6).
Healy, K.A. 1982. Water Compliance Unit Seepate and Pollutant Renovation Analysis for Land Treatment, Sewage
Disposal Systems. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, CT.
Hey, D.L., and K.R. Barrett. 1991. Hydrologic, Water Quality, and Meteorollogic Studies. In The Des Plaines River
Wetlands Demonstration Project, Final Draft Report to the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources.
Wetlands Research, Inc., Chicago, IL.
Hickok, E.A., M.C. Hannaman, and N.C. Wenck. 1977. Urban Runoff Treatment Methods: Volume I- Non-Structural
Wetland Treatment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. EPA-600/2-77-217.
Hill, D.E., and C.R. Frink. 1974. Longevity of Septic Systems in Connecticut Soils. Connecticut Agricultural
Experiment Station Bulletin 747.
Hoffman, E.J., A.M. Falke, and J.G. Quinn. 1980. Waste Lubricating Oil Disposal Practices in Providence, Rhode
Island: Potential Significance to Coastal Water Quality. Coastal Zone Management Journal, Vol. 8.
Holler, S. 1989. Buffer Strips in Watershed Management In Watershed Management Strategies for New Jersey, Cook
College Department of Environmental Resources and New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers
University, New Brunswick, NJ, pp. 69-116.
Homer, R.R. 1988. Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation of Calcium Magnesium Acetate. National Research
Council, Transportaion Research Board, Washington, DC.
Horsely Witten Hegeman, Inc. 1991. Quantification and Control of Nitrogen Inputs to Buttermilk Bay. Vol. I.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-167

Houlihan, J.M. 1990. The Effectiveness of the Maryland Critical Area Act in Reducing Nonpoint Source Pollution
to the Rhode River Estuary. Master's Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Hoxie, D.C., R.G. Martin, and D.P. Rocque. 1988. A Numerical Classification System to Determine Overall Site
Suitability for Subsurface Wastewater Disposal. On-Site Wastewater Treatment Vol. 5. In Proceedings of the Fifth
National Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, American Association of Agricultural
Engineers, Chicago, IL, December 14-15, 1987, pp. 366-374. ASAE Publication No. 10-87.
Huang, J.Y.C. 1983. Management of On-Site Disposal Systems: Case Study. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Journal of Environmental Engineering, 109(4):845-858.
Hurst, C.J., W.H. Benton, and K.A. McClellan, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Undated. Thermal and
Water Source Effects upon the Stability of Enteroviruses in Surface Fresh waters. Canadian Journal ofMicrobiology,
35:474-480.
IEP, Inc. 1991. Vegetated Buffer Strip Designation Method Guidance Manual. Narragansett Bay Project. Prepared
for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management,
Providence, RI.
Indiana Administrative Code. 1991. Cumulative Supplement. Title 327 lAD 2-5-1.
International City Management Association. 1979. The Practice ofLocal Government Planning. American Planning
Association.
Irwin, G.A., and G.T. Losey. 1978. Water Quality Assessment of Runoff from a Rural Highway Bridge Near
Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey and the Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee.
Jacobs, H.M. 1992. Planning the use of land for the 21st century. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 47(1):32-
34.
Jarrett, A.R., D.D. Fritton, and W.E. Sharpe. 1985. Renovation of Failing Absorption Fields by Water Conservation
and Resting. American Association of Agricultural Engineers, Paper No. 85-2630.
Jenkins. 1991. Chesapeake Bay Restoration: Innovations at the Local Level. A Compilation of Local Government
Programs. The Chesapeake Bay Local Government Advisory Committee and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Annapolis, MD.
Johnson, F., and F. Chang. 1984. Drainage of Highway Pavements. Federal Highway Administration, Washington,
DC.
Johnston, K., and C. Kehoe. 1989. Facility Prepares HHW for Recycling, Reuse. Waste Age, July 1989.
Jones, P., B. Jeffrey, P. Walter, and H. Hutc. 1986. Environmental Impact of Road Salting- State of the Art. R&D
Ontario Ministry.
Kelly, J., M. Haque, D. Shuping, and J. Zahner. 1991. Xeriscape: Landscape Water Conservation in the Southeast.
Cooperative Extension Service, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.
King County Solid Waste Division. 1990. Local Hazardous Waste Managemnet Plan for Seattle-King County: Final
Plan and Environmental Inpact Statement for the Management ofSmall Quantities ofHazardous Waste in the Seattle-
King County Region. King County Department of Public Works, Solid Waste Division, Seattle, WA.
4-168 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Klein, R.D. 1985. Effects of Urbanization on Aquatic Resources, draft. Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
Tidewater Administration, Annapolis, MD.
Klein, R. 1990. Protecting the Aquatic Environment From the EffectsofGolfCourses. Community & Environmental
Defense Associates, Maryland Line, MD.
Kobriger, N. et al. 1983. Guidelines for the Management of Highway Runoff on Wetlands. National Research
Council, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Kuo, C.Y., K.A. Cave, and G.V. Loganathan. 1988. Planning of Urban Best Management Practices. American
Water Resources Association. Water Resources Bulletin.
Lamb, B., A.J. Gold, G. Loomis, and C. McKiel. 1988. Evaluation of Nitrogen Removal Systems for On-Site
Sewage Disposal. On-Site Wastewater Treatment Vol. No.5. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium on
Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, IL,
December 14-15, 1987, pp. 151-160. ASAE Publication No. 10-87.
Landers, M.N. Undated. A Bridge Scour Measurement Data Base System. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Lernly, D.A. 1982. Erosion Control at Construction Sites on Red Clay Soils. Environmental Management, 6(4):343.
Leonard, D. et al. 1991. The 1990 National Shellfish Register of Classified Estuarine Waters. Department of
Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Strategic Assessment Branch, Washington, DC.
Leopold, L.B. 1968. Hydrology for Urban Land Planning, Circular 559. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC.
Lindsey G., L. Roberts, and W. Page. 1991. Stormwater Management Infiltration Practices in Maryland: A Second
Survey. Maryland Department of the Environment, Sediment and Stormwater Administration, Baltimore. June 1991.
Linker, L. 1989. Creation of Wetlands for the Improvement of Water Quality: A Proposal for the Joint Use of
Highway Right-of-Way.
Livingston, E.H., and E. McCarron. 1992. Stormwater Management: A Guide for Floridians. Florida Department
of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee.
Logsdon, G. 1990. Greenhouse Industry Breakthrough: Plant Protection Through Compost. Biocycle, January 1990:
52-54.
Long Island Regional Planning Board. 1982. The Long Island Segment of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program.
Hauppauge, New York. December. Chapter 5, pp. 115-131.
Long Island Regional Planning Board. 1984. Nonpoint Source Management Handbook. Hauppauge, New York.
Lowrance, R., R. Leonard, DQG-Sheridan. 1985. Managing Riparian Ecosystems to Control Nonpoint Pollution.
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 40(1):87-91.
Lugbill, J. 1990. Potomac River Basin Nutrient Inventory. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,
Washington, DC.
Macal, C.M., and B.J. Broomfield. 1980. Costs and Water Quality Effects of Controlling Point and Nonpoint
Pollution Sources. National Science Foundation, Argonne National Laboratory.
Maddaus, W.O. 1989. Water Conservation. American Water Works Association
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-169

