-------
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES
Informational material
and access to information
Public consultation
and assistance
Public
notice and
Enforcement
Legal
I
CO
X
\
\
X
N.
PLANNING PROCESS N^
9. Industrial
Facilities Needs
10. Nonpoint Source
Control Needs
11. Residual Waste
Control Needs
12. Stormwater Needs
13. Target Abatement
bate's "
14. Regulatory
Programs
15. Implementing and
Operating Agencies
16. Environmental,
Social, and Eco-
nomic Impact
17. Plan Review and
Approval
•a
C 01
«B
w •
O u
vt o
t) 1-1
O 10
f-4 &
£ %
I
75
*
U)
c
c
a
o
a.
c
q
d
'
•;
i
c_
M
•r
Tj
j
V
e
.c
<.
c
c
c
in
[
i
•3 «
es i-
a t
m *f
0. E
o
n
lr^
n
ra
co
in
^j
in
''"j
CO
C
f~l
in
CO
c
•H
VJ
Q
U
r-4
O
O
•H
|
r-1
S
E
o
U-4
c
h-<
U-I
o
C to
O £?
i-4 O
AJ *(-<
S >
O C
•O CJ
•r-l C4
S2
O -i-l
u o
t-< O O
o at-*
3 a j-i
•c e «s
•r-l tj CX,
> S •"
•H 0
C JJ 4J
•H V*
- X 13
u-i u a.
0 C
u ° °
- 13 i-l
a. /3
a. t. 3
< O a.
A
V
u
•r^
4-1
O
c
u
rt
-1
Q
3
i.
. u^l^ t£U
m
O *r^
tf -2
0 U
•^ O
u >a
a
O t-l
2 S
j3 *i-i
^^
•LUti
C
•J
It
Cl
u
•rl
I
5
i\uie
c
o
•H e>
•U rl
6 5
C ta
o u>
•s ^
•rl
1-1 O
-naKi
1
«
a
u
1
i
-------
An exemplary arrangement would be a fully-funded public participation
working group, acting in partnership with the planning staff and management
agency(s). Funds should be made available to cover the cost of printing,
announcements in the media, and other incidental expenses.
4.5 Program Eyajjjation
An important part of any public involvement program is a set of feed-
back mechanisms to continually monitor the success or failure of the program.
If feedback indicates ongoing efforts are inadequate, adjustments should
be made as soon as possible, so that the success of the program will not be
jeopardized. In making an evaluation, information may be drawn from a
variety of sources, including:
- nature of informal contacts initiated by the public;
- amount of interaction between the planners and the public;
- attendance at meetings and hearings;
- amount of related public-sponsored activity such as meetings,
workshops, door-to-door campaigns, etc.;
- amount and nature of media coverage;
- formal surveys.
In addition to monitoring inputs received from the public participation
program, an evaluation should also be made of the effect these inputs had on
subsequent decision-making. An effective public participation program.should
be structured in such a way that the inputs received have an influence on
later decisions. Otherwise, the program is inadequate, and steps should be
taken to correct the deficiency.
4.6 Advisory Committee for Designated Areas
In compliance with Section 304(j) of P.L. 92-500, the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency has entered into an agreement with
the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Army, and Interior.
Notice of Final Agreements was published in the Federal Register, Vol. 38,
No. 225, November 23, 1973.
As a result of this agreement, the designated area planning agency must
create a policy advisory committee, with representatives of the Departments of
Agriculture, Interior, and Army invited to participate. Each Department may
or may not participate as it deems appropriate. This requirement provides for
coordination of the programs authorized under other Federal laws with water
quality planning.
Provisions should also be made for inclusion of representatives of the
general public on the policy advisory committee. The membership
may be further expanded as considered appropriate by EPA and the State. A
special effort should be made to include representatives of agencies res-
ponsible for other environmental programs being conducted in the planning
area.
4-9
-------
The requirement for State policy advisory committees is fully discussed
in Chapter 2.3.B.
In addition to Policy Advisory Committees, citizen advisory committees
should be established. It is unlikely that adequate citizen input will be
obtained solely through the Policy Advisory Committee. Citizens can provide
valuable inputs throughout the planning process. Their participation should
be actively encouraged.
4-10
-------
CHAPTER 5
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS REVISION
Guidance on revising water quality standards is being
prepared and will be made available as soon as it is
completed.
-------
CHAPTER 6
LAND USE CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Introduction
A. Purpose
The purpose of this chapter 1s to describe an optional procedure
for developing alternative subplans or strategies for pollution abate-
ment for entire planning areas. This procedure consists of breaking
the planning area Into a series of units corresponding to various
land uses, and calculating the pollutant loading (from all sources)
associated with the land use configuration. Alternative abatement
measures can be devised by changing the mix of land uses and land
management practices associated with such uses. This will also
enable tradeoffs between structural solutions (e.g., treatment facil-
ities) and nonstructural solutions (e.g., alternative land uses),
thus increasing the flexibility in the choice of methods to achieve
water quality standards. Analysis of abatement strategies on an
areal basis provides a focal point for developing particular point
and nonpoint source abatement measures for various land areas within
the planning area.
The areal approach to development of abatement measures Is also
useful as a means of relating possible control strategies to other
planning activities which can affect land use decisions. Since water
quality is one of a series of economic, social, and environmental
objectives which may be considered when making land use decisions,
the planning agency should be fully aware of planning and Implementa-
tion programs designed to achieve these and other objectives of the
area. Of particular Importance are planning efforts which may be
ongoing during the development of the plan. This could Include land
use, coastal zone management, and air quality maintenance planning.
The planning agency must work closely with agencies responsible for
other planning and Implementation programs to ensure that plans are
compatible and that the Implementation of other plans and programs
does not have an adverse Impact on carrying out the plan.
*
B. Pertinent Authorizations
*.
Section 201(c) authorizes, to the extent practicable, the "control
or treatment of all point and nonpoint sources of pollution...."
This implies a need for considering land use controls and land manage-
ment practices as a means for nonpoint source control.
Section 208(b)(2)(C)(11) provides that the areawlde waste treatment
management plan include "the establishment of a regulatory program to
regulate the location, modification, and construction of any facilities
6-1
-------
within such area which may result in any discharge in such area —"
This provides authority for the management agency(s) to regulate
location of new pollutant dischargers by determining the location of
municipal treatment facilities, by seeking control of other pollutant
sources, and by seeking appropriate changes in land use plans and
controls from the agencies possessing land use jurisdiction in the
area. The term "facilities" in the above citation includes any
controllable source of pollutants, the regulation of which contributes
to attaining water quality standards.
More explicit authority for the plan to consider land use in the
area is provided in Section 208(b)(2)(F-H) which states that the plan
will set forth procedures and methods including "land use requirements"
to control to the extent feasible certain nonpoint sources of pollu-
tion. The term "land use requirements" in Section 208(bJ(2)(F-H)
includes those land use controls (legally permitted uses) and those
land management regulations (regulation of activities conducted on
land) which contribute to the attainment of water quality standards.
C. Relationship with Existing Land Use Plans
Throughout the process of incorporating land use considerations
into the plan, primary reliance should be placed on utilizing
existing land use plans, projections, and controls, although it will
be necessary in some cases to identify necessary revisions to incorporate
changes responsive to water quality objectives. Since it is unlikely
'that the planning agency will have the authority to enact or implement
changes in land use controls, it is essential that the planning agency
work closely with those government agencies possessing legal author-
ity for land use planning and control. This will be necessary to
assure that the management agency(s) has the authority to implement
the plan.
It is also possible that some jurisdictions within the area will
not have land use plans, projections, and/or controls. In this case,
the planning agency should work with the appropriate jurisdictions
to gather enough information about the area so that current and future
development patterns, densities, and policies can be identified. If
it is determined that revisions in these patterns, densities, and poli-
cies are necessary to achieve water quality standards in a cost-effective
manner, the planning agency must work closely with the appropriate
jurisdictions possessing legal authority to enact and Implement such
revisions.
The major output of the procedure describe in this chapter should
be alternative abatement strategies or subplans for all pollutant
sources, with particular attention given to land use and land manage-
ment controls that could be used to Implement these strategies.
6-2
-------
6.2 Develop Area Subplans through Land Use Analysis
A. Inputs
1. Waste Load Projections by Land Area
Abatement strategies for land units within the planning area
should be designed to reduce existing and projected waste loads in
the area to an acceptable level. The population, employment, land
use, and waste load projections developed as part of element (c)
of the State WQM Plan should be used as the basis for developing
the abatement strategies.
2. Display of Waste Load Projections
In order to develop abatement strategies, it may prove useful,
especially to elicit public reaction, to display existing and
projected wasteloads to show their special configuration. This
could be done on maps used to develop land use projections. Rather
than using a single map, it might be appropriate to use a series
of maps so that point sources, nonpoint sources, and various
pollutant parameters can be clearly Identified.
3. Detailed Projection of Wasteloads
Where land use and wasteload projections developed for element (c)
do not provide sufficient information to enable design of abate-
ment alternatives, the following land use and environmental factors
may be useful in developing a more detailed breakdown of wasteload
information:
a. Topographic and soil series classifications;
b. Bodies of water and related lands that would be beneficially
or adversely affected by a change in water quality;
c. Water supply, treatment, and distribution systems;
d. Existing waste treatment and collection systems, Including
interim facilities and major urban storm drainage facilities;
e. Solid waste disposal sites;
f. Areas presently served by septic tanks and areas suitable
for septic tanks at specified densities;
6-3
-------
g. Environmentally sensitive areas:
- Aquifers and aquifer recharge areas;
- Marshland and wetlands;
- Drainageways and stream buffers;
- Flood plains;
- Forests and woodlands;
- Erodable and/or poorly drained soils;
- Steep slopes;
- Shore!ands.
However, before collecting additional land use and environmental
information, it is important to understand how the information can
be used to relate land use and environmental factors to water quality.
(A discussion of wasteload estimation and prediction techniques is
found in Chapters 7 and 8.)
B. Develop Alternative Abatement Strategies
1. Analyze Alternative Land Use Controls and Practices
Land use controls and practices should be analyzed to determine
those which would be most cost efficient in reducing pollutant
loadings, based on the specific water quality problems 1n the area.
For example, if sediment is a primary problem, special considera-
tion should be given to controls such as grading regulations,
construction ordinances, and sediment and soil erosion control
ordinances.
Following is a list of major land use controls and practices
that should be considered as possible measures for implementing
pollution control in a planning area. Other ordinances, regula-
tions, and policies which may have a direct or Indirect Impact on
water quality should also be assessed:
- Zoning;
- Flood plain zoning and regulations;
- Environmental performance zoning;
- Subdivision regulations;
- Planned unit development regulations;
- Buffer zones;
- Conservation and scenic easements;
- Density bonuses;
- Housing codes;
- Building codes;
- Construction permits;
- Development permits;
- Transferable development rights;
6-4
-------
- Hillside development regulations;
- Drainage regulations;
- Grading regulations;
- Soil erosion and sediment control ordinances;
- Solid waste control ordinances;
- Septic tank ordinances;
- Taxation policies;
- Public works policies;
- Public investment policies;
- Land conservation policies;
- Discharge permits.
Land use controls and practices should be reviewed and analyzed
as early as possible in the planning process to ensure their feasi-
bility in plan implementation especially with respect to nonpoint
source control. When evaluating land use controls and practices
for the area, the planning agency should be cognizant of the general
authority and requirements for land use provided under state and local
environmental, conservation, and land use planning programs. Addition-
ally, the agency should survey existing State enabling laws relating
to land use and identify necessary or desirable statutory changes.
This will help ensure that the plan can be implemented with proper
legal authority. Institutional structures for implementing the
controls are discussed in Chapter 9.
Since land use controls and practices are used to achieve a
variety of objectives, the following factors should be considered
when conducting the analysis:
a. Implementation capability. Careful consideration should
be given to the feasibility of land use controls and their
relationship to existing and proposed institutional and
financial arrangements.
b. Consistency with other programs. To the extent that it is
practical, the land use controls should be consistent with
other programs, policies, and plans such as those related to
transportation, water supply, capital improvements, air quality,
etc. •
c. Public acceptance. Since controls that are unacceptable
to the public are unlikely to be implemented, it is essential
that serious consideration be given to the public's viewpoint.
Appropriate public participation measures are discussed in
Chapter 4. .
6-5
-------
2. Develop Alternative Subplans
Alternative subplans for all sources should be developed, based
on the analysis of land use controls and practices and specific
point and nonpoint source controls for each land unit considered
in the analysis. Information on point and nonpoint source abate-
ment techniques is found in Chapters 7 and 8.
3. Display Waste!oads for Subplan
The waste loadings for each subplan should be displayed to
show their alternative spacial configuration. (This step completes
the development of alternative area subplans (Chapter 3.6.E).)
A list of the land use controls and practices needed to implement
a given subplan should accompany the display. This list as well
as the display can be used in the environmental assessment and
plan selection process.
C. Refine Subplans
After the various subplans have been developed, further refinements
should be considered in screening alternative subplans and combining
subplans into alternative areawide plans. The following questions
may prove useful in suggesting some final refinements:
1. Is this the optimum development pattern for water quality?
2. Could the number and magnitude of discharges be reduced if
the development pattern was changed?
3. Will the location of discharges have an adverse impact on water
quality? .
4. Will the timing of discharges have an adverse impact on water
quality?
5. Would the implementation of additional land use controls reduce
overall investments?
6-6
-------
CHAPTER 7
NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
7.1 Introduction
Chapter 3 presents a framework for the systematic evaluation of all
sources of pollution and selection of alternative plans for the area. The
control plans must identify nonpoint sources, evaluate their impact on
water quality, and delineate measures for their control.
Nonpoint sources, while not defined in the Act, are, by inference,
the accumulated pollutants in the stream, diffuse runoff, seepage, and
percolation contributing to the degradation of the quality of surface and
ground waters*. They include the natural sources (seeps, springs, etc.)
and millions of small point sources that presently are not covered by
effluent permits under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System.
Provisions for control of nonpoint sources from agricultural, silvi-
cultural, mining, construction and urban/suburban area must be included in
the development of a State WQM Plan. Land and subsurface disposal of
residual wastes, salt water intrusion, and hydrographic modification con-
tributing to water quality degradation must also be considered.
7.2 Statutory Requirements and EPA Policy
A. Statute
Section 208(b)(2)(c)(1) states that a 208 plan shall include estab-
lishment of a regulatory program to "implement the waste treatment
management requirements of Sec. 201(c)," which calls for control of all
point and nonpoint sources of pollution.
Section 208(b)(2)(F-I) states that a plan prepared under the
areawide waste treatment management planning process shall include:
"A process to (1) identify, if appropriate,...(nonpoint
sources of pollution)..and (ii) set forth procedures and
methods (Including land use requirements) to control to
the extent feasible such sources."
*This definition of nonpoint sources 1s for purposes of explaining how
the States could develop Best Management Practices for all runoff sources
of pollution not covered by the NPDES program. This definition is not
intended to reflect EPA's possible response to the court order required
by Judge Flannery's decision on NRDC v. Train. Civil Action No. 1629,
Federal District Court for the District of Columbia.
7-1
-------
Finally, Sections 208(b)(2)(J) and (K) provide that a plan shall
include:
"A process to control the disposition of all residual waste
generated in such area which could affect water quality,"
and
"A process to control disposal of pollutants on land or in
subsurface excavations within such area to protect ground
and surface water quality;"
B. EPA Policy on Implementing the Statutory Requirements
The requirement for a regulatory program over all point and
nonpoint sources places a clear responsibility on areas developing
State WQM Plans to establish regulation of nonpoint sources. It
is EPA policy that the type of regulation appropriate for each
nonpoint source category should be established by the State.
Designated 208 planning agencies may also define nonpoint source
regulatory measures for approval by the State.
For each nonpoint source problem category, "Best Management
Practices" (BMP) should be defined and implemented through
appropriate regulation. The term "Best Management Practice" refers
to a practice, or combination of practices, that is determined by a State
(or designated areawide planning agency) after problem assessment, exam-
ination of alternative practices, and appropriate public participation
to be the most effective, practicable (including technological, economic,
and institutional considerations) means of preventing or reducing the
amount of pollution generated by nonpoint sources to a level compatible
with water quality goals.
C. General Criteria for Choosing BMP
The definition of BMP states several criteria or tests which should
be applied by the State in choosing Best Management Practices (BMP):
- a BMP should manage "pollution generated by
nonpoint sources"
- a BMP should achieve water quality "compatible
with water quality goals"
- a BMP should be "most effective in preventing
or reducing the amount of pollution generated"
- a BMP should be "practicable"
7-2
-------
1. A BMP should manage "pollution generated by nonpoint sources"
Water pollution sources can be functionally categorized in
accordance with man's activities. This type of categorization has been
used in Sections 208 and 304(e), P.L. 92-500, in connection with
nonpoint sources. It is considered to be applicable to the selection
of BMP to prevent or reduce pollution from these sources. As a mini-
mum, the State should consider the following activity categories in
its establishment of BMP for nonpoint sources:
1. Agricultural Activities
2. Silvicultural Activities
3. Mining Activities
4. Construction Activities
5. Urban Runoff
6. Hydrologic Modifications
7. Sources Affecting Ground Water
8. Residual Wastes Disposal
The interrelation of the activities outlined above should be
considered in the selection of BMP. It may be advantageous to
further categorize the nonpoint sources based on similar control
aspects. Utilization of sub-categorization could reduce the
amount of duplication in the selection of BMP. Examples of such
subcategorizations are: (1) by similar physical conditions,
e.g., soils, slope, precipitation patterns; (2) by similar
activities, e.g., soil disturbance — construction, strip mining,
land development; (3) by site-specific characteristics, e.g., all
activities in a single area of like conditions; and (4) by
pollutant to be controlled, e.g., sediments, acidity/alkalinity,
oxygen demanding materials. Further guidance on establishing
categories is found in Chapter 7.4.
2. A BMP should achieve water quality "compatible with water
quality goals"
Through analysis of existing water quality data and of newly
acquired data where necessary, target levels of abatement should
be chosen for each planning area in the State. The BMP should be
selected in terms of meeting these targets. The pollutants that
must be controlled should be determined. While BMP will normally
prevent or reduce several pollutants, the final selection of BMP
should be related to those pollutants that must be controlled to
achieve water quality goals.
7-3
-------
3. A BMP should be "most effective in preventing or reducing
the amount of pollution generated"
Through water guality analysis, the State should select abate-
ment levels against which the effectiveness of the BMP can be
related. These levels (Ibs/tons per day/week/month/year, Ibs/tons
per acre/square mile/basin, etc.) should be related to the reduction
of pollutants and achievement of water quality goals. The effec-
tiveness of the BMP in reducing pollutants should be fully evaluated
in terms of the selected abatement levels.
The reduction or elimination of pollutants in the runoff,
seepage, and percolation from nonpoint sources can materially
contribute to the protection of the quality of the Nation's waters.
In general, there are two options for accomplishing the needed
reductions and/or eliminations, namely; (1) collection and treat-
ment of the pollutants and, (2) reduction and/or prevention of the
formation, runoff, seepage, and percolation of the pollutants.
Collection and treatment of the runoff, seepage and percolation
of pollutants from nonpoint sources may be necessary in some cases.
However, the collection and treatment of pollutants from nonpoint
sources is generally complex and expensive. Because of this,
collection and treatment is considered to be a final measure to
be utilized where other preventive measures will not reach the
necessary water quality protection goals.
The BMP must be technically capable of preventing or reducing
the runoff, seepage, or percolation of pollutants. First consid-
eration should be given to those preventive techniques that have
been shown to be effective during their past use. New and innovative
techniques should be fully analyzed as to their technical capability
of preventing or reducing pollutants prior to their consideration for
incorporation into the BMP.
While one practice (measure) may be adequate in some cases, BMPs
will generally consist of a combination of practices. The various
alternatives should be fully evaluated. In choosing among the alter-
natives, the BMP that most effectively achieves the desired level of
water pollution control should be chosen. If more than one alterna-
tive will achieve the level of effectiveness necessary to reach
water quality goals, the least costly alternative should be chosen.
7-4
-------
4. A BMP should be "practicable"
Implementation of the BMP should be feasible from not only
the technical standpoint b.ut also from the financial, legal, and
institutional standpoint. The practicality of securing early
implementation should be evaluated in the selection of the BMP.
The primary goal of BMPs is the protection of water quality
However, expensive preventive techniques that will result in
little water quality benefits should be avoided. The BMP must
be capable of being implemented within the financial capability of
the area, and of the owners or operators of the various sources.
Side benefits as well as the installation and operational costs
should be included in the evaluation. The final selection of the
BMP should take into consideration both the costs of the preventive
techniques and the economic benefits (water quality or otherwise)
to society that will result from their use.
A number of the preventive techniques that may be incorporated
in the BMP are already in wideapread use within various source
categories. These techniques should receive first consideration
in the selection of the BMP. Techniques that will require opera-
tional changes in the source management should be avoided unless
they are necessary for water quality protection. Insofar as is
possible, the initial implementation of the BMP should be accomplished
with the existing legal and institutional framework of the State.
However, if additional legal authority is needed, steps should be
taken at an early date to secure the needed authority.
Full consideration should be given to the total effect
on the environment in the selection of the BMP for water pollution
control. A BMP applied to prevent or reduce water pollution
should not result in adverse effects on the other portions of the
environment such as the creation of air pollution or solid waste
disposal problems. Adverse effects on other portions of the environ-
ment are not only undesirable but also will delay the implementation
of a BMP to control water pollution.
7-5
-------
7.3 Planning Methods for Selection of Best Management Practices
Best Management Practices should be related to water quality protection
needs. In order to choose management practices, It 1s Important to establish
(1) how much of a water quality problem exists, (2) to what extent the problem
is attributable to particular categories of nonpoint source generating
activities, (3) how much reduction of pollution from these activities might be
needed, (4) what it might cost to achieve such reduction, and (5) through
what legal, financial, and institutional mechanisms the practices might be
implemented. In order to answer these questions, it is helpful to Investi-
gate them in a systematic manner. The following guidance is designed to help
answer these questions, based on the planning process framework established
in Chapter 3.
7.4 Technical Planning
A. Introduction
The purpose of this phase of nonpoint source planning is to answer
the question of how much reduction of pollution 1s needed for particular
nonpoint source activities in order to protect water quality, and
establish the most cost-effective measure for accomplishing this. There
are many conceivable approaches for relating nonpoint source control
needs to water quality. The level of sophistication of planning should
be chosen 1n the light of data availability and the need for analyses 1n
order to make a reasonable argument that particular BMPs are needed and
will accomplish their purpose. It should be recognized that relating
1n-stream water quality to levels of pollution generation from cate-
gories of nonpoint source activity 1s a difficult analysis. Nevertheless,
this analysis should be carried out 1n order to provide the best infor-
mation possible for establishing the needed level of abatement of various
nonpoint sources. Once abatement levels are established for particular
nonpoint source activities, 1t 1s possible to rely on existing Infor-
mation on costs and abatement effectiveness of alternative management
practices.
7-6
-------
B. Inputs
1. Water Quality Analysis
The wate'r quality analysis described in Chapter 3 should provide
the following inputs to nonpoint source planning:
- assessment of nonpoint sources:
The assessment should Indicate whether in-stream problems
exist related to runoff and what categories of runoff
pollution are suspected of causing problems.
- segment classification:
Planning for nonpoint sources 1s only required in relation
to water quality needs. Thus nonpoint source planning should
be undertaken in water quality limited segments, including
segments classified.as water quality limited as part of .an
anti-degradation policy.
- existing/projected wasteloads:
Information on existing/projected loads from nonpoint
sources* should be used in the process,of classifying
le nonpoint sources are the sources contributing to water quality
degradation where that degradation cannot be accounted for by the
known point sources. This applies from the largest basin to the
smallest subbasin. The nonpoint source load can be expressed as
follows:
N «' (Q+S+D) - (P+I)
Where:
N • Quantity (mass) of nonpoint source pollutants in terms
of a given parameter, under a given design flow condition
Q = Quantity of pollutants in the water leaving the test area
S = Quantity of settlement and precipitation of pollutants
D = Quantity of decay of nonconservative pollutants
P = Quantity of pollutants discharged by point sources '
(assumed to be constant under a given design flow condition)
I - Quantity of pollutants in the water entering the test area
7-7
-------
segments. However, since information on existing nonpoint
source loads .is likely to be scanty, this information should
be further developed in order to choose nonpoint source
management practices.
- maximum allowable loads:
In water quality limited segments, a gross allotment for
each parameter of pollution should be made (under design
flow conditions) for nonpoint sources. This allotment
provides the basis for establishing pollution reduction
levels for various nonpoint source categories.
Priorities
The level of detail of plan elements should be established early
in the planning process. For plan elements which cannot be im-
plemented in the next five years, an assessment can be undertaken
(see Ch. 3.3.C). In the case of nonpoint sources a number of factors
should be considered in determining whether controls can be imple-
mented in the near future.
First, the water quality problem that the controls would seek
to alleviate should be physically reversible. Problems of benthic
deposits (classified as nonpoint sources) may or may not be easily
reversible. Natural levels of siltation and stream bank erosion
may not be controllable.
Second, to be controlled in the near future, the receiving
water should have a potentially fast recovery rate. Examples
might be impoundments or lakes exhibiting eutrophication due
to nutrients from nonpoint sources or estuaries where shellfish
production is limited by toxics or siltation from nonpoint sources.
Third, there should be public support for solving the particu-
lar problem. The prospects for public support are probably greatest
where a particular problem impairs beneficial uses such as water
supply, recreation, and fish and wildlife habitat. Public support
also entails financial support for capital-intensive control measures.
There should be a reasonable prospect of obtaining financial support
for the measures; however, development of management practices should
not be precluded by lack of specific sources of funding for such
measures.
