Leading Stormwater Management Programs In Pennsylvania
Leading Stormwater Management Programs in PennsylvaniaTable of ContentsPg. 1 of 3ABSTRACTpg. 1INTRODUCTIONpg. 1A. LEGAL AUTHORITYpg. 3B. SOURCE IDENTIFICATIONpg. 3C. DISCHARGE CHARACTERIZATIONpg. 31. City of Philadelphia Biomonitoring2. City of Allentown Outfall MonitoringD. MANAGEMENT PROGRAMSpg. 3pg. 4pg. 41. Land Managementa) Parks Systemspg. 7b) Flood Management and Flood Controlsc) Documentation of Existing Conditions2. Operation of Public Streetsa) Deicing and Salt Storage Practicesb) Street Cleaning Practicesc) Inlet Cleaning Practicespg. 83. Floatables Controlpg. 94. Pesticides, Herbicides, and Fertilizerpg. 95. Used Oil and Toxic Material Disposalpg. 96. Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Collectionpg. 107. Spill Prevention and Responsepg. 101
8. On-lot Sewage Disposal (Septic) Systemspg. 119. Animal Waste and Code Enforcementpg. 11Leading Stormwater Management Programs in PennsylvaniaTable of ContentsPg. 2 of 310. Sanitary Infiltration Controlspg. 1111. Detection and Abatement of Illicit Connections/Improper Disposalpg. 1112. Monitor and Control Industrial Activitiesa) Municipal Industrial Permitsb) Inspections, Monitoring, and Enforcementpg. 1213. Monitor and Control Stormwater from Construction Activitiesa) Inspections, Monitoring, and Enforcementb) Public Educationc) City of Philadelphia – SEPA Partnershippg. 13pg. 1414. Watershed Technology Centerpg. 1415. Watershed Monitoringpg. 1416. Capital Projectsa)Streambank Restorationb)Environmental Landscape Designpg. 14pg. 15PUBLIC EDUCATION and PARTICIPATIONpg. 15E. WATERSHED PARTNERSHIPSpg. 16F. ASSESSMENTS OF CONTROLS1. Pollution Reduction Estimates2. Ground Water Impactspg. 16pg. 17G. FISCAL RESOURCESpg. 172
H. CONCLUSIONSpg. 18ABOUT THE AUTHORSpg. 19REFERENCESpg. 203
Leading Stormwater ManagementPrograms in PennsylvaniaLeading Stormwater Management Programs in PennsylvaniaByLaureen Boles, City of PhiladelphiaDaniel Koplish, City of Allentown4
Table of ContentsPg. 3 of 3FIGURESFigure 1:Five Year Biological Assessment Cycling Programpg. 5APPENDICESAppendix A: Allentown BMP Annual Review, Status Summary, and ManualAppendix B: Allentown BMP Implementation Example- Street Sweeping BMP, Residuals, and CostsAppendix C: Philadelphia Public Education and ParticipationAppendix D: Philadelphia Watershed PartnershipsLeading Stormwater Management Programs in PennsylvaniaBy: Laureen Boles1, Dan Koplish2ABSTRACTIn Pennsylvania the 1990 Stormwater Regulation resulted in the issuance of stormwaterpermits to the City of Philadelphia and to the City of Allentown. Although the permitconditions vary, particularly in the monitoring requirements, there is one common thread- emphasis on best management practices or BMPs. The following is a discussion of thesimilarities and differences between these Phase I stormwater permits, and thesignificance to Phase II stormwater communities.INTRODUCTIONStormwater Management Program goals are to control point and non-point sourcedischarges, reduce polluted runoff, and enhance the health of the region's waterways.Watershed planning and management objectives are employed to define causes ofimpairment in watersheds, implement BMPs where feasible, develop integrated waterquality monitoring programs, coordinate mapping and GIS programs, coordinatewatershed education activities, and evaluate BMP effectiveness.12City of PhiladelphiaCity of Allentown5
In 1990 the Stormwater Regulation was an unfunded mandate and therefore Phase I citiesfound creative ways to comply with the regulation, some compiled existing programs todevelop a stormwater management program, while others created stormwater utilitieswith user fees, and others still implemented some combination of existing programs, newstormwater practices, and utilities. Stormwater management programs were developedwith achievable standards in mind.The stormwater permit application was a two-year process that included Part I:identification of existing policies, practices, and procedures and Part II: systemcharacterization and development of a comprehensive program. The analysis of datacollected in Part 1 and Part 2 of the permit application process, and the data collected inthe monitoring programs, help form a baseline for the impact of pollution reductionefforts. The higlights of the Phase I stormwater mangement programs are outlined below.Phase I cities continue to improve upon methodologies to assess the effectiveness of theStormwater Management Programs. Philadelphia and Allentown continue to supportexisting pollution prevention programs, and develop new programs as necessary tomaximize pollution reduction. Because the Phase I cities enjoy the benefit of programexperience, comprehensive watershed management strategies have become the center ofprogram improvements.6