Maestri, B., and B. Lord. Undated. Guide for Mitigation of Highway Stonnwater Runoff Pollution. Society of
Transportation Engineers.
Maine DEP. 1990. Best Management Practices for Stonnwater Management. Maine Department of Evironmental
Protection, Bureau of Water Quality, and York County Soil and Water Conservation District, Sanford, ME.
Maine DEP. 1991. Stonnwater Management Best Management Practices. Maine Department of Environmental
Protection and York County Soil and Water Conservation District, Sanford, ME.
Mancl, K.M. 1985a. Mound System for Wastewater Treatment. Agricultural Engineering Fact Sheet. The
Pennsylvania State University, PA.
Mancl, K.M. 1985b. Septic System Failure. Agricultural Engineering Fact Sheet. The Pennsylvania State
University, PA.
Mancl, K., and W. Magette. 1991. Maintaining Your Septic Tank. Water Resources 28. Cooperative Extension
Service, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Mantell, M.A., S.F. Harper, and L. Propst. 1990. Creating Successful Communities: A Guidebook to Growth
Management Strategies. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Marble, A.D. 1990. A Guide to Wetland Functional Design. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.
July 1990.
Martin, E.H. 1988. Effectiveness of an Urban Runoff Detention Pond-Wetlands System. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, 114(4):810-827.
McKenzie, D., and G. Irwin. 1983. Water-Quality Assessment of Stonnwater Runoff from a Heavily Used Urban
Highway Bridge in Miami, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey and the Florida Department of Transportation,
Tallahassee.
McLusky, D.S. 1989. The Estuarine Ecosystem. Chapman and Hall, Inc., New York, NY.
McNelly, J. Undated. Yard waste composting guide for Michigan communities. Michigan Department of Natural
Resources, Lansing.
Maryland Cooperative Extension Service. 1987. Your Farm and the Chesapeake Bay, Bay Leaflet 1. Maryland
Cooperative Extension Service, Maryland Dept. of Agriculture, Maryland Farm Bureau, and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC.
Maryland DOE. 1983. 1983 Maryland Standards and Specifications for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control. Maryland
Department of the Environment, Sediment and Stormwater Administration, Baltimore
Meeks, G., Jr. 1990. State Land Conservation and Growth Management Policy: A Legislator's Guide. National
Conference of State Legislators. Washington, DC.
Meiorin, E.C. 1986. Urban Stonnwater Treatment at Coyote Hills Marsh. Association of Bay Area Governments,
Oakland, CA.
Metro-Dade Planning Department. 1988. Comprehensive Development Master Plan. Miami, FL.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, St Paul.
4-170 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Misner, M. 1990. King Comity's Wastemobile Project. Waste Age, 21:44.
Mitchell, D. Undated. Laboratory and Prototype Onsite Denitrification by an Anaerobic-Aerobic Fixed Film System
WWPCREII. University of Arkansas.
Monroe County Florida, Planning Department. Undated. Monroe County Code.
Morris, F.A., M.K. Morris, T.S. Michaud, and L.R. Williams. 1981. Meadowland Natural Treatment Processes in
the Lake Tahoe Basin: A Field Investigation (Final Report). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV. EPA-600/4-81-026.
Morton, T.G., A.J. Gold, and W.M. Sullivan. 1988. Influence ofOverwatering and Fertilization on Nitrogen Losses
from Home Lawns. Journal of Environmental Quality, 17(1):124-130.
MSHA. 1990. Chesapeake Bay Initiatives Action Plan. Maryland State Highway Association.
Munsey, C. Project Wipes Out Washouts. The Capitol. June 26, 1992.
Munson, T. 1991. A Flume Study Examining Silt Fences. In Proceedings of the 5th Federal Interagency
Sedimentation Conference, Las Vegas, NV, March 18, 1991.
Murray, D., and E. Ulrich. 1976. An Economic Analysis of the Environmental Impact of Highway Deicing. U.S.
MWCOG. 1983. Urban Runoff in the Washington Metropolitan Area: Final Report Washington, D.C. Area Urban
Runoff Project. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, Washington,
DC.
MWCOG. 1989. State of the Anacostia- I989 Status Report. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,
Washington, DC.
MWCOG. 1991. Coastal Urban NPS Management Measures-Draft. Report. Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments, Washington, DC.
Myers, J. 1991. Draft Management Measures for Onsite Sewage Disposal Systems in Coastal Areas. The Land
Management Project. Providence, RI.
Myers, J.C. 1988. Governance of Non-Point Source Inputs to Narragansett Bay: A Plan for Coordinated Action.
Prepared for The Narragansett Bay Project, Providence, RI. NBP-88-09.
Myers, L.H. 1989. Grazing and Riparian Management in Southwestern Montana. In Practical Approaches to
Riparian Res. Management: An Educational Workshop. Montana State University, pp. 117-120.
Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board. 1978. Areawide Water Treatment Management 208 Summary Plan. Interim
report series: 7. Hauppauge, NY. May 1988, pp. 71-218.
New Hampshire State. 1991. New Hampshire State Model Shore/and Protection Ordinance.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1986. Best Management Practices. In Stream Corridor
Management: A Basic Reference Manual. Division of Water, Bureau of Water Quality, Albany, NY. pp. 65-93.
New York Soil and Water Conservation Society. 1988. New York Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment
Control. Empire State Chapter, Soil and Water Conservation Service.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-171