7-8
-------
3. Designation of Planning Agencies
It 1s possible that many agencies will be Involved 1n nonpoint
source planning and Implementation. These agencies should be
Identified 1n the State/EPA Agreement (5130.11). As explained 1n
Chapter 2, It 1s advisable for one agency to develop the water
quality analysis and constraints for particular areas of a State.
However the responsibility for developing alternative abatement
measures may be divided among many agencies. In order to make
decisions concerning the divisions of planning and implementation
responsibilities, it may be helpful to initiate management analysis
(see Chapter 7.5) 1n order to identify agencies and levels of
government having particular expertise 1n nonpoint source management.
C. Approach for Relating Water Quality Constraints to Abatement Measures
1. Area Approach
As.explained in Chapter 3, where there are complex interactions
between activities that generate nonpoint sources and point sources,
1t may be appropriate to analyze the problems of particular land
areas within a planning area, develop a mass balance for each of the
pollutants, and attempt to choose the optimal level of abatement
for all these sources. For example, this approach may be advisable
where a number of sources contribute to a given problem - e.g., storm
water and municipal treatment effluents contributing to high fecal
coliform counts. The control needs for storm water should be chosen
in conjunction with those for municipal plants. This might vary from
one urban area to another. The problem may be very complex and the
solutions potentially very costly. Careful analysis of the tradeoffs
is warranted in establishing BMPs 1n such cases.
2. Category Approach
It 1s possible that particular pollution problems such as
sediment are attributable to certain activities having well defined
geographic boundaries. If the total problem can be quantified, it
should be possible to divide the total Into manageable parts and
devise abatement measures for -each part. For example, if the
sediment problem can be sufficiently well Identified so that an
overall annual loading of sediment can be established for a basin,
this level can be divided Into a series of targets for particular
activities through a variety of allocation techniques. This allows
7-9
-------
planning efforts to focus on particular problems one at a time.
Another example of the category approach would be in the case of
new or potential nonpoint source problems. Since they are diffi-
cult to quantify and predict, it is not feasible to establish
tradeoffs between different new sources. Instead each activity
could be planned for independently, with the goal of determining
highest feasible abatement levels for each activity.
a. Establish Planning Categories
Under either the area approach or the category approach,
it is necessary to divide the nonpoint source problem into
parts in order to devise management practices appropriate
to each aspect of the problem. In general the following broad
categories of nonpoint sources should be used in establishing
BMPs:
agricultural activities
silvicultural activities
mining activities
construction activities
urban runoff
hydro!ogic modifications
sources affecting groundwater
residual waste disposal
1) Existing and new sources
For each category of nonpoint sources in the area, an
operational definition of new and existing sources should
be established. A new source would be one that would cause a
major change in drainage. A change from agricultural to
residential use with a resulting significant change in
runoff could be considered new. In addition, all new
stormwater systems and hydrographic modification after a
given date might be considered as "new". Normal changes
in the conduct of a given activity such as agriculture should
not be considered as creating a new source. Rather the
distinction should be based on major changes in topography
and drainage that would tend to cause significant increases
in nonpoint source pollution. The purpose of the distinction
between new and existing sources is twofold. First, greater
depth of planning detail may be appropriate in determining
management practices for existing sources, which vary great-
ly in their magnitude and controllability. Secondly, since it
is not possible to anticipate the magnitude of future nonpoint
source problems, the presumption should be that once existing
sources adopt controls needed to protect water quality, new
sources should be required to adopt the best practices available
for preventing future increases in pollution. The best
7-1Q
-------
practices for new sources will in many cases prevent more
pollution per dollar spent than best practices for existing
sources, since there will be flexibility to prevent problems
before they arise, rather than attempting to control them
after the fact.
2) Factors Which Could be the Basis for Further Subcategorization
The following are some of the factors that could be used
to distinguish subcategories of each existing and new nonpoint
source category:
- physical conditions: e.g. soil, slope, rainfall, proximity
to streams, underlying geologic
structure, etc.
- activity: e.g. surface disturbance, subsurface
disturbance, road construction, change
in ground cover, etc.
- site specific e.g. a certain type of mining carried
conditions: out in a particular geographic area
b. Allocate Load Reductions to Each Category
1) Allocation Techniques
As discussed in Chapter 3, there are a number of ways of
expressing the maximum allowable load of pollutants* The
allowable load may be expressed in units of mass/unit time,
where time refers to a particular wet weather flow condition.
The load may also be expressed as mass/unit time where the
time period is longer. « perhaps mass/year. The following are
some possible approaches for allocating this load to the
eight general categories of nonpoint sources discussed
previously:
Option 1.1 - proportional to area occupied by category:
Under this approach, each major nonpoint source category .
would be allocated a permissable load in proportion to the
area it occupied. This approach would result in the same
loading constraint per acre for all categories. This would
be exceedingly difficult for the categories that generate
relatively large quantities of pollutants per unit area to
meet.
7-11
-------
Option 1.2 - proportional to area, with tolerance levels
for each category:
This approach would involve assigning each category a base
allowance of pollutant loading per acre according to the
uncontrollable or background loading expected from each
category. The remaining amount of the maximum load could be
assigned in proportion to area occupied by the category. This
approach has the merit of recognizing realistic limits of
load reduction for each category.
Option 2.1 - equal relative reduction:
Rather than develop a mass per acre constraint for each
category, the information used in determining the maximum
allowable load could provide an indication of the relative
reduction from the existing loading needed to meet the stand-
ards. For example if the existing loading were twice the
loading that should be allowed, the relative reduction for
all sources should be 50% of whatever amount of pollution
each source or category of sources was causing. This approach
would treat all polluters as equally responsible for the
cleanup burden whether their per acre contribution was large
or small.
Option 2.2 - equal relative reduction, with tolerance level
for each category:
By this approach each category would be allowed a given load
per acre based on background or uncontrollable factors. An
equal relative reduction of the excess over the allowed amount
could be applied to all polluters. The relative reduction
would be based on the aggregate reduction needed for the entire
segment or basin.
Option 3.1 - best technology:
This approach involves defining the load constraint for
each category on the basis of the abatement efficiency of
the best techniques for abating pollution for each source
category. These abatement levels can be expressed 1n units
of mass/acre/time converted to units of mass/time in order
to determine whether the sum of the loads for all categories
would be compatible with the maximum allowable load. Based
on the comparison between the abatement achievable with best
techniques and the allowable load, adjustments 1n the load
constraint for each category might be necessary.
7-12
-------
To the extent that the allowable load would be assigned
to existing sources, with little or no allowance for pollu-
tion from new sources, it would be necessary to establish load-
ing constraints for new sources on the basis of best technology.
These allocation approaches could be used to divide the
burden of meeting the maximum allowable load among the
principal nonpoint source categories. Within the eight categories
mentioned, there are many possible subcategories representing
different natural physical conditions and production activities.
The allocation for the eight categories could be further
divided into the subcategories.
c. Relationship Between Generation of Pollutants and Transport
to Receiving Waters"
The portion of the allowable load assigned to each nonpoint
source category is the loading that would be generated by sources
in that category and transmitted to receiving waters. Since part
of the load that is generated may be assimilated on the land as
1t flows over or through land to the receiving water, the load
constraints referred to above apply to the combined generation and
transmission of a pollutant. If the constraint 1s 10 TN/acre/yr
at the receiving waters and the rate of generation at the source
is reduced to 20 TN/acre/yr, with a transmission rate of 50% of
the amount generated at the site, the receiving water constraints
can be met.
d. Relationship Between Pollutant Parameters
In order to simplify the process of establishing the management
practices to meet the load constraints for each pollutant and
for each category, It may be possible to focus on one or more
pollutant parameters as the principal constraints to be met. For
example, 1n rural areas, the chemical analysis of sediment may be
fairly uniform over large areas. Thus 1f appropriate controls
are determined for sediment, these controls will also have a
predictable effectiveness 1n reducing BOD, pesticides, phosphorus,
and other pollutants that are associated with sediment. In
urban areas the relative proportion of sediment and other parameters
may also exhibit certain uniformities.
7-13
-------
D. Develop Abatement Subplans
1. Area Approach
Procedures for developing abatement measures for each part of
the planning area, for all pollutant sources are discussed in
Chapter 6. Procedures for developing alternative controls for each
category are analogous to those described below in regard to the
category approach.
2. Category Approach
The following steps could be followed in order to determine how
to meet the abatement levels established for each nonpoint source
category. These same steps could also be followed in the area
approach to predict the costs and effectiveness of alternative
abatement measures for all nonpoint source categories within each
part of the planning area.
a. Estimate Existing Waste Loads for each Category/Subcategory
Once the total nonpoint source load of a given pollutant
under given flow conditions has been established, it is necess-
ary to evaluate the breakdown of sources of this pollutant load.
The runoff, seepage, and percolation of pollutants from
nonpoint sources is highly dependent on climatic, seasonal, and
other variable events. High rainfall, antecedent rainfalls,
cropping patterns, street sweeping schedules, time of travel of
runoff, scouring and re-entry of pollutants, etc., must be
considered in the evaluation. While average conditions shed
light on the general situation, an analysis based on high
and/or low runoff periods, covering specific climatic events
and seasonal periods, is more likely to provide an accurate
evaluation of the significance of each nonpoint source.
Data from sources such as building inspection offices, soil
and water conservation districts, and planning agencies, should
be evaluated to locate many of the potential nonpoint sources
of pollutants. Soil survey maps, construction records, urban
sanitation records, and other such documents can provide much
information for evaluation of the pollution potential from
nonpoint sources. A number of agencies (USGS, water treatment
plants, health units, etc.) maintain water quality records,
which should provide information on the origin of nonpoint
sources.
7-14
-------
In general, there are two approaches for tracing the origin
of nonpoint source loadings:
. generalized prediction and,
. monitoring and sampling.
Whichever approach or combination of approaches is used, the
objective should be to determine a reliable estimate of the
load from each category of sources*.
In general, sampling and monitoring may be needed where
problems are so site-specific that prediction techniques cannot
be used with confidence; otherwise prediction techniques may
be preferable, especially those that can be applied using
existing information. However, analysis of nonpoint source
loading should only be carried out to the level of detail need-
ed to choose best management practices.
1) Prediction of Nonpoint Source Loads
Because monitoring and sampling for nonpoint source
detection is costly and requires a long time period to
construct an 'accurate set of data, it is advantageous to
use nonpoint source load prediction techniques. Although
estimating the pollution generated from nonpoint sources
is a difficult task, there are prediction techniques
which can be used. These techniques enable prediction of
nonpoint source load generation and transport based on such
measurable watershed parameters as soil, slope, vegetative
cover, land use, size of drainage area, etc. While these
techniques vary in their reliability, especially with regard
to soluble pollutants and pollutants subject to breakdown in
the environment, they can be useful in choosing best manage-.
ment practices.
'* The sum of the loads from each category should enable construction of
a materials balance showing loading for each pollutant to the stream and
origin (location of each category of sources) of the loads. A materials
balance should be constructed 1n order to carry out the area approach as
described in Chapter 6. The materials balance can be broken down to
whatever degree of detail is appropriate, depending on the accuracy of the
method for estimating nonpoint source loading.
7-15
-------
Guidance on the applicability of these models and
the services available from federal agencies for utilizing
the models is discussed in:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Methods for
Identifying and Evaluating the Nature ancT Extent of
Nonpgint Sources of Pollution, Report No. EPA
430/9-73-014. Washington, D.C. 1973. GPO, $2.45.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Interim Report
on Loading Functions for Assessment of'Water Pollution
from Nonpoint Sources, November 1975, Project 68-01-2293.
Available from Water Planning Division (WH-554), EPA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Control of Water
Pollution from Cropland. 1975, Report No. EPA-600-2-75-026A.
Available from Water Planning Division (WH-554), EPA.
Additional guidance on prediction models and technqiues
for nonpoint sources is being developed by EPA and will be
available in subsequent guidance.
2) Monitoring and Sampling to Identify Nonpoint Source Loads
Monitoring and sampling should be undertaken in the short
term to identify nonpoint source loading in situations where
more accurate estimates are needed than can be obtained through
use of predictive models. Secondly, monitoring and sampling
should be undertaken over a longer term to refine information
on nonpoint source loading and to serve as a management device
for assessing the progress made in attaining and maintaining
water quality through implementation of best management practices.
In the short term, monitoring may be undertaken, 1f nec-
essary, to estimate a single gross allotment (target abatement
level) for all nonpoint sources contributing to a given water
quality segment. Also, monitoring of carefully selected
nonpoint sources may be undertaken as necessary to calibrate/
verify the analytical technique chosen to estimate the nature
and relative magnitude of the loads associated with each
nonpoint source category. In particular, monitoring may be
needed to verify or supplement loading estimates for such
sources as stormwater outfalls, waste lagoons, septic seepage
7-16
-------
areas, land fills, spray irrigation areas, and other signi-
ficant sources that are difficult to estimate through pre-
dictive techniques.
Since it is not expected that nonpoint source load
estimates can be verified in the relatively short timeframe
of initial plan formulation, it may be desirable to initiate
an ongoing monitoring program to be carried out in the plan
implementation phase.
The monitoring and sampling approach needed for nonpoint
source identification and verification should determine a
schedule of prioritized activities that will enable a given
degree of identification of individual nonpoint sources at a
given point. For example, if the total nonpoint source load
to the area is 1/3 of the total pollutant load for a given
pollutant, the monitoring and sampling activities should be
aimed at verifying a given percent of the nonpoint source
load by a given date. Instream water quality data which could
be related'to specific nonpoint source sites should be evalu-
ated in order to determine whether a given increment of waste
detectable in the stream could be attributed to a given nonpoint
source.
The sum of the wasteloads that could be traced back to
contributing sources should be a given percent of the total
nonpoint source load that is chosen for the initial monitoring
and sampling coverage. If the individual nonpoint sources
that can be identified do not sum up to that given percent of
the total nonpoint source load, then additional data should be
collected.
b. Assess Effectiveness and Costs of Alternative Management
' Practices for each Category
No single control method or set of control methods will be
appropriate for all types of nonpoint source problems. Even
controls for a particular type of source will vary in effective-
ness according to geographic location. The controls should be
tailored to local conditions if they are to be effective. Thus,
a thorough knowledge of both specific types of nonpoint sources
and local conditions is a prerequisite to the design of appro-
priate and effective controls.
The second step in determining best management practices
for nonpoint sources is the identification of the technically
feasible structural controls and the practicable nonstructural
controls that are available for particular nonpoint source
problems. Technically feasible control alternatives for
7-17
-------
particular types of nonpoint sources are categorized and
discussed in the Best Management Practice papers, attached
to these guidelines as Supplement No. 1. It should be
emphasized that these control alternatives are cited only
as examples, and that other viable alternatives, if available,
should also be investigated and considered.
For each nonpoint source category causing a water quality
problem, technically feasible control options should be pre-
sented. For each option, the cost of the control and the
effectiveness of the control in abating different pollutants
(either at their source, or their yield to receiving waters)
should be presented. Determination of nonstructural control
costs should be based upon the opportunity cost of the
control as discussed in Chapter 10.
1) Representative Data for Cost and Effectiveness
Since the cost and effectiveness of nonpoint source
controls depend on the exact circumstances in which the
control is used, cost and effectiveness vary considerably.
For purposes of evaluation, cost data should represent the
typical or average situations. This will assure that the
cost and effectiveness of the control are neither over-
estimated nor underestimated if the control is being
considered for widespread application. Naturally, if the
control is only applicable in very specific cases, data
should be representative of that specific situation.
2) Estimation of Cost and Effectiveness Information
Because the precise cause-effect relationship between
application of a given control and achievement of a given
reduction of wastes to receiving waters is difficult to
define, calculation of cost-effectiveness may require pre-
liminary estimation.
Once a particular nonpoint source problem has been
identified, the approximate reduction of the source load
that could be obtained through a given control can be
determined. Since the cost of the control can generally
be assessed with some degree of accuracy, the cost-effectiveness
estimation enables an overall ordering of the most feasible
controls for nonpoint sources. To the extent that the esti-
mates are difficult to make, some reasonably effective practice
should be combined with a monitoring program to assess the
effectiveness of the practice.
7-18
-------
c. Propose Best Management Practices for Each Category
After Identifying instream pollutant loading from nonpoint
sources and examining technically feasible nonpoint source
controls, the final step in nonpoint source technical planning
is determination of best management practices for existing and
new nonpoint sources. This selection process should be based
on determining the cost effectiveness of alternative controls
for reducing existing and potential loading to a level com-
patible with water quality goals.
The process of selecting controls for existing and new
nonpoint sources is essentially the same in that cost-effectiveness
and implementation feasibility should be the criteria for choosing
controls. However, for most new sources there are often more
options for highly effective management measures and these
higher levels of abatement (chosen in the establishment of
maximum allowable pollutant loads) should be considered in the
selection of best management practices in order to prevent or
minimize future pollutant increases.
1) Relationship with Management Program
Selection of best management practices should be closely
coordinated with the development of a management program
to implement controls for point and nonpoint sources. A
management program should establish the following legal,
financial, and technical support aspects of best management
practices (see Ch. 7.5 for further discussion):
. Regulatory mechanisms, including legal authority
to implement and enforce best management practices;
Fiscal programs to provide incentives to adopt
best management practices;
Technical assistance and interagency coordination
to help affected parties comply with regulatory
programs.
2) Preliminary Screening of Nonpoint Source Control
Options
In order to compare nonpoint source control options, it
1s necessary to reduce the number of possible options for
each category to those that are technically feasible, with
adequate documentation of cost and effectiveness. A reason-
able number of control options for each significant non-
point source category should be presented.
7-19
-------
3) Development of Alternative Subplans
After control options for each category have been
developed, they should be combined to form alternative
subplans. Each subplan should indicate the cost and
effectiveness of possible BMPs in meeting the target
nonpoint source load reduction levels.
The following information for each category of nonpoint
sources should be presented as an input to the combined
evaluation of technical and management plans:
. Wasteload characteristics of each alternative;
. Total cost of each alternative expressed as its
present value of capital and operating costs for
the overall alternative and subsystem components;
. Reliability of each alternative and subsystem
included in each alternative;
. Significant environmental effects of each alter-
native consistent with NEPA procedures, including
a specific statement of future development impact;
. Contribution of each alternative to other water-
related objectives of the planning area.
7.5 Management Planning
A. Introduction
The purpose of management planning is to determine the legal,
financial, and Institutional means needed to implement best management
practices. After proposed management practices can be determined from
a technical standpoint, it is necessary to examine their implementation
feasibility and, if necessary, make adjustment to the originally pro-
posed practices in order to ensure that the selected practices are
feasible from a legal, financial, and institutional standpoint. The
following management planning procedures are based on the framework
for management planning described in Chapter 3.
B. Define Management Agency(s) and Institutional Arrangements
The first step in management planning should be to define the scope
of legal authority, financial capacity, and institutional arrangements
to manage nonpoint sources.
7-20
-------
1. Legal Authority
Legal authority to treat wastes from nonpoint sources or to
regulate owners and operators of nonpoint sources according to
the management practices proposed in the technical phase of
nonpoint source planning should be defined.
2. Financial Capacity
The level of public and private expenditure to carry out the
management practices and possible financial programs to obtain
the funds should be identified.
3. Management Agency(s) and Institutional Arrangements
A general description of the type of agency and interagency
arrangements to carry out proposed practices should be described.
C. Management Analysis
1. Legal Analysis
An analysis should be made of the existing legal basis for
requiring management of nonpoint sources within the planning area.
The analysis should attempt to determine the adequacy of the exist-
ing law, distinguishing the extent to which authority to regula'te
nonpoint sources may exist, as opposed to the administrative
effectiveness in carrying out the law. Wherever possible the
proposed nonpoint source management practices should rely on
existing general authority and seek to establish necessary
implementing regulations and administrative and enforcement
capability. The need for new legislation should also be iden-
tified early in the planning process.
2. Financial Analysis
For each proposed management practice, a tentative financial!
program should be developed. This program should identify capital,
operating, and administrative costs and sources of financing for
the various cost elements. The financial analysis should explore
the possibility of relying on existing programs to finance parts
or all of the costs for particular cost elements.
3. Institutional Analysis
There are many existing agencies and programs concerned with-
nonpoint source management. An analysis should be made of the
extent to which these programs could incorporate the function of
land management controls for water quality protection. It Is
7-21
-------
possible that many existing programs could undertake part or all
of the responsibilities for implementing best management practices.
Where uncertain authority exists for these agencies and programs to
undertake management projects or regulate nonpoint source owners
and operators, it may be possible to strengthen the authority of
these agencies or have the agencies administer a program in cooper-
ation with other agencies and levels of government that have the
requisite legal authority. In other instances the legal authority
may exist to implement management practices, but insufficient funds
may prevent an effective program. In such cases some of the funding
sources suggested in Chapter 10 should be explored and expanded budgets
proposed for the agencies that otherwise could be effective in
implementing management practices. A third deficiency of existing
agencies and programs may be lack of a coherent administrative
structure to relate water quality and other resource management
programs. For example, many public works and land management pro-
grams have an impact on water quality; however, water quality
protection may not be an explicit goal in these programs. By slight
modification in the mission of these existing land and resource
management programs, it may be possible to develop effective water
quality management institutions. However, it may still be necessary
to develop coordination mechanisms between the many institutions
having the potential to carry out water quality management.
The following is a partial list of existing agencies and levels
of government that may have the potential to carry out nonpoint
source management:
Regional
Federal State County/Local
. Agriculture Soil Conservation Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation
Service Districts
. Silviculture Forest Service Dept. of Natural
Resources
. Mining Federal Bureau of Dept. of Mining
Mines
. Construction Dept. of Housing Dept. of Trans. County/Municipal
& Urban Dev. Engineer
Dept. of Trans. Municipal Bldg.
Inspector
7-22
-------
Urban Runoff
Hydrologlc Modi*
flcatlon
Source Affecting
Ground Water
Residual Waste
Disposal
Public Land/Re-
source Mgmt.
Activities
Affecting
Above Non-
polnt Sources
Federal
Dept. of Housing &
Urban Dev.
(Flood Insurance
Program)
Dept. of Army,
Corps, of Engineers
Dept. of Interior
Bureau of Land Mgmt.
Bureau of Reclama-
tion
Forest Service
National Park Serv.
Federal Power Comm.
Dept. of Army, Corps
of Engineers
Regional
State County/Local
County Municipal
Engineer
Sanitary Sewage
Authority
State Dept. of Health Local Dept. of Health
Regional County and
Municipal Departments
of Sanitation
State Land Resource
Managing Agencies
County, Local Parks
Departments
The analysis of existing programs having the potential to Implement
nonpblnt source management should lead to specific proposals for organ-
izations to Implement the management practices developed 1n the technical
phase of planning. Depending on the results of this analysis, the
function of technical development of proposed best management practices
may be delegated to an agency having particular expertise 1n nonpolnt
source management. Whatever agency has the responsibility for technical
development of BMPs, there should be close coordination between the
technical phase of BMP development and the selection of management
agencies to supervise BMP implementation.
D. Development of Alternative Management Plans
1. Propose Alternative Management Options
For each category of sources and each major technical alternative
for BMP management, options to Implement the BMP should be proposed.
These options should Identify the source of legal authority for the
management practice (Including proposed schedules for enabling legis-
lation, 1f necessary), a proposed financial program Identifying
existing or new sources of funding, and the agency(s) proposed to
7-23
-------
provide technical assistance, supervise, monitor, and enforce BMP
implementation. In addition where many agencies are proposed for
different source categories, the management structure to coordinate
these agencies and to integrate nonpoint source management into
the overall State WQM Plan should be identified.
2. Assessment of Management Alternatives for Consistency with
Technical ProposaTs
Since technical BMP proposals may vary in their complexity, it
is important to determine whether the agency proposed to supervise
their implementation has the necessary manpower, expertise, and
financial resources to administer the particular technical proposal.
3. Screen in Terms of Implementation Feasibility
Before final selection of BMPs, the proposed management approach
for each category of sources should be evaluated according to the
criteria of implementation feasibility discussed in Chapter 3. The
following evaluation should be made for the BMPs proposed for each
category of sources:
. legal authority: Is there adequate authority, or an adequate
legislative proposal to acquire the authority called for
in Section 208(c)(2) of the Act and for the regulatory program
specified in Section 208(b)(2)(C) of the Act?
. financial capacity: For public sector projects, are there
adequate funds or a specific legislative proposal to acquire
such funds? For BMP costs to be borne by private landowners,
are the costs reasonable and affordable; is adequate provision
made to phase implementation of the BMP according to the
capacity of landowners to bear the costs? For overall program
management, are there sufficient resources devoted to super-
vision of the entire nonpoint source management effort, in
addition to the separate administrative costs of each program
element?
. institutional feasibility: Is the management approach practical
in the sense of relying on available programs where possible?
Is the management approach administratively coherent, with
adequate supervision of each program element and of the program
as a whole? Is there broad public understanding and acceptance
for the management approach?
4. BMP Selection
The selection of BMPs should be undertaken as part of the overall
plan evaluation and selection process described 1n Chs. 13 and 14.
7-24
-------
CHAPTER 8
POINT SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS
8.1 Introduction
Chapter 3 presents a framework for systematic evaluation and selection
of pollution control strategies for all sources of pollutants. This chapter
describes technical planning considerations for developing alternatives
abatement measures for point sources of pollution. The point sources con-
sidered in this chapter are discharges from municipal treatment plants,
combined sewer overflows, and industrial waste effluents. Disposal of
wastewater sludge, and wastewater reuse are also discussed. Balanced
consideration of measures other than the traditional capital intensive
approaches of point source control is stressed in this chapter.
Alternatives considered should encompass all applicable structural and
management measures for preventing, abating, reducing, storing, treating,
separating, recycling, reclaiming and disposing of municipal and industrial
wastewater and combined sewer discharges.