Phase I Stormwater Management Program Highlights Legal AuthorityFor Philadelphia and Allentown, legal authority to operate and maintain StormwaterManagement Programs included various ordinances, regulations, and policies enforcedby City departments, many of them in place prior to the EPA Stormwater Regulation.Phase II communities will find that similar legal authority already exists within theirjurisdictions. System CharacterizationConsiderable resources were employed to characterize the MS4s. Field surveys wereconducted to identify stormwater discharge points and other potential sources ofpollution. Although Geographic Information System (GIS) was in place in the Phase Icities, additional data layers were developed. Water Quality MonitoringBiomonitoring and outfall discharge monitoring are techniques that Philadelphia andAllentown employ to characterize water quality. Although there are no monitoringrequirements in the Phase II Stormwater Regulations, existing monitoring programs maybe included in a Phase II permit application as a BMP. Public Education and ParticipationMost of the public outreach efforts are local, though attempts are being made tocoordinate efforts with nationally recognized programs. Phase II communities will findthat many of these programs are easily adaptable to local situations. The emphasis ofprogram assessments is placed on the level of effort undertaken to reduce pollution, theimplementation of BMPs versus end-of-pipe treatment technologies. Program FundingEPA estimated the stormwater permit application costs to vary from 120,000 to 3million. Per capita costs were estimated to vary from 0.30 to 5. The cost estimatesreflect the level of effort undertaken in the application process, varying from an exerciseto compile existing programs versus procurement of consulting services in thedevelopment of new programs.3The time, effort, and money required to maintain Phase I stormwater programs aremeaningless if improvements are not made on a watershed basis. As the Phase I cities are3Public Works Magazine – January 1993 Survey of Phase I Municipalities7
highly developed, regional implementation of BMPs are necessary in order to yieldwatershed benefits.8
A.LEGAL AUTHORITYLegal AuthorityPhase I cities maintain adequate legalauthority to enforce StormwaterManagement Programs, in accordancewith the National Pollutant DischargeEliminationSystem(NPDES)Regulations, 40 Code of FederalRegulations (CFR) 122.26(D)(2)(i).Legal authority to operate and maintainStormwater Management Programsincludesvariousordinances,regulations, and policies enforced byCity departments, many of them inplace prior to the EPA StormwaterRegulation. Phase II communities mayfind that the required legal authoritymay already exist.Clean Water Act, Amendments of 1987 (CWA)Pennsylvania Clean Streams LawStormwater Act 167Sewage Facilities Act 537Municipal Building CodeMunicipal Fire CodeMunicipal Plumbing CodeMunicipal Storm Water OrdinanceLand Development and Zoning CodesSARA Title III: Community Right to KnowThe City of Allentown has also entered into an Interagency Agreement with 4 adjacentcommunities that addresses stormwater discharged into the permitted municipal stormsewer system (MS4). The agreement establishes policies and procedures, allowabledischarges, and penalties, and has language of reciprocal responsibilities among theparties whose discharges cross political boundaries.GIS Layers StormwaterOutfallsB.SOURCE IDENTIFICATION Stormwater Inlets SewershedsConsiderable resources were employed Watershedsto characterize the MS4s. Field surveys Land Useswere conducted to identify stormwater Population Densitydischarge points and other potential Projected Growthsources of pollution. Geographic Runoff CoefficientsInformation System (GIS) data layers Structural Controlswere developed that are now used to Landfillsproduce maps for special interest Public Landprojects. Industries ParcelsC.DISCHARGE CHARACTERIZATION1.City of Philadelphia BiomonitoringPhiladelphia WatershedsPhiladelphiaisimplementingabiomonitoring program in the alitiesto 9 Darby - Cobbs CreekDelaware RiverTacony - Frankford CreekPoquessing CreekPennypack CreekSchuylkill RiverWissahickon Creek