Nichols, M., E. Towle, et al. 1977. Water, Sediments and Ecology of The Mangrove Lagoon and Benner Bay, St.
Thomas. Island Resources Foundation, Virgin Islands, Technical Report 1. Department of Conservation and Cultural
Affairs Division of Natural Resources Management, U.S. Virgin.Islands.
NOAA. 1991. Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance. U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1991. NCDOT Erosion and Sediment Control Manual - New
Standards.
North Carolina State University. 1990. Evaluation of the North Carolina Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Program. North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, Raleigh. pp. V6-V13.
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission. 1988. Model Stream and Wetland Protection Ordinance for the Creation
of a Lowland Conservancy Overlay District: A Guide for Local Officials. Chicago, 1L.
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission. 1980. Guidebook for Screening Urban Nonpoint Pollution
Management Strategies. A Final Report. Prepared for the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,
Washington, DC.
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission. 1987. BMP Handbook for the Occoquan Watershed. Annandale,
VA.
NVSWCD. 1991. Newsletter entitled, Please Don't Feed Our Streams - How to Feed Your Lawn Without
Overloading the Bay. Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District, Lake Barcroft Watershed
Improvement District, Northern Virginia Planning District Commission, and Virginia Cooperative Extension Service
(Fairfax Office), Fairfax, VA.
Nottingham, D. et al. 1983. Costs to the Public Due to Corrosive Deicing Chemicals. Alaska Department of
Transportation.
Novotny, V. 1991. Urban Diffuse Pollution: Sources and Abatement. Water Environment and Technology, December
1991.
Novotny, V., and G. Chesters. 1981. Handbook of Nonpoiunt Pollution: Sources and Management. Van Nostrand
Reinhold, New York.
Nutter, W.L., and J.W. Gaskin. 1989. Role ofStreamside Management Zones in Controlling Discharges to Wetlands.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report SE-50, pp. 81-84.
O'Neill, W.A., and L. Carothers. 1985. Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control. Connecticut
Council on Soil and Water Conservation, January 1985.
Oberts, G., P.J. Wotzka, and J.A. Hartsoe. 1989. The Water Quality Performance of Select Urban Runoff Treatment
Systems: Part One of a Report to the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources. Metropolitan Council of the
Twin Cities Area, St. Paul, MN. Pub. No. 590-89-062a.
OECD. 1989. Curtailing Usage ofDeicing Agents in Winter Maintenance. Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development, Paris.
Olivieri, A.W., R.J. Roche, and G.L. Johnston. 1981. Guidelines for Control of Septic Tank Systems. Journal of
the Environmental Engineering Division, 107:1025-1034.
4-172 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Otis, R.J. Undated. Subsurface Soil Absorption of Wastewater: Mound Systems. In Small Flows Clearinghouse,
ed. West Virginia University, Morgantown.
Otis, R.J. Undated. Subsurface Soil Absorption of Wastewater: Trenches and Beds. In Small Flows Clearinghouse,
ed. West Virginia University, Morgantown.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. 1990. Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control Program
Manual.
Pitt, D.G. 1990. Land Use Policy: A Key to Ground Water Management, Water Resources Information.
University of Maryland System, Cooperative Extension Service. Water Resources 33.
Pitt, D.G., W. Gould, Jr. and L. LaSota. 1990. Landscape Design to Reduce Surface Water Pollution in Residential
Areas, Water Resources Information. University of Maryland, Cooperative Extension Service. Water Resources
32.
Pitt, R., and G. Amy. 1973. Toxic Materials Analysis of Street Contaminants. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC.
Pitt, R. and J. McLean. 1992. Stormwater, Baseflow, and Snowmelt Pollutant Contributions from an Industrial Area.
Water Environment Federation 65th Annual Conference & Exposition, Surface Water Quality & Ecology Symposia,
Volume VII, September 20-24, New Orleans, LA. Order No. C2007.
Pitt, R., and B. Shawley. 1981. San Francisco NURP Project: NPS Pollution Management on Castro Valley Creek.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Pitt, R. 1986. Runoff Controls in Wisconsin's Priority Watersheds. Urban Runoff Quality-Impact and Quality
Enhancement Technology. In Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation Conference, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Henniker, NH, June 23-27, 1986, pp. 290-313. ASCE.
Portele, G., et al. 1982. Effects of Seattle Area Highway Stormwater Runoff on Aquatic Biota. Washington State
Department of Transportation, Olympia.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. 1986. Issue paper: Nonpoint source Pollution. Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority, Seattle, WA, May 1986.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. 1989. Managing Nonpoint Pollution-An Action Plan Handbook for Puget
Sound Watersheds. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Seattle, WA.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. 1990. Pesticides in Puget Sound. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority,
Seattle, W A.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. 1991. Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan. Chapter 3: Action Plan.
Household Hazardous Waste Program. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Seattle, WA, pp. 134-139.
Reed, S.C. 1991. Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment BioCycle: Journal of Waste Recycling.
Reef Relief. 1992. Brochure for public education on septic tanks. Key West, FL.
Reneau, R. 1977. Changes in Organic Nitrogenous Compounds from Septic Tank Effluent in a Soil with Fluctuating
Water Table. Journal of Environmental Quality, 8:189-196.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-173