8.2 Planning Approach for Point Sources
A. Inputs
1. Water Quality Analysis
— problem assessment:
The problem assessment should indicate where planning is
needed for existing point source problems. A determination
of planning needed to prevent future problems can be made
by evaluating projections of future population, employment,
land use, wasteloads.
— segment classification:
The segment classification should indicate the type of
•wasteload constraints that will be required of point source.
Where waste load allocation is required, it is important
to Choose a planning approach allowing consideration of
tradeoffs between all sources requiring load allocation.
— maximum allowable loads:
In Water Quality Limited segments, the maximum allowable
load for pollutants provides the planning constraints that
should be met in developing abatement strategies.
8-1
-------
2. Priorities
Before developing abatement strategies for point sources, it
is important to determine the level of detail of the outputs of
these strategies. If the abatement measures are to be imple-
mented in the next five years, all the outputs for point sources
specified in Table 3.1 should be developed at a level of detail
sufficient for implementing the outputs. (The relationship
between the facility plans outputs provided in the State WQM Plan
and further facility planning is described in Chapter 2). Where
the particular element of the plan cannot be implemented in the
next five years, the level of detail may consist of a more
general assessment having the type of information indicated in
table 3.2
B. Choice of Methods (and Level of Detail) for Relating Water Quality
Analysis to Development of Abatement Measures
1. Water Quality Limited Segments - Area Approach
The area approach to developing abatement measures is described
in Chanter 3. A detailed procedure to carry out this approach,
relating pollution loads to land use plans and policies is described
in Chapter 6. It is recommended that the area approach be followed
for developing point source subplans in Water Quality limited
segments. The reason for this recommendation is that the area
approach encourages evaluation of alternative levels of abatement
and alternative discharge locations for point sources, allowing
the maximum flexibility in the waste load allocation process.
2. Effluent Limited Segments
The waste load constrained in effluent limited segments would
be established in the effluent guidelines for the particular point
source category.
C. Development of Abatement Plans
The following sections (Chapter 8.3-8.6) describe procedures for
developing alternative abatement plans for municipal, private waste-
water combined sewer, and industrial point sources. These alternatives
should be combined into alternative area subplans for point sources as
described in Section 8.7.
8:3 Municipal Wastewater Facilities
A. Introduction
Planning of municipal facilities within an area should provide for
(1) cost-effective, environmentally sound, and implementable treatment
8-2
-------
works to meet the present needs of the area and (2) a general program
to phase facilities development to meet future needs as projected in
an overall land use plan. Balanced evaluation of nonpoint source
abatement and prevention measures as well as point source measures
should precede final selection of the treatment works. Treatment
works must meet the applicable requirements of Sections 201(g), 301,
and 302 of the Act. As a minimum, facilities plans must provide
for application, by 1983, of the best practicable waste treatment
technology (BPWTT). Where necessary to meet wasteload allocation
constraints consistent with water quality standards, plans must
provide for measures to further reduce pollutants. The determina-
tion of BPWTT, or measures providing for higher treatment levels if
needed, is based upon evaluation of technologies included under each
of the following waste management techniques:
a. treatment (biological or physical-chemical) and
discharge to receiving waters;
b. treatment and reuse;
c. land application or land utilization
Comparlsion of the above techniques and determination of BPWTT for
a specific case should include considerations for management of nutri-
ents in wastewater and sludges, development of integrated (solid, liq-
uid, and thermal) waste facilities, and enhancement of recreation and
open space opportunities.
This section covers major aspects of the municipal wastewater
facilities planning presented in the EPA document entitled "Guidance
for Facilities Planning".
B. Delineate Service Area
Service areas for municipal waste treatment facilities should
be delineated based on the population, economic, land use, and
waste load projections discussed in Chapter 3. In general, a
treatment service area includes the sewered areas tributary to an
Integrated waste treatment system plus those additional portions
of watersheds likely to be connected over the planning period..
The delineations should outline, on at least a preliminary
basis, geographic areas sufficient to permit cost-effectiveness
analyses of alternatives, including waste treatment methods and
ultimate disposal options for sludge and treated effluents. Also,
each of the areas should be of sufficient size to consider cost
savings, management advantages, or environmental gains resulting
from reglonalization. Given these.concepts, service areas for
waste treatment systems and ultimate sludge disposal or utilization
are not necessarily the same. For example, sludge from two (or more)
8-3
-------
separate treatment service areas could be land-filled or used as a
soil-conditioner at a-common site; in this case, the sludge disposal
service area would include the separate treatment service areas.
In smaller SMSAs (less than 100,000), or those with few political
entities or public bodies having jurisdiction over sewage disposal,
the service areas should encompass either the entire SMSA or the core
city plus contiguous urban places. The fact that service areas are
delineated does not necessarily imply that all land within a service
area should, be serviced by municipal sewage collection and treatment
systems. In fact, in many less densely populated areas, or parts of
urbanized areas there are economic and environmental advantages to on
site disposal of waste; The service area delineation merely represents
a potential area in which to investigate possible municipal treatment
systems.
In larger urban areas, single facilities plan coverage of the
entire area may be unattainable or inappropriate for institutional,
geographic, or other reasons. Service areas should still encompass
contiguous waste treatment systems when these conditions occur: 1)
such systems may require major new or expanded treatment plants, sludge
disposal or effluent disposal facilities; and, 2) system interconnection
or joint facilities would be feasible alternatives.
Recognizing the considerations discussed above, service area
boundaries for non urban areas should encompass the entire com-
munity including those areas subject to future urban development.
Where cost savings or other advantages might result from waste
treatment system interconnect joint effluent or sludge disposal faci-
lities, or collective management for two or more nearby communities,
the service area should encompass the community group. If a community
is isolated sufficiently to preclude regionalization, the service
area should be confined to that community.
The delineated service areas should be outlined on maps to the
same scale as those used in the projected population and land-use
presentation (Chs. 3 and 6).
C. Inventory Existing Conditions and Determine Existing Flows
The existing waste treatment systems must be accurately assessed
to establish a basis for planning any systems modifications. Where
available, the Phase I Plans will provide essential information on
municipal point sources, waste loads, wastewater flows, and water
quality within the planning area. Data from permits would be an
additional source of information. At the start of planning, this data
should be reviewed and supplemented as necessary. The assessment of
each existing waste treatment system should include a performance
evaluation of the treatment plant, including operating problems and
personnel, and sampling and maintenance program. Data on current
8-4
-------
performance of many treatment facilities will be available from
State water quality agencies as a result of their programs involving
operations and maintenance visits and consultations. An infiltration/
inflow analysis should also be made on a preliminary basis to deter-
mine whether excessive infiltration or inflow exists and, on a pre-
liminary basis, costs of any corrective measures required. Should
the analysis determine the existence of excessive infiltration/inflow,
a more detailed sewer system evaluation survey should be made to
specifically define problems and determine types and costs of correc-
tive measures. A State WQM planning grant cannot be used for the
detailed sewer evaluation survey; however, grant assistance may be
obtained under a construction grant (40 CFR 35, Subpart E). To
assure satisfactory management of residual wastes, an inventory of
sludge utilization and disposal should also be conducted.
D. Estimate Future Waste Loads and Flows
To provide a basis for planning and preliminary design of
facilities, future variations of waste loads and the flows over the
planning period must be forecast. As described in Chapter 3, forecasts
must be based on economic and demographic growth trends for the
planning area and should be based upon evaluation of land use plans,
and any growth contraints imposed by air quality implementation
plans, zoning restrictions or permit conditions. The effects of
selected flow and waste reduction measures, including sewer system
rehabilitation to correct infiltration/inflow, should also be
reflected in the flow forecasts to permit subsequent calculation of
waste treatment system cost reductions.
1. Land Use and Development
Wastewater load and flow projections should conform to the
time phased development shown on the land use projections that
are proposed as being compatible with water quality goals. (See
Chapter 3 and 6). To avoid changes in the growth pattern from
that projected in the land use plan, schedules of hookups should
be developed through a regulatory program. (See Chapter 9).
2. Flow and Waste Load Forecasts
The expected economic and population growth patterns for
the planning area, as projected in the land use plan, should
be translated into estimates of wastewater flows and waste loads,
with a realistic allowance for unpreventable infiltration. The
estimated future changes in flows and waste loads from industries
served by the municipal system should reflect application of EPA
pretreatment requirements for existing and new industries plus any
expected process changes affecting wastewater and treatment
residuals. Wastewater flow forecasts should also include the
8-5
-------
and anticipated discharges from septic tank pumpages into the
systems.
3. Sludge Generation Forecasts
The volumes and composition of sludge which will be
generated from treatment of wastewater should be estimated.
These forecasts should be modified to reflect the different
treatment levels characteristic of the alternative systems
considered.
E. Develop and Evaluate Alternatives
Since the facilities element of State WQM planning does not
necessarily imply larger interconnected waste treatment systems
for an area, the initial planning for facilities systems should
involve a systematic comparison of many subsystem, as well as
system, options. For each municipal wastewater system, subsystem
options should be identified. Compatible options should be
combined into preliminary treatment systems consistent with the
alternative wasteload allocation sets.
By using a rough estimation of cost and impact, the components
of the alternative facility plan should then be screened on the
basis of goal attainment, monetary costs, and environmental,
social, and economic effects. Legal or institutional constraints
and implementation feasibility should also be considered. Unacceptable
alternatives should be rejected; those remaining should be developed
into a limited number of proposals, employing each of the previously
discussed waste management techniques. Adequate justification
should be given for eliminating any of those techniques at any
stage.
The following paragraphs briefly describe major factors that
might be considered and procedures that might be applied in the
development and evaluation of alternative wastewater systems.
However, the following factors should only be considered to the
extent needed to develop the required facilities element of a
State WQM Plan:
1. Flow and Waste Reduction Measures
The Act encourages the use of a variety of methods
where cost-effective for reducing both the volume and amount
of waste within municipal wastewater systems. Some of the
following measures would reduce not only wastewater loads,
but water supply demands as well:
8-6
-------
a. Infiltration/Inflow reduction by sewer system
rehabilitation and repair, and elimination of roof and
foundation drains.
b. Household water conservation measures, such as
water saving appliances and fixtures.
c. Water and wastewater rates that impose costs
proportional to water used and wastewater generated;
use of water meters.
d. Educating the public on the value of water resources
and the need to reduce water consumption.
2. Industrial Service
Municipal waste treatment systems should be planned to
serve industrial users of the area whenever practicable and
cost-effective. Special requirements, issues, and procedures
associated with industrial use of a municipal system are
covered in section 8.6 of this chapter.
3. Sewers
a. System Configuration and Capacity
Planning of a waste treatment system includes the
comparison of alternative arrangements of interceptors
and collection pipes, including phased development, to
assure selection of a cost-effective configuration. In
. newly developing portions of the planning area, the
capacities of the system, in particular the larger
lateral and interceptor sewers, should generally accommodate
not more than the 20-year wastewater projection based
upon the land use plan. However, choice of interceptor
and collection pipe sizes should reflect cost-effective
analysis of alternatives over the planning period. The
practice of designing interceptors for long-term projected
growth or ultimate development within the service area
should be discouraged. As an alternative, consideration
should be given to interim (short-term) treatment works
for outlying areas or to septic tank units for individual
or clustered developments in low density areas.
b. Sewer Hookup Schedules
Since the capacity of the facilities and design of
the treatment system is based on flow projections which
conform to a time-phased land use plan, it is necessary
8-7
-------
to establish a schedule for hookups in the system. A
hookup schedule is important in managing the system over
time in order to prevent growth from exceeding the designed
capacity of the system.
In the event that a violation of an NPDES permit
occurs due to overloading of treatment works, the Regional
Administrator (or the State if the NPDES program has been
delegated to a State) may, under authority of Section
402(h) of the Act, seek a court order imposing a ban or
restrictions upon sewer connections. A series of planning
and management actions to prevent overloading of facilities
may be included as special conditions to permits issued to
facilities in danger of imminent overloading.
Since the State WQM Plan is to include a regulatory
program to regulate location of pollutant discharges in the
area, and since the management agency(s) must possess
authority to refuse to treat wastes from a municipality or
subdivision which does not comply with the plan, a schedule
of hookups 1s an appropriate management approach for carrying
out this regulatory program. The enforcement of the schedule
through the regulatory program may require specific authorizing
legislation and will therefore necessitate thorough legal
analysis. (See Chapter 9.)
4. Waste Management Techniques
Alternative waste management techniques must be evaluated
to determine the BPWTT for meeting applicable effluent
limitations, including those related to wasteload allocation.
Information pertinent to this evaluation is contained in an
EPA document entitled "Alternative Waste Management Techniques
for Best Practicable Waste Treatment" (Proposed 1n March
1974). Selection of a waste management technique is closely
related to effluent disposal choices. Preliminary alternative
systems featuring at least one technique under each of the
three categories (treatment and discharge, wastewater reuse,
and land application or land utilization) should be identified
and screened. Techniques which incorporate wastewater reuse
and land application should be utilized whenever possible. A
more detailed proposal should be prepared for each unless
adequate justification for eliminating a technique during the
screening process is presented.
Published cost, performance, and other information is
available for many alternative treatment technologies.
Preliminary screening of these technologies Involves comparing
costs and relative treatment capabilities.
8-8
-------
a. Treatment and Discharge
Treatment and discharge techniques Include the
following:
(1) Biological treatment including ponds, activated
sludge, trickling filters, processes for nitrification,
and denitrification;
(2) Physical-chemical treatment including chemical
flocculation, filtration, activated carbon, breakpoint
chlorination, ion exchange, and ammonia stripping.
b. Wastewater Reuse
In comparing waste management techniques and
alternative systems, wastewater reuse applications
should be evaluated as a means of contributing to local
water management goals. Such applications include:
(1) Industrial processes;
(2) Groundwater recharge for water supply enhancement
or preventing salt water Intrusion;
(3) Surface water supply enhancement;
(4) Recreation lakes;
(5) Land reclamation.
Wastewater reuse needs should be identified and
defined by volume, location, and quality. These needs
may Influence the location of the treatment facilities,
the type of process selected, and the degree of treatment
required.
c. Land Application
The application of wastewater effluents on the
land Involves the recycling of most of the organic
matter and nutrients by biological action 1n the soil
and plant growth, generally providing a high degree of
pollutant removal. Planning of the land application
techniques should reflect criteria and other Information
contained 1n the EPA document on "Alternative Waste
Management Techniques for Best Practicable Waste Treatment."
8-9
-------
Land application techniques include:
(1) Spray, ridge and furrow, and flood
irrigation techniques;
(2) Overland flow;
(3) Infiltration-percolation;
(4) Other approaches such as evaporation,
deep well injection, and subsurface leach
fields.
5. Residual (Sludge) Management
Evaluation of alternatives for management of residual
wastes from municipal treatment works should be closely
coordinated with the evaluation of each waste management
technique. Such evaluation includes the evaluation of
alternative combinations of sludge processing and utilization
techniques for satisfactorily and economically disposing of
quantities of residual wastes. Care must be taken to assure
that these methods do not appreciably add to air quality or
water quality problems.
A variety of sludge processing and utilization techniques
are available including (a) thickening, (b) chemical conditioning,
(c) chemical stabilization, (d) aerobic and anaerobic digestion,
(e) dewatering, (f) thermal processing for volume reduction
or drying, (g) composting, and (h) land spreading as a soil
conditioner. Sludge disposal options are limited primarily
to land disposal, land utilization, and incineration, and
.must comply with the EPA policy statement on acceptable
methods, based on current knowledge, for the ultimate disposal
of sludges from publicly-owned wastewater treatment plants.
Disposal techniques such as soil conditioning and land
utilization which realize the nutrient value of sludge as
fertilizer should be given special attention in adopting a
sludge disposal program for the area. Furthermore, consideration
should be given to local air pollution control regulations
and energy rquirements if incineration is an option.
(Guidance on management of residuals in general is contained
in Chapter 7.)
8-10
-------
6. Location of Facilities
Evaluation and choice of sites for treatment plants,
Interceptors, transmission lines, outfalls, pumping plants,
and other major works should comply with the land use plan.
Factors to be considered in selecting location include:
a. Possible odor and aesthetic problems;
b. Flexibility to convert to possible future reuse
and additional pollution abatement needs;
c. Special protection of potable, shellfish, and
recreation waters;
d. Avoidance of floodplain and wetland areas, if
practicable;
e. Induced growth impacts in flood hazard or environmentally
sensitive areas.
7. Regionalization
Regionalization options should be evaluated to assure
use of the most cost-effective facilities systems consistent
with the planning area's waste management needs. Various
combinations of treatment plants, interceptors and other
works should be identified; and each should be consistent
with a target wasteload allocation. The economy of scale
associated with a large treatment plant should be balanced
with consideration of environmental and social Impact,
especially if the inter-connected system would tend to
induce growth patterns conflicting with the land use plan.
The effect of streamflow depletion due to transport of
wastewater to a downstream plant, and the impact of concentrating
wastes from plant effluents at fewer points should also be
considered. The evaluation of regionalization might lead to
reconsideration of the service areas that were Initially
chosen for developing the facilities element of the State
Water Quality Management Plan.
8. Phased Development
a. General
In examining the cost-effectiveness of a waste
treatment system, two alternatives should be considered:
(1) Initial provision of sufficient capacity to serve
8-11
-------
the needs of the area as projected over the planning
period; and (2) phased development of systems and
modular construction of -individual facilities within
the system to meet future needs. The phased and modular
development option would involve planning for construction
of facilities and facilities components at intervals
throughout the planning period to accommodate projected
increases of waste loads and flows. The following
factors should be included in an assessment of the
options: the service life of the treatment works; the
incremental costs; and flow and waste load forecasts.
b. Reserve and Excess Capacity
The planning of waste treatment facilities will
normally provide some excess capacity to allow for
daily, wet weather, and seasonal flow variations as
well as projected flow increases. The system capacity
excess should be examined from a cost-effective viewpoint,
particularly for treatment plants serving areas experiencing
growth where phased construction may be more cost-
effective than initial construction for long-term
capacity needs. Provision of holding storage at the
plant intake should also be considered to equalize
daily flow variations.
c. Phased Development of System
Phased development of the system is advisable in
rapidly growing areas, in areas where the projected
flows are uncertain, or where full initial development
of facilities would tend to distort growth from that
shown In the area land use plan. The phasing should
provide sufficient excess capacity at the beginning of
each construction phase to accommodate expected flow
increases during the phase. Phasing of sewers may
involve provision of parallel or multiple systems or
extension of single lines.
d. Modular Development of Individual Facilities
Modular development of Individual facilities is
advisable In areas where high growth rates are projected,
where the required degree of treatment must be upgraded
later In the planning period, or where existing facilities
are to be used initially but phased out later. Modular
development would avoid long-term operating problems
8-12
-------
associated with underutilization of certain components
of the plant. Where modular development is used, provisions
should be made during the design of the initial facilities
for future additions.
e. Interim Facilities
After the State WQM plan has been approved, no
NPDES permit issued may be in conflict with that plan.
Since interim facilities receive permits, they must be
considered in the planning process. Such facilities
are often used to treat wastes from areas not immediately
serviceable by larger, often regional, treatment facilities.
Careful consideration should be given to the way in
which interim facilities will be used, especially in
high growth areas. Since such facilities have the
potential for inducing development that may be in
conflict with regional service plans, special attention
should be given to the interim facilities' eventual
connection to the larger system. Thus, in planning for
interim facilities, particular consideration should be
given to:
(1) Ensuring that the area to be served by the
interim facility is in conformance with land use
plans and controls;
(2) Ensuring, through the establishment and
enforcement of a schedule of hookups for the life
of the facility, that the interim facility will
not be overloaded;
(3) Ensuring when the facility is no longer
needed, that its service area is transferred to a
permanent facility;
(4) Reusing the abandoned facility for some other
needed function, such as use as a pumping station;
(5) Ensuring proper operation, maintenance, and
inspection. (Trained, certified operators should
be used.)
f. Flexibility and Reliability
Flexibility and reliability should be considered
throughout the planning of municipal facilities. As men-
tioned in previous sections, flexibility factors include
8-13
-------
possible upgrading of water quality objectives, future
application of new technologies, future application of
wastewater reuse, modular and phased development of facilities,
and temporary treatment plants.
Reliability considerations are important since a
risk of failure exists in any wastewater system. With
a view toward minimizing this risk, the probability,
duration, and impact of such failures should be considered
for each system and its components.
8.4 Other Point Sources
The identification of other point sources within the planning
area, possible control options, and feasible controls should be included
in point source subplans. In particular, private wastewater systems
should be evaluated, preferably in conjunction with the municipal
wastewater facilities. Information regarding planned capacity of such
systems should be sought from private wastewater management agencies.
Planned capacity should be reviewed for consistency with future waste
load reductions. Any point sources required to obtain permits should
be included in point source subplans.
8.5 Combined Sewer Discharges
A. Introduction
Combined sewer overflows can be sources of significant
quantities of pollutants. Since they are an integral part of the
municipal wastewater collection system, untreated overflows from
combined sewers pose an added threat to public health.
Various techniques for controlling and treating combined
storm and sanitary sewer flows can be incorporated into alternative
areawide subplans for point sources. Quite often, these problems
can be substantially reduced through effective control of the
sources and/or the runoff before it enters the combined sewer
systems, as is discussed in Chapter 7. The most cost-effective
combination of controlling the problems at their source or controlling
the runoff once it enters the stormwater system can be made in
the later steps of the planning process where alternative subplans
for point and nonpoint sources are combined into alternative
plans. (Chapter 3.6.E.)
8-14
-------
B. Inventory Existing Conditions
An inventory of existing combined sewer systems should be
conducted to the extent data are available; the inventory should
include locations and condition of intake bypasses, pipes, regulatory
equipment and other features, and an assessment of both the
existing performance of the system and its optimum performance
with intensive management, operation and maintenance. Information
on flow variations, design capacities, wastewater constituents,
and waste loads is also needed. Where flow records are lacking,
estimates of overflows and discharges based upon observations
should be correlated with rainfall amounts. Wasteload estimates
should be based on pollutant sampling and subsequent tests for
dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), ammonia
nitrogen (NH3-N), phosphates (PoOg)' total solids (TS), suspended
solids (SS), toxics, and both total and fecal coliform counts.
C. Estimate Future Waste Loads and Flows
To provide a basis for planning of control measures, forecasts
should be made of the waste load magnitude, intensity, and duration
of the problems associated with discharges throughout the planning
period. Information on existing discharges can provide a convenient
base for the estimates. Flow volumes and waste loads during
storm periods should be related to the tributary drainage area;
the resulting information can permit forecasting of flow volumes
and waste load increases resulting from future changes in land
use and development. This information can provide the basis for
estimating flows in combined sewer systems within the planning
area. Adjustments in projections should be made to account for
density changes, reduction in pollutant discharges due to future
protection of environmentally sensitive areas as reflected in the
land use plan, and probable flow and waste reduction measures.
D. Develop and Evaluate Alternatives
The development of alternative areawide control of combined
sewer overflows Involves the systematic comparison of feasible
control options, both structural and non-structural. Operational
strategies should be explored for the entire system to maximize
use of the system capacity. EPA research has demonstrated many
types of control and treatment techniques for combined sewer
overflows. Among these, storage options, both upstream from the
system or within the system, appear feasible. However, this
capacity would generally be limited to the most highly polluted
initial storm runoff from a low-frequency storm event (one chance
in one, to one chance in five of being equalled or exceeded
during any single year).
8-15
-------
Specific factors to be.considered in the development evaluation
of combined sewer discharge subplan components are contained in
the following paragraphs. In general, the most cost-effective
solution will be a mixture of operation/maintenance and construction
techniques.
1. Flow and Waste Reduction
A variety of techniques can be used for reducing flow
volumes and waste amounts which enter the system. Consideration
of these techniques should be coordinated with nonpoint
source control options planned for the tributary drainage
area. They include:
a. Reduce disturbance of land cover and maintain surface
infiltration capacities;
b. Control patterns and densities of urban development;
c. Reduce nonpoint source runoff through control measures
for urban and construction activities;
d. Preserve or manage lands that have natural or existing
characteristics for retarding or reducing flow and surface
pollutants;
e. Control surface runoff and in-system runoff by use of
permeable material for paving, flow retardation structures,
and other means of storing and retarding runoff, including
planned intermittent shallow flooding of parking areas,
streets and other surfaces where damage would be minimal.
In State WQM planning, emphasis should be placed on use
of the above management practices as alternatives or supplements
to the control measures discussed below, as the former are
generally far more cost-effective and less environmentally
disruptive. Management of runoff is further discussed in
Chapter 7.
2. Alternative Control Techniques
Alternative control techniques that should be considered
in combined sewer overflows can be grouped into the following
five categories:
a. Separation of sewage and storm collection systems
(generally the most costly and least environmentally
acceptable approach);
8-16
-------
b. Operational control of the existing system (maximum
use of the system storage by computerized flow regulation
and subsequent treatment at the plant);
c. Storage at points, within the system or at the point
of discharge, and subsequent treatment;
d. Direct treatment of overflows (in-line high rate
treatment methods);
e. High level of maintenance including periodic flushing
of sewer systems.
8.6 Industrial Wastewater
A. Introduction
The overall objective of planning for the control and treatment
of industrial wastewater is to provide the most efficient approach
for serving the present and future industrial wastewater treatment
needs of the area. Treatment techniques must meet the applicable
requirements of Sections 204, 301, 302, 304, 306, 307, and 316 of
the Act. Industries served by municipal systems must comply with
pretreatment and cost recovery requirements. Direct discharge of
industrial wastes to receiving waters must comply, at a minimum,
with the provisions of the pertinent Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Sources Performance Standards. Higher treatment levels
or internal wasteload reductions will be required where wasteload
allocations dictate more stringent restrictions. Application of
higher treatment levels to meet water quality standards can be
mitigated through restricting the location of future industrial
development to areas where receiving waters can more readily
assimilate the treated wastewater. Control of industrial location
should be incorporated into the land use plan with recognition of
other constraints such as air quality control.