characterize the health of streams. Thebioassessment approach is currently theprincipaltoolfordeterminingimpairment in aquatic ecosystems. Acomplete description of the programand standard operating procedures aredescribed in the City’s “Five-YearBiomonitoring Cycling Program”.The results of biological assessments and habitat assessments are compared to a referencesite on an unimpaired stream. Chemical data trends are generated and analyzed by theWater Department’s Bureau of Laboratory Services. The aggregation of biological,physical and chemical information is utilized as a comprehensive tool to measure thedegree of impairment and the major contributing stressors, within each assessment siteand at the watershed scale. In addition, algal assessments are conducted to identifyspatial and temporal changes in periphyton (i.e., attached algae) communities as well asnutrient uptake analyses.The bioassessments will serve as a baseline for future analyses and will also be integratedinto a larger-scale report on the aquatic integrity of the watersheds. Bioassessments mustbe employed in conjunction with appropriate chemical/physical measures, land usecharacterizations, and source information, however to establish linkages betweenstressors and applicable restoration and remediation techniques.2.City of Allentown Outfall MonitoringAllentown conducts outfall monitoring, at 5representativestormwater outfalls, for 3representative storm events, in an effort tocharacterize stormwater discharges from the city’s230 stormwater outfalls. Representative outfallsportray the typical land use, size, population, andrunoff coefficient of sewersheds in the city.Allentown Watersheds Little Lehigh CreekJordan CreekTrout CreekCedar CreekLittle Cedar CreekRepresentative storms are typical of the region; they are greater or equal to 3 hours induration, greater or equal to 0.1 inch of rainfall, preceded by a minimum of 72 hours dryweather, and more than one month apart from the last representative storm. Dischargeflowrates are recorded and the stormwater samples are analyzed for 239 parameters.Annual and seasonal pollutant loads and event mean concentrations are calculated foreach of the 230 outfalls.Although there are no monitoring requirements in the Phase II Stormwater Regulations,some municipalities have implemented monitoring programs utilizing professional andvolunteer services. Existing monitoring programs may be included in a Phase II permitapplication as a BMP.10
D.MANAGEMENT PROGRAMSStormwater Management Program goals are to control point and non-point sourcedischarges, reduce polluted runoff, and enhance the health of the region's waterways.Watershed planning and management objectives are employed to define causes ofimpairment in watersheds, implement BMPs where feasible, develop integrated waterquality monitoring programs, coordinate mapping and GIS programs, coordinatewatershed education activities, and evaluate BMP effectiveness.11
12
Recognizing that reduction in stormwater pollution loads is largely dependent uponpublic acceptance of sustainable behaviors, and the consistent and proper application ofstormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs), assessments of BMPs are made with anemphasis on public education and participation.Philadelphia and Allentown continue to support existing pollution prevention programs,and develop new programs as necessary to maximize pollution reduction. The BMPsinitially identified by these Phase I cities were existing programs that had the potential topositively impact stormwater quality. Both cities acknowledged the value of theseprograms. Allentown noted in their permit application that “programs to reduce andcontrol pollutant discharges into stormwater [had already been initiated]. Consequently,reductions already achieved [are] part of the baseline. This must be appreciated by anysubsequent review.”Most of the best management practices are good housekeeping practices that help toprohibit pollution from being deposited in the watershed area. These include litterordinances, hazardous waste collection programs, illegal dumping policies andenforcement, bulk refuse disposal practices, and recycling programs as described below.The BMPs are provided here to identify the breadth of practices implemented by thePhase I cities, but also to get Phase II communities thinking about their existingstormwater related policies and practices, and other practices that may be implementedeasily.City of Allentown BMP ManualThe City of Allentown produces an annualBMP Manual, documenting current BMPsimplemented by the City. The manual is aliving document, as the BMPs are reviewedon an annual basis to examine the benefits ofcontinued implementation. For a successfulStormwater Management Program