Rhode Island, Land Management Project. 1989. Nitrate Nitrogen Pollution from Septic systems; and Phosphorus
Pollution from Septic Systems. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Land Management Project, Providence, RI.
RIDEM. 1988. An Assessment ofNonpoint Sources ofPollution to Rhode Island's Waters. Rhode Island Department
of Environmental Management,· Providence, Rl.
RIDEM. 1988. /SDS Task Force Report, pp. 1-9. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management,
Providence, Rl.
Richardson, D.L., C.P. Campbell, R.J. Carroll, D.l. Hellstrom, J.B. Metzger, P.J. O'Brien, R.C. Terry, and Arthur
D. Little, Inc. 1974. Manual for Deicing Chemicals: Storage and Handling. NERC, ORD, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA 670/2-74-033.
Richardson, D.L., et al. 1974. Manual for Deicing Chemicals: Application Practices. NERC, ORD, U.S.
Ritter, W. 1986. Nutrient Budgets for the Inland Bays.
Ritter, W. 1990. Impact of Alternative Onsite Wastewater System on Ground Water Quality in Delaware.
Rogers, C.S. 1990. Responses of Coral Reefs and Reef Organisms to Sedimentation. Marine Ecology Progress
Series, 62:185-202.
Rushton, B.T., and C. Dye. 1990. Hydrologic anbd Water Quality Characteristics of a Wet Detention Pond. In The
Science of Water Resources: 1990 and Beyond, November 4-9, 1990, ed. M. Jennings. American Water Resources
Association, Betesda, MD.
Salt Institute. Undated a. Deicing Salt and Our Environment. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA.
Salt Institute. Undated b. Deicing Salt Facts. Salt Institute,. Alexandria, VA
Salt Institute. Undated c. Salt Storage. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA
Salt Institute. Undated d. Sensible Salting Program. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA
Salt Institute. 1987. The Salt Storage Handbook. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA.
Salt Institute. 1988. Snowball Snowfighter. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA
Salt Institute. 1991a. Salt and Highway Deicing. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA.
Salt Institute. 1991b. The Snowfighters Handbook. Salt Institute, Alexandria, VA.
Sandy, A.T., W.A. Sack, and S.P. Dix. 1988. Enhanced Nitrogen Removal Using a Modified Recirculating Sand
Filter (RSF2). On-Site Wastewater Treatment Vol. 5. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium on Individual
and Small Community Sewage Systems. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, IL, December 14-15,
1987. ASAE Publication No. 10-87. pp. 161-170.
Santa Clara Valley Water Control District. Undated. Best Management Practices for Automotive-Related Industries.
Practices for Sanitary Sewer Discharges and Stonn Water Pollution Control. Santa Clara, CA.
4-174 EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993

