Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 02-14; BRESSI RANCH RESIDENTIAL; STORM WATER MGMT PLAN; 2002-09-014 OZr / STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN BRESSI RANCH RESIDENTIAL TM City of Carlsbad, CA September 2002 Prepared For: LENNAR COMMUNITIES c/o LENNAR BRESSI VENTURE, LLC 5780 Reet Street, Suite 320 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Prepared By: PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS 701 B Street, Suite 800 SanDiego, CA 92101 Document No. 2267.00 Adolph Lugo RCE 50998 Registration Expires 09/30/05 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Project Background 3 2.1 Hydrologic Unit 4 2.2 Beneficial Uses 4 2.3 Impaired Water Bodies 6 3.0 Existing and Developed Condition Pollutants 6 4.0 BMP Pollutant Removal Efficiency 9 5.0 Project BMP Design Criteria 10 6.0 Project BMP Plan Implementation 10 6.1 Constmction BMP 10 6.2 Municipal/Post-Construction BMP Options 11 6.3 BMP Funding Source and Maintenance 14 7.0 Conclusion 14 FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map 2 TABLES 1 Beneficial Uses for Inland Surface Waters and Coastal Waters 4 2 Beneficial Uses for Groundwater 4 3 Existing and Developed Condition Pollutants 7 4 BMP Treatinent Controls 7 5 BMP Pollutant Removal Efficiency 9 6 BMP Design Criteria 10 7 Pollutant Load Estimates for the Residential Pas A-l 8 Pollutant Load Estimates for Existing Conditions A-l 9 Required Mitigation Flowrates and Volumes A-3 EXHIBITS A Water Quality Exhibit Map B CDS Unit Location Map APPENDICES 1 Residential Planning Area Pollutant Loads and Support Documentation 2 Nationwide Treatment Control BMP Information 3 Table 9: Required Mitigation Flowrates and Volumes 4 Post-Constmction BMPs 5 CDS Unit Information 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Califomia State Water Quality Control Board approved Order Number 2001-01 (Order) on Febmary 21, 2001. The Order outlines the storm water discharge requirements for municipal storm water systems, which drain "development" area from watersheds within 1) the County of San Diego, 2) incorporated cities of San Diego County, and 3) San Diego Unified Port District. The City of Carlsbad is identified as one of the municipal copermittees in the Order and, therefore, subject to its requirements. From a storm water quality perspective, the new Order requires the implementation of storm water BMPs. The BMP design criteria, pursuant to the Order, are either volume- or flow-based. Specifically, volume-based BMPs must be designed to treat the volume of runoff produced from a 24-hour 85* percentile storm event. In general, this is equal to 0.6 inches of runoff for San Diego County. Flow-based BMPs must be designed to treat a flow rate of 0.2 inches of rainfall per hour. In general, regardless of the criteria used, storm flow must be removed and treated before re- entering the storm drain system, or removed completely and allowed to percolate via a retention pond. This Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) was prepared to define potential Project Best Management Practice (BMP) options that satisfy the requirements identified in the following documents: 1) Carlsbad Municipal Code Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, 2) Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 3) NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Constmction Activity, and 4) County of San Diego Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permit (Order Number 2001-01). Specifically, this report includes the following: 1) prefened BMP options for the Project, and 2) BMP device information for the Project options. T:\WaIer Resources\1325-Bressi\Waler Qiiality\WQP_Plaii-Checkl\1325WQ-ciIy0902.doc o o o cz: o Project site. ROiD W: '-'/y// '•'// //. n ''7 •'/•'•'•// ,':'(• ^ ^MELROSE DRIVE OINSETTIA LANE T:\Waler Resources\1325-BresshWater QuiUity\WQP_Ptan-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND This SWMP provides a "concept" water quality plan for the residential land use component of the Bressi Ranch development. The property, with a total acreage of approximately 585 acres, is located southeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road in the City of Carlsbad, Califomia. The site consists of an inegular-shaped piece of property bordered on the north by Palomar Airport Road, on the west by El Camino Real, on the southwest and south by undeveloped property, and by the Rancho Carrillo development to the east (see Figure 1). The approved Master Tentative Map (Master TM) proposes to develop 623 dwelling units and 2,160,000 square feet of iiidustrial space. From an existing condition drainage perspective, the majority of the site drains to an unnamed creek that is tributary to San Marcos Creek. San Marcos Creek eventually drains to Batiquitos Lagoon, located southwest of the project. The remaining 38 acres of the site, located in the northwest comer, are part of the Encinas Creek watershed. This area drains into a concrete ditch via a culvert beneath El Camino Real into Encinas Creek and terminates at the Pacific Ocean. More specifically, the site generates an existing lOO-year storm runoff of 705 cfs tributary to San Marcos Creek, and 68 cfs from the 38 acres tributary to Encinas Creek. Under proposed conditions detention basins will be provided along the southem boundary of the site to attenuate storm runoff back to the existing conditions peak discharges. Also, the site will generate a total water quality treatment flow of approximately 54.9 cfs (28.2 cfs residential and 26.7 cfs industrial) and a water quality treatment volume of 855,512 cubic feet (549,070 cu-ft residential and 306,442 cu-ft industrial). Note that the BMP plans described herein focus on the residential and mixed-use portions of the tentative map. Specific Industrial Site BMPs are addressed in a separate report. T:\Waler Resources\1325-Bressi\Water Quality\WQP_Plan-Checkni325WQ.<:ity0902.doc J 2.1 Hydrologic Unit The Bressi Ranch project is located in the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit. The majority of the project site is located within the San Marcos Hydrologic Area (HA) and the Batiquitos Hydrologic Sub- Area (HSA) 904.51. A relatively small portion of the site, 38 acres, located in the northwestem portion of the project is part of the Encinas HA 904.40. 2.2 Beneficial Uses The beneficial uses for the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit are provided in Tables 1 and 2 below. The tables were obtained from the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (WQCP). Also included below are the definitions of the various acronyms in the tables. Table 1. Beneficial Uses for Inland Surface Waters and Coastal Waters Hydrologic Unit Number MUN AGR IND RECl REC2 WARM WILD 904.40 Encinas HA -1-0 • • • 904.52 San Marcos Creek HA + • • • • • 904.53 Unnamed Intermittent Streams -1-• • • • • Source: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin, September 1994. Table 2. Beneficial Uses for Groundwater Hydrologic Unit Number MUN AGR IND 904.40 Encinas HA 4- Source: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin, September 1994. T:\Water Resources\1325-Bressi\Water QuaUty\WQP_Plan-Chcckl\1325WQ-city0902.doc ^ Notes for Tables 1 and 2: • = Existing Beneficial Use o = Potential Beneficial Use -1- = Excepted from Municipal MUN - Municipal and Domestic Supply: Includes use of water for community, military, or individual water supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water supply. AGR - Agricultural Supply: Includes use of water for farming, horticulture, or ranching including, but not limited to, irrigation, stock watering, or support of vegetation for range grazing. IND - Industrial Services Supply: Includes use of water for industrial activities that do not depend primarily on water quality including, but not limited to, mining, cooling water supply, hydraulic conveyance, gravel washing, fire protection, or oil well re-pressurization. RECl - Contact Recreation: Includes use of water for recreational activities involving body contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming, wading, water-skiing, skin and SCUBA diving, surfing, white water activities, fishing, or use of natural hot springs. REC2 - Non-Contact Recreation: Includes use of water for recreation involving proximity to water, but not normally involving body contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, camping, boating, tide pool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing, or aesthetic enjoyment in conjunction with the above activities. WARM - Warm Freshwater Habitat: Includes uses of water that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish or wildlife, including invertebrates. T:\Waler Resources\1325-Bressi\Water QualiIy\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc ^ WILD-Wildlife Habitat: Includes uses of water that support tenestrial ecosystems including but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of tenestrial habitats, vegetation, wildlife, (e.g., mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates), or wildlife and food sources. 2.3 Impaired Water Bodies Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA, 33 USC 1250, et seq., at 1313(d)), requires States to identify and list waters that do not meet water quality standards after applying certain required technology-based effluent limits (impaired water bodies). The list is known as the Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. San Marcos HA (904.50) was first listed in 1998 on the 303(d) list as having 0.4 miles of impairment due to a high coliform count at Pacific Ocean, Moonlight State Beach. The proposed Project is located approximately 5 miles upstream of the listed body within the same hydrologic area. The Project runoff will be treated prior to entering the tributary system and should not adversely affect the 303(d) listed water body. Furthermore, any potential remaining contaminants would be greatly diluted via advection and dispersion during the 5-mile transport to the Pacific Ocean. Encinas Creek HA is not on the 303(d) list. It is important to note that neither proposed nor existing condition drainage pattems contribute mnoff to the nearby listed 303(d) water body, Agua Hedionda. 3.0 EXISTING AND DEVELOPED CONDITION POLLUTANTS Table 3 below lists the anticipated existing and developed condition pollutants. The types of pollutants for residential land use are documented in the Municipal Califomia Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbook (Municipal Manual). There is no current sampling data for the site; therefore, existing pollutant loads are not available. However, Appendix 1 provides calculations for approximate existing and proposed pollutant loads. T:\Water Resoim;es\1325-Bressi\Water Qualily\WQP_Plaii-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc g Table 3. Existing and Developed Condition Pollutants Description Typical Source Existing Open Space Residential Oxygen Demand and Sediment Sediment from constmction and open space areas •/ Nutrients Fertilizers Heavy Metals Organic Compounds Open space areas Trash and Debris Oil and Grease Streets, Driveways, and other paved areas Bacteria & Viruses Open space areas, lawns, landscaped areas Pesticides Lawns and landscaped areas Source: Califomia Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbook (Municipal Manual). The following sections address Project-specific BMPs and BMP plan implementation; however. Table 4 below lists a number of effective treatment control BMPs for each pollutant category in Table 3. Table 4 references the Municipal Manual and serves as a compilation of the BMP fact sheets. Refer to Appendix 4 for copies of the fact sheet used in the formation of Table 4. The fact sheets provide more detailed BMP technical backup information. Table 4: BMP Treatment Controls Description Most Effective BMP Adequate BMP Oxygen Demand and Sediment: Infiltration Constructed Wetlands Wet ponds Biofilters Extended Ponds Media filfration Oil/water sep. Multiple systems T:\Warer Resources\1325-Bressi\Waler QuaIity\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ.city0902.doc -j Description Most Effective BMP Adequate BMP Nutrients Constmcted Wetlands Infiltration Wet ponds Biofllters Extended ponds Media filfration Oil/water sep. Multiple systems Heavy Metals Inflitration Constmcted wetlands Wet ponds Biofllters Extended ponds Media filtration Oil/water sep. Multiple systems Organic Compounds Infiltration Constmcted wetlands Wet ponds Biofllters Extended ponds Media filtration Oil/water sep. Multiple systems Trash and Debris Screen Filters and Street Sweeping Infiltration Biofllters Media filtration Multiple systems Oil and Grease Inflitration Constmcted Wetiands Oil/water sep. Wet ponds Biofllters Extended ponds Media filtration Multiple systems Bacteria and Vimses Media Filtration Infiltration Constmcted Wetlands Extended ponds Pesticides Infiltration Constmcted wetlands Infiltration Wet ponds Biofilters Extended ponds Media filtration Oil/water sep. Multiple systems Source: Modified from California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbooks (Municipal Manual). T:\Water Resources\1325-Bressi\Waler Quality\WQP_Plan-Checkni325WQ-city0902.doc g 4.0 BMP POLLUTANT REMOVAL EFFICIENCY In general, a number of engineering and climatic constraints ultimately affect the selection of BMP treatment controls used in a project water quality SWPPP. A critical path item in the BMP selection process is the contaminant removal efficiency associated with treatment control BMPs. Table 5 below identifies typical contaminant removal rates for a number of BMPs. Appendix 2 contains a matrix that includes a detailed list of BMP treatment control, associated benefits, and pollutant removal efficiencies that was used in the creation of this table. Additionally, Section 6.2 provides additional information regarding the removal efficiency associated with the CDS Unit. Table 5: BMP Pollutant Removal Efficiency BMP Type Suspended Nitrogen Phosphorous Pathogens Metals Solids (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Dry Detention Basin 30-65 15-45 15-45 <30 15-45 Retention Basins 50-80 30-65 30-65 <30 50-80 Constmcted Wetlands 50-80 <30 15-45 <30 50-80 Infiltration Basins 50-80 50-80 50-80 65-100 50-80 Porous Pavement 65-100 65-100 30-65 65-100 65-100 Grass swales 30-65 15-45 15-45 <30 15-45 Vegetated Filter Strips 50-80 50-80 50-80 <30 30-65 Source: Compiled from Califomia Storm Water Management Practice Handbooks (Municipal Manual). Structural BMPs such as CDS Units, Stormceptor Units, Vortechs Units and Curb Inlet Inserts are effective at removing the following pollutants: T:\WaIer Resources\I325-Bressi\Water QualiIy\WQP_Plao-Checkl\l325WQ-city0902.doc g • Trash and debris (approximate 80-100% removal); • Sediment and suspended solids (approximate 80-100% removal); • Oil, grease, diesel, and gasoline (approximate 50-80% removal) • Metals (approximately less than 50% removal). The pollutant removal efficiencies for these devices vary widely from various sources, so the information provided represent approximate averages. 5.0 PROJECT BMP DESIGN CRITERIA The design of BMPs is primarily based on the numeric sizing criteria defined in Section 1.0. In general. Table 6 below summarizes the criteria that should be implemented in the design of the recommended project BMP. Appendix 1 contains the water quality treatment flow and volume calculations. Exhibits A and B provide the recommended project BMP location and drainage areas. Table 6: BMP Design Criteria BMP BMP Hydrology Treatment Area/Volume Design Constraints Structural BMP: CDS Unit, Stormceptor, Vortechs Unit, etc. Flow-based: 0=CLA. I = 0.2 in/hour C= mnoff coefficient A = acreage Qm=0.2xCxA Locate outside public right-of- way, access to maintenance area, utility conflicts 6.0 PROJECT BMP PLAN IMPLEMENTATION This Section identifies the prefened BMPs to meet the applicable stormwater and water quality ordinance requirements. This includes incorporating BMPs that minimize mnoff contamination and volume from the site. The plan was developed per the proposed roadway and lot layout/density associated with the Residential TM. The following Sections address the use of T:\WaterResources\1325-Bressi\WaterQualiIy\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ-cily0902.doc JQ constmction- and post-constmction BMPs. Note that the BMP Project options are discussed in Section 6.2. 6.1 Construction BMP During constraction, BMPs such as desilting basins and other erosion control measures will be employed, consistent with the NPDES Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP). The objectives of the SWPPP are to: (1) identify all pollutant sources, including sources of sediment that may affect the water quality of stormwater discharges associated with constraction activity from the constraction site; (2) identify nonstormwater discharges; (3) identify, constract, implement in accordance with a time schedule, and maintain BMPs to reduce or eliminate pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized nonstormwater discharges from the constraction site during constraction; and (4) develop a maintenance schedule for BMPs installed during constraction designed to reduce or ehminate pollutants after constraction is completed (post-constraction BMPs). BMPs, in addition to desilting basins, may include silt fences, sand bags, and gravel bags. The SWPPP will be prepared at the time of final engineering. 