BMPsmust be re-evaluated to assess effectiveness.Consideration must also be given to theaddition of BMPs or the deletion of nonproductive BMPs.Allentown also drafts a BMP ReviewSummary that identifies personnel, financial,and implementation issues, as well asrecommendations and comments. Thepractice of an annual review is one of theBMPs implemented by the city. Allentownalso produces an annual BMP Status13 BMP descriptionGoverning regulationsPollution prevention benefitsPollution Removal AssessmentDocumentation of BMP AssessmentAuthorization RequirementsResponsible PartiesLegal RecourseCity of Allentown BMP Status Summary§§§BMP StatusBMP OrientationG Pollution PreventionG Pollutant RemovalG Productivity AssessmentAvailability of Annual Assessment
Summary. These documents are included asAttachment A.14
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES1.Land Managementa.Parks Systems:Philadelphia and Allentown have regional and statewide reputations for splendid parksystems. Unlike many communities both cities got involved in land management,particularly land acquisition, adjacent to waterways as a means of watershed andstormwater management. Along the streams are walking, biking, jogging, and horseriding paths. The parks are extensively used for family outings, picnicking, sightseeing,kayaking, and photographing.As important as the term “eyeballs” is to the internet, eyeballs is equally important tostream networks. All the aforementioned recreational activities continually bringwatchful eyes to the streams. Citizens report oil spills, discolorations, and similarstormwater pollution - to which the cities respond. In addition some creeks in the Phase Icities are raw drinking water supplies, and therefore monitoring of the waterways havebeen routine business for Philadelphia and Allentown. The result is that watercourses inPhiladelphia and Allentown have been watchfully protected for many years.b.Flood Management and Flood Controls:Minimum flood control measures insure that structures, built within the floodplain, arelocated a minimum of one foot above the 100 year flood elevation. However when anarea experiences a major storm event, watercourses may experience flooding. Duringthese floods both natural and manmade debris may make its way to into waterways.When the flood waters subside, any residual debris deposits should be cleaned up.Plans for proposed stormwater structural controls are reviewed as a part of newdevelopment plan review process, such that storm water pollution issues are addressedprior to site development. In Allentown the basins are publicly-owned by regulation, andinspected every three years. In Philadelphia the basins are privately-owned; typicallyownership is transferred from the developer to a community association upon projectcompletion.c.Documentation of Existing ConditionsThe City of Philadelphia recently completedreconnaissance of structural controls withthe use of global positioning and digitalphotography equipment. The data will beused to evaluate the effectiveness of thestructural controls for flood controlpurposes, as well as the potential for15
improved water quality control.Structural Controls Site Reference16
2.Operation and Maintenance of Public Roadwaysa.Deicing and Salt Storage PracticesPhase I cities monitor deicing practices in ncymanagement procedures. Municipal saltstorage areas have been covered to preventprecipitation from coming in contact withthe salt.During the course of snow removal anddisposal, refuse and other waste productscan be picked up in the snow removalprocess – thus creating a need to clean snowstorage areas once the snow has melted.Good housekeeping practices like these arelow-cost and easily maintained.b.Deicing SnowmeltStreet Cleaning PracticesLitter reduction programs are developed, implemented and promoted in an effort toincrease public awareness of litter as a source of stormwater pollution. The PhiladelphiaMore Beautiful Committee (PMBC) organizes volunteers for 15,000 block clean-upsbetween April and September. These activities are coordinated through 6,000 volunteerblock captains. Allentown has an Anti-Litter and Garbage Collection Ordinance, withcurbside collection twice per week. Many public receptacles are distributed throughoutCenter City and emptied routinely. In addition, Allentown collects and analyzesrepresentative samples from the debris to ascertain a pollutant profile. Based upon theresults of the analysis and removal volumes, the pollutant loads removed are determinedon a watershed basis.Phase II communities may have similar programs in place. To assist in documentation ofthis BMP and others, implementation of Allentown’s street sweeping program is used asan example. The details are included as Attachment B.c.Inlet Cleaning PracticesLitter reduction programs are developed, implemented, and promoted, in an effort to keepinlets free from litter and improve the quality of stormwater discharges. The City ofPhiladelphia maintains all City-owned storm sewer inlets, including scheduled cleaningof the trapped inlet catch basins. The trapped catch basins are designed to capture solidsthat otherwise would discharge to the receiving waterbody. Philadelphia cleans an annual17