Santa Clara Valley Water Control District 1992. Best Management Practices for Automotive-Related Industries.
Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program and the San Jose Office of Environmental
Management, Santa Clara, CA.
Sartor, J., and G. Boyd. 1972. Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Schiffer, D. 1990a. Wetlands for Stormwater Treatment. U.S. Geological Survey and the Florida Department of
Schiffer, D. 1990b. Impact of Stormwater Management Practices on Groundwater. U.S. Geological Survey and
the Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee.
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., J. Galli, L. Herson, P. Kumble, and D. Shepp. 1991. Developing Effective BMP Strategies for Urban
Watersheds. In Nonpoint Source Watershed Workshop, September 1, 1991, Seminar Publication, pp. 69-83. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPN625/4-91/027.
Schueler, T.R., P.A. Kumble, and M.A. Heraty. 1992. A Current Assessment of Urban Best Management Practices:
Techniques for Reducing Non-Point Source Pollution in the Coastal Zone. Department of Environmental Programs,
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC.
Schueler, T.R., and J. Lugbill. 1990. Performance of Current Sediment Control Measures at Maryland Construction
Sites. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC.
Schultz, W. 1989. The Chemical-Free Lawn. Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA.
Schwab, G., R. Frevert, T. Edminster, and K. Barnes. 1966. Soil and Water Conservation Engineering. John Wiley
& Sons, Inc, New York.
Seattle-King County Department of Public Health. 1990. Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan for Seattle-King
County.
Shaheen, D. 1975. Contributions of Urban Roadway Usage to Water Pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection
Shaver, E. 1991. Sand Filter Design for Water Quality Treatment. Presented at 1991 ASCE Stormwater Conference
in Crested Butte, CO.
Shaver, H., and F. Poirko. 1991. The Role of Education and Training in the Development of the Delaware Sediment
and Stormwater Management Program. Delaware Department of Natural Resources, Dover.
Silverman, G.S., and M.K. Stenstrom. 1988. Source Control of Oil and Grease in an Urban Area. Design of Urban
Runoff Quality Controls. In Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation Conference, Potosi, MO, July 10-15, 1988,
pp. 403-420. American Association of Civil Engineers.
Simmons, M.M. 1991. Coastal Barriers Protection Issues in the 101st Congress. Congressional Reporting Service,
Environment and Natural Resource Policy Division, Washington, DC.
Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, ed. 1989. Small Flows Clearinghouse, Morgantown.
EPA-84D-B-92-002 January 1993 4-175

Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, ed. 1991. Very Low Flush Toilets WWBKGN09. (Product
information from various vendors.) Small Flows Clearinghouse and West Virginia University, Morgantown.
Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, ed. 1992. More States Using Constructed Wetlands for
Onsite Wastewater Treatment. Small Flows, 6 (1). Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University,
Morgantown.
Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, ed. Undated. On-Site Systems. (A series of fact sheets.) Small
Flows Clearinghouse and West Virginia University, Morgantown.
Small Flows Clearinghouse, West Virginia University, ed. Undated. Introduction Package on Sand Filters. Small
Flows Clearinghouse and West Virginia University, Morgantown.
Silverman, G.S., M.K. Stenstrom, and S. Fam. 1986. Best Management Practices for Controlling Oil and Grease
in Urban Stormwater Runoff. The Environmental Professional, 8.
Smith, D.R. 1981. Life Cycle Cost and Energy Comparison of Grass Pavement and Asphalt Based on Data and
Experience from the Green Parking Lot, Dayton, Ohio. City of Dayton, OH.
Smith, D.R., M.K. Hughes, and D.A. Sholtis. 1981. Green Parking Lot Dayton, Ohio–An Experimental Installation
of Grass Pavement. City of Dayton, OH.
Smith, D., and B. Lord. 1989. Highway Water Quality Control-Summary of 15 Years ofResearch. Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC.
Smith, D., and M. Raupp. 1986. Economic and Environmental Assessment of an Integrated Pest Management
Program for Community-Owned Landscape Plants. Journal of Economic Entomology, 79:162-165.
Sonzogni, W., and T. Heidtke, 1986. Effect of Influent Phosphorus Reductions on Great Lakes Sewage Treatment
Costs. American Water Resources Association, Water Resources Bulletin, 22(4):623-627.
South Florida Water Management District. 1988. Biscayne Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan.
West Palm Beach, FL.
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. 1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution
Control Measures. SWRPC, Waukesha, WI. Technical Report Number 31.
Spectrum Research, Inc. 1990. Environmental Issues Related to Golf Course Construction and Management: A
Literature Search and Review. A final report submitted to the United States Golf Association, Green Section. p. 245.
Spotts. D. 1989. Effects of Highway Runoff on Brook Trout. Pennsylvania Fish Commission.
Stack, W.P., and K.T. Belt. 1989. Modifying Stormwater Management Basins for Phosphorous Control. Lake Line.
May 1989, pp. 1-8. (A publication of the Virginia Regional Symposium, April 1988.)
Stanek, III, E.J., R.W. Tuthill, C. Willis, and G.S. Moore. 1987. Household Hazardous Waste in Massachusetts.
Archives of Environmental Health, 42(2):83-86.
Starr and DeRoo. 1981. The Fate of Nitrogen Fertilizer Applied to Turfgrass. Crop Science, 21:351-356.
State of Washington Water Research Center. 1991. Nonpoint Source Pollution: The Unfinished Agenda for the
Protection of Our Water Quality. In Proceedings from the Technical Sessions of the Regional Conference, March
20-21, Tacoma, WA.
4-176 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Swanson, S.W., and S.P. Dix. On-Site Batch Recirculation Dottom Ash Filter Performance. On-Site Wastewater
Treatment Vol. No.5. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage
Systems. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, IL, December 14-15, 1987, pp. 132-141. ASAE
Publication No. 10-87.
Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. 1988. Water Quality Management for the Lake Tahoe Region, Handbook ofBest
Management Practices, Vol. II. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Tahoe, NV.
The Land Management Project - Rhode Island. 1989. Land Use and Water Quality; and Best Management
Practices Series-Fact Sheets. The Land Management Project, Providence, Rl.
Transportation Research Board. 1991. Highway Deicing: Comparing Salt and Calcium Magnesium Acetate.
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. Special Report No.235.
Tull, L. 1990. Cost of Sedimentation/Filtration Basins. City of Austin, TX.
U.S. ACOE. 1990. Anacostia River Basin Reconnaissance Study. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District,
Baltimore, MD.
USDA-SCS. 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service, Washington, DC. Technical Release 55.
USDA-SCS. 1988. 1-4 Effects of Conservation Practices on Water Quantity and Quality. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC.
USDOI. 1991. Pollution Prevention Handbook: Housing Maintenance. No. 16 in a series of fact sheets. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Office of Environmental Affairs, Washington, DC.
USDOT, U.S. Coast Guard. Undated. Bridge Permit Application Guide. U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S.
Coast Guard, Washington, DC.
USDOT, U.S. Coast Guard. 1983. Bridge Administration Manual. U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Coast
Guard, Washington, DC. M16590.5.
USEPA. 1973. Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control Pollution Resulting from All Construction Activity.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Water Programs, Washington, DC. EPA 430/9-73-007.
USEPA. 1977a. Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems. (Volumes 1, 2 and 3). U.S. EPA
Technology Transfer Seminar Publication.
USEPA. 1977b. Nonpoint Source-Stream Nutrient Level Relationships: A Nationwide Study. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. NTIS No. PB-276 600.
USEPA. 1980. Design Manual-Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. (in revision).
USEPA. 1983. Final Report of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Water Planning Division, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1984. Handbook: Septage Treatment and Disposal. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Planning
Division. Municipal Environmental Research Lab, CERI.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-177

USEPA. 1986. Septic Systems and Groundwater Protection: A Program Manager's Guide and Reference Book.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1987a.
USEPA. 1987b. DRASTIC: A Standardized System for Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Using
Hydrogeologic Settings. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA-600/2-87-035.
USEPA. 1988. Used Oil Recycling. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/530-SW-89-
006.
USEPA. 1989a How to Set Up a Local Program to Recycle Used Oil. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC. EPA/530-SW-89-039A.
USEPA. 1989b. Septic Systems. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, The Land Management
Project, Providence, Rl.
USEPA. 1989c. Recycling Works! State and Local Solutions to Solid Waste Management Problems. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/530-SW-89-014.
USEPA. 1989d. Process Design Manual Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater. With the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1989e. Research Review: Nitrate Nitrogen Pollution from Septic Systems. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, The Land Management Project, Providence, Rl.
USEPA. 1989f. Research Review: Phosphorus Pollution from Septic Systems. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, The Land Management Project, Providence, Rl.
USEPA. 199la. Guides to Pollution Prevention: The Automotive Refinishing Industry. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. EPA/625/7-91/016. October 1991.
USEPA. 1991b. A Method for Tracing On-Site Effluent from Failing Septic Systems. In U.S. EPA Nonpoint
Source News Notes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 199lb. Snowmelt Literature Review. Prepared by Tetra Tech for the U.S. Environmental Protection
USEPA. 199ld. Proposed Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources ofNonpoint Pollution in Coastal
Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1992a. Environmental Impacts of Stormwater Discharges. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1992b. Notes of Riparian and Forestry Management In U.S. EPA, Nonpoint Source News Notes. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. March 1992, pp. 10-11.
USEPA. 1992c. Sequencing Batch Reactors for Nitrification and Nutrient Removal. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water Enforcement and Compliance, Washington, DC.
USFWS. Undated. Specification: Riparian Forest Buffer, unpublished memorandum. U.S. Department of Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region.
4-178 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