6.2 Municipal / Post-Construction BMP Plan PDC has identified a BMP plan for the Bressi Ranch project that should meet the stormwater requirements identified in the Order. Note, however, that the City has yet to implement its policy for compliance with the Order, or develop specific BMP Standard Drawings. Therefore, the following BMP plan is preliminary and is subject to change pending City review and implementation of future policy requirements. Note that additional BMP plan options could be developed that utilize an assortment of BMPs, however, the plan presented herein provides a cost effective water quality approach that compliments the cunent site planning. See Exhibits A and B for the BMP locations discussed below and Table 9 in Appendix 3 for required mitigation flowrates and volumes for each location and Planning Area T:\Warer Resources\1325-Bressi\WaIer Qualicy\WQP_Plan-Checkni325WQ-cily0902.doc J 1 BMP Plan: The Project BMP plan treats storm flows with Continuous Deflective Separation Units (CDS Units) located at the downstream end of each major storm drain system and specific pad locations that drain directiy into adjacent canyon watercourses. The major CDS Units would be located at locations A, F, I and J and would accommodate both residential and industrial storm flows. In addition, it is anticipated that Units would also be constracted at locations B through E to serve PA-11. CDS Units are a flow based water quality mitigation device that uses a non-blocking, non- mechanical screening process to remove pollutants from storm water flow. Their use is appropriate for stractural treatment of developed residential and industrial storm ranoff. CDS units capture fine sands and solids and are capable of removing: • More than 80% of annual total suspended solids (including sediment); • 100% of floatables (trash and debris); • 100% of all particles which are equal to or greater than one-half the screen opening size, 93% of particles which are one-third the screen opening size, and 53% of all particles one-fifth the screen opening size; and • 80-90% of oil and grease with optional sorbent material within the Unit. The CDS Unit will act as the main BMP for the project. However, in addition to the CDS Units, non-stractural post-constraction source control BMPs will be used at the site. Source control BMPs is operational practices that prevent pollution by reducing the pollutants at the source by not allowing the pollutants to enter the storm water or non-storm water ranoff. Typically for large project sites such as Bressi Ranch source control BMPs are used in conjunction with treatment control (stractural) BMPs to provide effective BMP storm water treatment. The source controls for the project include 1) education, 2) stenciling curb inlets, 3) permanent landscaping on graded slopes, 4) good-housekeeping. These BMPs are described in more detail below: • Education includes handing out information pamphlets regarding pollution. Cunentiy, in San Diego County, there is a public outreach program called 'Think Blue." The Think TAWater Resources\1325-Bressi\WaterQuality\WQP_Plan-Clieckl\l325WQK;ity0902.doc ^2 Blue program's goal is to educate the public regarding storm water pollution. The developer will be responsible for obtaining and disseminating this information. Information regarding the Think Blue program can be obtained by dialing (888) THINK BLUE or (888) 844-6525. Curb inlet stencils can be obtained from the "I Love a Clean San Diego" organization. The address is 4335 Ruffin Road, Suite 118, San Diego, CA 92123. The contact person for "I Love a Clean San Diego" is Mr. Wes Jackson, (858) 467-0103. Permanent landscaping on graded slopes will be per the project landscaping plans. Good housekeeping practices include the controlled application of carefully selected fertilizers and pesticides, and a general on-site maintenance, disposal, and street sweeping program to keep the site free of litter and debris. Grass lined swales, biofllters, and retention ponds are not proposed for use within the residential areas due to site grading, layout, and storm drain constraints. However, water quality benefits will be obtained from the onsite landscaping, parks, and open space areas. Further, two proposed flood control detention facilities for Bressi Ranch will provide additional water quality benefits. Speciflcally the detention basins will provide: 1) reduction of the post-constraction lOO-year storm event peak discharges to existing conditions, thereby decreasing the potential for downstream flooding and erosion, and 2) a limited buffer between the two major storm drain outfalls and the natural watercourses. The combination of the CDS Units and source control BMPs will provide a water quality solution that provides pollutant reduction to the maximum extent practicable and should meet the applicable local and regional water quality regulations. BMP Plan Assumptions: The following assumptions were made in developing the BMP plan: TAWater Resources\1325-Bressi\ Waler Qiiality\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc j g • Only onsite flows will be treated. All offsite flow treatment will be the responsibility of the upstream owners. • Runoff coefficients, 'C values, of 0.55, 0.70, and 0.95 were used in the ranoff calculations for residential, mixed-use, and industrial areas respectively. • CDS units will be accepted for use in the City of Carlsbad. • BMPs for adjacent residential and industrial Planning Areas can be combined. 6.3 Funding Source and Maintenance Responsibility The CDS Unit constraction and long-term maintenance costs are cunently being negotiated between Lennar and the City of Carlsbad. The anticipated maintenance cost of each CDS unit is approximately $1,000-2,000 annually. Appendix 3 provides approximate CDS Unit constraction and maintenance costs. Appendix 5 contains a detailed operation and maintenance schedule for the CDS Units. 7.0 CONCLUSION This Storm Water Management Plan has been prepared to define Best Management Plan (BMP) options, or schemes, that satisfy the requirements identified in the following documents: 1) Carlsbad Municipal Code Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, 2) Standard Specifications for Public Works Constraction, 3) NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Constraction Activity issued by the State Water Resources Conti-ol Board, and 4) San Diego NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit (Order Number 2001- 01). Specifically, this report includes the Project BMP option and BMP device information. The Project BMP plan treats storm flows with CDS Units located at the downstream end of each major storm drain system and specific pad locations that drain directly into adjacent canyon watercourses. In addition to the CDS Units, non-structural post-constraction BMPs will include: 1) education, 2) stenciling curb inlets, 3) permanent landscaping on graded slopes, and 4) good- housekeeping. The combination of the CDS Units and source control BMPs will provide a water quality solution that should meet the local and regional regulations. TAWater Resources\1325-Bisssi\Waler Quality\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc APPENDIX 1 Residential Land Use Pollutant Loads and Support Documentation TAWater Resources\1325-Bressi\WaterQuality\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ<ity0902.doc Table 7. Pollutant Load Estimates for the Residential PAs AVERAGE ANNUAL SURFACE RUNOFF (R) Cp Ci IMP 1 (in.) R(l) in/yr 0.15 0.9 0.4 10 4.5 1 LOADING FACTOR FOR RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED LAND USE (M,) PA EMC Rl K Area Ml (mq/l) (in/yr) (conv. factor) (acres) Ib/yr PA6 338.2 4.5 0.2266 19.0 6552 PA7 338.2 4.5 0.2266 22.7 7828 PAS 338.2 4.5 0.2266 22.4 7725 PA9 338.2 4.5 0.2266 34.0 11725 PAID 338.2 4.5 0.2266 34.0 11725 PAIIa 338.2 4.5 0.2266 12.0 4138 PAIIb 338.2 4.5 0.2266 12.0 4138 PAIIc 338.2 4.5 0.2266 7.0 2414 PAIId 338.2 4.5 0.2266 11.0 3793 PAI 2a 338.2 4.5 0.2266 13.0 4483 PAI 2b 338.2 4.5 0.2266 15.0 5173 PAI 3 338.2 4.5 0.2266 13.0 4483 PAI 4 338.2 4.5 0.2266 1.0 345 PAI 5a 338.2 4.5 0.2266 22.0 7587 PAI 5b 338.2 4.5 0.2266 14.0 4828 Open Space 337.4 1.54 0.2266 192.3 22641 Totals: 444.4 109581 Notes: 1. The above calculations assumes an average imperviousness of 40% within the residential/mixed use areas (Per Draft San Diego County Hydroiogy Manual, Medium Density Residential with 7 DU/acre. Table 8. Pollutant Load Estimates for Existing Conditions AVERAGE ANNUAL SURFACE RUNOFF (R) Cp Ci IMP i R(i) (in.) in/yr 0.15 0.9 0.005 10 1.54 LOADING FACTOR FOR EXiSTING LAND USE (M,) (FOR ENTIRE SITE - 585 ac) Drainage EMC Rl K Area Mi Basin (mg/1) (in/yr) (conv. factor) (acres) Ib/yr 1 377.4 1.54 0.2266 547 72039 2 377.4 1.54 0.2266 38 5005 Notes: 1. Drainage Basin Number 1 is tributary to San Marcos Creek/Batiquitos Lagoon. 2. Drainage Basin Number 2 is tributary to Encinas along Palomar Airport Road. LOADING FACTOR FOR EXiSTING LAND USE (M,) (WITHIN THE FUTURE RESIDENTIAL/MIXED USE/OPEN SPACE AREAS) Drainage EMC Ri K Area Ml Basin (mg/1) (in/yr) (conv. factor) (acres) Ib/yr 1 377.4 1.54 0.2266 444.4 58527 Notes: 1. Drainage Basin Number 1 is tributary to San Marcos Creek/Batiquitos Lagoon. step 4 - Select BMPs The nio^ cost-effective BMP saaiario is selected uaog Worksheet 2 ia CYmptex 3. Thc first in scttii^ op Woitdiect 2 is to detenmne the average dstmsd poUucmt toa<ing ftom the ate prior to development (i.c, pasture wkh no BMPs), the annaal poButaot load tircre^ due to the devd<H'o»itt, aod thc avenge ammal pcAi^t loa^og under each of the toec BMP scenarios idsrtified in Step 3. UIB puqx^ is to coa^e jwojected non-point sowce pt^lutant loa<b bcfiMC md after <tevelc^pii^ in mSec to idemify the load reductions tea COBW bc adhfevcd by placi^ different BMP o|«ions. The IWRP (fetta and/OT other local stntfies could be used fes poflutant load estiimtcs, runcrff eainmes, OT removal e£5ci««:ies. FOT tWs example, pollutant l<M»ds were siimil^ usi^ the Canp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) Watcishcd Ma^emeirt ^to<tel (WMM). WMM is a spreacfeheet-based toc^ for anmial and/OT season^ load eviduati(m based OTI tbe nttth«ioiogy otitU^d in the Gi^toace Maro^ fOTthePieoagatlonofPart 1 of the NTOES Perimt Atmliiatioo t)r Disctom fttm Mwma Separate Swm Stsmx Svsteas. EPA, 1991. EKCs mi b^cr^ioiB v^s fot WMM are shown inl^WeZ ThKC are biBcd i^ NURP d^ and Cmi experience. Fbr WMM, flirmifli raoc^ vohimes for fte pcrvioiBAmpervio^ »eas in eadi land use csicgoiy arc c^cidated by mtdtiplying ttie averag armmd tmdaXt vdume by a runoff co^idei^ A mnoff coefBdent of 0.9 is typically used for inpervfous laeas 0^-. 90 perceaJ of flje r^t^ is asstt^d to be OKiverted to ninoff firom fee in^pcrvio^ fracticm of each tai ttsc). A pervious area nmoff coe^aSeot of 0.15 is tyi^cafly used. The tot^ average an^ mhx» laaoif frwn a ^ven laod u% L c^cuia^ ^ w^ttii^ ^ uq>a>^oas mi pervicw »ea tmsM factOTS for each land tise oiegory as f(Aows: Rt. = [C, + (Cr Cp) IMPL ]*I Equation 1 Vf\iete: RL = total avei^e mwal surface runoff from land use L (in/yr) IMPL ~ Mc&smii ianpnvioi^KSs (tf land use L fmm TaMe 2 I = long-term aver^ dmmi fsec^rita&in (in/yr) Cp = pCTvious fflca rmxoff co^&ieQt = 0.15 d = inq)avious saea runoff coefBdeitt = 0.90. The WMM ^nerates ooqwist somx polhitiOTi iMds (jessed as Ibs/yr) ttiat vary by tol use Md tte pcrceitt ia^>erviouso«s ffisodaied wtt eaefe tod IBC. The poMtoa lo«&ig faclOT ML is con^i^d for land use L by the frdkmt^ ec^tioo: A/t = £MQ*«t*Jr*At Equation! Where: ML = loa^&ig £actOT fOT b«d use L (Bi/yr) EMCL - e^sat mean coecealra&» oi tmaS ftom land tue L im^Y, EMCL vades by land ^ aad hy fioBa^t Rj^ s totil avet:^ annual satfact tms0 fam land tase L computed from Equatioo 1 fm/yr) K = 02266, a imit cooversiai constant AL - ai» of use L (aaes). The kKttls «e then aaomcd for a pvea »ca OT sceimio to produce summary remits wittwut BI^. BMP cffidaicics are ffien !^Ocr^^ loads. Munidpal Handbook 8-4 Mardi, 1993 Event Mean Concentrations And Inifiervteiis Percentages AsMgned For The Watershed Management Model VI Souke: EPA, 1983 and COM experience APPENDIX 2 Nationwide Treatment Control BMP Information TAWaterResoufces\1323-Bressi\WaterQuality\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Managenient Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limilations Benefits Removai Efficiency Capital Cost (approximate) O&M Cost (approximate) Infiltration - a family of treatment systems in which the majority of the runoff from smail storms is infiltrated in the ground rather than discharged into a surface water body. (1) Infiliralion Trench - is an excavated trench (3 to 12 feet deep), backfilled with stone aggregate, and lined with filler fabric. (23) It is used to treat a small portion ofthe runoff by detaining storm waler for short periods until it percolates down to the groundwater table. (21) Useful life is usually around 10 years. (20) *potenlial loss of infiltrative capacity. (1) *applicability depends on ^ specific site characteristics/opportunities (slope, soil types, proximity to water table). (23) *potential groundwater contamination. (I) *not suitable for sites that contain chemical or hazardous material. (23) *may need to be preceded by appropriate pretreatment. (23) •relatively short life span. (23) •efficient removal of pollutants. (1) *can recharge groundwater supplies. (2) •provides localized streambank erosion control. (2) •easy to fit into unutilized areas ofdevelopmeni sites. (2) •an effective runoff control. (1) •increases basetlow in nearby streams. (23) •Low land use requirement, (20) • nitrogen compounds 40% to S0%. (2) • phosphorus compounds 40% to 80%. (2) • combined nilrogen and phosphorus compounds 45% to 15% (depending on design). (8) • total suspended solids 15%. (20) •total phosphorous 60%i. (20) • lotal nitrogen 55%. (20) •COD 65%. (20) • Lead 65%. (20) • Zinc 65%'. (20) • $4,900/acre (prorated using ENR index from 1992 COSI). (5) • $3.6 to $l0.70/cubic feet Storage (proraled using ENR index from 1986 cost). (20) • $l,800/acie/year (proraled using ENR index from 1992 cost). (5) • 9% of Capilal Cost (20) Pond (Basin) - consist of shallow, tlat basins excavated in pervious ground, with inlet and outlet structures to regulate llow. (19) Useful Life is usually around 25-years. (20) •potential loss of infiltrative capacity. (1) •low removal of dissolved pollulanis in very coarse soils. (I) •possible nuisance (odor, mosquito). (2) •frequent maintenance requirement. (2) •risk of groundwater contamination. (1) • High land use requirement. (20) •achieves high levels of particulate pollutant removal. (1) • can recharge groundwater supplies. (2) •an effective runoff conlrol. (1) •can serve tributary areas up to 50 acres. (1) •provides localized streambank erosion conlrol. (2) •cosl effective. (2) • nilrogen compounds 40%. to 80%. (2) • phosphorus compounds 40'>(. lo 80%.. (2) r • combined nilrogen and I phosphorus compounds 45% to 75% (depending on design). (8) • total suspended .solids 75%. (20) •lotal phosphorous 65%. (20) • total nitrogen 60%.. (20) •COD 65%. (20) • txad 65%. (20) • Zinc 65%. (20) • $36,900/million gallons (proraled using ENR index from 1992 cosl). (5) • ,$0.60 to $ 1/cubic feet storage (prorated Using ENR index from 1986 cost). (20) • $l,200/mi!lion gallons/year (proraled using ENR index from 1992 cosl). (5) • 7%. of Capilal Cost (20) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Porous Pdveiiieitl - is an alternative to conventional pavement whereby runoff is diverted ihrough a porous asphalt layer and into an underground stone reservoir, (10) Useful life is around 10 years. (20) Limitations /potential loss of infiltrative capacity. (1) >15% tailure rate due to clogging, resurfacing or just failure afler construction. (10) /high maintenance - requires special vacuum sweeping or jet hosing. (10) /may require twice as much material as without porous pavement to achieve the needed strength. (10) /unsuitable in fill sites and steep slopes. (5) /potential risk of groundwater contamination. (1) •limited efficiency (6 months). (23) Benefits /achieves high levels of pollutant removal. (1) /groundwater recharge. (2) /localize streambank erosion control. (2) /reduced land consumption. (2) /elimination of curbs and gutters. (2) /safer driving surface. (2) Removal Efficiency • nilrogen compounds 60% to 80%. (2) • phosphorus compounds 40%. to 80%. (2) •nilrogen and phosphorus compounds 45%) to 75% (depending on design). (8) • sediment 82 to 95%. (23) • tolal phosphorus compounds 65%.. (23) • total nilrogen compounds 80 to 85%, (23) • tolal suspended solids 90%, (20) •lotal phosphorous. 