The procedures for evaluating industrial waste sources and
problems are basically parallel to those presented for municipal
wastewater systems in section 8.3 of this chapter.
Wastewater flows from all major industrial sources in the
area should be accurately assessed. Existing information should
be used where available, including information on those industries
that discharge into municipal systems. To estimate design flows
and wasteload reductions, information is needed on average flow
rates, flow variations, seasonal variations, wastewater characteristics
and constituents, and mode of disposal. Particular emphasis
should be given to toxic constituents within the wastes and to
thermal pollutants present. Forecasts should be made of the
8-17
-------
future variations of wasteloads and flows over the planning
period and the discharge locations of those wastes. These forecasts
should be based upon economic and industrial trends, types of
industries and constituents of associated wastes, location constraints
imposed by land use plans, and other restrictions imposed by
industrial permits and air quality implementation plans. Attention
should be given to estimating waste sludges and slurries generated
by the industries as well as to the influence that industrial
loads will have on treatment plant sludge. The effects of user
charges, pretreatment, and effluent limitations guidelines or
higher treatment levels on water and wastewater flows should be
incorporated into the projections.
B. Develop and Evaluate Alternatives
The development of alternative approaches for treatment of
industrial wastes and the degree of treatment involves a systematic
comparison of the following options:
1. Pretreatment and discharge of wastewater to municipal
systems;
2. Direct treatment by individual industries and discharge
of wastewater into receiving waters;
3. Direct treatment and discharge by groups of industries;
4. Reuse of industrial wastewater;
5. Land application.
In conjunction with each of the above options, consideration
should be given to discharge to either water or land and to the
effects of flow and waste reduction on internal recycling and
process changes. Areawide options should be identified in terms
of meeting wasteload allocation constraints and compared to
provide a rough assessment of costs and impact. Consideration
should also be given to institutional constraints and feasibility.
Specific issues that might be addressed in formulating alterntaives
are included in the following paragraphs:
1. Flow and Waste Reduction
The flow and waste reduction as it relates to those
industries that discharge or will discharge into municipal
systems should be assessed. Increasingly stringent technical
and financial requirements on industry should lead to process
changes that use less water and create less wastewater.
8-18
-------
2. Minimum Effluent Limitations
Industrial wastewater treatment must comply with the
minimum treatment requirements for Best Practicable Control
Technology (BPT) and Best Available Control Technology (BAT)
by 1977 and 1983, respectively. These treatment requirements
are set forth for the industries cited in Section 306 of the
Act in a series of EPA documents entitled "Development Document
for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New Source Performance
Standards for __________ Point Source Industry." These
guidelines contain criteria for each industry for Best Practicable
Control Technology Currently Available (known commonly as
BPT) and Best Available Control Technology Economically
Attainable (known as BAT). The guidelines also provide
minimum criteria for New Source Performance Standards and New
Source Pretreatment Standards.
3. Joint vs. Separate Municipal and Industrial Facilities
Municipal waste treatment systems should be planned to
serve industrial users of the area whenever practicable and
cost-effective. Because of the unusual economy of scale
associated with larger municipal-industrial facilities, as
compared to separate municipal and industrial facilities, a
joint system will often be cost-effective. In many cases,
however, it may be more economical to have separate industrial
treatment facilities because of the characteristics and
quantities of industrial waste, industrial pretreatment
requirements, and industrial locations and groupings which
facilitate joint industrial treatment and/or reuse of industrial
wastewater. These considerations are also relevant to the
cost and effectiveness of sludge disposal options for each
alternative facility.
Industrial use of municipal facilities should be encouraged
where total costs would be minimized. Where industrial flow
handled by municipal systems is significant, cost of separate
treatment of industrial wastes versus cost of pretreatment
and joint municipal-industrial facilities should be compared.
This involves comparing the incremental cost of the municipal
facilities required to transport, treat, and dispose industrial
wastes (and the costs of corresponding pretreatment required)
with the cost of separate industrial treatment and disposal
facilities of those wastes. In particular, the analysis
should cover those industries desiring, but not receiving,
municipal service when facilities planning is initiated.
8-19
-------
4. Pretreatment and Cost Recovery
Industrial wastes served by municipal systems must comply
with industrial pretreatment and cost recovery regulations.
The pretreatment regulations basically require the removal of
industrial waste constituents that are not compatible with
the municipal wastewater treatment process. Compatible
wastes, generally BOO and suspended solids, can be passed to
the municipal plant for treatment. The cost recovery regulations
prescribe that industrial users must bear a proportionate
share of the cost of operating and maintaining the municipal
system and must repay the portion of the Federal grant attributed
to that waste. Industrial sites should be located where
receiving waters can more readily assimilate the residual
wastes and associated nonpoint source runoff. Such control
of industrial locations should be incorporated into the land
use plan and recognize other constraints such as air quality
control.
8.7 Development of Alternative Subplans
The alternative subplans for point source controls should correspond
to alternative wasteload allocation sets for design conditions for
meeting water quality standards under both dry weather and rainfall
conditions. At least one subplan should be developed to correspond to
each wasteload allocation set. Subplans for continuous point sources,
primarily from municipal and industrial treatment works, should satisfy
the wasteload allocation sets for dry weather conditions. Subplans
for combined sewer flows should correspond to wasteload reductions for
design conditions reflecting rainfall.
A. Continuous and Seasonal Point Source Subplans
Investigation of controls for municipal and industrial wastewater
may reveal control options that do not correspond to the target
wasteload reduction sets previously considered. Additional
wasteload reduction sets should be developed if necessary to
enable consideration of reasonable point source control techniques.
B. Intermittent Point Source Subplans
Subplans for Intermittent point sources such as combined
sewer discharges should correspond to target wasteload reduction
sets prepared to enable standards to be met under wet weather
conditions. As discussed 1n Chapter 3, calculation of treatment
levels required to meet standards at wet weather conditions
should be based on point source treatment levels established for
dry weather conditions. Thus, the additional wasteloads carried
to streams after rain should be dealt with through load reduction
for intermittent point sources and nonpoint sources.
8-20
-------
C. Disposal of Residual Wastes.
Point source subplans should provide for the disposal of
sewage treatment plant residual wastes and should conform with an
areawide program of solid waste disposal.
D. Description of Alternative Subplans
Following the screening of the system alternatives, the
following information on the alternative subplans should be
presented as an input to the development of pollution control
alternatives (refer to Chapter 3.6.E.).
o Wasteload characteristics of each alternative expressed
in appropriate units for relating to the water quality
prediction model;
o Total cost of each alternative expressed as its present
value or average equivalent value of capital and operating
costs for the overall alternative and subsystem components;
o Reliability of each alternative and subsystem included
in each alternative;
o Significant environmental effects of each alternative
consistent with NEPA procedures, including a specific
statement on future development impact;
o Contribution of each alternative to other water-related
objectives of the planning area.
8-21
-------
CHAPTER 9
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
9.1 Introduction
Institutional arrangements for water quality management are the
formal structure of affected government units responsible for implementing
the plan. Units within this structure must have adequate authority to
carry out the full range of management responsibilities (functions)
including, particularly, the regulatory and waste treatment management
requirements of the Act. It is also essential that the arrangements
assure proper management and accountability for program operations.
Sufficient institutional arrangements and authority for plan
implementation may exist when water quality management planning begins.
However, the specific authority required by the Act to be vested in the
implementing agency(s) will rarely have been delegated under State law
to any particular government entity. Where sufficient institutional
arrangements and authority do not exist, enabling legislation must be
sought and/or arrangements for plan implementation must be created.
Management agency designations cannot be fully approved by EPA unless
the agencies have adequate statutory authority and the regulatory
programs required to implement the plan.
The planning agency should take the lead role in formulating
institutional arrangements in conjunction with other State and local
agencies. This chapter discusses the general responsibilities of the
implementing agency(s), the particular .tasks associated with the regulatory
and waste treatment management programs and issues associated with the
selection of appropriate institutional arrangements.
9.2 General Management Responsibilities
The implementation of a State water quality management plan depends
upon the implementing agency(s) carrying out a number of related functions
for which they must be prepared through adequate authority, resources
and organization.
A. Program Supervision and Coordination
Institutional arrangements must assure that the overall program
of waste treatment and regulation of pollution sources is coordinated,
the plan Implemented, and its performance assessed. It is essential
that overall supervision of the program and accountability for its
operation be achieved through the designation of an agency to possess
the authority and resources for program oversight. The selection of
the appropriate unit to which this responsibility will be allocated
9-1
-------
will require careful consultation among all the major institutions
affected by the State WQM planning process. Program supervision
is needed both at the State level and in each planning area. A
lead agency should also be selected for each planning area to
supervise planning activities within the area.
B. Continuous Planning
Because implementing a program to abate all sources of water
pollution will require continual attention to changing conditions
and pollution control needs, continuing planning is an integral
part of the State WQM Plan. This continuing planning responsibility
must be allocated within the institutional framework. This
responsibility may be delegated to a lead agency within each planning
area.
C. Fiscal Management
A major responsibility of institutions implementing the State
WQM Plan will be obtaining and budgeting the financial resources
necessary for plan implementation. Among other things, this
will mean establishing financial arrangements to support the
regulatory and waste treatment programs, together with arrangements
for the funding of continuing planning operations and other
administrative expenses. Since financial arrangements are a crucial
component in an effective management strategy, their detailed
operation must be clearly established prior to plan implementation.
Financial arrangements are discussed in more detail in Chapter 12.
9.3 Regulatory Program
The regulatory program formulated by the agency must contain the
following elements specified in Sec. 208(b)(2)(C) of the Act:
1. The identification of all pollution sources in each planning
area and an indication of which agencies have been designated
for their regulation.
2. An Indication that agency(s) with regulatory responsibility
possess the statutory authority, or have initiated legislative
proposals to obtain the authority to carry out this activity
and to utilize the specific forms of regulation called for in
the program.
3. An indication of which form(s) of regulation (land use, permits,
licenses, pretreatment standards, associated fiscal policies, etc.)
will be applied to pollution sources.
9-2
-------
4. Specification of the technical requirements to be incorporated
into the regulation.
5. Provisions that those affected by regulation will have adequate
notice, rights of appeal, and other legal safeguards to encourage
full compliance.
A. Agency Selection
Many existing agencies with responsibilities in the water quality
management area should be considered when arranging regulatory
responsibilities for specific pollution sources. In addition to
various State and local agencies, it may be possible to utilize
regional agencies. For the regulation of point sources, these
agencies may include state air and water pollution control organiza-
tions, natural resource departments, public health agencies or
institutions responsible for the NPDES program. Regional and local
agencies might include governments of general jurisdiction, sewage
treatment agencies, or special district authorities. For nonpoint
source regulation, agencies might include Soil Conservation Districts,
State agricultural and forestry agencies, State land management
bureaus, and State soil and water conservation agencies.
B. Statutory Requirements
The Act requires that a regulatory program include the following:
1. To the extent practicable, provide for waste treatment
management on an areawide basis and for identification, evalua-
tion and control or treatment of all point and nonpoint
pollution sources;
2. Regulate the location, modification, and construction of
any facilities within the area which may result in any discharge
in such area;
3. Assure that industrial or commercial wastes discharged Into
any treatment works in the area meet applicable pretreatment
requirements.
The regulatory program 1s also affected by Sec. 208(b)(2)(F-K) which
requires that water quality management plans: 1) set forth procedures
and methods (including land use requirements) to control to the
extent feasible nonpoint pollution sources related to.agriculture,
silviculture, mining, and construction; and 2) establish processes
to protect ground and surface water quality through controls on
disposition of residual wastes and on land disposal of pollutants.
9-3
-------
To meet the requirements of the Act, the implementing agency(s)
will need clear, explicit and overall authority for their regulatory
activities. They should not assume that the authority is implicit
or inherent in existing law. In some cases, the authority necessary
for some of the regulatory tasks may be present in governmental
entities, or combinations of them, to be included in the management
arrangements. In other cases, additional authority may be necessary
to carry out specific regulatory responsibilities. This may require
a delegation of authority from other state or federal agencies or
new state legislative enactments. It may be possible to acquire
necessary regulatory authority by amending existing legislation.
Instead of enacting new legislation or amending existing laws, it may
be advisable to include in the institutional arrangements, agencies
which already have the needed authority but may not normally be
involved in water pollution control. Examples of such agencies would
include those with regulatory power over land use and construction
activity.
C. Regulatory Controls
The regulatory controls are the specific measures used to regulate
a pollution source. There are several general forms of regulation
which may be used individually, or in combination, for regulatory
purposes. Additional regulatory controls are discussed in Ch. 6.
1. Land Use. Many land use control measures could be used in a
regulatory program. These include:
- authority over the use and development of public lands;
- soil conservation measures;
- flood plain or other critical area controls;
- zoning or subdivision controls exercised by local govern-
ments in collaboration with the state water quality program
2. Permits and Licenses. It is often possible to create permit
and/or licenses to accomplish many water quality management goals:
- NPDES permits may be issued with effluent standards that
assure desired water'quality;
- pretreatment permits may be required for effluents entering
wastewater treatment facilities to assure desired water
quality;
- permits for other point sources; or permits and licenses
for activities generating nonpoint source pollution, may specify
criteria for siting, design, and performance of facilities and
operations.
9-4
-------
The effectiveness of any permit program depends upon the
availability of sanctions and adequate staffing. It Is
Important that planning agencies give careful attention to
providing adequate sanctions for the program and to assuring
the availability of resources necessary to implement them.
3. Standards. State water pollution control agencies have the
ability to create or to modify water quality standards. State
agencies may set water quality standards at more stringent
levels than the national guidelines in order to implement anti-
degradation policies. Like the use of permits for regulatory
purposes, the effectiveness of the program depends upon the
availability and use of effective sanctions for noncompliance
and adequate staffing.
4. Fiscal Policies. Various fiscal policies, such as taxation
and pricing, may be used to complement the regulatory program.
a. Pricing Policy
Pricing policy can be used to reduce the flow of wastewater
through metering. In this regard, there are two decisions
which must be made. The first, for many areas, is whether or
not to meter. Unless there are meters, charges cannot be
be assessed for Incremental use, and therefore a pricing
policy cannot affect flow and waste reduction. Savings from
a reduction in water and wastewater flow must be balanced
against the costs of metering. Relevant savings and costs
apply to both the water and waste treatment systems.
If a decision 1s made to meter, or to meter certain classes
of users, the second decision 1s to determine the rate levels.
To encourage cost-effective choices on the part of users,
economic analysis indicates that at the margin of use, rates
should equal marginal costs. Rates should reflect the
Incremental cost attributable to flow, the incremental cost of
BOD removal, etc.
In practice, and 1n current guidelines, the emphasis on
developing user charges has been on identifying average
costs attributable to flow removal of BOD or other constituents.
While rates based on such estimates are not Ideal, they have
been effective in Inducing wastewater flow reduction and
industrial process change.
9-5
-------
b- Taxation Policy
Differential assessment ratios can serve as an inducement
to keep land in a nonurban classifiaction for open space or
low density. Such a policy permits owners to maintain land
in its present use, but does not prohibit its sale for a
more intensive use at a later date. The policy therefore
tends to slow down the rate of development, without completely
prohibiting it, but gives no assurance that the most environ-
mentally sensitive areas are given the most protection.
Other taxation policies should also be considered. For
example, sales tax exemptions, property tax exemptions, and
tax deductions can be used to pay or subsidize private
dischargers to encourage process changes to lower the genera-
tion of pollutants.
c. Public Investment Policy
The waste treatment facilities elements of the plan will
have a direct relationship with public investment policy.
The provision of sewerage service is one of the more important
public investment decisions an area can make. Careful
consideration must be given to ensuring that other public
investment policies and decisions are consistent with the plan.
Most important among these are transportation, water supply,
and public facilities. In developing the plan it is necessary
to ensure that areas scheduled to be sewered also receive
other necessary public facilities and services. Decisions
about public investments can be made to reinforce the plan
and, in particular, the regulatory program. For example,
areas that are to be moderately developed should have a
transportation system adequate for that level but not for
extensive development.
D. Technical Requirements
To determine whether compliance with a regulatory program is
being achieved, the program should include a specification of the
type of pollutant to be regulated from each pollution source and
the level of control which is sought. The regulatory goal should
be clearly understood by those responsible for assuring compliance
and those regulated by the program. A more detailed discussion of
technical requirements may be found in Chapters 3.6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.
9-6
-------
E. Procedural Requirements
The regulatory program should Incorporate adequate compliance
proecdures and arrangements to protect the interest of those
affected by the program. The procedural arrangements in the
program should include at least the following:
1. A procedure for giving adequate notice to those regulated
by the plan concerning when, where, and how the regulation
will apply to them.
2. Information to regulated parties specifying how they are
expected to conform to the regulatory program.
3. A method for hearing and responding to grievances among
those affected by regulation.
4. A notice and hearing procedure for major regulatory decisions
made by the management agency(s).
5. Provisions for public participation in the administration
of the regulatory program.
In order to devise an effective regulatory strategy, it may be
useful to take an inventory of existing regulation for each
pollutant source category. Based upon an assessment of the adequacy
of existing regulation to deal with each pollutant problem, necessary
modifications of existing regulatory approaches can be proposed.
The need for additional legislation to establish adequate regulation
of pollution sources should be assessed as early as possible in the
planning process so that action may be taken to obtain the necessary
regulatory authority.
9.4 Haste Treatment Management Program
A waste treatment management program consists of all those activities
necessary to create, operate, finance, and enforce the waste treatment
provisions of the State WQM Plan. It is particularly important that
management agency(s) obtain the required authority for these tasks as
described in Section 208(c)(2) of the Act and that they develop effective
management strategies for implementing these responsibilities. Manage-
ment agencies should not rely upon implied powers for their authority
but should obtain explicit authority for their tasks. It is very likely
that some of the required authority will not be possessed by management
agency(s) when planning begins and will have to be explicitly obtained
before the management phase begins. The waste treatment management
tasks include all of those mentioned below.
9-7
-------
A. Securing Comprehensive Authority
Section 208(c)(2)(A) requires that there be adequate authority
"to carry out appropriate portions of an areawide waste treatment
management plan..." The tasks for which this authority is needed
are described in Sec. 208(b). Usually, this authority will be
distributed among several agencies in the 208 area. An important
planning task is to allocate, and sometimes to consolidate, this
authority among those units responsible for the management program.
The plan must identify agencies necessary to carry out the plan.
Section 208(c)(2)(B) requires that there be adequate authority
to "manage effectively waste treatment works and related facilities..."
in conformance with the plan. In this regard, the broad definition
of "treatment works" set forth in Sec. 212(2){B) and discussed in
Chapter 8 should be kept in mind. Institutional arrangements must
incorporate some means of coordination among the agencies involved
in administering the plan so that conflicts can be resolved and
the plan properly enforced.
B. Operations Management
The Act requires in Section 208(c)(2)(C) that there be adequate
authority "directly or by contract, to design and construct new
works, and to operate and maintain new and existing works as
required by (the) plan..." Generally, existing waste treatment
agencies already have this authority. However, where works are
to be located outside the immediate jurisdiction, or when discharges
from outside the immediate jurisdiction are to be accepted, adequate
enabling legislation to meet this requirement may have to be enacted.
When approval of a superior agency is required, it should be secured
before a construction grant application is made. The management
plan should provide sufficient manpower, fiscal resources, and
administrative expertise to assure that the customary management
tasks associated with such a waste treatment operation are properly
discharged.
C. Financing
The Act requires in Section 208(c)(2)(D) that there shall be
adequate authority "to accept and utilize grants, or other funds
from any source for waste treatment management purposes." Most
waste treatment agencies have this authority under state law.
Where such authority does not exist, enabling legislation must
be passed. Some States have arrangements permitting State agencies
to redistribute grants among local government units, but the Act
requires that the full federal share of funding for treatment agencies
be distributed to the local units.
9-8
-------
Section 208(c)(2)(E-G) deals with other authority required in
relation to financial arrangements. It should be noted that
Sec. 204(b)(l)(A) and (B) require that all user charge arrangements
must assure that each user pay his proportionate share of service
costs and that there be full industrial cost recovery in the program.
Many existing arrangements for assessing user charges are not
likely to meet these tests. See Chapter 10 for a discussion of
user charges.
In addition to these specific statutory requirements, the
management agency(s) must be prepared to deal with the customary
fiscal responsibilities for program management, including the raising
and transfer of funds internally, and the apportionment of responsibility
for financing operating costs of the program among the constituent units.
D. Sanctions
An effective waste treatment program includes sanctions. Section
208(c)(2)(H) requires that there be adequate authority "to refuse to
receive any wastes from any municipality or subdivision thereof,
which does not comply with any provisions of (the) approved plan..."
This authority, which may be exercised by an appropriate state agency,
would be used only in extreme cases, and only if such measures as
negotiations, fines, additional charges, moratoria, and court settle-
ments have proven unsuccessful.
The Act also requires in Sec. 208(c)(2)(I) that there be adequate
authority "to accept for treatment industrial wastes." This authority
also extends to refusal of wastes which do not meet applicable pre-
treatment requirements as mentioned in Sec. 208(b)(2)(C)(iii).
Other grounds for refusal exist when an industry does not comply with
the State WQM Plan or violates applicable State or federal discharge
laws.
^•5 Basic Issues in Management Agency Designation
Many issues will have to be resolved to determine the management
a9ency(s) and institutional arrangements necessary to meet the requirements
°T the Act. The basic issues are:
1. What agency will exercise responsibility for overall program
supervision and enforcement?
2. To what extent will the affected local governments be involved
in the management arrangements?
3. Will Implementation responsibility be vested in a single agency
or diverse agencies?
9-9
-------
4. What will be the relationship between the management agency(s)
implementing the State WQM Plan and those agency(s) implementing
portions of the State WQM Plan in designated 208 areas?
5. If consolidation of agency responsibilities is undertaken, how
will this be accomplished?
6. What decisions will be taken to assure that local land use
decisions do not adversely affect water quality?
7. To what degree will agencies be supported from tax revenue?
Attached (page 9-11) is a chart which suggests where responsibility
for major elements of plan implementation might be located.
A. Options in Institutional Arrangements
The choice of the agency(s) to implement the State WQM Plan
will probably be influenced by the number of governmental units
which possess or can secure the authority to manage the waste treat-
ment program and to implement the regulatory aspects of the State
WQM Plan. Generally, there are several approaches to consider:
1. Single Planning and Implementing Agency for Each Planning Area
One option is to establish a single planning and implementing
agency for all the area included in the plan. This would facilitate
greater coordination and continuity between planning and imple-
mentation than would be possible if these two responsibilities
were assigned to separate entities. If this approach is taken,
it is important to assure that the agency involved has sufficient
statutory authority to carry out the requirements of both planning
and implementation and that elected officials are included in
the planning process. This option might be especially appropriate
for carrying out State WQM Plans on public lands where a state or
federal agency could assume both planning and implementation
responsibility.
2. Single Planning and a Single Implementing Agency for Each
Planning Area
Another option is to divide the planning and implementation
responsibilities between two separate agencies. This would make
day-to-day coordination more difficult, but might facilitate
the implementation of the plan by requiring less reorganization
of existing agency authorities than might otherwise be needed.
Again, it is Important that the planning agency have elected
9-10
-------
POSSIBLE LOCATION OF MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES
FOR MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Responsibilities
City/County
Regional
Representatives of Special
General Purpose Government Districts
State
General Management
—supervision/coordination
—continuous planning
—fiscal management
X
X
X
Regulation
—land use and other land
management controls
—permits and licenses
—standards
—fiscal policies
X
X
X
X
X
X
Waste Management
—operations management
—financing
—sanctions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
officials on its Advisory Board. This option might be necessary
if one agency conducted planning and another agency undertook
implementation responsibilities for public lands.
3. Single Planning Agency and Plural Implementing Agencies for Each
Planning Area ~~
A third option would be a single planning agency and more than
one management agency. The use of multiple implementing agencies
might permit the gathering of sufficient authority and resources
for plan management without consolidation or other reorganization
of existing governmental bodies. While coordination between the
planning agency and the management agencies would be more difficult,
the plan might be more rapidly implemented. Economies of scale
in plan Implementation, however, would not be likely due to frag-
mentation. Two approaches to securing supervision and enforcement
in plan implementation should be considered:
a. A single supervisory agency with clear responsibility and
resources for overall management, coordination, arid plan
enforcement.
b. Apportionment of some responsibilities for plan supervision
and enforcement among several agencies with one given the lead
role.
The advantage of fixing responsibility for supervision and enforce-
ment of the plan upon a single agency 1s clear accountability and
greater coherence in conflict resolution, plan coordination, and
overall management activities. Dividing responsibility for program
supervision and coordination among several agencies while designating
one as the lead agency may disturb existing agency powers and relation-
ships less and reduce the difficulties of formulating a satisfactory '
management scheme.
4. Role of the State in Planning and Implementation under Options
Presented Above
For each planning area, the State may delegate both planning and
Implementation responsibilities. However, 1f planning responsibilities
are delegated, a lead planning agency should be designated 1n each
planning area. Under any of the options discussed above, the State
is ullmately responsible for assuring plan implementation.
9L12
-------
B. Intergovernmental Agreements
No matter which of the above options 1s chosen, formal Inter-
governmental agreements must be made. Adjustments 1n the authority
and in services of local, regional, or state governments 1n a State
WQM area may be effected by different forms of legal agreement and
statutory authorization.
1. Contract
Where a single agency already encompasses the entire 5208 area,
other participating local units (county, metropolitan government,
or metropolitan special district, etc.) of government may contract
with it to provide the services required.
2. Joint Exercise of Powers
Where they do not already exist, consolidated agencies may be
established jointly by the participating local units of government.
Interlocal contracts or agreements may be utilized in such joint
exercise of powers.
3. Delegation of Responsibility
Where a new areawlde agency is established, the State may
transfer functions to 1t from other local, regional, or state
agencies through appropriate enabling legislation.