U.S. Geological Survey. 1978. Effects of Urbanization on Streamflow and Sediment Transport in the Rock Creek and
Anacostia River Basins, Montgomery County, Maryland, 1962-74. Professional paper 1003. United States Government
Printing Office, Wasbington, DC.
University of Wisconsin. 1978. Management of Small Waste Flows. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Cincinnati, OH. EPA-600/2-78-173.
VADCHR and DSWC. 1987. Chesapeake Bay Research/Demonstration Project Summaries. July 1, 1984- June 30,
1985. Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources, Richmond.
Venhuizen, D. 1991. Town of Washington, WI, Wastewater System Feasibility Study-Exploration of Treatment
Technology and Disposal System Alternatives. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison.
Venhuizen, D. 1992. Equivalent Environmental Protection Analysis - Draft.
Virginia Cooperative Extension Service of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 1991. Report on
Pesticides and Fertilizes in the Urban Environment. Prepared for the Governor and the General Assembly of
Virginia. House Document No. 14. Richmond, VA.
Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources. 1987. Chesapeake Bay Research/Demonstration Project
Summaries, December 2, 1987.
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Soil and Water Conservation. 1980, 1990. Virginia
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Draft.
Vitaliano, D. 1991a. An Economic Assessment of the Social Costs of Highway Salting and the Efficiency of
Substituting a New Deicing Material. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Vitaliano, D. 1991b. Infrastructure Costs of Road Salting. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Voorhees, Temple, Barker, and Sloane, Inc. 1989. Generation and Flow of Used Oil in the United States in 1988.
Undated. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, under EPA Contract No.
68-01-7290.
Wanielista, M., et al. 1978. Shallow-Water Roadside Ditches for Stonnwater Purification. Florida Department of
W anielista, M., et al. 1980. Management of Runofffrom Highway Bridges. Florida Department of Transportation,
Tallahassee.
Wanielista, M., et al. 1987. Best Management Practices -Enhanced Erosion and Sediment Control Using Swale
Block. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee. FLDOT-ER-35-87.
Wanielista, M.P., and Y.A. Yousef, ed. 1985. Overview of BMP's and Urban Stormwater Management In:
Proceedings: Stonnwater Management - "An Update", University of Central Florida Environmental Engineering
Systems Institute, Orlando, FL. Pub. 85-1.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1989. Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment and Management Program.
Washington State Department of Ecology, Water Quality Program, Olympia, WA. Document No. 88-17.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1990. 1991 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan. Washington
State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-179

Washington State Department of Ecology. 1991. Stonnwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin- Public
Review Draft. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, W A.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1992. Stonnwater Program Guidance Manual for the Puget Sound Basin.
Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Washington State Department of Transportation/University of Washington. 1988. Washington State Department of