65% (20) • total nitrogen 85%. (20) •COD 80%. (20) • Lead 100%. (20) •Zinc 100%.. (20) Capital Cost (approximate) • $123,000/acre (prorated using ENR index from 1992 cost). (5) • $2.10/square feet (prorated using ENR index from 1987 cost) (incremental cost beyond the conventional asphalt pavement). (20) O&M Cost (approximate) • $250/acre/year (prorated using ENR index from 1992 cost). (5) • $0.14/square feet/year (prorated using ENR index from 1987 cosl). (incremental cosl beyond the convenlional asphalt pavement). (20) Concrele Grid Puvenieni - are lattice grid structures with grassed or pervious material placed in the grid openings. (1) Useful iiie is usually around 20 years. (20) /require regular maintenance. (20) /not suitable for high traffic areas. (20) /potential groundwater contamination. (20) /only feasible where soil is permeable. (20) / groundwater recharge. (20) /can provide peak How control. (20) •total nitrogen 90%. (20) • total phosphorus compounds 90%. (20) • total suspended solids 90%., (20) •COD 90%, (20) • Lead 90%. (20) • Zinc 90%.. (20) •.$17-$3.5/ft' (prorated using ENR index from 1981 cost) (incremental cosl beyond the conventional asphalt pavement) (20) • 40.07/fl' feel (prorated using ENR index from 1981 cosl) (incremental cost beyond the conventional asphalt pavement) (20) Infiliralion Drainfields - a sysiem composed of a pretreatment structure, a manifold system, and a drainfield. (28) •high maintenance when sedimenl loads are heavy. (28) •shorl life span ifnot well maintained. (28) •not suitable in regions with clay or silty soils. (28) •anaerobic conditions could clog the soil, (28) •potential groundwater contamination, (28) /groundwater recharge, (28) •used to conlrol runoff, (28) • depends on design - little monitoring data currently available. Potentially 100% of pollutant could be prevented from entering surface waler, (28) Approx. $72,000 for a drainfield with dimensions: 100 ft long, 50 feet wide, 8 feet deep with 4 ft cover. (28) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Conlrol (Source) Limilations Benefils Removal Efficiency Capilal Cosl (approximate) O&M Cost (approximale) Wet Detention Ponds - small ariificial impoundments with emergent wetland vegetation around the perimeter designed for the removal of particulate matter and dissolved nutrients. (19) Useful life is around 50 years. (20) /maintaining oxygen supply in the pond. (I) /need of supplemenlal waler to maintain water level. (1) /land constraints, infeasible in dense urban areas. (1) /local climate might affect biological uptake, (27) /eventual need for costly sediment removal. (2) • potential nuisance (mosquito, odor, algae). (2) •potential stratification and anoxic conditions. (27) /achieves high levels of soluble and organic nutrient removal. (2) /creation of local wildlife habitat. (2) /decrease potential for downstream flooding. (27) /recreational and landscape amenities. (2) /decrease potential downstream stream bank erosion, (19) • nitrogen 20% to 60%, (2) • phosphorus 40% to 80%.. (2) • nitrogen & phosphorous 30% to 70% (depending on volume ratio). (8) • total suspended solids 50% to 90% (27)&60%. (20). • total phosphorus 30% to 90% (27) & 45%. (20). • total nitrogen 35%.. (20) • soluble nutrients 40% to 80%.. (27) • lead 70%. to 80% (27) & 75%. (20). • zinc 40% to 50% (27) & 60%. (20). • COD 40%.. (20) $17.50 to $35 per cubic meter of storage area (27) 3 to 5 percent of construciion cost per year (27) Wetlands - constructed wetlands are a single stage treatment system consisting ofa forebay and micro pool with aquatic plants. They remove high levels of particulate, as well as some dissolved contaminants. (19) Useful life is around 50 years. (20) /need of supplemental water to maintain water level. (1) /potential nutrient release in the winter. (19) /reduction in hydraulic capacity with plant growth. (19) /wetland area less than 2% of watershed area. (10) •potential groundwater contamination. (26) * high land requiremenis. (20) /passive recrealion and wildlife support. (1) /improve downstream water and habilal qualily. (26) /flood attenuation. (26) /achieves high levels pollutant removal. (1) • total suspended solids 67%. (26) & 65%. (20), • lolal phosphorus 49% (26) & 25% (20), • total nitrogen 28% (26) & 20%. (20). • organic carbon 34%. (26) • COD 50%.. (20) • petroleum hydrocarbons 87%. (26) • cadmium 36%.. (26) • copper 41%. (26) • lead 62% (26) & 65% (20). • zinc 45% (26) & 35% (20). • bacteria 77%. (26) $26,000 to $55,000 per acre of wetland. (26) 2 percent of construction cost per year. (26) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BIVIPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limitations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capilal Cost (approximale) O&M Cosl (approximate) Biofdters • Systems designed to pass storm water runoff slowly over a vegetated surface in the form of a swale or strip to filter pollutants and to infiltrate Ihe runoff. (19) Bioretention - system designed to treat runoff. The runoff is conveyed as sheet flow to the treatment area, which consists of a grass buffer strip, sand bed, ponding area, organic layer or mulch layer, planting soil, and plants. (33) •cold climate may hinder infiltrative capacity. (33) •not suitable for slopes greater than 20 percent. (33) •clogging may occur in high sediment load areas. (33) •enhance quality of downstream water bodies. (33) •improves area's landscaping. (33) •provide shade and wind breaks. (33) • total Phosphorus 70 to 83%. (33) • metals (copper, lead, zinc) 93 to 98%. (33) • TKN 68% to 80%, (33) • total suspended solids 90%, (33) • organics 90%. (33) • bacteria 90%. (33) $500 for new development of a biorelenlion, $6,500 for retrofitting a site into a bioretetion area (33) Vegetated Swale - is a broad, shallow channel (typically trapezoidal shaped) wilh a dense stand of vegetation covering the side slopes and bottom. (29) Useful life is around 50 years. (20) /generally incapable of removing nutrients. (2) •can become drowning hazards, mosquito breeding areas. (29) /not appropriate for steep topography, very flat grades. (29) /tributary area limiled to a maximum of 5 acres. (19) /difflculi to avoid channelization, (19) •ineffective in large storms due to high velocity Hows. (29) / design to convey runoff of 2 year storm, with freeboard of 10 year slorm. (19) • low land requirement. (20) /suitable for small residential areas. (1) /can removes particulate pollutants at rates similar to wet ponds. (1) •reduction of peak flows. (29) •lower capilal cost. (29) •promotion of runoff infiltration. (29) • low land requirements. (20) • nitrogen 0 lo 60%. (2) • total nilrogen 10%. (20) • phosphorus 0 to 60% (2) • tolal phosphorus 9%. (29) & 20%. (20). • COD 25%.. (20) • oxygen demanding substances 67%. (29) • tolal suspended solids 81% (29) & 60% (20), • nitrate 38%., (29) • hydrocarbons 62%, (29) • cadmium 42%., (29) • lead 67% (29) & 70%. (20). • zinc 71% (29) &60% (20), • copper 51%, (29) •$6.80 to $12.50 per linear foot (prorated using ENR index from 1987 cosO. (29) •$10.80 to $63.40 per linear foot (prorated using ENR index from 1991 cost), (29) • typical total for a 1,5 fl, deep, lOfl wide, 1,000 ft long Low-$8,100 Moderate - $14,870 High-$21,640 Prorated using ENR index from 1991 cost). (29) • $0.73 - $0.95 per linear foot (prorated using ENR index from 1991 cost). (29) • $1/1 inear foot 9prorated using ENR index from 1987 cosl). (20) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limitations Benefils Removal Efficiency Capilal Cosl (approximate) O&M Cosl (approximale) Infiltration (Vegetative Filler) Strip - are broad surfaces with a full grass cover thai allows storm water to flow in a relalively thin sheets (21) Useful life is around 50 years (20). •sheet flow may be difficult to attain. (1) •not appropriate for sleep slopes. (19) •tributary area limiled to 5 acres. (19) •suitable for parking lots. (1) •slows runoff flow. (1) •removes particulate pollutants, (1) • nitrogen 0 to 40%.. (2) • phosphorus 0 to 40'7(.. (2) • total suspended solids 65%.. (20) • total phosphorous 40%. (20) • tolal nitrogen 40%. (20) • COD 40%. (20) • lead 45%. (20) • zinc 60%.. (20) •$3,100/acre (prorated using ENR index from 1992 cost). (5) • $310/acre/yr (prorated using ENR index from 1992 cost). (5) • $139 to $l,IOO/acre/year (prorated using ENR index from 1987 cosl). (20) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limitations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capital Cost O&M Cosl (approximate) (approximale) Exiended Detention Basins - consist of a •occasional nuisance in •creation of local wildlife • nilrogen 20% lo 60%. $123,000/million • $l,230/million settling basin with an outlet sized to inundated portion. (19) habilal, (2) (2) gallons gallons/year remove particulate matter by slowly •inability to vegetation may •recreational use in • phosphorus 20%. to 80% (proraled using (proraled using releasing accumulated runoff over a 24 to result in erosion and re-inundated poriion, (2) (2)& 10% to .30%. (10) ENR index from ENR index from 40 hour period. "Dry" detention basins suspension. (1) •can remove soluble • nitrogen and phosphorus 1992 cost). 1992 cosl). may be designed lo empty between •limiled orifice diameler nutrients by shallow marsh 30%. to 70%. (depending on (5) (5) usages. (19) preclude use in small or permanent pool, (2) volume ralio). (8) • 4%. of capital Useful life is usually 50 years. (20) watersheds. (1) •suitable for sites over 10 • .soluble nutrients - low or cost, (20) •requires differential in acres. (10) negative. (10) elevation at inlet and outlel. •temporary storage of • tolal suspended solids (1) runoff. (1) 45% (20) & 88% (44). •frequenl sedimenl •no need of supplemental • nitrate 15%. (44). maintenance. (19) waler. (1) • nitrile 61% (44). • High land requirement. •proiection for downstream • oil and grease 56%.. (44) (20) channel erosion, (2) • fecal coliform 45%.. (44) tolal petroleum hydrocarbons 17%lo20%. (44) • TKN 40%. (44) • ammonia 5%.. (440 •total phosphorous 25% (20) & 57% (44). • total nitrogen 30%. (20) •COD 20% (20) & (44). • lead 20% (20) & 55% (44). • zinc 20% (20) & 47% (44). • chromium 68%;. (44) • copper 37%.. (44) • nickel 62%. (44) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limilations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capital Cosl (approximale) O&M Cost (approximate) /Modular Treatinent Systems SlormTreal™ System (STS) - trealment technology consisting of a series of sedimentation chambers and constructed wetlands. The 9.5 feet diameter recycled polyethylene modular treats storm waler wilh sedimentation chambers, where pollutants are removed through sedimentation and filtration, then the water is conveyed to a surrounding constructed wetland. Vegetation in the wetland varies depending on local conditions. Because the system is relatively new, there is no data available on lifetime of the system. It is estimated lhat the plants and the gravel in the system need to be replaced every 10-20 years. (32) •may require modificalions lo function in different environments. (32) • relatively new and remains to be tested in different geographical locations. •protect groundwaier by removing pollutants prior to infiltration. (32) •high removal rates. (32) •spill conlainment feature. (32) •soil types and high water table won't limit effectiveness. (32) • fecal colifonn bacteria 97%. (32) • lolal suspended solids 99% (32) • COD 82%. (32) • lolal dissolved nilrogen 77%., (32) • phosphorus 90%, (32) • tolal pelroleum hydrocarbons 90%.. (32) • lead 77%. (32) • chromium 98%. (32) • zinc 90%. (32) $4,900 per unit + $500 to $1,000 installation cost + $350 to $400 for additional material (32) $80 to $120 per tank for removal of sediment (32) Hydrodynamic Separators - are flow- through structures with a settling or separation unii to remove sediments and other pollutants that are widely used. With proper upkeep, useful life is over 30 years. (25) Downstream Defender''''^ - designed to capture settleable solids, floatables and oil and grease. It utilizes a sloping base, a dip plate and internal components to aid in pollutant removal, (25) • requires frequent inspections and maintenance is site-specific. (25) Can achieve 90'?'(. particle removal for flows from 0.75 cfs to 13 cfs (25) $10,000 to $35,000 per pre cast unit (23) Coniiiwoiis Deflection Separator (CDS) - pre cast units placed downslream of freeway drain inlets to capture sedimenl and debris. These underground unils create a vortex of water that allows water to escape through the screen, while contaminants are deflected into the sump. (21) • suitable for gross pollutant removal. (21) /intended to screen litier, fine sand and larger particles, (21) /act as a first screen influence for trash and debris, vegetative material, oil and grease, heavy metals. (21) oil and grease - 77% (34) $2,300 to $7,200 per cubic feel second capacity (23) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Managenient Practices (BMPs) Treatment Conlrol (Source) Limitations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capital Cost (approximate) O&M Cosl (approximale) Contiinious Deflection Separator (CDS) with Sorbenis, Application of different types of sorbents in the CDS units. OARS^*^ - is a rubber type off sorbent (34) Rubberizer - is composed of a mixture of hydrocarbon polymers and additives, (34) Aluminum Silicate: Xsorb'^^ is made from a natural blend of silica minerals, which when expanded in our unique manufacturing process, make a white granular material that absorbs spills instantly on contact (web) Sponge Roli^'*^ - primarily sold as a soil bulking agent (34) Nanofiber''^ - is a polypropylene adsorbent. (34) • requires frequenl inspections and maintenance is site-specific. (25) •sorbents remove many times their own weighi (34) •could be used oil spill control. (34) OARS: oil and grease - 82%, 83%, 86%, 94%. (34) Rubbei'izer: oil and grease 86%. (34) Xsorb: oil and grease 79%. (34) Sponge Rok: oil and grease 41%. (34) Nanofiber: oil and grease 87%.. (34) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limitations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capilal Cost (approximate) O&M Cost (approximate) Stormceptor® - This system is a stormwater interceptor that efficiently removes sedimenl and oil from stormwater runoff and stores these pollutants for safe and easy removal. Units are available in prefabricated sizes up to 12 feet in diameter by 6 to 8 feet deep. They re designed to trap and retain a variety of non-point source pollutants, using a by-pass chamber and treatment chamber. A fiberglass insert separates the upper (by-pass) and lower (separation/holding) chambers, (25) • requires frequenl inspections and maintenance is site-specific. (25) •use for redeveiopmenl projecis of more lhan 2,500 sq. feel where there was no pervious storm waler inanagement, (25) •projects that double the impervious layer. (25) •easy to design in new or retrofit applications. (35) •inexpensive to service and maintain. (35) •internal bypass prevents release of trapped pollulants. (35) •Ideal for highways, industrial properties, gas stations, parking lots and sites where there is a potential for oil or chemical spills. • total suspended solids 80%. (35) • free oils 95%.. (35) •oil 98.5%.. (36) • inorganic sediment 80%.. (36) • organic .sediment 70%, (36) • total suspended solids 51.5%. (36) • oil and grease 43.2%. (36) •zinc 39.1%. (36) • total organic carbon 31.4%. (36) • chemical oxygen demand 26.0%.. (36) • lead 51.2%, (36) • chromium 40.7%.. (36) •copper21.5%. (36) • iron 52.7%. (36) •calcium 17,9%., (36) .$7,600 to $33,560 per unit (23) $ 1,000/year per slructure (23) Voriechs'^''^ - a major advancement in oil and grit separalor technology, Vortechs unils removes grit, contaminated sediments, heavy metals, and oily floating pollulants from surface runoff. It is a stormwater treatment system consisting of four structures to treat stormwater: a baffle wall, a grit chamber, an oil chamber and a flow control chamber. This system combines swirl-concentrator and flow-control technologies. (25) •most effective when separation of heavy particulate or flt)alable from wet weather runoff. (25) •suspended solids are nol effectively removed. (25) • requires frequenl inspections and maintenance is site-specific, (25) •suited for areas with limited land available (25) •good for "hotspots" such as gas stations (high concentrations). (25) •able to treal runoff flows from 1.6 cfs to 25 cfs. (25) • lolal suspended solids 84%. (37) $10,000 to .$40,000 per unit (not including installation) (23) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Managenient Practices (BMPs) Treatment Conlrol (Source) Limitations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capilal Cost (approximate) O&M Cosl (approximale) Multi-Chambered Treatinent Trains (MCTT) - consist of a three treatment mechanisms in three different chambers. 