C. A-95 Review
In accordance with OMB (Office of Management and Budget)
Circular A-95 Revised, dated November 13, 1973, all applicants under
federal programs which provide assistance to state, local, and area-
wide projects and activities planned on a mult1jurisd1ct1ona1 basis
must notify the appropriate state and areawlde planning and develop-
ment clearinghouse for review and comment. The proposed application
will be reviewed for its consistency with areawlde plans including
comprehensive planning, environmental concerns, water supply and
distribution systems, sewage facilities and waste treatment works,
and land use. In most cases, either a regional planning agency or
COG serves as the regional clearinghouse, and, as mentioned above,
may be utilized as the areawlde planning agency under S208. As
part of Its review responsibilities, the State should ensure that
any part proposed applications are consistent with State WQM Plans.
On the national level, EPA reviews the annual certification of
State plans.
9-13
-------
CHAPTER 10
FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS
10.1 Introduction
Financial planning must be an integral part of the planning process.
The purpose of financial planning is to determine the methods and arrange-
ments which management agency(s) can use to finance the implementation of
a water quality management plan. A financial plan including a budget should
be developed to describe the sources of financing for the three functions to
be carried out by the management agency(s):
1. General management program, including program administration,
supervision and coordination, and continuing planning;
2. Regulatory program, including administrative activities and
possible capital outlays involved in compensation of land owners
affected by regulation;
3. Waste treatment management program, including planning, construction,
operation and administration of municipal facilities and other
public sector pollution control projects (including nonpolnt source
abatement projects).
In order to budget for these activities of management agency(s), it
is useful to consider three types of costs that may be Incurred 1n carrying
out the activities:
- capital construction costs;
- operational costs and revenue;
- indirect (overhead) costs.
In developing a financial plan, it is useful to distinguish the
activities in need of financing, the management agency(s) proposed to
administer the element of a plan, and the possible means of financing the
capital, operating, and indirect costs associated with that element of the
Plan. The following section discusses the requirements of the Act pertain-
ing to three types of financing Involved in carrying out a water quality
management plan. The next section (Ch. 10.3) discusses how these requirements
might be met 1n order to carry out management agency functions. The final
section (Ch. 10.4) suggests Information to include in a financial plan.
10.2 Requirements of the Act
Provisions directly and indirectly affecting financial arrangements
are contained throughout the Act with those specifically affecting the State
WQM Plan set forth in Title II.
10-1
-------
A. Capital Construction Costs
1. 8208(b)(2)(E) requires that the water quality management plan
include identification of the measures necessary to carry out
the plan including financing and the costs of carrying out the
plan within the necessary period of time. This applies to all
capital costs associated with point and nonpoint source controls.
2. $204(a)(4) requires that the applicant proposing to construct
treatment works agree to pay the non-Federal costs of such work.
3. S204(b)(l)(C) provides that the Administrator shall not
approve any grant for any treatment works unless he shall first
determine that the applicant has the financial capability to
insure adequate construction, operation, and maintenance of the
treatment works through the applicant's jurisdiction.
4. $208(c)(2)(C) requires that the waste treatment management
agency(s) have adequate authority directly or by contract to
design and construct new works and operate and maintain them.
5. S208(c)(2)(D) requires that waste treatment management agency(s)
have adequate authority to accept and utilize grants or other
funds from any source for waste treatment management purposes.
6. S208(c)(2)(F) requires that the waste treatment management
agency{s) have adequate authority to incur short and long term
indebtedness.
7. §204(b)(l)(B) provides that the Administrator shall not
approve any grant for any treatment works unless the applicant
has made provision for industrial cost recovery (recovery from
industrial users of the portion of the Federal share of treat-
ment works construction cost attributable to industrial waste
treatment).
8. Section 12 of the Act provides for an Environmental Financing
Authority under the Secretary of the Treasury. This Authority is
established to assure that inability to borrow necessary funds on
reasonable terms does not prevent state or local public bodies
from carrying out waste treatment works construction projects
eligible for assistance under the Act. The Authority is authorized
to purchase the financial obligations of these public bodies to
finance the non-Federal share of such construction.
B. Operational Costs and Assessment of Revenue
1. S204(b)(l)(C) provides that the Administrator shall not
approve any grant for any treatment works unless the applicant
10-2
-------
has financial capability to insure operation and maintenance
of the treatment works.
2. S208(c)(2)(E) provides that the waste treatment management
agency(s) must have adequate authority to raise revenues, includ-
ing the assessment of waste treatment charges, to implement all
elements of the plan.
3. S208(c)(2)(6) provides that the waste treatment management
agency(s) must have adequate authority to assure, in implementing
waste treatment management plan, that each participating
community pays its proportionate share of the treatment costs.
4. S204(b)(l)(A) provides that the Administrator shall not approve
any grants for any treatment works unless the applicant has adopted
a system of user charges assuring that each recipient of waste
treatment services will pay its proportionate share of the cost of
operation and maintenance (including replacement) of any waste
treatment services provided by the applicant.
C. Indirect (Overhead) Costs To Be Financed
1. Continuing planning is an indirect cost to be financed by the
management agency. S208(b)(3) requires that the water quality
management plan shall be certified annually by the governor of
the state or his designee as being consistent with the applic-
able basin plan.
2. S208(b)(2)(F)-(K) provide that the management plan shall
Include processes to identify and/or control nonpoint sources
of pollution. Nonpoint source planning 1s an especially
Important part of continuing planning.
3. 5201(e) provides that the Administrator shall encourage waste
treatment management which results in integrating facilities for
sewage treatment and recycling. It further provides that such
integrated facilities shall be designed and operated to produce
revenues 1n excess of capital and operation and maintenance costs
and that such revenues shall be used by the designated regional
management agency to aid 1n financing other environmental improve-
ment programs.
10.3 Development of Financial Plans
A. Capital Construction Costs
Capital costs will be Incurred primarily in the construction
of waste treatment systems. However, in some cases, fixed capital
10-3
-------
investment may be necessary in order to finance a regulatory program
involving acquisition of land or compensation of landowners.
1. Waste Treatment Program
Due to the number and variety of methods for financing waste
treatment under State and local laws, each plan should include
the broad range of financial arrangements available rather than
follow any rigid formula. Some requirements of the Act should
present few if any difficulties with regard to financial arrange-
ments for treatment of wastes; others are more likely to cause
problems. Financial arrangements which should be relatively easy
to provide are as follows:
a. Capital funds may be raised or generated from the general
fund, particularly if the applicant is a government unit of
general jurisdiction.
b. Capital funds may be generated from grants or funds from
any other sources. In some instances, matching funds may be
required.
c. The capacity and ability to contract indicates a limited
ability to generate short-term indebtedness.
d. The capacity to incur short-term indebtedness may be demon-
strated by the ability to issue bond anticipation notes, grant
anticipation notes, or to borrow from state agencies. Such
short term indebtedness must, of course, comply with constitu-
tional limitations on borrowing and with any state or local
statutory requirements.
e. The capacity to incur long-term debt may be demonstrated
by the capacity to issue general obligation bonds, revenue
bonds, or the capacity to borrow from state agencies. Exercise
of this capacity to borrow is of course limited 1n many instances
by constitutional or statutory provisions. There must also be
compliance with state and local statutory requirements for the
issuance of bonds or the incurring of such long-term indebtedness.
Areas in which problems may be encountered in complying with the
Act include the following:
a. The industrial cost recovery requirements of the Act are
specifically covered in 40 CFR 35 Subpart E, of the grant regu-
lations. Industrial cost recovery charges may be allocated on
a systemwide basis provided that the treatment works project
for which the grant is made is substantially interconnected,
with a goal to be completely interconnected physically to all
other portions of the system.
10-4
-------
Where revenue bonds are used to finance the local share
of construction costs, funds designated for bond repayment
should be accounted for separately from those received in
compliance with industrial cost recovery requirements. This
should avoid any problem in establishing priorities for repay-
ment to revenue bond holders entitled to receive the industrial
cost recovery share of total revenues. In instances where
industrial users must make long-term commitments for repayment,
provision mfght be made for transfer of this commitment, in
order to facilitate industrial growth and change within the
area. Since it is implied that a long-term commitment to repay
is in exchange for provision of services to treat the user's
industrial wastes, such rights to services should be trans-
ferable. Both the commitment and the right to services should
be transferable, subject, however, to approval by the waste
treatment management agency.
b. In the event of consolidation of two or more areas or
agencies, each of which had incurred indebtedness and other
contractual obligations in supplying waste treatment services,
a legally acceptable method must be set forth for the consoli-
dated agency to assume payment of the debts and obligations.
Personnel contracts, retirement benefits, long-term supply
contracts, etc., should be paid particular attention.
c. In the event of treatment system consolidation, problems may
arise over the new waste treatment management agency reimbursing
the participating agencies for the value of their existing facili-
ties and assets. A fair and uniform method of determining the
values of these assets and a legally acceptable method of handling
the transfer should be set forth.
2. Regulatory Program
Capital outlays may be necessary in carrying out a regulatory
program over existing and future waste discharge; such outlays
might arise from land acquisition or compensation of landowners
for reduction in the value of their land due to development restric-
tions. These expenditures may be financed through some of the
financial arrangements discussed above—general funds, grants, or
bonds. Capital expenditure for land acquisition could be considered
as part of multi-objective programs such as programs for parks and
recreation. Alternative means for defraying potential capital
expenditures incurred by regulatory programs would include land
dedication requirements and incentives 1n subdivision regulations,
cluster zoning, planned unit development ordinances, and other self-
financing schemes for encouraging land development that is compatible
with environmental objectives.
10-5
-------
B. Operational Costs and Revenue Assessments
1. Waste Treatment Program
The Act provides two mechanisms for financing the operating
costs of waste treatment facilities:
a. User charges. 40 CFR 35 Subpart E, and related guidelines
provide the basis for establishing user charges. As set forth
in these regulations and guidelines, the Act requires that each
recipient of waste treatment services pay its proportionate
share of costs of operation and maintenance. Charges based on
property values only will not suffice to satisfy this requirement,
except in cases where such charges have been used historically,
change-over would be costly and disruptive, and the goal of pro-
portionality among user classes can be achieved by such systems.
Untform rates on volume among classes of users will suffice if
the classification reflects the differences in cost of treatment
among classes of users.
b. Participating communities' proportionate shares. In deter-
rain ing~e!icnl>aTHcTpl^^ share of
treatment costs, the differentials among communities should be
explained and justified. In the event that all participating
communities are charged on the same basis, justification should
be given. The provisions and effects of Interlocal agreements
and contracts to supply waste treatment services should be
reviewed and set forth. The methods of charging users within
each of the participating communities should be defined. The
user charge requirement cannot be avoided by Interlocal agree-
ments or contracts to supply waste treatment services. User
charge requirements must be reflected in determining the par-
ticipating communities' proportionate shares of treatment costs.
For pollution abatement projects not financed through the
construction grants program of the FWPCAA (for example, non-
point source abatement projects), the principle of effluent fees
or user charges should also be followed for financing operating
costs.
2. Regulatory Program
Locally established regulatory programs 1n which capital Invest-
ments are Incurred may also be financed through user charges. For
example, if land 1s acquired for protection of critical or flood
prone areas, recreational facilities on these lands could provide
a source of revenue to defray capital and operating expenses of such
projects.
10-6
-------
C. Indirect (Overhead) Costs
1. General Management Program
The overall management of State WQM Plan implementation, includ-
ing continuing planning, program administration, supervision, and
coordination, will necessitate specific sources of funding. The
following are examples of some of the activities of a management
program for which financing would be needed:
a. Program supervision and coordination:
- water quality monitoring and surveillance;
- development of revised work plans and State/EPA Agreement;
- performance evaluation for each planning area;
- determination of the need to revise elements of the plan and
delegation of revision to regional, State, or Federal
agencies;
- coordination with other planning programs;
- public participation in plan implementation.
b. Continuous planning:
- plan revision and updating;
- annual certification of plan.
c. Fiscal management:
- budget development;
- development of financial arrangements to implement plans;
- financial consulting with affected management agency(s)
during plan Implementation.
The possible sources of financing for the general management
program might include general revenue, grants, bonds, and special
taxes and assessments. Since water quality management provides
specific services such as sewage treatment, nonpolnt source
pollution abatement (Including protection of property from flood
and erosion hazards), access to recreation opportunities, water
supply protection, fish and wildlife conservation and many, other
benefits, the administrative costs for carrying out the State
WQMP should be assessed to those benefiting from the services
provided by plan implementation. Examples of financing mechanisms
directed to users of these services would Include: water and
sewer charges, flood Insurance premiums, portions of general taxes,
recreational user fees, and hunting and fishing licenses.
10-7
-------
10.4 Budget Preparation and Supporting Documentation
A. The plan must include a projection of costs of carrying out the
plan. This projection should be over a 20-year period. The
projection could distinguish between waste treatment, regulatory,
and general management activities of the agency(s) designated to
implement the plan. The projection could also break the costs of
carrying out these activities into capital, operating, and indirect
costs as appropriate. For each activity involved in plan implementation,
the budget should indicate the specific form(s) of financing to be
employed.
B. For activities and elements of the plan to be carried out in the
first five years of plan implementation, a more detailed 5-year projec-
tion including capital Improvement budgeting and cash flow should be
provided. It should include start-up costs, carrying charges during
the first years of operation and similar nonrecurring costs associated
with plan implementation.
C. The method for obtaining budget approval for the 5-year capital
improvement budget should be described, and should indicate the
schedule for obtaining such approval.
D. Where an activity or element of the plan is to be financed by
increased taxes, charges, unused bonding capacity, or other increased
assessment through existing sources of financing, the budget should
indicate the present and projected charges.
E. The legal authority of the agency(s) to undertake the financing
necessary for plan implementation should be described in an opinion
letter from the legal counsel for the agency(s). This opinion letter
could also be prepared by counsel experts specialized in the field of
bond financing and State and local taxation.
10-8
-------
CHAPTER 11
COST ASSESSMENT CONSIDERATIONS
11.1 Introduction
The State Water Quality Management Plans are to include an estimate
of the cost of carrying out the plan. The costs to be assessed should
include capital, operating, administrative, and maintenance costs. These
costs can usually, be measured in monetary terms. Other costs, however, such
as social, environmental and economic costs, may be more difficult to quantify,
and may be described and evaluated in a more subjective way. Guidance on
such evaluation is provided in Chapter 13.
In determining an estimate of the cost of carrying out the plan, cost
estimates should be made for the following categories:
- municipal facilities;
- industrial facilities;
- nonpoint source control;
- urban and industrial stormwater systems;
- residual waste control;
- regulatory program;
- program management.
These cost assessments should be based on the best available data. '
For example, cost estimates for municipal facilities should be based on
engineering plans, specifications, and detailed cost estimates when available.
Cost estimates for other abatement measures should also be based on engineering
designs and specifications to the extent that such details are available in
the descriptions of proposed abatement measures. Program management costs for
carrying out these plan elements should be distinguished by plan element or as
a separate category of administrative costs. Where the proposed abatement
measures are only described in general terms, a general estimate of their
cost should be undertaken (see Chapter 11.4). In addition, emphasis should
be placed on the cost estimates for plan elements to be implemented in the
first five years of the planning period. Due to a number of factors, includ-
ing changes in economic forecasts and population projections, cost estimates
beyond five years will be less accurate. Greater attention, therefore,
should be given to refining the accuracy of the estimates for the initial
five years.
11.2 Basic Concepts in Estimating Costs
A. Economic Cost
In considering the cost of Implementing a plan, it is necessary to
distinguish between outlays and economic cost. In many Instances cash
11-1
-------
outlays adequately represent costs, but sometimes a resource is
used, with no cash outlay. The cost in such a case is the value
of the resource in its best alternative use -- its "opportunity
cost." For example, acquiring public land for a treatment plant
may involve no cash outlay, but may have an opportunity cost in
terms of foregone recreation or commercial use. If opportunity
costs are not considered, plan selection will be biased towards those
options which do not require outlays, despite their other costs.
Moreover, the concept of opportunity cost accounts for the cost to
the community and Nation as a whole, not merely the cost to one
part or another.
B. Price Levels
Where costs are estimated for future periods, they should be
stated in terms of base period dollars. Future costs should not
reflect any expected overall increase in wages and prices, unless
there is reason to expect significant changes in relative prices
during the planning period. For example, due to the present energy
shortage, long term prospects are for higher energy costs. While
it is difficult to predict how much costs will rise, alternative
plans should be tested for the effect of higher energy costs.
C. Interest Rates
Discounting is a way to account for the opportunity cost of funds
invested in a project, in the sense that the funds could also have
been used productively in the private sector of the economy or in
some other public project. The applicable discount rate determines
the optimal choice between capital expenditures now versus higher
operating costs in the future, the optimal amount of reserve capacity
to build, and so on.
In discounting, the costs of a plan are stated in terms of their
present values. That is, future costs are discounted at an applicable
rate of interest back to some intial starting date, and added to the
initial capital costs. Alternatively, the present values may be
converted into equivalent annualized values. Standard procedures
are described in engineering, economics, and business finance texts.
The interest rate to be used in evaluating water-related public
projects is prescribed by the Water Resources Council, a Federal
inter-departmental group, in its "Principles and Standards for Plan-
ning Water and Related Land Resources", as amended by P.L. 93-251 (1974)
The rate specified by the Council is based oh the interest rate on
Federal Securities with maturities of 15 years or more. The rate to
be used for each fiscal year is determined by the Council on July 1.
For fiscal year 1976, the rate is 6 1/8%.
11-2
-------
11.3 Specific Cost Questions
A. Sunk Costs and Salvage Values
Sunk costs and salvage values refer to capital assets 1n exist-
ence at the beginning or end of a program.
Sunk Costs. For simplicity, Investments and cost commitments
made prior to or concurrent with the planning study are regarded
as sunk costs and are not Included 1n the cost estimate. Such
Investments and costs commitments Include, for example: (1) invest-
ments 1n existing wastewater treatment facilities and associated
lands to be Incorporated Into a plan; (2) outstanding bond Indebted-
ness. However, if Inherited assets were to be disposed of — for
Instance, a small treatment plant scrapped and the land sold — their
sale value would be treated as a credit to that plan.
Salvage Value. At the end of the planning period, land for
treatment works (including that used as part of the treatment process
or for ultimate disposal or residues), should be assumed to have a
salvage value equal to Its market value at the time of the analysis,
less any costs required to restore the lands to pre-project conditions.
Salvage value of land reclaimed by land treatment of sludge disposal
should be estimated as the value of the reclaimed land. R1ghts-of-
way and easements should be assigned a salvage value not greater
than the market value at the time of the analysis.
Permanent structures should be assumed to have a salvage value
at the end of the planning period if those structures can be expected
to continue fulfilling their planned use. Salvage value should be
based on the remaining functional life of the structure using a
straight line depreciation over the assumed functional life of the
structure. The same approach applies to process and auxiliary equip-
ment that will have usable value at the end of the planning period.
B. Capital and Operating Costs
Elements of total cost include capital construction cost, annual
operation and maintenance costs, and equipment replacement costs.
As set out 1n EPA cost-effectiveness guidelines (40 CFR 35),
capital costs for facilities include: cost of land, relocation and
right-of-way and easement acquisition; design engineering, field
exploration, and engineering services during construction; contractors'
costs, Including overhead and profit; administrative and legal services,
Including cost of bond sales; and startup costs such as operator train-
Ing. Contingency allowances consistent with the level of complexity
and detail of the cost estimate are also Included.
11-3
-------
The capital costs of a plan would Include those incurred by
both public agencies and private parties. Treatment facilities
built by industrial companies for direct discharges or for pre-
treatment would be included in private costs.
Where waste and flow reduction measures are carried out by a
large number of industrial and household dischargers, it is diffi-
cult to estimate the private costs. Unless the costs have a bearing
on the choice of a cost-effective plan, such estimates are unnecessary.
Annual operating and maintenance costs for each alternate plan
must be established. These costs should be adequate to ensure effect-
ive and dependable operation and should include all costs for operating
and maintaining the facilities under study including power, labor,
parts, materials, overhead, chemicals and repair or replacement of
equipment and structures.
Cost-effectiveness analysis requires establishing a service life
for each component and salvage values for components having service
lives longer than the planning period. The following service lives
are to be used, unless other periods can be justified:
Land Permanent
Structures 30-50 years
Process Equipment 15-30 years
Auxiliary Equipment 10-15 years
C. Administrative Costs
Water quality planning and management are likely to include a
number of ongoing costs for activities not always associated with
sewage facilities management. These activities Include monitoring
of streams, monitoring the waste characteristics of major industrial
dischargers, periodic checks of infiltration and inflow, records of
storm and runoff characteristics, collecting and analyzing data on
residential water use, continuing planning, coordination with other
planning, public participation, and other program management responsi-
bilities. These functions are as important to the effectiveness of
a plan as the physical units 1n place. The costs should be included
1n financial projections. Recovery of costs by direct charges --
e.g., permit fees, monitoring .fees, etc. — should be considered and
evaluated.
D. Accuracy of Cost Estimates
The accuracy of cost estimates for all point and nonpolnt elements
of the plans should be sufficient to assure the selection of the most
cost-effective solution.
11-4
-------
The cost estimates should be sufficiently refined to provide a
basis for the 5-year financial budget discussed in Chapter 10.
Such estimates might be based upon preliminary engineering layouts
and designs, taking account of facilities 1n place. As discussed
1n Chapter 10, financial budgets should cover the first five years;
therefore, the level of detail for cost estimates should be greater
for that period.
E. Present Values
Using the Interest rate discussed in 11.2.C., the costs for
construction and operations, by year, should be discounted to the
proposed plan Initiation date, to obtain the present value (or,
what 1s much the same thing, the annual1zed value) of the plan.
An example Is given 1n EPA Guidance for Facilities Planning, May, 1975.
11.4 Generalized Cost Estimation
As explained 1n Chapter 3.3.C, in some cases there may be good reason
to develop particular plan elements at a more general level of detail than
would be needed 1f that element were to be Immediately implemented. In
such cases, a generalized cost estimate for abating particular forms of
pollution would be sufficient. The following guidance discusses methods
for undertaking generalized cost estimates.
For some cost categories, such as for municipal facilities, there are
recognized methods of cost estimation. For other categories, such as non-
point source control, estimating procedures are not as well developed. All
of the categories listed in the Introduction to this chapter are discussed
below. More definitive guidance can be provided for those categories
where more recognized cost estimation procedures exist.
A. Municipal Facilities Needs
Where facilities or areawide planning 1s 1n progress, the required
cost effective analyses can be used in cost estimation. For specific
facilities, the best sources are proposed contract costs from completed
plans and specifications. At a less advanced stage in facilities
planning, cost estimates based on firm or preliminary engineering
estimates, and costs of recently constructed facilities of a similar
nature should be used when available.
In the absence of completed facilities or areawide plans and
firm or preliminary engineering estimates, a cost estimation procedure
must be used. The generalized estimate of costs resulting from the
State WQM Plan does not constitute a final decision governing facil-
ities planning efforts. Rather, they represent the best estimate
for the future project to be used in the absence of better estimates.
11-5
-------
The treatment of wastewaters from various collection systems
at a single treatment facility can take advantage of the economies
of a large scale operation. Generally, justification of region-
alization requires a detailed analysis. The time for such an
analysis probably will not be available in the context of a pre-
liminary cost estimate. If the need for several facilities in a
limited area strongly suggests a centralized treatment plant, then
this possibility should be reflected in the cost estimates. This
option may not be evident at the local level; therefore, decisions
may have to be made at the basin level.
B. Industrial Facilities Needs
A generalized cost estimate for treating industrial wastes
discharged to a municipal system should be included in the estimate
of municipal needs. In those cases where industrial wastes are
treated and discharged directly to receiving waters, an estimate of
the cost should be included in the plan. Similarly, the plan should
identify pretreatment costs borne by industry.
In many instances, it will be difficult to estimate Industrial
costs due to uncertainty as to the type of industry that might locate
in the planning area. The cost estimate should be based on the best
estimate of industrial growth and the types of Industries likely to
locate in the area. Estimates of the volume and nature of the wastes
should take into consideration estimates of future processing and
control methods. Information on the range and average treatment costs
for particular industries In available in the Economic Analysis series
developed by EPA for Proposed Effluent Guidelines for various indus-
trial categories.
C. Nonpoint Source and Residual Waste Control Needs
Cost estimates of nonpoint source and residual waste control needs
should include estimates of cost for both structural and nonstructural
control measures. Costs associated with structural measures include
land acquisition and construction of facilities. Nonstructural costs
include staffing, administration of programs, and costs of compensa-
tion of landowners (if required) affected by regulatory measures.
The cost of existing programs in the planning area, elsewhere 1n
the State, or in other States can serve as a basis for cost estimation,
Recent studies often provide Information on abatement costs and can
also serve as bases for estimates.
The cost estimates should be by agency and activity presented 1n
5-year Increments over the planning period.
11-6
-------
D. Urban and Industrial Stormwater Systems
The cost estimates for urban and industrial stormwater systems
should be disaggregated to show: (1) cost of required improvements
to existing systems; and (2) cost of systems needed for areas not
served, over at least the 20-year planning period (in 5-year incre-
ments). Included in the cost assessment for urban and industrial
stormwater systems should be a generalized estimate of the effect
on capital construction costs brought about by the use of non-
structural controls as well as capital and annual operating costs
of such control programs. EPA is in the process of developing a
cost estimation procedure for stormwater systems. The procedure
should be available for use 1n Spring, 1976. If estimates are made
using other procedures, a discussion of the chosen procedure and
reasons for using it should be included with the cost estimate.
E. Regulatory Program and Monitoring
Costs associated with a regulatory program include staffing,
administration, and capital costs (e.g., land acquisition or land-
owner compensation). Many of the regulatory program costs will be
the same as those Included in the costs for nonpoint source control
needs. For example, certain regulatory actions over silvicultural
practices may be part of the plan. Where such actions could be
listed as part of the nonpoint source control or as part of the
regulatory program, the cost estimates should be included with the
nonpoint source control needs.