Transportation, Highway Water Quality Manual. Chapters 1 and 2. Washington State Department of Transportation,
Olympia, W A.
Washington State Department of Transportation/University of Washington. 1990. Washington State DOT Highway
Water Quality Manual. Chapter 3. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, W A.
Welinski and Stack, Baltimore Department of Public Works. 1989. Detention Basin Retrofit Project and Monitoring
Study Results. Water Quality Management Office, Baltimore, MD.
Westchester County, New York. 1981. Highway Deicing Storage and Application Methods. Westchester County,
NY, White Plains.
Whalen, P.J., and M.G. Cullum. 1989. An Assessment of Urban Land Use/Stormwater Runoff Quality Relationships
and Treatment Efficiencies of Selected Stonnwater Management Systems. South Florida Water Management District
Resource Planning Department, Water Quality Division. Technical Publication No. 88-9.
Wiegand C., T. Schueler, W. Chitterden, and D. Jellick. 1986. Cost of Urban Runoff Quality Controls. Urban
Runoff Quality- Impact and Quality Enhancement Technology. In Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation
Conference, Henniker, NH, June 23-27, 1986. American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 366-380.
Wieman, T., D. Komac, and S. Bigler. 1989. Statewide Experiments with Chemical Deicers-Final Report Winter
of '88/' 89. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, W A.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1991. A Nonpoint Source Control Plan for the Milwaukee River South
Priority Watershed Project. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Nonpoint Source Water Pollution
Abatement Program, Madison. PUBL-WR-245-91.
Wisconsin Legislative Council. 1991. Wisconsin Legislation on Nonpoint Source Pollution. Wisconsin Legislative
Council, Madison.
Woodward-Clyde. 1986. Methodology for Analysis of Detention Basins for Control of Urban Runoff Quality.
Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Nonpoint Source Division, Washington, DC.
Woodward-Clyde. 1989. Analysis ofStonn Event Characteristics for Selected Rainfall Gages Throughout the United
States.
Woodward-Clyde. 1990. Urban Targeting and BMP Selection, An Information and Guidance Manual for State
Nonpoint Source Staff Engineers and Managers. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
5, Water Division, Chicago, IL, and the Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, DC.
Woodward-Clyde. 199la. The Use of Wetlands for Controlling Stonnwater Pollution. Prepared for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, IL.
Woodward-Clyde. 199lb. Urban BMP Cost and Effectiveness Summary Data for 6217(g) Guidance: Erosion and
Sediment Control During Construction- Draft. December 12, 1991.
4-180 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Woodward-Clyde. 1991c. Urban Nonpoint Source Pollution Resource Notebook. Final Draft Report.
Woodward-Clyde. l992a. Urban Management Practices Cost and Effectiveness Summary Data for 6217(g)
Guidance: Onsite Sanitary Disposal Systems. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
DC.
Woodward-Clyde. 1992b. Urban BMP Cost and Effectiveness Summary Data For 6217(g) Guidance: Erosion and
Sediment Control During Construction. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Wotzka, P., and G. Oberts. 1988. The Water Quality Performance of a Detention Basin-Wetland Treatment System
in an Urban Area. In Nonpoint Pollution: 1988- Policy, Economy, Management, and Appropriate Technology, pp.
237-247. American Water Resources Association, Bethesda, MD.
Yates, M.V. 1985. Septic Tank Density and Groundwater Contamination. Groundwater, 23:5.
Yorke, T.H., and W.J. Herbe. 1978. Effects of Urbanization on Streamflow and Sediment Transport in the Rock
Creek and Anacostia Basins, Montgomery County Maryland, 1962-1974. Professional Paper 1003. U.S. Geological
Survey, Washington, DC.
Young, G. K., and D. Danner. 1982. Urban Planning Criteria for Non-Point Source Water Pollution Control. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Office of Water Research and Technology, Washington, DC.
Younger, L.K., and K. Hodge. 1992. 199Jlntemational Coastal Cleanup Results. Center for Marine Conservation,
Washington, DC.
Yousef, Y., et al. 1985. Consequential Species of Heavy Metals in Highway Runoff. Florida Department of
Yousef, Y., et al. 1986. Effectiveness ofRetention/Detention Ponds for Control ofContaminants in Highway Runoff.
Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee.
Yousef, Y.A., L. Lin, J. Sloat, and K. Kay. 1991. Maintenance Guidelines For Accumulated Sediments in
Retention/Detention Ponds Receiving Highway Runoff. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee.
Yousef, Y.A., M.P. Wanielista, H.H. Harper, D.B. Pearce, and R.D. Tolbert. 1985. Best Management
Practices-Removal of Highway Contaminants by Roadside Swales. Final Report. Florida Department of
Yu, S.L., and D.E. Benelmouffok. 1988. Field Testing of Selected Urban BMP's. In Critical Water Issues and
Computer Applications: Proceedings of the 15th Annual Water Resources Conference. American Society of Civil
Engineers, Water Resources Planning and Management Division, pp. 309-312.
EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-181

Czara Chapter4 Urban

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Czara Chapter4 Urban

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Czara Chapter4 Urban

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 4: MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR

A. What .. Management Measures .. Are

B. What .. Management Practices .. Are

C. Scope of This Chapter

(1) Runoff from developing areas;

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-1

(3) Runoff from existing development;

D. Relationship of This Chapter to Other Chapters and to Other EPA

• Changes in State coastal boundaries; and

4-2 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

E. Overlap Between This Management Measure Guidance for

1. The Storm Water Permit Program

2. Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs

3. Scope and Coverage of This Guidance

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-3

• Protection of environmental quality and social well-being;

4-4 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

• Minimization of soil erosion and sedimentation problems;

.. Maintenance of the predevelopment hydrologic conditions;

.. Protection of ground-water resources;

• Control and management of runoff to reduce/prevent flooding; and

1. Urbanization and Its Impacts

Increased frequency and severity of flooding;

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-5

b. Water Quality Changes

4-6 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Figure 4-2. Changes in stream hydrology as a result of urbanization (Schueler, 1992).

2. Nonpoint Source Pollutants and Their Impacts

Parameter Residential Commercial Industrial

TKN (mg/1) 0.23 1.5 1.6

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-7

Table 4-2. Sources of Urban Runoff Pollutants

Source Pollutants of Concern

Plants and animals Plant debris and animal excrement

4-8 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

Table 4-3. Percent of Limited or Restricted Classified Shellfish Waters

Septic Urban Ag.

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-9

4-10 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-11

II. URBAN RUNOFF

A. New Development Management Measure

(1) By design or performance:

Sound watershed management requires that both structural and nonstructural

4-12 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

• Soil porosity decreases;

EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993 4-13

Table 4-4. Example Effects of Increased Urbanization on Runoff Volumes

Development Scenario Predicted Runoff

100 percent open space 2.81 inches (baseline)

4-14 EPA-840-B-92-002 January 1993

. Concrete Grid Pavement •

. • Provides water quality control without

Table 4-5. (Continued) c:

Table 4-6. Regional, Site-Specific, and Maintenance Considerations for Structural

Size of Regional Maintenance

Infiltration trenches Moderate Same as for infiltration basins

Concrete grid Small Same as for porous pavement Moderate to High

Wet ponds Moderate to Deep soils Arid regions Low High

EPA-840-8-92-002 January 1993 4-21