1) catch basin - screening process to remove large, grit sized material, 2) settling chamber - removing settleable solids and associated constituents with plate separators and sorbent pads, 3) media filter - uses a combination of sorption (layers of sand and peat covered by filter fabric) and ion exchange for the removal of soluble constituents. (21) •high maintenance - require renewing sorbent pads, removing sediment, replacing clogged media. (21) •treats storm water at critical source areas wilh limited space, (21) • toxicity 70%. to 100%. (24) • chemical oxygen demand 0%. to 100%. (24) • total suspended solids 70% to 90% (24) • approx. $375,000 to $900,000 (depending on drainage area) Media Fillration - these are usually two or three stage constructed treatment systems, composed ofa pretreatment sellling basin and a filter bed containing filter media (and a discharge chamber). (19) Sand Filler • Ihe filter is designed to hold and treat the first one half inch of runoff and the pollutant removal ability of the sand filter has been found to be very good. (3) •nol effective treating liquid or dissolved pollutants (19) /routine maintenance requirement. (19) /significant headloss. (19) /severe clogging potential. (19) •media may be replaced 3 to 5 years. (30) •climate conditions may limil filter's performance. (30) /high removal rates for sediment, BOD, and fecal coliform bacleria. (30) •can reduce groundwater contamination. (30) /requires less land, can be placed underground, (19) /suitable for individual developments. (1) /minimum deplh of 18 inches, (1) /tributary areas of up to 100 acres, (19) • fecal coliform 76%. (30) • BOD 70 %.. (30) • tolal suspended solids 70 %. (30) • lolal organic carbon 48%. (30) • total nilrogen 21%. (30) • lolal phosphorus 33'/f'. (30) • Lead 45%, (30) • zinc 45%, (30) • iron 45%, (30) •$18,500 (1 acre drainage area) (1997). (30) • $6,940 to $11,600 (less than 1 acre - casl in place) (proraled from 1997 prices using ENR index). (30) • sand filter vault $1,790 (proraled from 1997 prices using ENR index). (18) • sand filler basin $3,370 (proraled from 1997 prices using ENR index). (18) • 5 percenl of the initial construciion cost. (30) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Conlrol (Source) Limitations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capilal Cosl (approximate) O&M Cosl (approximate) Activated Carbon - has long been used in the chemical process industry and in hazardous waste cleanup as an effective melhod for removing trace organics from a liquid. (3) •heavy maintenance requirement. (19) •severe clogging potential, (19) •limited by the number of adsorption sites in the media, (3) •small net surface charge and ineffective at removing free hydrated metal ions, (3) •can be placed underground, (19) •less space required. (1) •effective in removing trace organics from liquid. (3) •suitable for individual developments. (1) •$l/lbor$3l5/cy (proraled from 1997 prices using ENR index). (18) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limilations Benefits Removal Efficiency Capilal Cosl O&M Cosl (approximate) (approximate) Composted Leaves - made from yard •heavy mainlenance •can be placed * lolal suspended solids • $1.30/cy * $2,400/year waste, primarily leaves, have been requirement. (19) underground. (19) 84%. (3),-155% to 72%. (prorated from (prorated from advertised to have a very high capacity •severe clogging potential. •no vegetation required. (22). 1997 prices using 1998 prices using for adsorbing heavy metals, oils, greases. (19) (19) • pelroleum hydrocarbons ENR index). ENR index). (22) nutrients and organic toxins due to the •in some cases, negative •smaller land area required. 87% (3), 4%. to 64%. (22). (18) humic content of the compost. (3) removal efficiencies with (3) • chemical oxygen demand * $27,000 to treal increased loads have been •suitable for individual 67% (3), 32% to 38%. (22). 1 cfs (proraled reported. (22) developments. (1) • lolal Phosphorus 40% (3) from 1998 prices & -320%. to 28%. (22). using ENR index). •TKN-133%. to 43%. (22) (22) • fecal coliform 6%. to. 80%, (22) • oil and grease 0% lo 44%. (22) • total petroleum hydrocarbons 33% lo 64%. -(22) • ammonia 41% to 64%. (22) •nilrate-I72%to7%. (22) • nitrite-233%. to 29%., (22) • chromium 0%. to 25%. (22) • copper 67% (3) & 4%. to 9% (22). • zinc 88% (3) & 46%. to 65% (22). • aluminum 87%. (3) • nickel 33% lo 50%. (22) •lead 0% lo 17%.. (22) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limitations Benefils Removal Efficiency Capital Cost (approximate) O&M Cost (approximate) Peat Moss • is partially decomposed organic material, excluding coal, that is formed from dead plant remains in water in the absence of air. The physical structure and chemical composiiion of peal is determined by the types of plants from which it is formed. Peat is physically and chemically complex and is highly organic. (3) •heavy maintenance requirement. (19) •severe clogging potential. (19) •can have a high hydraulic conductivity, (3) •can be placed underground. (19) •no vegetation required. (19) •smaller land area required. (3) •polar and has a high specific adsorption for dissolved solids. (3) •excellent nalural capaciiy for ion exchange. (3) •excellent substrate for microbial growth and assimilation of nutrients and organic wasle material, (3) $25 to$105/cy (proraled from 1997 prices using ENR Index), (18) Peat-Sand Filler - man made filtration device, has good grass cover on the top underlain by twelve to eighteen inches of peat. The peat layer is supported by a 4 inch layer of peat and sand mixture which supported by a 20 to 24 inch layer of fine to medium sand. Under the sand is gravel and the drainage pipe. (3) •heavy maintenance requirement. (19) •severe clogging potential (19) •can be placed underground. (19) •less space required (I) •suitable for individual developments. (1) •works best during growing season as grass cover can provide additional nutrient removal (3) • suspended Solids 90% (3) & 80% (20). • total phosphorus 70% (3) & 50% (22). • lotal nitrogen 50%. (3) & 35% (20). • BOD 90%. (3) • bacleria 90%. (3) • trace melals 80%., (3) • lead 60%. (20) • zinc 65%. (20) • COD 55%. (20) $6.50 per cubic fool of malerial (prorated from 1990 prices using ENR index). (20) 7 % of construciion cost. (20) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Managenient Practices (BMPs) Treatment Control (Source) Limilalions Benefils Removal Efficiency Capital Cost (approximate) O&M Cost (approximate) Water Quality Inlets - commonly known as oil/grit or oil/water separators. These devices typically consist of a series of chambers, a sedimentation chamber, an oil separation chamber and a discharge chamber. (31) U.seful life is usually 50 years. (20) •limiled drainage area (1 acre or less). (31) •high sedimenl loads can interfere ability to separate oil and grease. (31) •limited hydraulic and residual slorage. (31) •frequent mainlenance. (31) •residual may be considered too toxic for landfill disposal. (31) •recommended oil/water separators be used for spill control as their primary application. (42) •re-suspension of pollulants. (36) •small flow capacity. (31) •reduction of hydrocarbon contamination. (31) •effectively trap trash, debris, oil and grease (31) •ideal for small, highly impervious area. (31) •ideal for mainienancc stations. (36) • low land requirement. (20) • sediments 20%. to 40%. (31) • efficiency directly proportional to discharge rale, (31) • tolal suspended solids 15%. to ?i5%. (20) • lolal phosphorous 5%.. (20) • total nilrogen 5% to 20%, (20) • COD 5%., (20) • lead 15%. (20) • zinc 5%. (20) $5,900 to $18,900 for casl in place water qualily inlets (proraled from 1993 prices using ENR Index). (31) Catch Basin Inlet Devices - devices that are inserted into storm drain inlets to filter or absorb sediment, pollutants, and oil and grease (21) • not feasible for larger lhan 5 acres. (20) • high removal efficiency for large particles and debris for pretreatment. (20) • low land requirement. (20) • flexibility for retrofit of existing syslems. (20) Slream Guard Inserts - are sock-type inserts thai allow collected water to filter Ihrough the geoiexlile fabric. (21) •mainlenance includes removal of sedimenl and debris. (21) •configured lo remove sediment, constituents ad.sorbed to sedimenl, and oil and grease. (21) approx, $50,000 lo $100,000 per calch basin, (21) Fo.'isil Filler Inserts - are trough-type of inserts filled with granular amorphous alumina silicate media. Removes pollutants Ihrough .sorption. (21) •maintenance includes removal of sedimenl and debris, (21) •configured lo remove sedimenl, consliiiicnls adsorbed to sedimenl, and oil and grease. (21) approx, $50,000 lo $100,000 per calch basin, (21) 0A/?5™ - is a rubber lype of sorbent insert (34) * free oil and grease 88% to 91%. (39) • emulsified oil and grease 3%.. (.39) Nanofiber^" - is a polypropylene adsorbent lype of insert. (34) • free oil and grease 86%., 92%, 78%, 85%. (.39) Nationwide Examples of Treatment Control (Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Treatment Conlrol (Source) Limilalions Benefits Removal Efficiency Capilal Cost (approximate) O&M Cosl (approximate) Aluminum Silicate: Xsorb'^^ is made from a natural blend of silica minerals, which when expanded in the unique manufacturing process, makes a white granular material that absorbs spills instantly on contact. Sponge Rok^*^ - primarily sold as a soil bulking agent (34) • free oil and grease 88%, 91%, 94%., 89%. (.39) • emulsified oil and grease 0%. (39) Curb Inlel Drain Diaper Insert - sorbent type diaper placed at the catch basin insert. (40) $125 per unit. (40) Siorm Clenz Filter and Midii Cell Flow Through Filter - developed by Besl Management Technologies, the filters are used typically in maintenance facilities and staging areas were sediment and hydrocarbons are present. (41) • multi cell flow through filters - $786 to $1233 depending on pipe size (6" to 12") • storm clenz filters - $339 to $702 depending on filter insert size. (41) • flow through filter absorbents $24 to $44 depending on size. • slorm clenz absorbents $24 to $ 54 depending on size. (41) Some Examples ofTemporary Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs - (typically used during construction activity) Temporary Seeding of Stripped Areas - The establishment of a temporary vegetative cover on disturbed areas by seeding with rapidly growing plants. This provides temporary soil stabilization to areas which would remain bare for more than seven days where permanent cover is not necessary or appropriate. (42) •Temporary seeding is only viable when there is a sufficient window in lime for plants to grow and establish cover. During the establishment period the bare soil should be protected with mulch and/or plaslic covering. (42) •If sown on subsoil, growth may be poor unless heavily fertilized and limed Because over-fertilization can cause pollution of stormwater runoff, other practices such as mulching alone may be more appropriate. The potential for over-fertilizalion is an even worse problem in or near aquatic systems, (42) •Once seeded, areas cannot be used for heavy traffic. (42) •May require regular irrigation to flourish. Regular irrigation is not encouraged because of the expense and Ihe potential for erosion in areas that are not regularly inspected. The use of low mainlenance native species should be encouraged, and planting should be timed to minimize the need for irrigation. (42) •This is a relatively inexpensive form of erosion control but should only be used on sites awaiting permanent planling or grading. Those sites should have permanenl measures used, (42) •Vegeiation will nol only prevent erosion from occurring, bul will also trap sediment in runoff from other parts of Ihe sile. (42) •Temporary seeding offers fairly rapid proiection to exposed areas. (42) Mulching and Matt ing - Application of plant residues or other suitable inaterials to the soil surface. This provides immediate protection to exposed soils during the period of short construction delays, or over winter months ihrough the applicalion of planl residues, or other suitable materials, to exposed soil areas. Mulches also enhance plant establishment by conserving moisture and moderating soil temperatures. Mulch helps hold fertilizer, seed, and topsoil in place in the presence of wind, rain, and runoff and maintains moisture near the soil surface. (42) •Care must be taken to apply mulch at the specified thickness, and on steep slopes mulch must be supplemented wilh netting. (42) •Thick mulches can reduce the soil temperature, delaying seed germination. (42) •Mulching offers instant protection to exposed areas. (42) •Mulches conserve moisture and reduce the need for irrigation. (42) •Neither mulching nor matting require removal; seeds can grow ihrough them unlike plaslic coverings. (42) Plaslic Covering • The covering with plaslic sheeting of bare areas, which need immediate protection from erosion. This provides immediate temporary erosion protection to slopes and disturbed areas lhat cannot be covered by mulching, in particular during the specified seeding periods. Plaslic is also used to protect disturbed areas, which must be covered during short periods of inactivity to meet November 1 to March 31 cover requirements. Because of many disadvantages, plastic covering is the least preferred covering BMP. (42) •There can be problems with vandals and maintenance, (42) •The sheeting will result in rapid, 100 percent runoff, which may cause serious erosion problems and/or flooding at the base of slopes unless the runoff is properly intercepted and safely conveyed by a collecting drain. This is strictly a temporary measure, so permanent stabilization is still required, •The plastic may blow away if it is not adequately overlapped and anchored, (42) •Ultraviolet light can cause some types of plastic to become brittle and easily lorn. (42) •Plastic must be disposed of at a landfill; it is not easily degradable in the environment. (42) •Plaslic covering is a good method of protecting bare areas, which need immediate cover and for winter plantings. (42) •May be relalively quickly and easily placed, (42) Nationwide Examples of Source Control (Non-Structural) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Source Control (5) Benefit (5) Capital Cost (5) O&M Cost (5) Minimizing Effects from Highway Deicing Public Education (billing inserts, news releases, radio announcements, school programs) /Can reduce improper disposal of painis and chemicals. .$200,000/yr(1992) $257,000/yr(1992) Employee Training - teaches employees about storm water management, potential sources of contaminants, and BMPs. (43) /low cosl and easy lo implemeni slorm waler managemenl BMPs. (43) Litier Conlrol /Reduce potential clogging. /proper disposal of paper, plaslic and glass. .$20 per trash cans (1992) $16/acre/yr(1992) Recycling Program /reduction in potential clogging and harmful discharge. $200,000/yr $350,000 per 300,000 people "No Littering" Ordinance /prevents litter from enter slorm drain. $20,000 potential self supporting Identify and Prohibit Illegal or Illicit discharge to Storm Drain /halt hazardous and harmful discharge. $2/acre (assumes 1 system monitored every 5 sq. miles) $50/acre/yr (assumes TV inspection) Street Sweeping - Two types of street sweepers are available for removal of solids from highway surfaces. The commonly used design is a mechanical street cleaner that combines a rotating gutter broom with a large cylindrical broom to carry the material onto a conveyor belt and into a hopper. The vacuum assisted sweepers, found to potentially remove more fine particles from the impervious surface, are impracticable due to their slow speed in highway mainlenance operations. (42) /reduction in potential clogging storm drain malerial. /some oil and grease conlrol. N/A $0.83/acre/yr Sidewalk Cleaning /reduction of material entering storm drain. N/A $60/acre/yr Clean and Maintain Storm Drain Channels /prevent erosion in channel. /improve capacity by removing sedimentation. /remove debris toxic to wildlife. N/A $2 l/acre/yr Clean and Mainlain Storm Inlet and Calch Basins - Inlets, catch basins, and manholes are to be periodically inspected and cleaned out using a vacuum truck. (42) /removes sedimentation, /may prevent local flooding. N/A $2 l/acre/yr Snow and Ice Control Operations - Snow control operaiions consist of removing accumulated snow from the traveled way, shoulders, widened areas and public highway approaches within the right-of-way. (42) /removes snow/ice before it requires ice control operations. (42) Clean and Inspect Debris Basin /flood conlrol. /proper drainage and prevent flooding. N/A $2 l/acre/yr Table References 1. Camp Dresser & McKee, et al. 1993. CaUfornia Storm Water Best Management Handbook. Prepared for Storm Water Quality Task Force. 4-8:4-77.5-3:5-69. 2. Scheuler, Thomas R. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practice Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMP's. Prepared for Washington Metropolitan Water Resources Board. 2.11:2.14, 5.1:7.25. 3. Pitt, R. et al. 'The Use of Special Inlet Devices, Filter Media, and Filter Fabrics for the Treatment of Storm Water." 9pp. 4. Eisenberg. Olivieri & Associates. 1996. Guidance for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Storm Water Treatment Best Management Practices. Prepared for the Bay Area Stonm Water management Agencies Association. 5-6:5- 7. 5. JMM. 1992 A Study of Nationwide Costs to Implement Municipal Storm Water Best Management Practices. Prepared for the Water Resources Committee American Public Works Association Southern Califomia Chapter. 4-3:4-14. 