As was the case with nonpoint source controls, cost estimates
should be based on data from existing programs, where available.
Data from programs 1n other States may be used but should be ad-
justed to reflect differences 1n economic conditions.
F. Program Management
Cost estimates for program management activities for those
elements of the State WQM Plan for which generalized estimates are
made should also be developed. Program management activities would
Include costs of monitoring, technical assistance, administration of
regulatory programs, coordination with other planning activities, etc.
11-7
-------
CHAPTER 12
TECHNIQUES FOR COORDINATION
12.1 Introduction
Water quality management is affected by broad policies concerning land
use, regional development, and the many functional planning activities carried
out in a State. As a result, it will be necessary to coordinate State WQM
Plan development with related policies, planning activities and programs. Of
particular importance are those related programs listed in 5130.34. Included
in Chapter 2 is a discussion of the requirements for coordination. This
chapter outlines techniques for coordination and describes how they may be
integrated into the planning process.
12.2 Coordination Techniques
A. Planning Agency Designation
In many instances, agencies which may be designated by the governor to
be responsible for preparing and coordinating State WQM Plans will
also be responsible for other related programs. Such programs may include
air quality management, land use planning, coastal zone management, water
supply, solid waste management etc. In making designations, governors
should take into consideration other related activities of the agencies
to be designated. Coordination between related programs can be improved
when responsibility for the programs is lodged in the same agency.
B. Planning Area Designation — Geographic Boundaries
As discussed in Chapter 2, planning area selection can be based on
hydrologic boundaries or political boundaries, or a combination of these.
Whichever approach is chosen, consideration should also be given to other
programs 1n the area. For example, an area may be involved 1n A1r Quality
Maintenance Area (AQMA) Planning. In determining the State WQM boundaries,
it may be possible to overlap considerably with the AQMA boundaries. As
discussed below, this could facilitate the development of integrated work
plans and use of common data bases. While it will be very difficult to
make boundaries coterminous, it may be possible to achieve a considerable
overlap. In deciding upon planning area boundaries, major planning
activities and programs should be reviewed to determine if boundaries can
be designed to coincide with those of other programs.
C. State/EPA Agreement
The State/EPA agreement on level of detail and timing is, in effect,
a work- program for the State WQM Plan effort. An agreement should be
drawn up for each basin or approved planning area. The agreement will
12-1
-------
set forth specific responsibilities and tasks needed to carry out the
State WQM Plan. Some of the tasks will be identical or similar to
those carried out under other programs. This is especially true of data
collection and projection of population, land use, and economic conditions.
State WQM Plans should utilize applicable information and analyses from
other programs and should identify this in the State/EPA Agreement.
Similarly, the planning agencies will be producing outputs that other
programs can use. This, too, should be identified in the agreement. In
some cases, it will be possible to carry out tasks jointly with other pro-
grams, especially data collection, projection, and analysis. To the
extent possible, specific tasks that will be coordinated should be identified
in the agreement. Coordination with other programs will be easier if
specific responsibilities are identified early and agreed upon.
D. Intergovernmental Agreements
After defining specific responsibilities and tasks, intergovernmental
agreements should be made to establish the responsibilities formally.
Such agreements may include contractual relationships, memoranda of
understanding, joint exercise of powers, and/or delegation of responsibility.
These are discussed with respect to plan implementation in Chapter 9.
E. Data
The data which will be needed to prepare a State WQM Plan will be
similar or identical to that needed or produced in other plans. This
is especially true of the population, economic, land use and air and
water quality data. The coordination between plans can be greatly
enhanced if consistent data bases and projections are used. To ensure
such consistency, it is often helpful if a common classification system
is used so that data can be compiled using a similar format. Planning
agencies should integrate their data requirements before gathering data,
so that information is transferable.
The feasibility of coordinating data collection and projection
depends on the timing of the planning efforts. If one is done much
earlier than others, more recent or comprehensive data may become
available by the time the latter planning effort is underway. If this
is the case, there may be adequate reason for modifying data and
projections.
* Another problem develops when the planning areas overlap but are
not identical. In this case the projections 1n the overlapping areas
should be the same and those for the adjacent areas should not conflict.
That Is, the growth rates for the entire area should be consistent.
12-2
-------
Predictions of pollution levels will be based in part on population
projections. These predictions will affect the selection of alternative
implementation strategies, which could in turn, necessitate modification
of the projections. This iterative process of revising projections must
also be coordinated so that conflicts do not arise.
F. Representation
Periodic consultation between agencies responsible for planning will
help ensure that plans are consistent. It is important, therefore, that
representatives of the planning agencies responsible for various pro-
grams be included in any advisory group which might be created to
ensure periodic consultation between the agencies. The Part 130 regu-
lations require the establishment of at' least one policy advisory committee.
Representatives of programs with a major relationship to the State WQM Plan
should be members of any advisory committees which are used. In addition, the
staffs of the planning agencies should develop a close working relationship.
For example, each agency could designate specific individuals to serve as
liaison to help ensure that necessary coordination is carried out in a timely
fashion. This would also help in identifying possible conflicts and resolving
them informally as they arise.
G. Evaluation of Alternative Strategies
Many of the management strategies which will be adopted as a result
of State WQM Planning will have an Impact on other programs. The stra-
tegies resulting from other programs may affect the development of
State WQM Plans. It is important, therefore, that the evaluation of
alternative strategies include an analysis of impacts on the activities
of related programs. This is especially true of other environmental
programs, in particular those dealing with air quality. Many of the
measures Incorporated in State WQM Plans to control point and nonpolnt
sources affect land use which could, in turn, affect air quality. For
example, sewer interceptor and facilities location, restricting the
location of industrial development to areas where the receiving waters
have assimilative capacity, and restricting development in areas where
significant nonpolnt pollution would result, are decisions which could
affect air quality. However, not all Interaction between State WQM
Plans and air quality plans need result in conflict. Both plans, for
example, should favor better management of construction activities.
Measures such as minimal exposure periods for active construction areas,
or utilization of staged grading, seeding and sodding procedures would
reduce both runoff and fugitive dust problems. In general, State WQM
Plans should take advantage of complementary strategies by evaluating
12-3
-------
the effectiveness of various alternatives to determine their impact on
other related programs.
The planning agencies should make sure that they inform one another
about alternatives being considered and offer one another an opportunity
to review and comment on alternatives. Such comments should be consid-
ered during the evaluation process so that alternatives for one program
could not be selected that would conflict with implementation of the
plans for other programs. This review and comment should be undertaken
by the planning staffs and the advisory groups to the planning agencies.
H. Reporting •
In order to keep the various planning agencies posted on current
developments, there should be some type of periodic or milepost report-
ing. This could take place quarterly or at the beginning and completion
of some subtask (e.g., data collection, projections, analysis of water
and air quality, etc.). Informal contacts would, of course, be more
frequent. Periodic or mil epost reporting, however, would provide formal
documentation of the communication which had taken place.
In addition, a report should be periodically sent to the EPA
regional office. The report should describe how representatives of
related programs are involved in an advisory capacity, any major meetings
which have been held, what information has been provided to each program,
how consistency in data and projections is being achieved, and any poten-
tial conflicts which may develop. This should be done at a minimum '
of every 3 months 1n the format of the quarterly Interim progress reports.
I. Resolving Conflicts
If potential conflicts arise during plan development, 1t is expected
that the planning agencies responsible will attempt to resolve them
Informally. If this 1s not possible, 1n designated areas the conflict
should be referred up to the State level where the agencies responsible
for administering the respective programs would resolve it. As a final
resort, conflicts should be referred to the Regional Administrator for
mediation.
In the case that other federal agencies were involved 1n a dispute,
then EPA should meet with representatives of the affected agency to review
the situation and whenever possible to formulate recommendations for
resolving the dispute.
12-4
-------
J. Program Approval
After completion, the planning agencies responsible for related
programs should review each other's plans to ensure that there are
no conflicts. If the agencies have been involved in plan development,
no conflicts should arise when 1t comes time to review the plan. In
its review, EPA will evaluate the consistency of the State WQM Plan
with other programs. Comments provided by the agencies responsible
for the programs will be a major input to EPA's review.
K. Procedures for Coordination of Planning Programs
EPA has developed agreements and memoranda of understanding con-
cerning coordination of a number of planning programs that affect water
quality management planning. These agreements and memoranda utilize
many of the plan coordination approaches discussed in this chapter.
However, greater detail on coordinating particular aspects of each pro-
gram with water quality planning may be found in the following:
Interagency agreement to relate HUD 701 planning and EPA 208
planning, March 24, 1975.
Integrating 208 Planning and 701 Comprehensive Planning.
Program Guidance Memorandum AM-9, May 2, 1975.
Coordination of EPA Water Programs and Coastal Zone Management
Programs. Program Guidance Memorandum AM-11, September 29, 1975.
Coordinating 208 Planning and A1r Quality Maintenance Area
Planning. Program Guidance Memorandum AM-14, October 30, 1975.
Joint agreement for Interagency coordination of areawlde waste
treatment management planning assistance to state and local
governments between the Environmental Protection Agency and
the Department of the Army, November 22, 1974.
12-5
-------
CHAPTER 13
ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT EVALUATION
13.1 Purpose
This chapter provides guidance for integrating environmental, social,
and economic impact evaluation into the planning process. It is intended
to meet, in part, the requirements of Sec. 102(2)(c) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and regulations issued pursuant to that
Act. It is also intended to meet the requirements of Sec. 208(b)(2)(E)
which requires "the identification of the economic, social, and environmental
impact of carrying out the plan "
The evaluation must be viewed as an integral part of the planning
process. As such, it will be performed throughout the process rather
than after the selection of the plan, with citizens and local units of
government afforded the opportunity to participate in impact evaluation
from the beginning of the planning process. Affected citizens and units
of government will thus be better able to analyze the various alternatives,
to identify specific plan impacts, and to provide meaningful suggestions
and recommendations.
13.2 Environmental, Social and Economic Impact Evaluation Process
A. Inventory Existing Conditions
The purpose of inventorying existing conditions is twofold:
(1) to aid in goal and problem identification; and (2) to serve as
a basis for the analysis and comparison of alternatives. At a
minimum, the inventory should encompass the planning area and other
areas that would be affected by the plan. For example, land disposal
sites for effluent or sludge, other wastewater reuse sites, and the
down-stream river corridor that would be affected by effective water
quality management should be included. The inventory will undoubtedly
require additions as new problem areas are identified in the planning
process.
Most of the data needed for the inventory will be readily avail-
able in existing documents and may have been gathered for use elsewhere
in the planning process. This would be true, for example, for most
of the population, land use, and hydrological data. Additionally,
items four through fourteen in the inventory (p.3-2) are impact
categories which may be used in the plan selection process (Chapter 14)
to determine differences among the plan alternatives.
13-1
-------
Only that data which is relevant to the analysis of alternatives
or determination of impacts should be included. Thus, the inventory
may include but not necessarily be limited to the following:
1. Climate and precipitation;
2. Topography;
3. Geology;
4. Hydrology (surface and groundwater):
a. water quality
b. water quantity
c. water quality and quantity problems
d. water uses
e. water quality management
f. flood hazards;
5. Biology:
a. rare and endangered species
b. fish, shellfish and wildlife habitats including nursery
and spawning areas
c. fish, shellfish and wildlife community
d. benthic community structure
6. Air quality;
7. Land uses:
a. existing land uses
b. land use planning and controls
c. amount, type, and Intensity of growth (The growth data
should be of recent origin. There is no necessity to
examine growth trends further back than 1960).
d. soil types, permeability, and erodablllty
e. significant environmentally sensitive areas;
8. Wastewater management resources:
a. energy (power)
b. chemicals
c. land commitment;
9. Population levels:
a. current
b. projected (5, 10, 15, and 20 years);
13-2
-------
10. Economic activity (gross assessment):
a. Income per capita
b. agriculture
c. mining
d. manufacturing
e. service;
11. Employment trends including regional availability of
skilled manpower for treatment plant operation and
monitoring;
12. Other local, state, and federal projects having major
interaction with proposed water quality actions;
13. Public health;
14. Aesthetics:
a. recreational accessibility and activities
b. unique archeological, historical, scientific, and
cultural areas
c. noise pollution.
The Inventory should also Include Identification of adopted
goals and pertinent constraints. Goals might typically include:
1. Preservation of high quality surface water;
2. Preservation of coastal or other wetlands;
3. Preservation or enhancement of fish, shellfish and wildlife;
4. Enhancement of municipal services.
Examples of constraints Include:
1. Air quality regulations and implementation plans;
2. Local climate, topography, soils, etc.;
3. Restrictions on flood plain use or other land uses.
B. Evaluate the Existing Situation
Based upon the Inventory, a brief analysis of the existing situation
should be conducted to prioritize pollution problems and sensitive
Impact areas. This prioritlzatlon which will be a primary concern during
the remainder of the evaluation will require participation of the public
and local government agencies.
13-3
-------
C. Develop Baseline Projection
The inventory and evaluation of the existing situation will serve
as inputs into the development of a baseline projection. Construction
of a baseline projection of relevant environmental, social, and
economic factors (see Table 14.1) will enable evaluation of each
alternative. The baseline projections should be quantitative when data
are readily available. In other cases, it should be qualitative. The
baseline projection can be established by extrapolating present indi-
cator trends over the planning period. In making this projection,
it should be assumed that no additional water quality actions will be
taken other than those that have already been approved.
D. Screen Options and Subplans
Both point and nonpoint control options as well as continuous
point source, intermittent point source, and nonpoint source subplans
should be screened according to the factors set forth in Chapters 7
and 8.
E. Evaluate Alternatives
After the alternatives have been developed, each of them should
be evaluated by comparing its impact to the baseline projection.
Special consideration should be given to those sensitive Impact areas
identified in the evaluation of the existing situation.
A complete environmental assessment of each alternative is not
necessary, although the impact of both the structural and nonstructural
aspects of the plan should be considered in every case. Table 14.1
contains a list of those environmental, social and economic factors
believed to be generally most important. However, discretion should
be employed when using this table. When there is no difference among
alternatives, a statement to that effect is sufficient. Similarly, a
statement will suffice when an alternative will have no perceptible
impact on a given factor.
Special attention should be given to long-term impacts, irreversi-
ble impacts, and indirect impacts such as induced development. Resource
and energy use associated with each alternative should also be high-
lighted. The results should be displayed in a format for use in public
meetings and other forms of public participation.
13.3 Environmental Effects of the Selected Plan
The results of the environmental, social, and economic impact evaluation
will be used in the plan selection process (Chapter 14). Once a plan has
been selected, a complete description of the impact that the selected plan
13-4
-------
will have on the area's environment should be completed. The vast majority
of the data required to do this should be readily available from the eval-
uations already performed. This more detailed evaluation should describe
the impact of the proposed structural and nonstructural actions. Whenever
possible, the impact of each action on each affected environmental, social,
or economic category (see Table 14.1) should be described and displayed.
However, if more than one action affects a category, the cumulative impact
may be described. Impacts may be categorized as:
1. Primary (direct) or secondary (induced);
2. Beneficial or adverse;
3. Short or long term;
4. Avoidable or unavoidable;
5. Reversible or irreversible.
Included under irreversible impacts should be an evaluation of any
irreversible commitments of resources including energy. (See 86.304 (c-f)
of 40 CFR Part 6 for an explanation of these terms and examples.)
While emphasis should be given to the cumulative impacts of all elements
of the plan, more localized impacts of specific plan elements, such as
treatment plant locations, Interceptor sewers, and Industrial site locations,
should also be assessed and highlighted when judged significant. Greater
emphasis should be given to the localized Impacts of individual projects
anticipated to be developed during the initial five years of plan implementation.
13-5
-------
CHAPTER 14
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES AND SELECTION OF PLAN
14.1 Purpose
This chapter provides guidance on the comparison of alternative plans
leading to the selection of a State water quality management plan. The
process presented here assumes that each of the alternatives, if implemented,
would meet all regulatory requirements and comply with appropriate goals
and objectives within specified limits of technical reliability. Plans
are to be compared in terms of the defined criteria of cost effectiveness
as discussed in Chapter 1, feasibility of plan implementation, and public
acceptability. Emphasis will also be placed upon drawing together the
evaluations already completed so that the alternatives can be more easily
discussed and compared. Finally, while public participation is necessary
throughout the planning process, it is essential that the public be Involved
to a significant degree during this stage.
14.2 The Plan Selection Process
A. Assess Alternative Plans
No rigorous analytical method exists which will readily identify
the best plan for the area. As discussed in previous chapters, many
factors should be considered in comparing the alternatives. While
some of the factors, 1n particular cost assessments, can be quantified,
others can only be qualitatively assessed based upon professional
judgement, and the views of the public. Plan assessment involves the
comparison of all key factors deemed pertinent for reliable decision
making. Table 14.1 contains a list of those which are believed to be
generally most important. The inputs for that table are to be devel-
oped in the technical planning process (Chapter 3.8), the step at
which alternative plans are evaluated in light of information on
their cost, technical reliability, environmental, social and economic
impact, implementation feasibility and public acceptability. The
effects of the alternatives should be assessed quantitatively whenever
possible. In all other cases a qualitative assessment should be made.
Representatives from all affected groups should be involved in
the assessment of the alternative proposals. In most areas, affected
groups would include conservation groups, economic interests, local
elected officials, planning agencies, state departments of health,
water pollution control, and natural resources, the regional office
of EPA and the Policy Advisory Committee. The plan approval and
implementation process will be more efficient if the people respon-
sible for carrying it out fully understand the issues and contribute to
the assessment and recommendation of alternatives.
14-1
-------
B. Develop Recommended Plan
Once the alternative plans have been assessed, the planning
agency should be in a good position to compare the alternatives and
develop a recommended plan. A logical approach for comparing the
alternatives would be to identify initially that alternative which
will achieve water quality objectives at minimum monetary cost. This
least cost plan can serve as a base against which the increased costs
and additional effects of other alternatives can be compared. The
major environmental, social and economic impacts of this least cost
plan should be listed, including a discussion of the institutional
and financial issues that would be raised if the plan were recommended.
Most of the required impact information should be contained in Table
14.1. A suggested format for displaying the least cost plan is shown
in Table 14.2.
The next step should be the identification of the incremental
monetary cost and incremental impacts of each of the remaining alter-
native plans in relation to the base plan. Information contained in
Table 14.1 would provide the basis for this incremental evaluation.
Description of alternatives should include the plan elements (such as
construction, zoning, operations, etc.) and measures or statements of
the changes in the impacts of those plan elements. In addition to
the environmental, social, and economic Impact and Institutional and
financial issues, additional benefits that could be gained or unde-
sirable situations that could be avoided should be described. The
alternatives should be described in such a way as to make comparisons
with the additional costs required as direct as possible. The results
may be summarized in the format of Table 14.3.
The planning agency should then conduct workshops for the elected
officials who will be reviewing and commenting on the proposed plan to
fully inform them of the consequences of implementing any of the alter-
native plans. The agency should also take note of their
responses to the alternatives to see 1f the alternatives can be changed
to improve plan acceptability. Since these workshops and the public
hearings to follow could very well result in requirements for sub-
stantial changes 1n the design of plan elements and for further analy-
sis of additional Impacts, the agency should schedule resource expen-
ditures to be able to respond fully to the need for additional modifi-
cations.
•if.
At the conclusion of the workshops, the planning agency should
recommend a single plan. The plan elements, costs, impacts, and
implementation Issues can be summarized 1n the format shown 1n Table
14.2, accompanied by a brief report summarizing the process followed,
the alternatives considered, and the criteria used to reach a final
recommendation. The report and charts should be suitable for use at
public hearings.
14-2
-------
C. Hold Public Hearings to Present Proposed Plan
The planning agency should conduct formal public hearings on
the proposed plan and the alternatives considered in its development.
The planning agency should then respond to the issues raised at the
hearings and modify the proposed plan if appropriate (as judged by
the agency). The planning agency will then submit the proposed plan
to the appropriate governing bodies for review and recommendations.
14-3
-------
TABLE 14.1
COSTS AND EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE PLANS
Alternative Plans
Significant Effects P-1 P-2 P-3
1. Water Quality Goals
A. 'Contribution to goals and
objectives of the Act. •
B. Contributions to other water-
related goals of the planning
area.
2. Technical Reliability
A. Frequency of plant upsets
B. Frequency of spills
C. Frequency and effects of
combined sewer overflows
D. Nonpoint source control
E. Regional availability of
skilled manpower for treat-
ment plant operation and
monitoring
3. Monetary Costs
A. Capital costs including discounted
deferred costs
(1) public
(2) private
(3) total
B. O.M. & R. Costs
(1) public
(2) private
(3) total
C. Net revenue (public)
D. Overhead and plan management
14-4
-------
TABLE 14.1 (cont)
'. COSTS AND EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE PLANS
Significant Effects Alternative Plans
E. Total average annual costs P-1 P-2 P-3
(1) public
(2) private
(3) total
4. Environmental Effects
A. Hydrology (surface and groundwater)
1) water quality
water quantity
water quality and quantity problems
water uses
(5) flood hazards
B. Biology
1) rare and endangered species
2) fish, shellfish and wildlife habitats; including
nursery and spawning areas
(3) fish, shellfish and wildlife community
(4) benthic community structure
C. Air quality
D. Land
(1) change in land uses
(2) land use planning and controls
(3) amount, type and intensity of
growth (relate to land use)
(4) soil erosion damage
(5) significant environmentally
sensitive areas
E. Wastewater management resources
(1) energy (power)
(2) chemicals.
(3) land commitment for planned
features including sludge disposal sites
5. Social and Economic Effects
A. Population changes (5, 10, 15, and 20 year
projections)
14^5
-------
TABLE 14.1 (cont)
COSTS AND EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE PLANS
Significant Effects Alternative Plans
B. Changes in economic activity P-l_ P-2 P-3
where appropriate
(1) income per capita
(2) agriculture
(3) mining
(4) manufacturing
(5) services
C. Dislocation of individuals, businesses,
or public services
D. Impact on other local, state and
federal projects having major
interaction with proposed water
quality actions
E. Public health
F. Aesthetics
(1) recreational accessibility and
activities
(2) unique archeological, historical,
scientific and cultural areas
(3) noise pollution
6. Implementation Feasibility
A. Legal authority
'B. Financial capacity
C. Practicability
D. Coordinative capacity
E. Public accountability
7. Public Acceptability
14-6
-------
PLAN ELEMENTS
1.
2.
3.
TOTAL COST $_
IMPACTS
TABLE 14.2
LEAST COST PLAN
(A summary list of planning, construction, zoning,
sludge and effluent disposal, operations, moni-
toring actions, etc., indicating their geographic
sites).
DESCRIPTION
Economic
1.
2.
.3.
Social
1.
2.
3.
Environmental
1.
2.
3.
IMPLEMENTATION
(Institutional and financial issues.)
14-7
-------
TABLE 14.3
ALTERNATIVE LEAST COST PLAN MODIFICATIONS
Plan Elements
1.
2.
3.
Least
Cost
Alternative
Alternative
A
Impacts
Cost
Increase
Alternative
B
Impacts
Cost
Increase
14-8
-------
GLOSSARY
The Act - Public Law 92-500. "This Act may be cited as the 'Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.'" (Act,
Section 1).
Base level technology - Minimum level of treatment required by the Act.
Basin - The term 'basin1 means the streams, rivers, tributaries, and
lakes and the total land and surface water area contained in
one of the major or minor basins defined by EPA, or any other
basin unit as agreed upon by the State(s) and the Regional
Administrator.
Best Available Technology (BAT) - "Not later than July 1, 1983, effluent
"limitations for categories and classes of point sources, other
than publicly owned treatment works...shall require application
of the best available technology economically achievable for
such category or class, which will result in reasonable further
progress toward the national goal of eliminating the discharge
of all pollutants as determined in accordance with regulations
Issued by the Administrator pursuant to section 304(b](2) of
this Act...." (Act, Section 301(b)(2)(A)).
Best Practicable Control Technology (BPCT) - "Not later than July 1,
1977, effluent limitations for point sources, other than
publicly owned treatment works...shall require the application
of the best practicable control technology currently available
as defined by the Administrator pursuant to section 304(b) of
this Act...." (Act, Section 301(b)(l)(A)). This 1s also referred
to as Best Practicable Technology (BPT).
Best Practicable Waste Treatment Technology (BPWTT) - "Waste treatment
management plans and practices snail provide for the application
of the best practicable waste treatment technology before any
discharge into receiving waters, Including reclaiming and
recycling of water and confined disposal of pollutants so they
will not migrate to cause water or other environmental pollution....'
(Act, Section 201(b)).
Capital Intensive - Measure requiring Initial capital outlays for Its
development and relatively little cost for operation and
maintenance.
Combined sewer - "A sewer Intended to serve as a sanitary sewer and a
storm sewer, or as an Industrial sewer and a storm sewer."
(40 CFR 35.905-2).
-------
Discharge of pollutants - "The term 'discharge of a pollutant' and the
term 'discharge of pollutants' each means (A) any addition
of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source,
(B) any addition of any pollutant to the waters of the contig-
uous zone or the ocean from any point source other than a
vessel or other floating craft." (Act, Section 502(12)).
Effluent limitation - "The term 'effluent limitation1 means any
restriction established by a State or the Administrator
on quantities, rates, and concentrations of chemical,
physical, biological, and other constituents which are
discharged from point sources into navigable waters, the
waters of the contiguous zone, or the ocean, including
schedules of compliance." (Act, Section 502 (11)).
Effluent limited segments - "Any segment where it is known that water
quality is meeting and will continue to meet applicable water
quality standards or where there is adequate demonstration
that water quality will meet applicable water quality standards
after the application of the effluent limitations reguired by
sections 301(b)(l)(B) and 301(b)(2)(A) of the Act." (40 CFR
130.2(o)(2)).