average of 90,000 inlets, collecting an average 13,000 tons of debris. The frequency ofinlet cleaning is location dependent; some inlets are cleaned annually and othersquarterly. Allentown also collects and analyzes representative samples from the inletdebris to ascertain a pollutant profile. Based upon the results of the analysis and removalvolumes, the pollutant loads removed are determined on a watershed basis.As a part of an infrastructure replacement program the City of Allentown has beenreplacing older style inlets, such as the ‘E’ Series inlets with larger open throats, withnewer PennDot type ‘C’ and type ‘M’ inlets. Type ‘C’ inlets have a small open throat,whereas type ‘M’ inlets have no curb opening at all. Reducing the size of the open throatswill help reduce the amount of solid materials entering the col
stormwater practices, and utilities. Stormwater management programs were developed with achievable standards in mind. The stormwater permit application was a two-year process that included Part I: identification of existing policies, practices, and procedures and Part II: system characterization and development of a comprehensive program.
NPDES: Stormwater Best Management Practice— — Stormwater Wetland Stormwater Retrofit A stormwater retrofit is a stormwater control (usually structural) that a community puts into place after development to improve water quality, protect downstream channels, reduce flooding or meet other specific objectives.
Green Stormwater Infrastructure Maintenance Manual 7 1.1 Introduc on The City of Philadelphia relies in part on Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) systems—comprised of one or more decentralized stormwater management prac ces (SMPs) such as rain gardens, stormwater tree trenches, and green roofs—to reduce stormwater volume and pollutants
Green Stormwater Infrastructure Maintenance Manual 7 1.1 Introduc on The City of Philadelphia relies in part on Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) systems—comprised of one or more decentralized stormwater management prac ces (SMPs) such as rain gardens, stormwater tree trenches, and green roofs—to reduce stormwater volume and pollutants
Pennsylvania Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual December 2006 Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual Cover and Table of Contents Chapter 1 - Introduction and Purpose Chapter 2 - Making The Case For Stormwater Management Chapter 3 - Stormwater Management Principles and Recommended Guidelines
1.3 New Jersey Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual The New Jersey Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual (BMP Manual) of April 2004, as amended, was developed to provide guidance to implement the standards in the Stormwater Rules. The BMP manual provides examples of ways to meet the standards required by the Stormwater R
The Clark County Stormwater Manual: Book 4 - Stormwater Facility Operations and Maintenance is adapted from the Clark County Stormwater Facility Maintenance Manual, 2009 and the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, Volume V, (Ecology, 2019). Illustrations are courtesy Washington Department of Ecology or redrawn from Washington
Stormwater Management Plan Best Management Practices This Stormwater Management Plan groups stormwater best management practices according to permit requirements into the following sections: 1. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination . 2. Industrial and Commercial Facilities . 3. Construction Site Runoff Control . 4. Education and Outreach . 5.
Abrasive water jet can do this with quality results but, generally is too expensive compared to plasma, laser or punching. 5. Cut Geometry Abrasive waterjet cuts have straight edges with a slight amount of taper. Kerf width is controlled by the orifice/nozzle combination. Cuts in thicker materials generally require larger combinations with more abrasive usage. The kerf width can be as small as .