6. Maine Department of Environmental Protection. Environmental management: A Guide for the Town Officials. 16,27. 7. Denver regional Council of Government. Nonpoint Source Demonstration Project. 7:14. 8. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990. Urban Targeting and BMP Selection. 25:31. 9. Strecker, Eric W. 1993. Assessment of Storm Drain Sources of Contaminants to Santa Monica Bay. 21:28, 32. 10. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1992. A Current Assessment of Urban Best management practices. 7:13, 23:29, 55:69, 105:109. 11. Unocal. "More Down to Earth Talk from Unocal - Best Management Practices." 12. The Fertilizer Institute. 1985. Symposium: "Plant Nutrients Use and the Environment." 13. The Fertilizer Institute. 1988. Best Management Practices. 14. 1994. Report of the Technical Advisory Committee for Plant Nutrient Management. 17:18. 15. Virainia State Waler Control Board Planning Bulletin 321. 1979. Best Management Practices Handbook: Urban. 111-1:111-9,111-45:111-48,111-63:111-69,111-163:111-229. 16. California Department of Transportation Environmental Program. 1997. Statewide Storm Water Management /'/fl/i.B-I4:B-53. C-l;C-22. 17. Callrans Compost Storm Water Filters (CFSs), Bonita Canyon & North Hollywood Maintenance Yard. 1998. Table 9-15. 18. Minton, Gary R. "Storm Water Treatment by Media Filter." Dec. 11-12, 1997. 19. Ventura Countywide Storm Water Quality Management Program. "Draft Land Development Guidelines." 20. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. 21. Caltrans. Storm Water Program. BMP Retrofit Pilot Studies. Technical Information. 1999. 22. Caltrans. Compost Storm Water Filters (CSFs), Bonita Canyon & North Hollywood Maintenance Yard 1997/1998 Wet Season. Post Sampling Summary Report. 1998. 23. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Infiltration Trench. EPA 832-F-99-019. 24. Flan, Daryl R. and Himat Solanki. "Removal Efficiencies of Stormwater Conlrol Structures." 25. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Hydrodynamic Separators. EPA 832-F-99-017. 26. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Storm Water Wetlands. EPA 832-F-99-025. 27. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Wet Detention Ponds. EPA 832-F-99-048. 28. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Infiltration Drainfields. EPA 832-F-99-018. 29. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Vegetated Swales. EPA 832-F-99-006. 30. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Sand Filters. EPA 832-F-99-007. 31. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Water Quality Inlets. EPA 832-F-99-029. 32. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Modular Treatment Systems. EPA 832-F-99-044. 33. Environmenlai Protection Agency. 1999. Bioretention. EPA 832-F-99-012. 34. Stenstrom, Michael K. and Sim-Lin Lau. "Oil and Grease Removal by Floating Sorbents in a CDS Device." University of California, Los Angeles, 1998. 35. Stormceptor Performance Testing Results, http://www.stormceptor.com/monitor.html Westmount Shopping Centre and Conventry University Testing Results. 36. Caltrans. Highwav Design Manual. Chapter 890 - Slorm Water Management. Table 892.3.1999. 37. Allen, Vaikko P. Results from the Vortechs Stormwater Treatment System Monitoring Program at Del-Orme Publishing Company, Yarmouth, Maine. 1998. 38. Environmental Protection Agency and American Society of Civil Engineers. National Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMP) Database. Version 1.0, June 1999. 39. Lau, Sim-Lin and Michael K. Strenslrom. "Catch Basin Inserts to Reduce Pollution from Stormwater." Comprehensive Stormwater and Aquatic Ecosystem Management Conference, Auckland, NZ, February 22-26, 1999. 40. Petro-Marine Co. Curb Inlet Drain Diaper Insert. Contact Ronald Isaacson. 28 Buckley Road, Marlboro, NJ 07746. 41. Best Management Technologies Brochure. Contact Rod Butler. 23 Balwin Ave, Crockett, CA 94525. 42. w^chinotnn <iiaip- Pppartmeni of Traasportation. Highwav Runoff Manual. Februarv 1995. 43. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Employee Training. EPA 832-F-99-010. 44. Caltrans. El Toro Detention Basin Storm Water Monitoring 1997/1998 Wet Season, Post Sampling Summary Report. 1998. Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency % BMPType Silc Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cosl Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (cis) Wel Season Nuniber or Slorms TSS Nilralc Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Tolal Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Los Angeles Area Bio Slrip • are broad surfaces wilh a full grass cover lhal allows slorm water to llow in a relatively ihin sheels. Alladena Mainl Slalion $218,000 1.7 1,0 1.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RECl, REC2 Infiliralion Trench -a trench is a depression used to treat small drainage areas by detaining slorm water lor shorl periods unlil ll pcrcolales lo the proundwaler lable. Alladcna Mainl Station (buill w/ bio strip) 1.7 1,0 1.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RECl, REC2 Bio Strip 1-60.VSR91 $193,000 0.5 1.0 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECl, REC2. SPWN. WILD, GWR Bio Swalc - are vegeialed conveyance channels (typically trapezoidal shaped) whecre slorm waler llow passes Ihrough lhe grass at a specilic deplh. I-60.VSR91 (buill w/ bio slrip) 0.2 1.0 0,1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECl, REC2, SPWN, WILD. GWR Bio Swale Cerrilos Maint Slalion $59,000 0.4 1.0 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECl, REC2, SPWN. WILD, GWR Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies ' Removal EITiciency % BMPType Sile Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cosl Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (cfs) Wei Season Number of Slorms TSS Nilrale Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Tolal Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Bio Swale \-5n-605 $97,000 0.7 1.0 0.3 N/A' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECl, REC2, SPWN, WILD, OWR Bio Swalc l-605/Del Amo Ave $124,000 0.7 1.0 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECl, REC2. SPWN, WILD. GWR Infiliralion Basin - a basin is a depression used 10 ireai larger drainage areas by detaining slorm water for shorl periods until il percolates lo the eroundwaler lable. 1-605/SR9I $273,000 4,2 1.0 0.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECl, REC2, SPWN, WILD, CWR Drain Inlel Inserl (Slream guard)(a) - sock lype inserts thai allow collecled water lo filter Ihrough the geotextile fabric. Las Flores Maint Slalion $88,000 0.2 1.0 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD V Drain Inlet Insert (fossil filler) - irough type inserts filled wilh granular amorphous alumina silicate media. Las Flores Maint Station (built w/Dll (a)) 0.8 1.0 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD Drain Inlel Inserl (slream guard)(a) Rosemead Mainl Station $65,000 0.3 1.0 O.I N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, OWR, RECl, REC2, WARM Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency 1 i- BMPType Silc Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cost Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (els) Wcl Season Nuinber of Slorms TSS Nilrale Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Toial Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Drain Inlel Inscri (fossil filler) Rosemead Mainl Station (buill w/ Dll (a)) 1,2 1.0 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, GWR, RECl, REC2, WARM Drain Inlel Inserl (stream guard)(a) Foolhill Maint Station $68,000 0.2 1,0 0.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, OWR. MUN. RECl, REC2, WARM Drain Inlel Inserl (fossil filter) Foolhill Mainl Slalion (buill w/ DII (a)) 1.6 1.0 0,4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, GWR, MUN. RECI, REC2, WARM Exiended Dcienlion Basin^ - is a depression lined wilh either vegclalcd soils or concrele. I-.5/1-605 Intersection $142,000 6.8 1.0 5.3 1998- 1999 2 • 80 10 -71 -84 10 23 N/A N/A -84 10 -81 •83 10 -92 RARE, RECl, REC2, SPWN, WILD, GWR lixlcndcd Dciciilitiii Basin* I-60.S/SR0I Inlerscclion $137,000 0,8 1.0 1.2 l'W8-3 -86 10 -58 -54 10 2 N/A N/A 15 10 222 -8 lo 339 RARE, RECI, REC2, SPWN. WILD, GWR Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal EITiciency "/ h BMPType Siie Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cosl Drainage Area (acres) Design Storm (in,) Design Peak Flow (cfs) Wet Season Numbcr of Slorms TSS Nilrale Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Tolal Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Media Filler* - designed removes fine sediment and particulate pollutants Ihrough two concrele lined vaults (sedimenlalion vault and filtering vault). Three filter types I) Austin - open lopped, 2) Delaware • closed lopped, 3) canister - uses pearlite/zeolite media. Eastern Reg. Maint Sta $341,000 1,5 1,0 1.9 1998- 1999 1 -34 112 N/A N/A 10 108 WILD, GWR, REC2. WARM Media Filter* Foolhill Mainl Slalion $479,000 1.8 I.O 3.0 1998- 1999 2 -42 to -34 285 10 289 N/A N/A •7 10 83 42 10 140 WILD, GWR, MUN, RECI, REC2, WARM Media Filler Terminatio n Park & Ride $450,000 2,8 1.0 3.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECI, REC2, SPWN, WILD, GWR Media Filler Paxlon Park& Ride .$331,000 1,3 1.0 1.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A GWR, REC2 r Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency % BMPType Site Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cosl Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (cfs) Wcl Season Numbcr of Slorms TSS Nilralc Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Total Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Mulli-Chambered Treatment Train - Three chamber mechanism 1) calch basin, which functions primarily as a screening process, 2) settling chamber, which removes setlleable solids with plate separalors and sorption pads, 3) media filter, which uses a combinaiion of sorption (ihrough layers of sand and peat covered by filler malerial) and ion exchange. Via Verde Park& Ride $375,000 1.0 1.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, WET, GWR. RECl, REC2, WARM Mulli-Chainbercd TrealmenI Train Metro Mainl Station $893,000 4.6 6.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A GWR, RECI, REC2, WARM Multi-Chambered Trealment Train Lakewood Park& Ride $456,000 1.9 1.0 2.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RARE, RECI, REC2, SPWN, WILD, OWR Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency % BMPType Silc Localion Approximale Construciion Co.sl Drainage Area (acres) Design Slonn (in.) Design Peak Flow (el's) Wcl Season Nuniber of Slorms TSS Nilralc Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Toial Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Continuous Dellection Separalor - a pre cast underground unit placed downslream of freeway drain inlets 10 caplure sedimenl and debris. The unit creates a vortex of waier thai allows waler to escape through screens, while contaminants are deficcted into a sump, and later removed. 1-210/Orcas Ave $62,000 l.l 1.0 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, GWR, RECI, REC2, WARM Continuous Defiection Separator l- 210/Filmor eSl $63,000 2.5 I.O 0,6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WILD, GWR, RECl, REC2, WARM Media Filler (compost)'' N. Hollywood Maint Sla $40,000 3.0 0.7 I.O 1997- 1998 5 -155 7 29 38' 28' 43 j- Mcdia Filter (compost) Bonita Canyon 1.7 0.8 6,0 1997- 1998 5 72 •172 -233 -1633 -320 -133 Exiended Delenlion Basin " El Toro 68 0.8 30,4 1997- 1998 5 88 15 61 22 57 40 RARE, RECI, REC2, SPWN, WILD, GWR San Diego Area Caltrans - Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency ? 'o BMPType Silc - Location Approximate Conslruclion Cost Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (cfs) Wel Season Number of , Slorms TSS Nilralc Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Toial Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Exiended Delenlion Basin 1- .5/Manchcsl er (casl) $369,000 4.8 1.3 4,6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RECI, REC2, BIOL, EST, WILD, RARE, MAR, . MIGR Exiendcd Detention Basin 1-.5/SR56 $166,000 5.3 1.3 5.7 1998- 1999 5 23 10 80 -IOO to 64 -65 to 68 •84 to 43 BIOL, - EST, MAR, MIGR, RARE, RECI. REC2, SHELL. WILD Exiended Delenlion Basin I-I.'i/SR78 $855,000 13.4 1.9 9.5 1998- 1999 4 45 to 72 -240 to 58 -299 10 -62 -101 to 19 AGR. COLD, MUN, RECI, REC2, WARM, WILD Infiliralion Basin l-5/La Cosia (west) $241,000 3.2 1,3 3.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A BIOL, EST, MAR, MIGR, RARE, RECI, REC2, WARM Caitrans • Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency % BMPType Sile Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cosl Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (cfs) Wet Season Number of Slorms TSS Nilrale Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Tolal Phosphorus TKN Beneficial Uses Wet Basin • a basin consisting ofa permanenl pool of walcr surrounded by a variety of wetland planl species. \-5/La Cosla (east) $694,000 4.2 1,3 2,2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RECI, REC2, BIOL, EST, WILD, RARE, MAR, MIOR Media Filler (pearoliie/zcoliie) Kearny Mesa Mainl Sta $340,000 I..'i 0.9 2,7 1998- 1999 .1 •27 10 20 5 10 29 • 115 10 46 5 10 32 REC2, WARM, WILD Media Filler (sand lype II) Escondido Mainl Slalion $451,000 0.8 1,0 2.2 1998- i<;<;9 3 Olo 66 I 1 10 70 •23 10 70 5610 84 MUN. AGR, RECI, REC2, WARM COLD, WILD Media Filter (sand lype 1) La Costa Park& Ride $242,000 2.8 0,9 2.3 1998- 1999 3 54 10 98 •98 to 4 •113 to 26 -28 10 38 BIOL, EST, AMR, MIOR, RARE, RECI, REC2, WARM Media Filler (sand iype 1) SR78/1-5 Park & Ride $231,000 0.8 1,0 2,7 1998- 1999 2 54 •313 -7 10 28 7 10 1 1 BIOL, MAR, RARE, RECI, REC2, WARM. WILD Bio Swalc SR78/Mclr ose Dr $156,000 2,4 1,2 6.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AOR, OMD, RECI, REC2, WARM, WILD Caltrans • Best Management Practices Pilot Studies Removal Efficiency 5. BMPType Silc Localion Approximale Conslruclion Cosl Drainage Area (acres) Design Slorm (in.) Design Peak Flow (d's) Wcl Season Numbcr of Storms TSS Nilralc Nilrile Dissolved Phosphorous Total PIiosplioiiis TKN Beneficial Uses Bio Swale 1-5/Palomar Airpori Rd $142,000 2.3 N/A 3.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A REC2, WARM, WILD Bio Slrip Carlsbad Mainl Sla (wesl) $196,000 0.7 N/A 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A REC2, WARM, WILD Infiliralion Trcnch/Slrip Carlsbad Mainl Sla (casl) (buill w/ bio Slrip) 1.7 1.3 2.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A REC2, WARM, WILD Caltrans. BMP Retrofit Pilot Studies: Technical Informaiion. 1999. This injormaiion is preliminary and will oe yen/tea inter. ^ ' Caltrans. Composl Slonn Waler Fillers (CSFs), Bonita Canyon & Norlh Hollywood Mainlenance Yard, Slorm Waler Moniloring. 