Facilities plan - The facility plan is the first step in a three step
process required to complete treatment works with federal
grants from the Environmental Protection Agency. It is to
assure that treatment works built under this program are
environmentally sound and cost-effective.
Infiltration - "The water entering a sewer system, including sewer
service connections, from the ground, through such means as,
but not limited to, defective pipes, pipe joints, connections,
and manhole walls. Infiltration does not include, and is
distinguished from, inflow." (40 CFR 35.905-9).
Inflow - "The water discharged into a sewer system, including service
connections, from such sources as, but not limited to, roof
leaders, cellar, yard and area drains, foundation drains,
cooling water dischargers, drains from spring and swampy
areas, manhole covers, cross connections from storm sewers and
combined sewers, catch basins, storm waters, surface runoff,
street wash waters, or drainage. Inflow does not include, and
is distinguished from, infiltration." (40 CFR 35.905-11).
Inplace pollution source - Time buildup of pollutant load deposited
In a receiving water bed and existing as a load upon that
receiving water.
Interim Facility - A temporary treatment facility, either public or private*
designed for a useful life of usually less than five years, and
with a treatment capacity usually less than five million gallons
per day.
-------
Land use - The physical mode of utilization or conservation of a given
land area at a given point in time.
Land use controls - Methods for regulating the uses to which a given
land area may be put, including such things as zoning, sub-
division regulation, and flood-plain regulation.
Materials balance - An illustration of the principle of conservation
of matter; that is, an accounting may be performed of all
transfers of mass from one point or state to other points or
states, such that the total original mass is entirely accounted
for.
Maximum daily load - "Each plan shall include for each water quality
segment, or appropriate portion thereof, the total allowable
maximum daily load of relevant pollutants during critical
flow conditions for each specific water quality criterion
being violated or expected to be violated." (40 CFR 131.ll(f)(!)).
Navigable waters - "The term 'navigable waters' means the waters of the
United States, including the territorial seas." (Act, Section
502(7)).
1983 goals - Pertains to goals outlined In Section 101(a) and elsewhere in
the Act.
1977 coals - Pertains to the July 1, 1977 milestone set by the Act,
particularly in terms of treatment technology and limitations.
Nonoolnt source - Generalized discharge of waste which cannot be located
as to a specific source Into a water body, as outlined in
Section 304(e) of the Act.
Permits - "The Administration may...Issue a permit for the discharge of
any pollutant, or combination of pollutants...upon condition
that such discharge will meet either all applicable requirements
under Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, and 403 of this Act, or
prior to the taking of necessary Implementing actions relating
to all such requirements, such conditions as the Administrator
determines necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act."
(Act, Section 402(a)0))« "The Administrator shall authorize
a state, which he determines has the capability of administering
a permit program which will carry out the objective of this Act,
to Issue permits for discharges Into the navigable waters within
the jurisdiction of such state." (Act, Section 402(a)(5)). The
permit program 1s a part of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES).
-------
Planning process - Strategy for directing resources, establishing
priorities, scheduling actions, and reporting programs toward
achievement of program objectives.
Point source - "The term 'point source1 means any discernible, confined
and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe,
ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, con-
tainer, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or
vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may
be discharged." (Act, Section 502(14)).
Pollutant - "The term 'pollutant' means dredged spoil, solid waste,
incinerator residue, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions,
chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials,
heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt
and Industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste discharged
into water." (Act, Section 502(6)).
Pretreatment - "The Administrator shall...publish proposed regulations
establishing pretreatment standards for introduction of pollu-
tants Into treatment works...which are publicly owned for those
pollutants which are determined not to be susceptible to treatment
by such treatment works or which would-interfere with the oper-
ation of such treatment works." (Act, Section 307(b)(l)). "Not
later than July 1, 1977...in the case of discharge into a
publicly owned treatment works...shall require compliance with
any applicable pretreatment requirements...under section 307
of this Act." (Act, Section 301(b)(l)(A)).
Residual waste - Those solid, liquid, or sludge substances from man's
activities 1n the urban, agricultural, mining and industrial
environment not discharged to water after collection and necess-
ary treatment.
Secondary treatment - "There shall be required...for publicly owned
treatment works in existence on July 1, 1977, or approved...
prior to June 30, 1974...effluent limitations based upon
secondary treatment as defined by the Administrator pursuant
to section 304(d)(l) of this Act." (Act, Section 301(b)(l)(B)).
"The Administrator...shall publish...Information, in terms of
amounts of constituents and chemical, physical, and biological
characteristics of pollutants, on the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of secondary
treatment." (Act, Section 304(d)(l)).
-------
State water quality standards - The term "State Water Quality Standards"
means those State adopted and Federally approved uses and criter-
ia that are legally applicable to the interstate and intrastate
waters. The water quality standards are incorporated by refer-
ence in Part 120 of Title 40 of Code of Federal Regulations.
Storm sewer - "A sewer intended to carry only storm waters, surface
run-off, street wash waters, and drainage." (40 CFR 35.905-22).
Upstream pollutant source - Source of pollutant discharged into the
receiving waters which is located upstream from the area of
consideration.
Waste load allocation - A waste load allocation for a segment is the
assignment of target loads to point, and to nonpoint sources
to achieve water quality standards in the most effective manner.
Waste treatment facilities - "Any devices and systems used in the storage,
treatment, recycling and reclamation of municipal sewage or
industrial wastes of a liquid nature...in addition...any other
method or system for preventing, abating, reducing, storing,
treating, separating, or disposing of municipal waste, including
waste in combined storm water and sanitary sewer systems." (Act,
Section 212(2)). Also termed treatment works.
tyater quality limited segments - "Any segment where it is known that water
quality does not meet applicable water quality standards, and/or
is not expected to meet applicable water quality standards even
after the application of the effluent limitations required by
sections 301(b)(l)(B) and 301(b)(2)(A) of the Act." (40 CFR
-------
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR STATE WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PLANNING
This bibliography has been prepared to assist those engaged
in State WQM Planning. The references have been arranged to
correspond to the planning process elements and outputs. Refer-
ences cited have been selected for their applicability to State
WQM Planning and for their availability.
Each reference is followed by a short abstract and, whenever
possible, by detailed price and ordering information. Instructions
for using the Government Printing Office and the National Technical
Information Service are also included on the last page.
-------
- 2 -
PLANNING PROCESS ELEMENTS
PROCESS DEVELOPMENT AND WORKPLAN CONTROL
Wprkplan Handbook for Section 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management
Planning.U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C. '75.Available upon request
from EPA Regional Offices.
Provides details on the preparation of areawide planning
workplans. The handbook provides examples of workplan
elements to assist locally designated planning agencies
in preparing 208 workplans.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM/INTERAGENCY COORDINATION
A Citizen's Guide to Clean Water. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. June '73.
Available upon request from U.S. EPA Office of Public Affairs (A-107)
Wash, D.C. 20460.
95 page booklet provides the layman with a good introduction
to the problem of water pollution and what can be done to solve
it including citizen action. Explains major EPA water pollution
abatement programs and emphasizes role of the citizen.
A Ladder of Public Participation, "Journal of the American Institute of
Planners'1, Vol. 35, no.4. Sherry R. Arnstein. Wash. D.C. July, '69.
Reprints of journals are available from Kraus Thomson Organization Ltd.,
Route 100, Millwood, N.Y. 10546, $3.75 per copy, State month and year of
journal desired.
A typology of citizen participation is offered using examples
from three federal social programs: urban renewal, anti-poverty,
and Model Cities. The typology, which is designed to be provoca-
tive, is arranged in a ladder pattern with each rung corresponding
to the extent of citizens's power in determining the plan and/or
program.
Agreement for Implementation of Section 304(j) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.Federal Register Vol. 38
No. 225, Nov 25, '73.
Agreement between EPA and Departments of Interior,
Agriculture and Army on setting up 208 advisory
committees with representation of signatory agencies.
Analysis of New Techniques for Public Involvement in Water Planning.
Water Resources Bulletin Vol. 11, No. 2 page 329.April '75.BacK
issues available at $4.00 per copy from Dana Rhoads, American Water
Resources Association, St. Anthony Palls Hydraulic Lab, Mississippi
River at 3rd Ave. S.E., Minneapolis, Minnesota 55414.
-------
- 3 -
Several techniques that have potential for overcoming some of
the limitations of standard public involvement techniques have
recently been developed. This paper describes several of
these new techniques and analyzes each of them in terms of
their potential utility in water resources planning.
Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning. U.S. EPA. Wash. DC.
NOV '74.GPO (stock no. 625-wu) or single copies available from
U.S. EPA Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Wash. D.C. 20460.
A 13 page booklet explaining the EPA's areawide waste treatment
management planning program under Section 208 of the Act. Explains
to layman what areawide planning is, what it can do, and how it
relates to other EPA programs. Explains roles of Federal, State,
and local agencies in the planning process. Suitable for public
information.
Citizen Participation Strategies, "Journal of the American Institute of
Planners". Edmund M. Burke. Wash. D.C. Sept '68. Reprints of journals
are available from Kraus Thomson Organization Ltd., Route 100, Millwood,
N.Y. 10546, $3.75 per copy. State month and year of journal desired.
Suggests that many of the problems planners and others have
had in involving the public in decision making can be resolved
by recognizing and adopting a strategy of participation specifi-
cally designed to fit the role and resources of a particular
organization. Five types of strategies are identified: Education-
therapy, behavioral change, staff supplement, cooptation, and
community power.
First Things First; A Strategy Against Water Pollution. U.S. EPA.
Wash. D.C. Sept '74.GPO (stock no. 551-507) or single copies available
from U.S. EPA Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Wash. D.C. 20460.
A 16 page booklet explaining the major elements of the strategy
used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the States
in their attack qn water pollution, the problems faced and what
is being done about them. Suitable for public information.
Joint Agreement for Interagency Coordination of Areawide Waste Treatment
Management Planning Assistance'to State and Local Governments between
fepA and the Department of tne Army. Federal Register Vol. 40 No. 11,
tan 16, '75.
Agreement between EPA and Department of the Army which
established coordination between the Corps of Engineers
Urban Studies Program and the 208 Program.
Public Participation in Water Resources Planning. University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor. HT. MTIS PB 204-245. "
-------
- 4 -
Reviews public participation activities and procedures which have
been utilized in connection with governmental planning studies,
especially water resources planning studies. Discusses identi-
fication of public; functions and objectives; mechanisms for
securing involvement; and timing. Also presents a model for a
participatory planning process.
Selected Techniques for Soliciting Community Participation in
Transportation Planning.Julie Hetrick Schermer.New York, NY, '74.
Copies of this paper available upon request from Mr. William Reed,
Director of Publications, Parson, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc.
1 Penn Plaza, 250 W. 34th St., New York, NY 10001.
Five techniques for greater community participation recently
employed in major transportation planning projects are reviewed
and assessed in this paper. They are equally applicable to waste
treatment management planning and include "citizen coinnittees",
"randomly selected participation groups", "open door policy",
"direct funding to community groups", and "planning balance sheet",
The Bole of Citizen Advisory Groups in Water Resources Planning,
Publication No. 43.Madge Ertel, Water Resources Research Center,
University of Massachusetts at Amherst, July, '74. Available At $3.00
per copy from Water Resources Research Center, University of Mass.,
A211 Graduate Research Center, Amherst, Mass. 01002.
Report is the result of case study observation of the citizen
advisory groups operating in conjunction with three planning
studies. Describes the ways in which these groups have dealt
with problems and to generalize from their experience for the
benefit of other citizen advisory groups and planning agencies.
Concludes with a set of practical "guidelines" derived from this
research, for the use of planning agencies seeking to maximize
the effectiveness of citizen advisory groups.
Water Resources Decision Making on the Basis of the Public Interest.
Report No. IWR Contract Report 75-1.U.S. Army Engineer Institute
for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Va, Feb '75. NTIS, AD/A 010 402
$4.25.
The concept of water resources decison making in the public
interest is both fundamental and elusive. OMs report discusses
alternative perspectives that have been suggested for defining
the public interest and provides an overview of the decision
making in involved in a typical water resources planning study.
It then examines various approaches to determining the public
interest in preauthorization planning and decision making.
-------
- 5 -
ESTABLISHMENT OF PLAN OBJECTIVES
Guidelines for Areawide Waste Treatment Management. U.S. EPA.
lagemer
: from
Wash. D.C. Aug '75.Available upon request from EPA Regional
Offices.
Intended to assist 208 planning agencies in carrying
out their areawide waste treatment planning responsibilities
within designated area. It applies also to other agencies—
local, State and Federal—that may be involved in the planning
process for those areas or in plan review procedures.
Policies and Procedures for State Continuing Planning Process. (40 CFR
Part 130).Federal Register, Vol. 40 No. 137 July 16, '75.
These regulations describe the necessary elements of a State's
continuing planning process, and therefore provide policies and
procedures for review, revision and approval of a State's
continuing planning process. Also provided is a mechanism for
satisfaction of the Statewide responsibilities of other sections
of the Act. They apply to phase I plans (those submitted
before July 1, '76.)
Preparation of State Water_Quality Management Plans_(Proposed Rules).
(40 CFR Part 131).Federal Register, Vol. 40, No. 137, July 16, '75.
These amended regulations describe the requirements for
preparation of water quality management plans and the
procedures governing plan adoption, submission, revision,
and EPA approval. These regulations apply to phase II plans
(those submitted after July 1, '76).
Preparation of Water Quality Management Plans. (40CFR Part 131)
Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 107, June 3, '74. (under revision)
These regulations describe requirements for preparation of basin
plans and the procedures governing basin plan adoption, .submission,
revision, and EPA approval. They apply to phase I plans (those
submitted before July 1, '76).
DATA COLLECTION (economic, demographic, land use, environmental
impact, waste loads, monitoring program, water quality data)
PROJECTIONS OF WASTE LOADS (projection of economic, demographic,
land use factors to develop waste load projections, interim outputs,
related to facilities planning.)
-------
- 6 -
Design of Cost-Effective Water Quality Surveillance Systems, Report
No. EPA 600/5-74-004.U.S. EPA.Wash. B.C. Jan. '74.GFO, $4.05.
Presents the development and successful demonstration of
quantitative methods for the design of river basin water
quality surveillance systems for pollution abatement. The
methods provide a systematic approach to the consideration of
expected stream conditions, system characteristics, equipment
performance, and cost in the selection of a preferred system
design from among a number of candidates. Methods are compu-
terized and programs are detailed in the report.
Design with Nature. Ian McHarg. Garden City: Natural History Press,
1969. Published for the American Museum of Natural History. The
Natural History Press, Garden City, NY, 501 Franklin Ave., Garden
City, NY 11530.
Demonstrates by using concrete examples how man's new knowledge
of ecology can be applied to actual environments, both natural
ones such as seashores, lakes, rivers, and swamps and those that
man has created such as large cities. Emphasis is placed on the
concept of design with nature and showing now man can impose
design but "use to the fullest, the potentialities and with them,
necessarily, the restrictive conditions - that nature offers."
Guidelines for Preparation of Water Quality Management Plans. U.S. EPA,
Wash. D.C. '74.Available upon request from EPA Regional Offices.
Describe the preparation of basin plans pursuant to the
State continuing planning process (Section 303(e) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
and 40 CFR Part 130-131). They are intended for use as
the basin planning methodology by State and local personnel
in preparing water quality management plans.
1972 OBERS Projections? Economic Activity in the U.S.; Based on
Series E Population, Vol. I-VII.(U.S. Water Resources Council).
Wash. D.C. '74.<5PD, stock no.: Vol. I, 5245-0013, $3.05;
Vol. II, 5245-00014, $2.50; Vol. Ill, 5245-00015, $3.10; Vol. IV,
5245-00016, $1.90; Vol. V, 5245-00017, $2.75; Vol. VI, 5245-00018,
$2.50; Vol. VII, 5245-00019, $2.75.
Hie projections in this report incorporate the Census
Bureau's 1972 "Series E" national population projection.
Vol. I: Concepts, Methodology and summary data. Vol. II:
BEA Economic Areas, Vol.Ill: Water Resources Regions and
Subareas, Vol. IV: States, Vol. V: Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas, Vol. VI: Non-SMSA Portions of BEA Economic
Areas, Vol. VII: Non-SMSA Portions of Water Resources Subareas.
-------
- 7 -
Program Guidance Memorandum AM-2. U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division.
Wash. D.C., March '75. Available upon request from EPA Regional Offices.
Sets forth policy and procedures concerning the use of interim
outputs to guide facilities planning after award of a 208
grant.
Program Guidance Memorandum AM-8. U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division
Wash. D.C. May '75.Available upon request from EPA Regional Office.
Transmits policy and decision rules to allow Regional Offices
to evaluate designated agency grant applications for acceptable
water quality analysis and modeling, waste load estimation, and
data collection efforts in proposed workplans for designated
208 areas.
Promoting Environmental Quality Through Urban Planning and Controls.
Report No. 600/5-73-015.U.S. EPA. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
Series, Feb '74. NTIS PB-227-090/8. $11.50.
Focuses on the changing awareness and current practices in
promoting environmental quality through urban planning and
controls in local and metropolitan planning agencies. Includes
a review of planning practices in the 1960's related to environ-
mental quality; and a detailed examination of numerous planning
approaches and controls considered to be promising for future
environmental quality enhancement.
Stream Quality Preservation Through Planned Urban Development. U.S. EPA.
Report No. EPA R5-73-019.Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series,
Wash. D.C. May '73. GPO, $2.60. NTIS PB 222-177.
The effects of a land use plan to restrict urban development
in areas critical to the water resouce system are identified
through empirical studies for example: relationships are
established between amount, density, type and location of urban
development, on the one hand, and stream water quality and stream
channel enlargement on the other.
The Quiet Revolution in Land Use Control. U.S. Council on Environmental
Quality.Fred Bosselman and David Callies. Wash. D.C. GPO, stock no.
4111-0006, $2.75
A report on the innovative land use laws of several States. The
report examines in detail several different Statewide regulatory
systems, several systems where "critical areas" only are regulated
and several systems focusing on key types of land development. The
examinations are based primarily on a review of the key statutes
regulations and decisions and on interviews with administering
officials and other groups. Key issues that run through all systems
are synthesized.
-------
- 8 -
Urban Land Use Planning. F. Stuart Chapin, Jr. Urbana, Illinois:
University of Illinois Press, '65.
Focuses primarily on theory and methods with special attention
given to the techniques required in making analysis of land
use, in measuring trends, and in estimating present and
future requirements for the uses of land. Aspects concerned
with the legal basis of planning, its legislative controls
and its administrative organization are specifically excluded
from detailed treatment.
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS (Model selection, calibration, verification,
prediction of water quality impact of waste loads, waste load
allocations—including interim outputs related to facilities
planning)
Guidelines for Preparation of Water Quality Management Plans. U.S. EPA.
Wash. D.C. '74.Available upon request from EPA Regional Offices.
Abstract: See previous reference
Program Guidance Memorandum AM-2. U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division
Wash. D.C.March *75.Available upon request from EPA Regional Offices,
Abstract: See previous reference
Simplified Mathematical Modeling of Water Quality, (with addendum).
U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C. March '71.Available from: Planning Assistance
and Policy Branch, (WH-554) U.S. EPA, Wash. D.C. 20460.
A general simplified methodology for the application of
mathematical models to the analysis of water quality. The
parameters modeled include certain dissolved oxygen in streams
and estuaries. The modeling efforts have been incorporated into
various tables, nomographs and figures, and along with some
technical data, may be used to estimate treatment levels to
meet specific water quality standards.
Information regarding the applicability and availability of other
specific water quality models is available from: Mr. William Somers,
Technical Assistance Section, Planning Assistance Branch (WH-554)
U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460.
The following 208 planning process elements are the basis for developing
the 208 outputs which follow on the next pages. References on these
elements are broken down according to the 208 outputs which follow
-------
- 9 -
DEVELOPMENT OF ABATEMENT ALTERNATIVES
DEVELOPMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION ALTERNATIVES
(legal, financial, institutional analysis, proposed management
agency(s) and institutional arrangement to carry out abatement
programs, including needed regulatory programs)
IMPACT EVALUATION AND PLAN SELECTION
(environmental assessment, plan evaluation, plan selection
through public involvement)
PLAN REVIEW/APPROVAL
(local review and recommendation, State review/approval,
EPA review/approval)
208 OUTPUTS
Municipal and Industrial Treatment Works Program (first six)
INTERIM OUTPUTS FOR FACILITY PLANNING
Interim Output Evaluation Handbook for Section 208 Areawide Waste
Treatment Management Planning.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.c. '75. Available
upon request from EPA Regional Offices.
Deals with interim outputs expected within the first 9 months
of the two-year 208 areawide waste treatment management planning
program namely: service area delineation, population and land use
projections, flow and waste load projections, and waste load
allocation revisions.
Program Guidance Memorandum AM-2. U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division.
Wash. D.C.March '75.Available upon request from U.S. EPA Regional
Offices.
Abstract: See previous reference.
FURTHER FACILITY PLANNING
Guidance for Facilities Planning. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. May, '75.
Available upon request tirom EPA Regional Offices.
Suggests procedures for engineers, planners, municipalities
and local, State and Federal agencies to follow in seeking
grants for the construction of publicly owned treatment works.
The procedures are intended to assure that treatment works to
be constructed will be cost-effective, environmentally sound
and publicly accepted.
-------
- 10 -
Program Guidance Memorandum AM-1. U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division.
Wash. D.C.March '75.Available upon request from EPA Regional
Offices.
Transmits policy statement issued March 11, 1975 by the
Assistant for Water and Hazardous Materials on the subject
of the relationship between 201 facilities planning and
208 areawide planning, (attached)
SEWER AND HOOK-UP ORDINANCE
Problems and Approaches to Areawide Water Quality Management. Vol. I-IV.
U.S. EPA. School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University,
Wash. D.C. '73. NTIS PB-239-808. $25.00
This report deals with the issues of the adequate authority of
designated waste treatment management agencies to perform as
required by Section 208(c)(2) and related sections of the Act.
"Adequate authority" includes both the legal authority and the
management capability of the agencies. The report is based on
a legal analysis of the laws of the fifty states and of federal
legislation, and on a survey of existing waste treatment manage-
ment agencies. The study consists of a main report, an executive
summary, and two separately bound appendices: Appendix A- Suggested
Representative or Model legislation, Appendix B - States Reports.
WPCF Manual of Practice No. 3 Regulation of Sewer Use. Water Pollution
Control Federation.Wash. D.C. '68.Available from Water Pollution
Control Federation, 3900 Wisconsin Avenue, Wash. D.C. 20016, price $2.00
The manual presents the case for legally constituted guidelines
to regulate the use of public sewer systems. It does so through
presentation of a model sewer use ordinance and a detailed discussion
of its component parts.
PRETREATMENT ORDINANCES
Federal Guidelines, Pretreatment of Pollutants Introduced into Publicly
Owned Treatment worEsTU.S. EPA.wash. D.C. Oct '73.Available upon
request from EPA Regional Offices.
Guidelines established to assist municipalities, States, and
Federal agencies in developing requirements for the pretreatment
of wastewaters which are discharged to publicly owned treatment
works. Also explain relationship between pretreatment and effluent
limitations for a publicly owned treatment works.
Improved Procedures for Municipal Regulation of Industrial Discharges
to Public Sewers (forth coming]. No report no. assigned.Draft avail-
able from U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division (WH-554), Wash. D.C. 20460.
-------
- 11 -
Reviews the current status of local government control of
industrial wastes discharged into publicly owned treatment
works and finds them ineffective as a means of controlling
large scale industrial activities. The report suggests an
effective and economical regulatory scheme for complying with
the federal pretreatment and effluent standards and the require-
ments imposed on federally-financed treatment works. The
approach involves a contractual agreement between an industry
and a public entity for treatment of the industry's wastewater.
Problems and Approaches to Areawide Water Quality Management , Vol. I-IV.
School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Wash. D.C.,
'73. OTIS PB-239-808. $25.00
Abstract: See previous abstract
DEFINITION OF INDUSTRIAL TREATMENT LEVELS AND TIE INTO
MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS
Design Criteria for Mechanical, Elect£ic, Fluid Systems and Component
Reliability! U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. NTIS FB-227-558/4. -
Amplifies and supplements the Federal Guidelines for Design,
Operation, and Maintenance of Wastewater Treatment Facilities
with regard to establishing minimum standards of reliability
for mechanical, electric and fluid systems and components.
Stresses component backup to attain system reliability.
Effluent Guidelines and Development Documents. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C.
The Effluent Guidelines Division of the Office of Water and
Hazardous Materials, EPA, has published effluent limitation
guidelines for existing industrial sources and standards of
performance and pretreatment standards for new industrial
sources. Effluent limitation guidelines and standards have
been published for each of a number of different industrial
categories. In addition, for each industrial category,
development documents have been published which contain
supportive data and rationales for the development of the
applicable effluent limitation guideline and performance
standard. While all of the effluent limitations guidelines
and development documents are too numerous to be referenced
here, information pertaining to specific industrial categories
can be obtained from, Ms. Frances Desselle, Effluent Guidelines
Division (WH-552) U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460.
Federal Guidelines, Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater Treatment
facilities; — U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. Aug '74. Available upon request
trom EPA Regional Offices.
-------
- 12 -
These guidelines are intended to assist in assuring that all
aspects related to wastewater treatment plant operation and
maintenance are appropriately considered by those responsible
for complying with grant requirements, specific effluent permit
criteria, and related water quality standards. They provide
information on the key elements that should be included in any
plan of operation for a wastewater treatment facility. Source
documents offering more detailed information are referenced
throughout.
Federal Guidelines, Pretreatment of Pollutants Introduced Into Publicly
Owned Treatment WorTtsIU.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. Oct '73.Available upon
request from EPA Regional Offices.
Abstract: See previous reference.