1998.' Caltrans. El Toro Delenlion Basin. StormWater Monitoring. \99?,. j m e *• Dissolved Phosphorus higher lhan Tolal Phosphorus concenlrations, due to results from slorm 4. Without storin 4, efficiencies are -36% tor dissolved phosphorus and 7 tor lotal phosphorus. N/A - Not Available at this time, • Preliminary Information. APPENDIX 3 Mitigation Flowrate and Volume Calculation Tables TAWaterResources\1325-BiEssi\WalerQuality\WQP_Plan-Checkl\1325WQ-city0902.doc TABLES. R EQUIRED MITIGATION FLOWRATE AND VOLUME CALCULAT ONS Location AREA (Ac) Planning Areas C Qm (cfs) Vm (ft^) Vm (cy) CDS Device No. CDS Cost A 155.0 PA5, 7-9,12-14, 15b 0.65 20.2 337590 12503 PSW 70_70 $84,000 B 4.5 PAIId 0.55 0.5 9801 363 PMSU 20 15 $10,300 C 4.5 PAIIc 0.55 0.5 9801 363 PMSU 20_15 $10,300 D 12.0 PAIIb 0.55 1.3 26136 968 PMSU 20_25 $17,500 E 5.2 PAIIa 0.55 0.6 11326 419 PMSU 20_15 $10,300 F 148.0 PA3b, 4, 6,10,15a 0.80 23.7 322344 11939 PSW 70_70 $84,000 F-1 75.0 PA3b, 4, 2b, road 0.95 14.3 163350 6050 PSWC 56_68 $67,000 G 60.0 PA 6, 10, 15a 0.55 6.6 130680 4840 PSW 50_42 $45,000 G-1 24.5 PA-10 0.55 2.7 53361 1976 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 G-2 34.3 PA-6 0.55 3.8 74705 2767 PMSU 40_40 $36,000 H 2.3 PAI 0.95 0.4 5009 186 PMSU 20_15 $10,300 1 22.0 PAI, PA2 0.95 4.2 47916 1775 PMSU 40 40 $36,000 1-1 8.6 PA2a 0.95 1.6 18731 694 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 1-2 8.5 PA2b 0.95 1.6 18513 686 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 J 14.0 PA3a, road 0.95 2.7 30492 1129 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 K-1 15.0 PA3b 0.95 2.9 32670 1210 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 K-2 11.9 PA3b 0.95 2.3 25918 960 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 K-3 75.0 PA3b, PA4 0.95 14.3 163350 6050 PMSU 56-53 $55,000 K-4 5.2 PA2b 0.95 1.0 11326 419 PMSU 20_20 $12,500 L 40.0 PA4, road 0.95 7.6 87120 3227 PSW 50_42 $45,000 L-1 20.8 PA4a 0.95 4.0 45302 1678 PMSU 40 40 $36,000 L-2 17.7 PA4b 0.95 3.4 38551 1428 PMSU 40_40 $36,000 M 29.0 PA5 0.95 5.5 63162 2339 PMSU 40_40 $36,000 M-1 15.5 PA5a 0.95 2.9 33759 1250 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 M-2 10.6 PA5b 0.95 2.0 23087 855 PMSU 30_28 $21,800 N 10.1 PAI 4 0.70 1.4 21998 815 PMSU 20 25 $17,500 0 13.0 PAI 3 0.55 1.4 28314 1049 PMSU 20 25 $17,500 P 83.0 PA7, 8, 9 0.55 9.1 180774 6695 PSW 50 50 $48,000 Q 12.5 PAI 2b 0.55 1.4 27225 1008 PMSU 20_25 $17,500 1. Qm = A X C X I = Peak discharge to be mitigated (A 2. Vm = 0.6in x A = Volume of runoff to be mitigated =Non-open space area, C=runoff coefficient, I = 0.2 in/hr) COST SUIWMARY Combined ndustrial and R esidential Option Location CDS Unit Size Installation Cost Maintenance Cost 1 A PSW 70_70 $84,000 $2,000 1 Q PMSU 20_25 $17,500 $1,000 1 B-E PMSU20_15 $48,400 $4,000 1 F PSW 70_70 $84,000 $2,000 1 1 PMSU 40_40 $36,000 $1,000 1 J PMSU 30_28 $21,800 $1,000 1 Q PMSU 20_25 $17,500 $1,000 TOTAL $309,200 $12,000 $321,2001 APPENDIX 4 Post-Construction BMPs TAWater Resoun;es\l325-Biessi\WaterQuality\WQP_Plaii-Checkl\t325WQ-city0902.d(3c 4. SOURCE CONTROL BMPs INTRODUCnOH •! This chapter describes specific source control mmmmi^^i^mmmmmmamm Best Management Practices for use by municipalities to reduce pollutants in its storm water discharges. Chapter 2 provided a comprehensive review of a municipal Storm Water Management Program while Chapter 3 led you through the steps of identifying BMPs that become a part of the SWMP. Fact sheets are provided for each of the BMP categories shown in the box. Each fact sheet contains a cover sheet with: • A description of the BMP • Approach • Requirements - Cost considerations - Regulations - Administrative and Staffing - Equipment - Training • Public Education/Participation • Limitations The side bar presents infonnation on where this BMP apiHies, targeted constituents, and an indication of the level of effort and costs to implement For some BMPs, further information, including examines of effective programs and references, is provided in additional sheets. Source Control BMPs Public Education SCO Public Education/Participation Planning Management SCI Land Use Planning/Management Material Use Controls SCIO Houseiceeping Practices SCll Safer Altemative Products Material Exposure Controb SC20 Material Storage Control SC21 Vehicle Use Reduction Material Disposal and Recycling SC30 Storm Drain System Signs SC31 Household Hazardous Waste Collection SC32 Used Oil Recycling Spfll Prevention and Cleanup SC40 Vehicle Leak and Spill Cootrol SC41 Aboveground Tank Leak and Spill Control Ukgal Dumping Controb SCSO Illegal Dumping Conlrol Illicit Connection Controb SC60 Illicit Connection-Prevention SC6I Illicit Connection-Detection and Removal SC62 Leaking Sanitary Sewer Control Street/Storm Drain Maintenance SC70 Street Qeaning SC71 Catch Basin Qeaning SC72 Vegetatioa Controb SC73 Storm Drain Rushing SC74 Roadway/Bridge Maintenance SC7S Detention/Infiltration Device Maintenance SC76 Storm Channel/Creek Maintenance Monicipal Handbook 4-1 March, 1993 BMP: PUBUC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION YOU CAN PREVENT VHTER POLLUTION Graphic: North C«ntral Texas CXX3,1993 Program Elements New Development Residentiary ^^ommercial AcUvit^^ Industrial Acthfitha Municipal FacttHiea C^^IDIachar^> DESCRIPTION Public education^iarticipation, like an ordinance ot a piece of equipment, is not so much a best management practice as it is a method by which to implement BMPs. This fact sheet highlights tbe importance of integrating elements of public education and participation into a municipality's overall plan for storm water quality management Public education/ partic^tadon are vital components of many of the individual source coatrol BMPs that follow in this clUQ>ter. A public education and participation plan provides tbe municipality with a strategy for educating its employees, tbe public and businesses about tiie iiiq)ortance of protecting storm water fitm improperly used, stored, aiid diq>osed of pollutants. Municipal employees must be trained, especially those that wmk in dq>artments not directiy related to storm water but whose actions affect storm water. Residents must become aware tiiat a variety of hazanlous products are used in the heme and diat tiieir inqnoper use and disposal can pollute storm waier. Increased puUic awareness also facilitates public scrutiny of industrial and municipal activities and will likely increase puUic reporting of incidents. Businesses, particularly smaller ones tiiat may not be regulated by Federal, State, or local regulations, must be informed of ways to reduce their potential to pollute storm water. The speaSx public education/partidpation aspocXi of each of tiie source oootrols are highlighted in die individual fact sheets. Tbe focus of tiiis Cact sheet b more generaL and includes tbe overall objectives and apiHoaches for assuring pubtic involvement in local storm water management progtams. Accordingly, tiie organization of tius fact sbeet differs somewhat from thc other fact sheets in diis chapter. OBJECTIVES The public educatioa and particqiatioa plan should be based on four objectives: • Promote a clear identificatioa and understanding of the problem and tbe solutions, • Identify reqxxisible parties and efiforts to date, • Pnxnote oooimunity ownership of the problems aiid the solutions, aiid • Integrate public feedback into program implementation. APPROACH . Pattern a new program after tbe many established programs frtm municipalities around thc state and country. Whenever possible, integrate slorm water public education/partic^on into existing piopams from otiier depart- ments at your munic^ialily. Manicipal Handbook 4-2 March, 1993 BMP: PUBUC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION (CONTINUE) Implement public education^partidpation as a coordinated campaign in wbich each message b related to tbe last Present a clear and consistent message and image to the public regarding how they contribute to storm water pollution and what they can do to reduce it Expand definition of "pubUc" to include small businesses and construction site opaatoti who often possess tbe same linuted leveb of awareness of the problems, regulations, and solutions as die "general" public. As a result small businesses need the same level of technical assistance (education) and partidpation in tbe process as the "generaT* public. Utilize multi-media to reach the full range of audiences. Translate messages into tbe fcHeign languages of die community to reach tbe full spectrum of your pc^ulace and to avoid misinterpretation of messages. Create an awareness and identificatioo with the kxal watershed. Invcdve focus or advisory groups in the development of a public educatioii^)artidpation plan. Thb will create a much more effective plan as well as prcnnote ownership of tbe fdan by those involved. Use everyday language in all public pieces. Use outside reviewers to highlight and reduce the use of technical terminology, acronyms, and jargoa Make sure all statements have a sound, up-to-date technical basb. Do not contribute to the spread of mbinforma- tion. Break up complicated subjects into smaller more siiiq>le concepts. Present these concepb to the pubUc in a metered and organized way to avoid "overioading" and confusing die audience. Manicipal Handbook 4 - 3 Man*, 1993 CommeKial Activities Industrial ActivHiea BMP: HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES DESCRIPTION Pttmiote effident and safe housekeepmg practices (storage, use, and deanup) when handling potentially harmfiil inaterials such as fertilizers, pestiddes, cleaning solutions, paint products, auttHnotive producb, and swimnoing pool chemicab. Related infonnation b provided in BMPs SC 11, Safer Alternative Products; SC31, HouseboW Hazardous Waste Collection; SC32, Used Oil Recycling; and tiie Spill Prevention and Cleanup BMPs (SC40/SC41). For information on specific activities at municqial CaciUties, see Cb^ter 4, Industrial Handbook. APPROACH • Pattern a new program after tbe many established programs ftom munidpalities around the state and country. Integrate tiib best inanagement practice as much as possible with exbting programs at your munidpality. • Thb BMP has two key audieiKes, munic^ employees and the general pablic. • Implement tiiis BMP in conjunction widi SCI 1, Safer Alternative Products. • Fbr a quick reference on diqiosal altematives for vpea&c wastes, see Table 4.1, SCSO, IUegal Dunqnng Control. REQUIREMENTS • Cost Considerations - The primary cost b for staff time as noted bekiw. • Regulations • Thete are no regulatory requirements to tius BMP. Existing regulations already requiie municqialities to properiy store, use. and diqiose of bazardoos materiab. • Adminbnative / Staffing Staff to train munidpal eiiq>k>yees and to coordinate pablic education efforts. • Equipment There are no major equ^Huent requiremenb to dus BMP. • Training - Munknpal employees who handle potentially harmful materiab sbouki be trained in good housekeeping practices. Personnd who use pesticides must be trained in tiieir use. The Califomia Department of Pesticide Regulation Bcense pestidde dealers, certify pestidde i^licators and conduct on-site inqiectioas. PUBLIC EDUCATION / PARTICIPATION • Public awareness b a key to tiib BMP. LIMITATIONS • There ate no m^orlinutatioos to this best management practice. Program Elements New Development J4unhlpal Facilities^ Illegal Discltarges Targeted Constituents # Sediment # Nutrients O Heavy Uetala # Toxic Materials O Floatable Materials # Oxygen Demand- ing Subatances # Oil A Grease O Bacteria A Viruses m UkatytoHsve SlgrJlleentlmpmBt O Probabh Low or Unknown Impaet Implementation Requiraments O Capital Costa Q OAMCoata O Regulatory Q Staffing # Training O Admlniatratlva Wgli O l-ow SC10 Best^ inanagement PracticesN Municipal Handbook 4.14 March, 1993 BMP: SAFER ALTERNATIVE PRODUCTS 8£ JS c il tt\ •*- Program Elements New Development Residential^ Commercial Activities Industriai Activities C^uni^pal Facilit^y Illegal Dischsrges DESCRIPTION Promote die use of less harmfijl products. Altematives exist for most produa classes including fertilizers, pesticides, deaning solutions, and automotive and paint products. Related information b provided m SCIO, Housekeeping Practices; SC31, Household Hazardous Waste Collection; SC32, Used Oil Recycling; and tiie Spill Prevention and Cleanup BMPs (SC40/SC41). For information on specific activities at munic^ fiacilities, see Cb^ter 4, Industrial Handbook. APPROACH Pattem a new program after the many established programs from munidpalities around the state and country. Integrate thb best management pacAct as much as possible with exbting programs at your muiudpality. Thb BMP has two key audiences, municipal employees and the general public. Implement tius BMP in conjunction widi SCIO, Hoasekee|»ng Practices. Fbr a quick reference oo diq)Osal altematives for sptsaSc wastes, see Table 4.1, SCSO. Illegal Dunging Cootrol. REQUIREMENTS Cost Considerations The primary cost b fw staff time as noted below. Regulations This BMP has no regulatory requirements. Existing regulations already require mimidpalities to rediice tbe use of hazardous ni«»wrink Safer alternatives for nse by tbe general public are presented through education rather than required by regulation. Adminbtrative / Staffing Staff to educate mimirirai employees and to coordinale public education efforts. Equipment There are no m^or equqiment requirements to thb BMP. Training - Manicipal empioyees wbo handle potentially harmfiil materiab shoukl be trained in die use of safer alternatives. - Putcfaasing departments should be encouraged to procure less bazardoos materials. PUBLIC EDUCATION / PARTICIPATION Awareness b tihe key to tius BMP. It promotes a willingness to try alternatives and to modify (dd behaviors. LIMITATIONS Alternative products may not be availaUe, suitable, or effective m every case. Targeted Constituents 0 Sediment 0 Nutrients O Hesnry Metals % Toxic Materials O Fhatable Materials % Oxygen Demand- ing Subatances # Oil A Grease O Bacteria A Viruses SlgmUcsnt Impaet O PrebeUeLowor Unlmown Impaet Implementation Requiraments O Capital Costs Q OAM Costs O fleguiatory # Training O Adminiatra/Ove Higtt O Low soil Best^ Management PracticesN Monkipal Handbook 4-17 Ma^d^l993 BMP: VEHICIE USE REDUCTION AND REDUCE POLLUTION Graphic: h4ofthCwilral TaxasCCX3.1993 Program Elements ^0Mr Development, ^Residential^ Commeicial Activities Industriai Activities C:^nicipal Facil'itiM^ Illegal Discharges DESCRIPTION ^. . ^ ^. . ^ Reduce tiie dbcharge of poUutants to stonn water from vehicle use by bigbhgbtmg the stonn water impacts, promoting die benefits to storm water of alternative transportahon. and integrating initiatives widi existing or emerging regulations and programs. APPROACH ^ . . Integrate dib best management practice as mucb as possible wiUi effwts bemg devetoped and implemented by government agendes and businesses to reduce vehide use and improve air quality (e.g. Coanty Congestion Management Agency). Integra- tion wiU help avoid redundant and/or confUcting programs and be more effective and effident Establish trq) reduction programs at m^or enqitoyers (govemment large businesses). REQUIREMENTS Cost Considerations - TTic primary cost b for staff time as noted betow. Regulations - SuRKKt efforts to pass reasonable regulations at tiie State and local leveKGeneral Plans, land use plans, and zoning ordinances) aimed at reducing vehicks use and devek^ing transit-oriented communities. - Support devdopment of regional governing bodies to address tiie issue in a comprehensive way (multi-media, watershed-based ^iproach). Adminbtrative / Stafifing - Requires at least one staff person to track, review, and comment 00 emerging legblation and programs. Equiixnent - There are no major equqjmcntrequiremenb for tiib BMP. Training Thete are no training requirements for thb BMP.^ PUBLIC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION . Make die assodation in ttie public's mind tiiat air poUutioo = water poUadoo. Educate die public and municipal employees about die water quality benefits of reduced vehicle use. Hc^> cooniinate pubUc partidpation in ride sharing programs. LIMTTATIO^^ may Bmit tiie levd of cooperation and integration between departments m?^5tonative transportation b highly dependent on its convenience and relative cost argeted Constituents O Sediment O Nutrients # Heavy Metala # ToxicMaterials O Floatable Materia O Oxygen Demand- ing Substancaa # OilAGreaae O Bacteria A Viruna # UkalytoHave StgrMeant Impaet O PnbableLewer Unknown Impaet Implementatton Requiraments O Coital Costa O OAMCoata Q Regulatory O Staffing Q Training Q Adminiatrative Higli O Low SC21 Best^ IManagement PracticesN Municipal Handbook 4-21 March, 1993 BMP: STORM DRAIN SYSTEM SIGNS Program Eiam«nt3 Residential ZComimrc'ial Activitiej^ mduatrial Acth/Hies _ "^UunicipMl FacilH^^ DESCRIPTION Slenciling of the stotm drain system (inkts, caich basins, dianncls. and credcs) with prohibitive language/graphic icons discourages thc iliegai dumping of unwanted marcxials. APPROACH Create a volunteer work force to stendl storm drain inkts, and use mumcipal staff to erect signs near drainage chaimels and creeks. For a quick reference oo disposal alternatives for specific wastes, see Tabk 4.1. SCSO, nicgal Dumping Control. REQUIREMENTS • Cost CoQsidcralioas Volunteer work force serves »lower program cost Stenciling kits require procureme« of duraWc/disposaWc items. - Need foe sloragcAnaintcnancc of stenciling kits requires pianning. Program can aid in tbe cataloging of the storm drain system. Regulations - Develop and enftxcc affordinanccthat requires inkts. caicb basins, channels, and creeks to be fined with anti-dumping, poUutioa prcventioo signs. • Administrative/StafOng - Primary staff demand is for program senate provide markctmg and training. Oogoing/foUow-up staff time is minimal because of vdunieer services. . Minimmn 2 pcTSOos aic fcquiicd foT high traffic areas, commercial and industrial zoocs. Staff requirement at program headquarters for emcrgcodcs, questions, etc. • Equipinent Storm drain stenciling kits. • Training - Training sessions of approximately 10-15 minutes will cover stenciling proce- dures, induding how to stencit record keeping, problem drain notatioQ, etc - Pnjper healdi and safety protocol (buddy system, traffic health concerns, etc.). PUBUC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION • Promote volunteer servk» (individual and business) through tadio/tefcvisioa and rnail out campaigns. • PubUc reporting of improper waste disposal by a HOTLINE iHmbcrstcncikd ooto thc stotm drain inkL Targ«tad Constttuorrts 9 Sedimaot 9 Nutrients O Heavy Metals 9 Toxh Matariala # Float^le Materials # Oxygen Demamt- ing Sulfstances # Oil A Grease O Bacteria i Viruses 9 UkwtytoHav* Signilicant Unpmct O Probable Low or Unknown Impaet lmpl«nMntation R«quir«nMnts O Capital Cost* Q OiM Costs O Regulatory O Staffing Q Training O Administrative High O Low SCSO Best^ Management Practlc8S^ Municipal Handbook 4-23 March, 1993 J BMP: HOUSEHOU) HAZARDOUS WASTE COUECTION i COLLECTION CENTER Program Elements |toy Development^ ^^IdentiaT Commerciai AcUvHiea Induatrial Acthfltiea Municipai FacllHlea Cji^l Diachar^y DESCRIPTION Household hazardous wastes (HHW) are defined as waste materiab which arc typically found in bomes or similar sources, which exhibit characteristics sucb as: corrosivity, ignitabiUty, reactivity, and/or toxidty, or are listed as hazardous materiab by die EPA. APPROACH • CoUection Method Options Permanent colledion centers. Periodic coUecticm centers. • MobUe collection centers. Curbside collection. Combination of above systems. • Frequency - Depoids on coUection program hni^emented (e.g., mondily, quarteriy, etc). • Fbr a quick refoeoce 00 diqwsal alternatives for ^jedfic wastes, see Table 4.1, SCSO, DIegal Dunqiiiig Contrcd. REQUIREMENTS • Cost Consklerations - Botii coUection and disposal can be very expensive. Trained operators required. Laboratory and deiecttoo equipment necessary. - Extensive record keeping reqoired induding daes, types, and qoantities. - Many communities have deferred HHW programs due to high cost - Ultimate cost dqieodsoo type of program chosen and avaUaWedi^wsal costs. • Rpgolatioos - Federal Regulations (RCRA, SARA, CERCLA) and State regulations regarding the diqiosai of liazardoos waste. . Local ordinances to discoarageinqvoper disposaL - Muntoqialitiesreqairtd to have a HHW elemem widiin tiiek miegrated management plan. • Admimstrative/SlafBng . Minimum b 6 persons. Targeted Constituents O Sediment O Nutrienta • HeavyMetaia • Toxk Materiala O Ftoatable Mat»iala O Oxygen Demand- ing Sul>stancea • OIIAGr O Bacteria A Viruaea • UkalytaHave SIgnHlcant knpeet o Probabia Low or Unknown Impact Implementation Requiraments Q Capital Coata Q OAMCoata O RegulaHory O Staffing Q Training Q Aibnlnlatratlve HIgli O Low SC31 Best^ Management PracticesN Munkipal Handbook 4-28 March, 1993 BMP: HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION (Continue) PUBLIC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION Educate public about hazaidous materiab in die home and consequences of improper use and/or disposal. Identify and promote use of non-hazardous altematives. Identify proper storage and di^iosal metiiods. PrcMnote HHW reuse and recycBng. PrtHnote participation m tocal HHW collection programs. Posters, handouts, and educational efforts aimed at tocal schoob. PubBc service announcements (PSAs) on tocal television, radio, and newspapers. Utility biU inserts. Video or sBde presentations at conununity organizations. Speakers bureau rnt^ up of tocal environmental professionab and recycUng experts. Emergencies related to HHW sbouki be repotted to 911. LIMITATIONS . ^ • Limited to areas widi convenient access to hazardous waste disposal facffities due to cost associated witii tran • Cost • Signiftoant liabUity issues mvtdved witb tiie coUection, handBng, and diqiosal of HHW. Munkipal Handbook 4-29 March, 1993 BMP: USED OIL RECYCUNG RECYCLE ^4 OIL HERE'^ lllllill' ll Graphic: North Car<r«IT««« COG. 1993 Program Elements New Development ^^uidenUa^ Commercial ActivHiea Induatrial Activities Municipal Facilitiea C^h^l Diacha^M^ DESCRIPTION Used oU recycBng b a responsible alternative to inqm^ di^wsal practices sucb as dumping oil in die sanitary sewer or storm dram system, ^^ying oU to roads for dust contnd, placing usedoU and fUters in tiie trash for disposal to kmdfiU, or sinq>ly pouring used oU on tbe ground. APPROACH • Set up a mtmicipal oollectioo center funded by the city. • Contract out the collection and hauling of used oil to a private hauler/recycler. • Utilize die automobile service industry for coUection of used dL • Fbr a quick reference on disposal altematives for qiedfic wastes, see Table 4.1, SCSO, DIegal Dunqiing Control. REQUIREMENTS • Cost Considerations A coUection fadBty or curbside coUection may result in significant costs CtMiiinerdal locations (automobile service stations, quick oU change centers, etc.) as odlection points eliminate hauling and recycling costs for dty - Staffmg costs are ininimal when using ctxnmerdal tocattons as coUectton points; staffing costs are higher if dty performs coUection services. • Regulattons - CaUfomia OU Recyding Enhancement Act requires die CaUfomia Integrated Waste Manageinent Board to pay recydii^ incentive not less than $.04/quart to curbside coUection programs and certified used ofl coUection centers after AprU 1,1993. - Cooqily witii aUqiplicabie State and Federal regulations reganBng storage, handling, and trm^iort of petroleum products. • MunknpaBties reqaired to have a used oU recycBng element witiun tiieir inte- grated waste management plan. • Adminbtrative/SlafBng - Staffing lequinoients are mininial if odlectioa/recyt^gb contracted out to a used (nl hauler/recyder or required at commercial tocations. PUBLIC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION • Cieate procedures for coflection such as; coUection locatioDS and schedule, accqiiablc cootatneis, and fnaTimiitn amounts accepted. • Promote pablk partidpation tiirough die use of posters, handouts, brochures, and annoancements in tiie print and broadcast media; provkle Bst of commerdal recyclers. • Devetop hKxntive programs for conamercial tocations and used oil haulcrs/rccyclers. Targeted Constituents O Sediment O Nutrienta • HeavyMetaia O Toxk: Materiala O Ftoatable Materiala O Oxygen Demand- ing Sultatancea # OilAGreaae O Bacteria A Viruses # UkafvtoHav Significant Impact O ProbabhLower Unknown Impaet implementation Requiraments O Capital Coata Q OAMCoata O Ragulatory O Staffing Q Training O Adminiatrative HIgfi O Low 8032 Best^ Managment PracticesN Monkipal Handbook 4-35 March, 1993 BMP: USED OIL RECYCUNG (Continue) LIMITATIONS • AvailabiUty of reliaUe, Ucensed used oU haulers and recyclers. • Requires continuous puUic education. • Used oil/hazardous waste separation requirement under Federal law. • Meeting zoning, fire, and healtii and safety laws associated widi coUecting used oU. Monkipal Handbook 4-36 March, 1993 BMP: ILLEGAL DUMPING CONTROL NO Graphic: North Central Texas CCX3,1993 Program Elements New Development Reakfentiai Commercial Activities Induatrial Acthfltiea Munkipal FacilHiea CjjhplDitcha^^ DESCRIPTION baplaaeat measures to detect correct and enfwce against iUegal dumping of pdlutants on streeb and into die storm dram system and creeks. Tbe remedial focus of tiib best manage- ment practice contrasts witii tiie preventative focus of die Material Dbposal and RecycUng BMPs (SC30-SC32) in tius chillier. Dkgal discbarges tiirough physical connections are addressed in BMPs SC60-SC62 (DUdt Connection Controb). APPROACH • PubBc awareness b die key to diis BMP. Train munidpal enq>toyees and educate tbe general pubBc to recognize and report iUegal dumping. • Deputizemnnidpalstaff witii die audiority to write environmental tickets. • EstabUsh system for tracking inddents. • Use the quick reference on dbposal altematives at tiie end of thb fact sbeet (Table 4.1) to train municqial emi^oyees and to educate businesses, contractors, and tbe general pubUc in proper and consistent methods for disposaL REQUIREMENTS Cost Considerations The primary cost b for staff time as noted betow. Tbe cost depends on bow aggressively a program b inqilemented. Municqial o()st for cotitaimnent and diqxKal may be borne by die disdiarger. Regulatioas - Municqnl codes should mdude sections prohibiting die disdiarge of soil, debris, refiise, hazardous wastes, and otber poUutanb into die stoon drain system. Adminbtrative / Staffing - Reqaires teduucal staff to detea and investigate Ulegal dumpmg viokitions, and to coordinate puUic education. Legal staff b required to pursue proseaitton of significant cases. Equipment A database fof defining and tracking the matininide of the problem. Training . Training (tf technical staff in identifying and documenting Ulegal dumping inddents b re()uired. PUBUC EDUCATION / PARTICIPATION Awareness of tiie issue acconqiUshes two tiungs. Therecdverof ti«nifonnatioo understands tiie bsue aod tiierefoce b unBkdy to cause a problem, plus tiieir aware- ness often he^ detect otiier violations. LIMITATIONS The eUmination of Ukgal dunqiing b de^wndent oo die avaflabdity, convenknce, and cost of altemative means of diqiosaL Targeted Constituents # Sediment O Nutrienta # HeavyMetaia # Toxk Materiala % Ftoatable Materiala % Oxygen Demand- ing Subatancn # OilAGreaae # Bacteria A Viruaea • UkalytoHave SIgnmeant Hnpaet O Probable Lower Unknown Impact implementation Requiraments O Capital Costa Q OAMCoata O Ragulatory O Staffing # Training O AdnUniatraava High O Low SCSO Best Manai Practices Monkipal Handbook 4-44 March, 1993 BMP: STREET CLEANING DESCRIPTION Reduce die dbcbarges of poUutants to storm water firom street surfaces by conductmg street cleaning on a regular basb. APPROACH Prioritize cleaning to use die most sophbticated sweepers, at die highest frequency, and in areas widi die highest pollutant loading. Restria street paiking prior to and during sweeping. Inaease sweeping frequency just befwe die rainy season. Proper maintenance and operation of sweepers greatiy increases tiieir efficiency. Keep accurate operatton logs to trade program. Reduce tiie number of paiked vehkles using regulatton. REQUIREMENTS Cost Consklerations - A street cleaning program requires a significant capital and O&M budget Sweeper capital costs range from $65,000 to $120,000, witii a usefiU Ufe of about 4 years. A careful review of deaning efficiency should be peiformed before increased cleaning b proposed. Regulations - Densdy populated areas or beavUy used streets may require paridng regulations to dear streets for cleaning. Adminbtrative / Staffing Sweqier operators, maintenance, supervisory, and administrative personnd are required. - TraffK cootrol officers may be required to enforce parking resmctions. Skillful design of deaning routes b required for program to bc productive. - Anangements must bc made for di^iosal of coUected wastes. Eqiupment - Mechanical broom sweepers, vacuum sweepers, oanbination sweepers, and street flushers. Training - Operators must be trained in proper sweqwr operation. PUBLIC EDUCATION / PARTICIPATION . The general pubUc sbouki be educated about die need to obey paridng restrictions and use Utter receptacks to reduce stred Utter. LIMITATIONS ^ • No currentiy availabte cooventiooal sweeper b effective at removmg od and grease. . Mechanical sweepers are not effective at removing finer sediments. Program Elements New Development Reakfentiai Commercial Activitiea Industrial Activities Targeted Constituents # Sediment # Nutrients # HeavyMetaia O Toxk Materiala # Ftoat^le Materiala # Oxygen Demand- ing Subatancaa O OilAGreaae O Bacteria A Viruses • UkalytoHave siipJUeant knpeet O ProbabhLower Unknown Impact Implementation Requiraments # Capital Coats # OAM Costa Q Regulatory # Staffing O Training Q Adminlatrathfm HIgli O Low SC70 Best' IManagement PracticesN Munkipal Handbook 4-64 March, 1993 BMP: CATCH BASIN CLEANING Program Elements New Development Reskiential Commercial Activities Industrial Activities ^Munkipal Facilities (^Tjtogai Diachargea DESCRIPTION Maintain cateh basins and storm water inlets on a regular basb to remove poUutants, reduce high pollutant coocentrations during die first flush of storms, prevent dogging of tbe downstream conveyance system, and restore die catch basins' sediment trapping capadty. A catch basin is dbtinguisfaed from a stonn water inlet by having at its base a sediment sump designed to catch and retain sediments below tbe overfiow point Thb faa sbeet focuses on die deaning of accumulated sediments from catch basins. APPROACH • Aggressively enforce anu-Uttering and illegal dumping ordinances. • Catch basins should be deaned regtilarly to reduce tbe possibiUty of sediment and poUutant toading from tbe flushing effea of storm water inftow. • Prioritize maintenance to clean cateh basins and iidets in areas witb die highest poUut- ant loading. • Keep accurate opeiation logs to track program. REQUIREMENTS • Cost Considerations An aggressive cateh basin cleaiung program could require a significant capital and O&M budget A careftd smdy of cleaning effectiveness should be undertaken before increased cleaning b implemented • Regulations There are no regulaU3ry requiiements for dus BMP. Munidpal codes should include secttons prohibiting tite disposal of soU, debris, refiise, hazardous waste, and otiier poUutants into dte storm drain system, and prohibiting Uttering. • Adminbtrative / Staffing Two-person teams may be required to dean cateh basins with vactor trucks. Arrangements must be mack for proper disposal of coUected wastes. • Equipment Except for smaU commuiuties with relativdy few cateh basins tbat may be deaned maniiaUy, most municqiaUties wiU ret^uire mechanical deaners such as eductors, vacuums, or bucicet loaders. • Training Crews must be trained in proper maintenance, including record keeping and disposaL PUBLIC EDUCATION / PARTICIPATION • Educate contractors (cement taasoory, painting) and utility emptoyees (telephone, cabte, gas and electric) about proper waste (soBd and Uquid) di^x^. LIMITATIONS • There are no major linutations to thb best manageinent practice. Targeted Constituents 0 Sediment O Nutrients # HeavyMetaia O Toxiic Materiais # Ftoatable Materials % Oxygen Demand- ing Subatancaa # OilAGreaae O Bacteria A Viruses • UkalytoHave Signiticant hnpaet O Prob^hUtwor Unknown Impact implementation Requiraments • Capital Coata • OAM Costs o Regulatory • Staffing Q Training Q Adnuniatrafive H/gft O l-ow SC71 Best' IManagement PracticesN Munkipal Handbook 4-67 March, 1993 BMP: VEGETATION CONTROLS Graphic: North Cwitrai Texas COG. 1983 Program Elements C^ew Developme^^ C^eakfentisl^ Commercial Activitiea Jndustrial Activities^ Munkipal Facilities Illegal Dischargee DESCRIPTION Vegetation control typicaUy involves a combination of chemical (herbidde) appUcation and mechanical mediods. Mechanical vegetation control metiiods are discussed berein, vegetation cootrol by heriikides are addressed in BMP SCIO (rf diis chapter. Mechanical vegetation contiol includes leaving existing vegetation, cutting tess fiequcntiy, handcutting, planting tow maintenance vegetation, coUecting and properiy dbposing of cUppings and cuttings, and educating employees and die pubtic APPROACH Areas (rf Concern Steep slopes. Vegetated drainage channeb. - Creeks. Areas adjacent to cateh basins. Detention/retention basins. • Areas Exempt - Flat or relatively flat vegetated areas. Areas not adjacent to drainage structures. - Areas screened from drainage stnictures by vegetation. REQUIREMENTS • Cost Consklerations - Possibte min(w cost impaa of upgrading certain mowing equipment for bagging. - Possibte cost impact for additiooal laborers involved in band cutting and picking up cuppings. • Regulations Ixtaii municipal anti-dumping ordinances. • Adminboative/Slafling > - Possibte need for additiooal labor to band cut and pick up dippings from areas wbere i«f*-tuwiirai catting aod coUectioo b not practicable. - Tram landsc^ contractors and munkipal en^loyces re. vegetation controb. PUBLIC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION • Promote volunteer servkes to create Utter coUectioo groups (such as Adopt-a-Stieam). • Educate pubUc reganling anti-dumping practices (foW into exbting boasebokl hazardous waste program), and impaa of erostoo fr(»n new constraction. LIMITATIONS • Does not address problems associated widi berbkkte use. Targeted Constituents % Sediment # Nutrients O HeavyMetaia O Toxk Materiala # Ftoat^ie Materiala 9 Oxygen Demand- ing Subatancaa O OilAGreaae O Bacteria A Viruses # UkalyteHave Signltfcant Impact O Probabh Lower Unknown Impaet Impiementation Requirements O Capital Coata O OAMCoata O Ragulatory O Staffing # Training O Admlniatrafiva Higli O Low SC72 Best' Management PracticesN Munkipal Handbook 4-69 March, 1993 BMP: DETENTION/INRLTRATION DEVICE MAINTENANCE DESCRIPTION Proper maintenance and siltation removal b required on both a itxitine and corrective basb to promote effeaive storm water poUutant removal effidencies for wet/dry detention pond and infUtration devices. APPROACH • Remove sUt after suffident accumulation. • Peri(xlicaUy dean accumulated sediment and sUt out of pre-treatment inlets. • Infiitiation device sUt removal should occur when die infiltration rate drops below 1/2 inch per hour. • Removal of accumulated paper, trash, and debrb shoukl occur every six (6) mondis or as needed to prevent dogging of control devkes. • Vegetation growth should not be altowed to exceed 18 inches in hdght • Mow die slopes periodicaUy and check for dogging, erosioo and tree growdi on dw embankment • Conective maintenance may require more frequent attention (as required). REQUIREMENTS • Cost Consklerations Frequent sediment removal can be labor intensive and costiy. However, properiy designed poods altow for easy removal of acxumulated sediments at relatively minor cost Cost of waste material for transport and di^xisal. • Actaninbtrative/Staffing Twopeison teams may be needed for routine sUt removal and excavation. Program manager needed to oadc maintenance activities and provide fkU assistance. Staff team needed for corrective maintenance activities. • Regulattons Pennits may bc required by Corps or Engineers, Fish & Wddlife or State Fbh & Game. • Equi{xnent • Vehicles, dump trucks, bulldozers, trackfaoes, excavators, mowers, weed trim- mers, sickles, i»?acbftys shovels, rakes, and personal protective equipment (PPE), (goggles, dust masks, coveraUs, boots, gloves). • Training Appropriate excavation and maintenance procedures. Pioper waste di^iosal procedures. Program Elements New Development Resklential Commercial Activities Induatrial Activitiea C^^nkipai Facilitin^ Illegal Discharges Targeted Constituents # Sediment O Nutrients # HeavyMetaia O Toxk Materials O Ftoatable Materiais # Oxygen Demand- ing Sulistancas O OilAGreaae % Bacteria A Viruaea # UkalytoHave SlgruHeant knpeet O PtobMa Lower Unknown Impact implementation Requirements Q Capital Coata Q OAMCoata O Regulatory Q Staffing O Training O Adminiatrative Higfi O Low SC75 Best' IMana^menf PracticesN Munkipal Handlmok 4-78 March, 1993 BMP: DETENTION/INFILTRATION DEVICE MAINTENANCE (Continue) PUBLIC EDUCATION/PARTICIPATION Create a pubBc education campaign to explain die function of wet/dry detention pond/infilttation devices and dieir operational requiremenb for proper effectiveness Encourage die pubtic to repon wet/dry detention pondAnfiltration devices neetting maintenance LIMFIATIONS Wet detentioa pond dredging can produce slurried waste dial often excee(b die requirements of many landfills Frequent sediment removal is labor and cost intensive Munkipal Handbook 4-79 March, 1993 5. TREATMEm CONTROL BMPs INTRODUCTION This chapter describes specific treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) for removing pollutants in storm water from urbanized areas. Each fact sheet contains a cover sheet with: A descripdon of die BMP Suitable Applications Selection Criteria Llmitadons Design and Sizing Considerations Construcnon/Inspccdon Considerations Maintenance Requirements Cost Consideradons The side bar presents information on which BMP considerations, targeted constituents, and an indication of the level of effort and costs to impIemenL Tbe remainder of tbe faa sheet provides funher information on some or all of ttiese topics, and provides references for additional guidelines. BMP faa sheets are provi<kd for each of the following controls: Treatment ContrvK BMPs TCI Infiltratioo TC2 Wet Poods TC3 Constructed Wetiands TC4 Biofilters TCS Extended I>etcntioa Basins TC6 Media Filtratioo TC7 Oil/Water Separators and Water Quality Inlets TCS Multipte Systems GENERAL PRINCIPLES There are severaJ ger^raJ principles that are applicable to all treatment control BMPs. Priority shouid \x given to source control: Source control BMPs are generally (but not always) less expensive than treatment control BMPs. Also, treatment control BMPs will not remove all pollutants and their removal efficiency is difficult to predia given the Umited understanding of the relationship between facility design criteria and perfonnance. Recognize the unique California climate: With few exceptions most storm water treatment experience has been in "wet" states where vegetation can be maintained without irrigatioa In contrast, Califomia's climate b semi-arid with the exception of the north coast. The treatment control BMPs diat require vegetative cover may not bc practical for many areas of Califomia unless irrigation is provided Also, design criteria have emerged from research of fadlities located in cUmates where the rainfall season b coincictent with thc growth of vegctatioiL However, in CaUfomia, die wet season does not occur during the primary growth season. Caution must bc used in using design criteria that have been developed elsewhere in die nation. Design Storm Size: It is commonly thought by diosc unfamiliar widi urban runoff quality management that design stonns for sizing water quality controls should be thc same as those used for die design of drainage facilities. This is not true. Thc damage done to a receiving water by die pollutant wash-off of a 25 year storm (commonly used to size a drainage system) is inconsequential to the Munictpal Handbook 5 - 1 March, 1993 Additional Information — Media nitration Catch Basin Grate Sediment Trap Filter Trays Bypass Outflow Source: McPherson (1992) FIGURE 6D. CATCH BASIN FILTER TC6 Muiicipal Handbook 5-56 March, 1993 BMP: OIUWATER SEPARATORS AND WATER QUALITY INLETS FLOW Consid^fations Soils Slope Wafer AvailabilitY Aesthetics Hydraulic Head Environmental Side Effects DESCRIPTION Oil/water separators arc designed to remove ooc specific group of contaminants: petroleum compounds and grease. However, separators will also remove floatable debris and settle- able solids. Two general types of oilAwUcr separators arc used: conventiooal gravity separalor and die coalescing plate interceptor (CP!)- EXPERIENCrE IN CALIFORNU Oil/water separators arc in use throughout Califoniia at industrial sites. Oil^vaicr separa- tors arc used at all bulk petroleum storage and refinery facilities. A few jurisdictioas require new commercial developmenls to install separators under certain situatioos that are CDviroomcntally sensitive. SELECTION CRTIERIA Applicable to situations where tbe coocentratioo of oU and grease related compounds will be abocnnally high and source cootrol cannot provide effective cootrol. Tbe general types of businesses where diis situatioa is likely arc truck, car. and equipment maintenance aod washing businesses, as well as a business tbat performs mainlenance oo its own equipoicnt and vehicies. Public facilities where separators may bc required inclutte marine pods, airfiekls, fleet vefaicie maintenance and washing, facilities, and mass transit paik-and-ride lots. Cooventiooal separators are capable of removing oil droplets with diameteis equal to or greater than ISO microas. A CPI separator should bc used if smaller droplets most be removed LIMITATIONS • Littte data oo oil characteristics in storm water leads to coosiderable uncertainty about perfonnance • Air quality permit (cooditioaal autborizatioo) pcrmit-by-iute from DTSC may be required DESIGN AND SIZING CONSIDERATIONS Sizing related to anticipated influent oil cooccntratioa. water temperature and velocity, and tbe effluent goaL To maintain rcasooable separator size, it shoukl be designed to bypass ftows in excess of fint flush. CONSTRUCTION/INSPECnON CONSIDERATIONS Nooe identified MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS Clean fiequcntiy of accinnulatcd oil, grease, and floating debris. COST CONSIDERATIONS Coalescing plate material is cosdy but requires less space than the coovcntioaal separator. Targeted Constituents O Sediment O Nutrients O Heavy Metals O Toxic Materials O FhattJjIe Materials O Oxygen Demand- ing Sutfstances 0 Oil t Grease O Bacleria t Virusea 9 UkafytoHava Significant knpact O ProbabhLower Unknown Impact impleinen tation Requirements Q CapHal Cost* Q OiM Coata O Maintenance O Training High O Low I TC7 Best^ Managemenf Practfces> Municipal Handbook 5 - 59 March, 1993 APPENDIX 5 CDS UNIT INFORMATION T:\Water Resources\1325-Bressi\Waler Quality\WQP_Pliin-Chcckl\1325WQ-cily0902.doc is the most effective system for the sustainable removai and gntion of suspended solids aiid floatables from storm water. Deflective Seoaratlon (Cn9i\ tprhnn\nnu ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^m^f •m^--'','-^:::s/s^^^^^KKMKKlmliKmt^a iTr-aTiini-o ^.-...-r-..,-.. CDS retention The Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) technology utilizes a non-blocking, non-mechanical screening process to remove pollutants from storm water flow and combined sewer overflows (CSO). CDS units capture fine sands and solids and are capable of removing more than 80% of annual total suspended solids from storm water. Additionally, CDS units remove 100% of floatables and 100% of all particles in the storm water which are equal to or greater than one-half the size of the screen opening. Studies show the units remove 93% of all particles which are one-third the size of the screen opening, and 53% of all particles one-fifth the size of the screen opening. A conventional oil baffle within a CDS unit effectively controls oil and grease in storm water. With the addition of sorbents, the permanent capture efficiency of oil and grease is increased to 80-90%. The combination of a conventional oil baffle and particulate sorbents is a unique feature of a CDS storm water treatment unit. Once pollutants are captured in a CDS unit, they cannot escape. PROVEN TECHNOLOGY The CDS technology has been proven by extensive independent laboratory studies and hundreds of actual installations in the United States and Australia. Copies of these performance reports are available at our web site, or by contacting our offices. APPROVED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE The CDS technology has achieved approval as a Best Management Practice (BMP) by municipalities and state DOTs throughout the United States. The USEPA lists CDS as a structural BMP. 1) Raw storm water enters the CDS unit's diversion chamber. Manufacture Malerial Model Designation Approximate Impervious Catchment Area (Acres) Treatment Capacity Q water quality Screen Diameter/tteighl (tt) Sump Capacity (yd') Deplh Below Pipe Invert (tt) Foot Print Diameler (tt) Manufacture Malerial Model Designation Approximate Impervious Catchment Area (Acres) cfs MGD Screen Diameter/tteighl (tt) Sump Capacity (yd') Deplh Below Pipe Invert (tt) Foot Print Diameler (tt) Precast Concrele PMSU 20_15 1-4 0.7 0.5 2.0/1.5 1.1 5.1 6.0 Precast Concrele PMSU 20_20 2-6 1.1 0.7 2.0/2.0 1.1 5.7 6.0 Precast Concrele PMSU 20_25 3-9 1.6 1.0 2.0/2.5 1.1 6.2 6.0 Precast Concrele PSW & PMSU 30_28 6-17 3.0 1.9 3.0/2.8 1.4-2.1 6.9 6.0-6.5 Precast Concrele PSWC & PMSU 40_40 12-33 6.0 3.9 4.0/4.0 1.9 9.7 8.3 Precast Concrele PSWC 56_40 & 50_40 & 50 50 18-61 9&11 5.8 & 7.1 5.6 / 4.0 & 5.0/5.0 1.9 9.7 9.5 Precast Concrele PSWC 56_53 28-78 14 9 5.6/5.3 1.9 10.8 9.5 Precast Concrele PSWC 56_68 38-106 19 12 5.6/6.8 1.9 12.5 9.5 Precast Concrele PSWC 56_78 & PSW 70 70 50-144 25&26 16& 17 5.6 / 7.8 & 7.0/7.0 1.9-3.9 13.5 9.5 Precast Concrele PSW100_60 60-167 30 19 10.0/6.0 6.9-14.1 12.0 17.5 Precast Concrele PSW100_80 100-278 50 32 10.0/8.0 6.9-14.1 14.0 17.5 Precast Concrele PSW 10OJ 00 128-356 64 41 10.0/10.0 6.9-14.1 16.0 17.5 Fiberglass Premanufac tured fiberglass units a e reinforced concrete u re available to treat small flows of 1 to 3 c s Casl-ln-Place Concrete COS cast-in-plac tured fiberglass units a e reinforced concrete u nits can be designed to treat flows up to 300 cfs , 2) A diversion weir guides the flow into the unit's separation chamber where a vortex is formed. (3) The vortex spins all floatables and most suspended solids to the center of the separation chamber. (4) The separation screen will not become blocked due to the washing vortex, but it will allow liquid to move through. ©The screened liquid which passes through the process quickly moves toward the outlet. flows will not wash put a the captured pollutants. The cleaned water then moves freely to the receiving water. (8)The cleaned storm water moves out of the separation chamber and into the diversion chambe' downstream from the diversion weir. 7)The sump can be equipped with an optional basket to facilitate emptying the unit, or simply clean with a vactor or clam bucket. ©Suspended solids gently settle into a sump where they remain until they are removed. EXTREMELY LOW MAINTENANCE CDS units are self-operating. They have no moving parts and they are entirely gravity driven, requiring only the hydraulic energy available within the storm vvater flow. The screens and supporting hardware are stainless steel and will resist corrosion. CDS units have very large sump capacities relative to their design flows, and only need to be cleaned out with a standard vactor truck approximately one to four times per year This operation eliminates workers' exposure to the materials captured in the units. KEY FEATURES and BENEFITS Uses • Storm Water Treatment • Combined Sewer Overflow Treatment • Dry Weather Flow Diversion Applications • Capture and retention of suspended solids, sand, floatables, oil and grease, and other gross pollutants from: • Commercial Service and Parking Areas • Industrial Areas • Public Property and Parkland • Residential Streets and Private Property • Pretreatment for: • Wetlands, Ponds, and Swales • Media and Sand Filters • Oil/Water Separators Efficient • Highly effective (up to 90%) in capturing and retaining sediment as small as one- third the screen aperture. • Captures and retains 100% of floatables and all other material greater than the screen aperture. Cost-Effective • CDS provides the lowest cost per CFS (Cubic Feet per Second) processed when compared to other structural BMPs. Large Flow Range • From 0.7 to 300 CFS. Non-Blocking and Non-Mechanical • Sfandard CDS units have no moving parts. They require no power or supporting infrastructure, and they will not clog. Unobtrusive and Easy lo Install • CDS units are compact and are installed below ground, so space requirements are modest. They are ideal for new construc- tion as well as retrofit or redevelopment. Low-Cost, Safe and Easy Pollutant Removal • Maintenance is easy using standard vactor, clam, or basket equipment which mini- mizes maintenance personnel exposure to hazardous material. Improves Discharge Water Quality • Removes floatables and suspended solids from storm water runoff. • Removes free oil and grease with the use of an oil baffle, and/or sorbents. CDS Unit Operation and Maintenance Inspection of its structural integrity and its screen for damage. Animal and vector control. Periodic sediment removal to optimize performance. Scheduled trash, debris and sediment removal to prevent obstruction. Removal of graffiti. Preventive maintenance of BMP equipment and structures. Erosion and structural maintenance. Inspection Frequency The facility will be inspected and inspection visits will be completely documented: • Once a month at a minimum. • After every large storm (after every storm monitored or those storms with more than 0.50 inch of precipitation.) • On a weekly basis during extended periods of wet weather. Aesthetic and Functional Maintenance Aesthetic maintenance is important for public acceptance of storm water facilities. Functional maintenance is important for performance and safety reasons. Both forms of maintenance will be combined into an overall Storm Water Management System Maintenance. Aesthetic Maintenance The following activities will be included in the aesthetic maintenance program: Graffiti Removal. Graffiti will be removed in a timely manner to improve the Appearance of a CDS and to discourage additional graffiti or other acts of vandalism. Functional maintenance has two components: Preventive maintenance Corrective maintenance Preventive Maintenance Preventive maintenance activities to be instituted at a CDS are: • Trash and debris removal. Trash and debris accumulation, as part of the operation and maintenance program at a CDS, will be monitor once a month during dry and wet season and after every large storm event. Trash and debris will be removed from the CDS unit annually (at end of wet season), or when material is at 85% of CDS' sump capacity, or when the floating debris is 12 inches deep, whichever occurs first. TAWater Resourcss\l325-Bres5i\Water Quality\WQP_Pl.-m-CheckI\1325WQ-city0902.doc the dry season, InS elery^^arge 1^7^^^^^^ ^ during removed from the CDS annually (at ln7 / be IS at 85% of CDS' sump capac ty o 'wl r''.'''^ "'^^^ "^^^erial deep, whichever occurs fS o^ZZ ^^^"^ '"^hes will comply with appl^abl local ^^^^^^^^^ '"P°^^^ °f ^^^tment • Mechanical and electronic cln: o °' ^'"^'"'^ requirements, will be performed on fenn;rrr" !\^^S^ ^'^heduled maintenance Corrective Maintenance Corrective mairrterrance acti^Ls inctde '™ °" '''' °fCDS. disposed. Temporary airangemel w^, T f '"^ P^°P^^^y ^ sediments until a pei^anent" ent i! ^"^^^ ^^^^^^ Structural repairs. Once deemed necessarv' • components of a CDS and its iniJf "^j^^^'^y' repairs to structural within 30 wo*„g div-d alsTe^T f p=aSc,r- -^^^^^^^^^ c„„dit.„„3 (,.e., include erosion cont™ bLkeHn™ °T These Designers or contractors wSe coSted' Z Z" the solution is not evident "^""'"''"^ "> ''ddress erosion problems if ^u"Z.^' " ''""^ -"hin 30 days to mamtain the fsrrovriraiT •ft"^ (ffllrngandcompa ng) I™ VLhiT'"' will be consulted' ,.g Sing ^mS .TiT''' '^^'''-'^ the threat of rab.es in some Z m»v '""'""'"^ "''^"^^^^ destroyed rather than rZa ed Z'BZTT "'"^'^ abatement will begin Otherwise ph,,, P^rfotmance is affected, September ^tfterwtse, abatement will be peiformed annually in General facility maintenance. In addition m u corrective maintenance, general collect "^""^^"ts of overall facility and Its a;sLiateloronem ^^^^^^^ ^'^^ being done to one component otherT coirective maintenance is maintenance is needed ' ' '^^"^P^^ents will be inspected to see i? Maintenanrp Fr^gD^^p.^. The maintenance indicator document inclnHeH h • , • maintenance activities to be implemenLd att'^^^^^^^ ''''' ^'^^^^"^^ °f ^Sbris^nd^edime^^ SeSssidS^iirr;,^^^^^^^^^^^ federal waste control programs. ' "^o^fty . State, and Hazardous Wa.stp Suspected hazardous wastes win Hazardous wastes generard on^ ^^ n^,^^^^^^ 'fr"^ ^'^^^^^^ ^P^--- applicable local, state, and federaT e^uhtTons ^^^^^^^^^^^ considered a hazardous waste if It elrefr^^^ solid or liquid waste is Article 11. ^"""^^^^^ tbe cntena hst in the CCR, Title 22, TAWater Resources\l325-Bressi\WaterQuali,yWOP Pln„ vua,,,y,wgp_pian-Check IM 325 WQ-ciiy0902.doc