Guidance for Sewer System Evaluation. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. '74.
Available upon request from EPA Regional Offices. -
Intended to provide engineers, municipalities, regulatory
agencies with guidance on sewer system evaluation to determine
presence of excessive infiltration/inflow. Includes discussion
of physical surveys rainfall simulation preparatory cleaning
internal inspection and survey reports.
Waste Load Allocations in River Basin Plans.
River basin plans required under Section 303 of the Act
contain waste load allocations for segments of streams
designated water quality limited. These allocations
would, of course, be useful in defining industrial treatment
levels.
ORDINANCES ON LOCATION OP PRIVATE AND INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES
Problems and Approaches to Areawide Water Quality Management, Vol. I-IV.
U.S. EPA.School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University?
Wash. D.C. '73. NTIS PB-239-808. $25.00
Abstract: See previous reference
RESIDUAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
Development of Residuals Management Strategies (forthcoming). U.S. EPA.
Report No. not assigned.Wash. D.C.Draft copy available from U.S. EPA
Water Planning Division (WH-554), Wash. D.C. 20460.
Study of the development of strategies for managing residuals.
Contains step by step guidelines for identifying alternate
residuals management strategies and then evaluating and selecting
a strategy. Presents a residuals generation and discharge model
-------
- 13 -
which identifies different methods for complying with recent
federal legislation that requires a specified level of environ-
mental quality and identifies many points in the residuals
generation and discharge process at which physical methods can
be introduced or changes made, to reduce or alleviate the effect
of discharging residuals into the environment.
Evaluation of Land Application Systems, Technical Bulletin, EPA Report
Ro. EPA 520/9-75-001. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C., March '75. GPO, OTIS
(awaiting number assignment).
Procedures are set forth to assist EPA personnel in evaluating
treatment systems that employ land application of municipal
wastewater. In addition information is provided which may be of
value to State, local and other Federal agencies. Consists of an
Evaluation Checklist, parallel background information and is
divided into three major parts dealing with: (1) facilities plans,
(2) design plans and specifications, and (3) operation and
maintenance manuals.
Information Package on Residual Waste Management. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C.
oct '75.Available upon request from U.S. EPA, Planning Assistance and
Policy Branch (WH-554) Wash. D.C. 20460.
Contains a bibliography of helpful publications. Provides
description and status of ongoing research and/or demonstration
projects dealing with residual waste management.
Land Application of Sewage Effluents and Sludges; Selected Abstracts,
Report'So. EPA 66o72"-74-042.U.S. EPA. National Environmental Research
Center, Corvallis, Oregon. 1974. GPO, $2.80, NTIS PB 235-386 $8.50
Combines selected abstracts from previous publications and
updates the sources abstracted into the year 1973. Ihe 568
abstracts selected for inclusion are arranged in chronological
groupings and are identified as to emphasis on effluent or sludge.
irison of Alternatives. Council on
Wash. D.C., Feb ' 74. GPO.
Provides a single document which can be utilized on a comparative
basis, to develop preliminary selections of appropriate wastewater
treatment schemes for a municipality. The format of the text
allows the reader to compare various treatment strategies on an
energy, environmental or economic basis and to develop cost figures
which may better reflect a particular local situation.
Environmental Quality and u.s.
-------
- 14 -
Process Design Manual for Sludge Treatment and Disposal, Report No.
EPA 625/41-74-006.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C., Oct'74. Available upon
request from U.S. EPA Office of Technology Transfer, CM#2 Rm 1014,
RD 677. Wash. D.C. 20460.
Presents a contemporary review of sludge processing technology
and the specific procedures to be considered, modified, and applied
to meet unique conditions. Emphasizes operational considerations
and interrrelationships of the various sludge treatment processes
to be considered before selecting the optimum design. Also
presents case histories of existing wastewater treatment plants
to illustrate the varous unit processes and results.
Wastewater Treatment and Reuse By Land Applicability, Vol. I, Report No.
gp^
EPA 660/2-73-006a.Vol. II 660/2-73-006b.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. Aug '73
GPO Vol. 1 - $1.10, Vol. II - $2.40
Report of a nationwide study of current knowledge and techniques
of land application of municipal treatment plant effluents and
industrial wastewaters. Information and data were gathered on
the many factors involved in system design and operation for the
three major land application approaches: irrigation, overland flow,
and infiltration-percolation. In addition, evaluations were made
of environmental effects, public health considerations, and costs—
areas in which limited data are available.
URBAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Comparative Analysis of Urban Stormwater Models. U.S. EPA. Nov '74.
Available upon request from U.S. EPA, Planning Assistance and Policy
Branch (WH-554), Wash. D.C. 20460.
Eighteen mathematical models for the nonsteady simulation of
runoff in urban storm and combined sewerage systems were
reviewed in a study sponsored by EPA. Most of the models
evaluated include the nonsteady simulation of the rainfall-
runoff process and flow routing in sewers. A few also include
the simulation of wastewater quality, options for dimensioning
sewerage system components, and features for realtime control
of overflows during rainstorms.
Contributors of Urban Roadway Usage to Water Pollution, Report No.
EPA 600/2-75-004.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. March '75.NTIS no. not
assigned yet.
Study of contributions of motor vehicle usage to urban roadway
loading factors. Specific roadway study sites within the non-
industrial Washington, D.C. area were selected so as to provide
minimal interference from non-traffic-related land use activities
and thus isolate, as much as possible, the traffic-related
depositions.
-------
- 15 -
Practice in Detention of Stormwater Runoff. Herbert G. Poertner,
American Public Works Association, '74.OTIS PB-234-554.
On-site detention of runoff was investigated as an alternative
to other methods of urban stormwater runoff management. It was
found that this method, which involves collecting excess runoff
before it enters the main drainage system, can often be applied
an an effective and economical means of reducing peak runoff slow
rates to lessen or eliminate problems of flooding, pollution, soil
erosion, and siltation.
Urban Stormwater Management Research and Planning Projects for FY 1975
and FY 1976, Information Package. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. March '75.
Available upon request from U.S. EPA, Planning Assistance Branch (WH-554),
Wash. D.C. 20460.
Information contained in this report is concerned with urban
stormwater management. Well over one hundred projects were
reviewed and those selected to be included within this report
were chosen because of their contribution to the planning process
for urban stormwater management. Five areas within the planning
process are identified and projects are categorized appropriately.
Also includes a list of bibliographies where information on projects
done prior to FY 75 is available.
Urban Stormwater Management and Technology; An Assessment, Report No.
EPA 670/2-74-040.U.S. EPA.National Environmental Research Center,
Cincinnati, '74. GPO, NTIS, PB 240-687/AS $11.50.
The results of a comprehensive investigation and assessment of
promising, completed, and ongoing urban stormwater projects,
representatives of the state-of-the-art in abatement theory and
technology. Presented in a textbook format, provides a compendium
of project information on management and technology alternatives
within a project framework of problem identification, evaluation
procedures and program assessment and selection.
Water Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff. Report No.
EPA-440/5-75-004. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. Dec '74. NTIS PB 241-689/AS
$7.50
Provides technical assistance to state and local water quality
management planners to enable them to quantify within reasonable
limits the urban non-point water pollution problem in a local
planning area without extensive data generation, and to make a
preliminary evalution of cost-effective abatement and control
practices. Prescribes procedures for several levels of input,
each requiring more self-generated data, with increasingly
sophisticated results.
-------
- 16 -
Water Resources Protection Measures in Land Development! A Handbook
U.S. iDept. of Interior, Office of Water Resources. Wash. D.C. '74.
NTIS PB 236-049.
Description of measures that can become an integrated part of
urban development to lessen problems that would otherwise adversely
affect water resources. Measures are presented in groups and
related directly to the problems of runoff, erosion, sedimentation,
flooding, runoff pollution and increased sewage effluent discharge.
Each group is preceded by a flow chart that relates individual
measures to each other and can aid in the selection of alternative
techniques that follow a logical sequence.
NONPOINT SOURCES MANAGEMENT GENERAL
Methods for Identifying and Evaluating the Nature and Extent of
Nonpoint Sources of Pollutants, Report No. EPA 430/9-73-014.U.S. EPA
Wash. D.C. '73. GPO, $2.45
This report issued under Section 304(e) provides general
information on the identification and assessment of nonpoint
sources. Particular attention is paid to agriculture, silvi-
culture, mining, and construction.
Report on State Sediment Control Institutes Program, Report No.
EPA 440/9-75-001.U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C. April T75. GPO Stock No.
582-421/246.
This report resumes the results of 40 State sediment control
institutes sponsored by EPA, through a grant to the National
Association of Conservation Districts. The status of laws
in the states is covered and a model State law for sediment
control is included.
AGRICULTURAL SOURCE MANAGEMENT
Evaluation of Salinity Created by Irrigation Return Flows, Report No.
EPA-430/9-74-006.U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C. '74.GPO, $1.65.
Report provides general descriptions of the problems,
major problem areas, and remedial and control measures.
Methods and Practices for Controlling Water Pollution from Agricultural
Nonpoint Sources, Report No. EPA 430/9-73-015.U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C.
"HT. GPO, $1.10.
Issued under Section 304(e), report provides general descrip-
tions of various measures that may be used to control agricultural
runoff. It is strongly directed to erosion and sediment control,
but nutrients, pesticides, and animal wastes are covered.
-------
- 17 -
Research Status on Effects of Land Application of Animal Wastes,
Report No. EPA-660/2-75-010.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. OTIS awaiting
number assignment.
Report primarily resumes research results. However, in one
chapter, it outlines a procedure for estimation of the effects
of animal wastes on crop utilization nutrients.
Study of Current and Proposed Practices in Animal Waste Management,
Report No. EPA 430/9-74-003.U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C.Jan. '74.
GPO, $4.70.
Report briefly discusses various methods of disposal and/or
utilization of animal wastes. The report contains 362 pages
of annotated bibliography.
Numerous Soil Conservation Service, Agricultural Research Service,
and other EPA ORD Reports.
SILVTCULTURAL SOURCE MANAGEMENT
Logging Roads and Protection of Water Quality, Report No. EPA
910/9-75-007.U.S. EPA.Seattle, Washington, March '75. NTIS
no. not assigned yet.
Report provides discussions and data for design, construction,
use and maintenance of logging roads to prevent pollution.
An overview of logging roads problems is provided.
Processes, Procedures and Methods to Control Pollution from
Silvicultural Activities.Report No. EPA 430/9-73-010.DTS. EPA.
Wash. D.C. '73.GPO, ?1.25.
This report issued under Section 304(e), provides general
information on the nature of silviculture pollution control
problems and on control methods. General predictive techniques
and criteria for management programs are included.
MINING SOURCE MANAGEMENT
Processes, Procedures and Methods to Control Pollution from
Mining Activities, Report No. EPA 430/9-73-011. U.S. EPA.
Wash. D.C. '73.GPO, $3.40.
Report provides general information on controls for surface
and underground mines, and treatment methods. Some cost
information is included.
Various publications of EPA (ORD), Bureau of Mines, SCS, Appalachian
Regional Commission, and others.
-------
- 18 -
CONSTRUCTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT
Comparative Costs of Erosion and Sediment Control, Construction
Activities, Report No. EPA 430/973-016.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. '73.
GPO $2.20
Cost information on erosion and sediment control measures
has been assembled in this report, evaluated, and documented
for more then 25 methods in current and widespread use in the
United States.
Control of Erosion and Sediment Deposition from Construction of
Highways and Land Development.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. Sept '71.
GPO, $.60
Discusses the causes and effects of excess sediment runoff,
measures for control, costs, and administration.
Methods of Quickly Vegetating Soils of Low Productivity, Construction
Activities, Report No. EPA 440/9-75-008.U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C., July '75.
GPO Stock No. 210-810/11 1-3.
Document prepared for use by planners, engineers, and resource
managers who need to provide for the rapid establishment of a
protective vegetative cover on bare soils on construction sites.
Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control Pollution Resulting from
All Construction Activity, Report No. EPA 430/9-73-007.U.S. EPA.
Wash. D.C. '73. GPO, $2.30.
Issued according to requirements of Section 304(e) of P.L.
. 92-500. Report provides information of a general nature
regarding measures for controlling or preventing erosion and
sediment runoff, stormwater, and pollutants other than sediments.
HYDROGRAPHIC MODIFICATION MANAGEMENT
The Control of Pollution from Hydrographic Modifications, Report No.
EPA 430/9-73-017. U.S. EPA.Wash. D.C.'73. GPO, $1.95.
This report issued under Section 304(e) provides information
and guidance for use in identification and evaluation of non-
point sources of pollutants, and processes, procedures and
control methods when pollution results from changes in the
movement flow or circulation of any navigable waters or ground
waters.
-------
- 19 -
GROUNDWATER POLLUTION MANAGEMENT
Ground Water Pollution from Subsurface Excavations , Report No. EPA
430/9-73-012. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. '73. GPO, $2.25.
Report issued under Section 304 (e), provides information on
identification and evaluation, and on control methods. Injection
wells , lagoons, septic systems, land fills, pipe leakage, etc.
are generally covered. Administrators Decisions Statement No. 5
is included.
Identification and Control of Pollution from Salt Water Intrusion.
U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. '73. NTIS PB 227-229/2.
Report issued under Section 304 (e), provides general information
on identification and assessment; and on control methods. Coastal
and inland waters are covered.
Subsurface Pollution Problems in the United States, Report No. TS-00-72-02.
U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. May '72. GPO StocK No. 514-148/60.
Report provides very general information on types of
subsurface problems experienced in the United States.
Subsurface Water Pollution, A Selected Annotated Bibliography. Part I -
"Subsurface Waste Inlect ion"; Part II - "Saline Water Intrus
y. Pa
ion";
Part III - "Percolation from Subsurface Sources". U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C.
March * 72. NTIS, Part I: PB-211-340; Part II: PB-211-341; Part III:
PB-211-342.
A selective bibliography produced from the computerized data
base of the OWRR Water Resources Scientific Information Center.
Represents published research in water resources as abstracted
and indexed in the semi-monthly journal, Selected Water Resource
Abstracts. Represents a search of a 33,980 - item data base,
covering SWRA from October 1968 through December 1971.
MANAGEMENT FISCAL AND REGULATORY
1971»Suqqested State Legislation (1971); 1972 Suggested State Legislation
/1972J: 1973 gugqesfcedlbaie Legislation (1973)? 1974 Suggested State
Legislation /l9?4h 11)75 Suggested State Legislation (1975). Council of
^^^^^^^^^^^^—^•^^Mwn»«iMM»"»""«™'««r*TrtP*^TJl^^^"Tl^^^?^TTB"**S^TK^^^^^F???'"T"""^T . _ * * r»j\
Legislation (»?4h la'/b ft
State Governments.Available from Council of State Governments, 1150
17th Street, N.W. Wash. D.C. 20036. $5.00 for each volume covering one
year.
Includes suggested legislation that would be relevant
for implementing 208 plans.
-------
- 20 -
Institional Design for Water Quality Management; A Case Study of the
Wisconsin River Basin, Vol. 1-JX. Irving K. Fox. Resources Center,
University of Wisconsin, Madison Wisconsin, 1971. NTIS PB-199-268.
A case study of the institutional arrangements for
implementing areawide water quality management plans.
Problems and Approaches to Areawide Water Quality Management, Vol.
j=jyt—O.g. "EwC—School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana
University, Wash. D.C., '73. NTIS PB-239-808. $25.00
Abstract: See previous reference
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A Procedure for Evaluating Environmental Impact, Circular No. 645.
Luna fe. Leopold, et. al. U.S. Geological Survey.Wash. D.C. '71.
Available upon request from U.S. Geological Survey, National Center,
Reston, Virginia 22092.
Suggests an approach to evaluate the probable impact of a
proposed action on the environment by providing a system
for the analysis and numerical weighting of probable impacts.
System uses the "generalized matrix" approach.
A Review of Environmental Impact Assessment Methodologies, Report No.
EPA 600/5-74-002.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C. April '74. GPO $.70,
NTIS PB-236-609/AS.
Seventeen methodologies applicable to preparation of
environmental impact statements are reviewed to identify
their strengths, weaknesses, and potential range of use.
Specific criteria are suggested for evaluating the adequacy
of an impact assessment methodology.
An Approach to Evaluated Environmental Social and Economic Factors
in Water Resources Planning.Water Resources Bulletin Vol. 8 No. 4
page 724.Aug. '72.Back issues available at $4.00 per copy from
Dana Rhoads, American Water Resources Association, St. Anthony Falls,
Hydraulic Lab, Mississippi River at 3rd Ave. S.E., Minneapolis, Minn.
55414.
Briefly discusses present methods of project evaluation and
then describes an approach adapted from highway planning
literature for evaluating both monetary and non monetary
variables and presenting them to decision makers at all levels.
Social and environmental consequences are analyzed using a
graphical description method. Includes a case example.
-------
- 21 -
Bibliography for Environmental Assessment and Impact Evaluation
of Areawide Water Quality Managements U.S. EPA. wash. D.c. Nov '75.
Available upon request from U.S. EPA, Planning Assistance and Policy
Branch (WH-554), Wash. D.C. 20460.
A bibliography of references dealing with environmental
assessment and impact evaluation. Emphasis is placed on
those relating to environmental assessment and impact
evaluation of areawide water quality management.
«
Manual for Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements for Wastewater
Treatment Works, Facilities Plans, and 208'Areawide Waste Treatment
Management Plans. U.S. EPA. Wash. D.c. '74. Available upon request
from U.S. EPA, Office of Federal Activities (A-104), Wash. D.C. 20460.
Provides the framework for preparing environmental impact
statements (EIS's) when required on wastewater treatment
works, facilities plans, or 208 areawide waste management
plans. Provides certain minimum standards of completeness
and consistency in those EIS's prepared by EPA in the above
categories.
Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands; A Practical Guide for
Local Administrators, Meporfc No. EPA-6QQ/5-75-dQ5. U.5. EPA.
Wash. D.C. March '75. OTIS, awaiting number assignment.
Intended as handbook for use by local planning officials
in planning for and regulating use of streams and creeks,
wetlands, woodlands, hillsides, and groundwater and aquifer
recharge areas. Discusses ecology and value of sensitive
areas, and recommends regulatory programs. Includes appendices
on obtaining technical assistance.
The Impact Assessment Scenario. A Planning Tool for Meeting the
Mation^s Energy heeds. fteport"No. M-72-56. Martin V. Jones.
The Mitre Corporation, McLean Virginia. April '72. NTIS PB-211-471.
Seeks to illustrate how the scenario technique, developed by
systems analysts in sixties, can be adapted to help accomplish
comprehensive, systematic planning in the energy field. Concepts
developed apply, however, to water quality management.
Secondary Impacts of Transporation a"g,w;f,^a^rn?:[i;ves^mgntg?,
Review and Bibliography, keport NO. BiA ^9/5-75-uuz. u.s. EFA.
Wash. 6.C. Jan '75. NTIS awaiting no. assignment.
A review of over 50 major studies and 300 relevant reports
related to secondary environmental impacts on various forms
of £blif iSvSSents, e.g. land based transportation and
wastewater collection systems.
-------
- 22 -
Secondary Impacts of Transportation and Wastewater Investments;
Research Results, Report No. EPA 600/5-75-013.U.S. EPA. Wash. D.C,
July '75.NTIS, awaiting number assignment.
The second report of a 2 part research study. This report
presents the results of original research on the extent to
which secondary development can be attributed to highways
and wastewater treatment and collection, and what conditions
under which causal relations appear to exist.
-------
- 23 -
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ORDERING PUBLICATIONS
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, Virginia 22161
The National Technical Information Service has available for sale,
both paper and microfiche copies of many EPA technical reports. Some
reports are, however, available only in microfiche. Information on .
availability and prices is given only by mail and can be obtained by
writing to the NTIS and giving them the following information:
1. Title of the report
2. NTIS accession number (usually in the form: PB-000-000).
3. EPA Report No. (If known, usually in the form: EPA 000/0-00-000)
4. Number of copies required.
5. Paper copies or microfiche.
NTIS will respond by mail with a price quote and availability
statement. Publications can then be ordered by mail with payment
enclosed.
U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO)
Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402
The Government Printing Office has available for sale, paper
copies of many EPA and other agency publications. Information on the
availability and price of publications can be obtained by calling the
Publications Information/Order Desk at GPO in Washington, D.C. The
desk can be reached at area code 202, 783-3238. The following infor-
mation will be needed.
1. Title of the report.
2. EPA Report No. (usually in the form: EPA OOO/o-OO-OOO).
3. GPO Stock No. (if known).
The Information/Order Desk can then check the availability and
quote the price. If the publication is available a check for the
amount, payable to the Superintendent of Documents, can be mailed
with the order to GPO. Publications will be mailed upon receipt of
the payment. If ordering in the Washington, D.C. area publications
can be picked up in person at GPO. When calling for information and
price ask the clerk to assign a pick-up number. The publications can
then be picked up in person at GPO.
-------
GUIDELINES FOR STATE AND AREAWIDE WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
SUPPLEMENT NO. 1
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
1.1 Introduction
This Supplement No. 1 to the Guidelines for State and Areawide
Water Quality Management Program Development provides additional
guidance to that already contained in regulations and guidelines. Policies
and Procedures for the State Continuing Planning Process ^ (40 CFR 130)
and Preparation of Water Quality Management Basin Plans (40 CFR 131)
delineate requirements for the utilization of Best Management Practices
(BMP) in water quality management programs. Procedures for implementing
the BMP concept are detailed in the Guidelines for State and Areawide
Water Quality Management Program Development. These regulations
and guidelines call for States to select BMP applicable to the pollution
problems and particular conditions in each State. Where designated 208
areas or agencies exist within a State, the State and the 208 agencies
must work together in establishing appropriate BMP for the designated
area. The purpose of this Supplement No. 1 is to illustrate for various
nonpoint sources alternative management practices that States might
consider in choosing the BMP.
1.2 Definition of Best Management Practices (BMP)
The term Best Management Practices (BMP) means a practice, or
combination of practices, that is determined by a State (or designated
areawide planning agency) after problem assessment, examination of alternative
practices, and appropriate public participation to be the most effective,
practicable (including technological, economic, and institutional considerations)
means of preventing or reducing the amount of pollution generated by
nonpoint sources to a level compatible with water quality goals.
1.3 Concept of BMP
The control of pollutants in the runoff, seepage and percolation
from nonpoint sources can be accomplished through management of the
sources. BMP is intended to be an acceptable basis for State management
of nonpoint sources and to be of assistance for pollution abatement under
NPDES. BMP are the management techniques necessary to protect water
quality. The management techniques (BMP) are to be determined by
State and local government.
Point sources are defined in P. L. 92-500. Nonpoint sources are
not defined. By inference, nonpoint sources are those sources that
result in diffuse runoff (seepage, infiltration and percolation) of pollutants
to the nation's waters.
-------
-2-
Point sources will be managed under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Permit issuance is based on Best Practical
Technology (BPT) and/or Best Available Technology (BAT). Permit
issuance and regulatory followup will be carried out by the States or
by EPA where authority for NPDES has not been delegated to the States.
Nonpoint sources will be managed under the authorities of Section 208.
This Section of the FWPCA specifies that the States have the primary
responsibility for managing and controlling nonpoint sources of pollution
under Federal overview and with Federal assistance and cooperation. The
mandatory State control program required by the Act may be based upon
utilization of BMP provided that the State Water Quality Management program
contains adequate measures for the identification of nonpoint source problems,
selection of such practices to correct existing and prevent future nonpoint
source problems, and assure implementation of approved, planned, or
proposed practices; including required regulatory and enforcement systems.
This guidance is primarily intended to apply to the BMP as they
may be used in the control of nonpoint sources. However, the BMP
may be equally as valuable in reducing the pollutants in point discharge
sources. In essence, the BMP should be considered as a useful tool
for reducing pollutants regardless of whether the source is classified
as a point or nonpoint source for planning, management, and
regulatory purposes.
Because of the variability in sources, topography, climate,, soils,
etc., no one BMP will be applicable to all activities or situations.
The BMP must be tailored to the needs of the particular source and
to the physical conditions that will govern its application. It is expected
that State and local expertise, fully familiar with both the sources
and the physical conditions, will be utilized in the final selection of BMP.
1.4 General Criteria for Choosing BMP for Nonpoint Sources
The definition of BMP states several criteria or tests which
should be applied by the State in choosing Best Management Practices
(BMP):
- a BMP should manage "pollution generated by
nonpoint sources"
- a BMP should achieve water quality "compatible
with water quality goals"
- a BMP should be "most effective in preventing
or reducing the amount of pollution generated'1
- a BMP should be "practicable"
-------
-3-
A. A BMP should manage "pollution generated by nonpoint sources"
Water pollution sources can be functionally categorized in accordance
with man's activities. This type of categorization has been used in
Section 208 and 304(6), P. L. 92-500 in connection with nonpoint sources.
It is considered to be applicable to the selection of BMP to prevent or
reduce pollution from these sources. As a minimum, the State should
consider the following activity categories in its establishment of BMP
for nonpoint sources:
1. Agricultural Activities
2. Silvicultural Activities
3. Mining Activities
4. Construction Activities
5. Urban Runoff
6. Hydrologic Modifications
7. Sources Affecting Ground Water
8. Residual Wastes Disposal
The use of this classification of sources should not be interpreted
as placing sources into nonpoint or point categories. As emphasized
earlier, BMP will be useful in preventing or reducing pollutants in both
nonpoint and point sources of water pollution.
The interrelation of the activities outlined above should be considered
in the selection of BMP. It may be advantageous to further categorize
the nonpoint sources based on similar control aspects. Utilization of
sub-categorization could reduce the amount of duplication in the selection
of management practices. Examples of such sub-categorizations are:
(1) by similar physical conditions, e.g., soils, slope, precipitation patterns;
(2) by similar activities, e.g., soil disturbance --construction, strip mining,
land development; (3) by site-specific characteristics, e.g., all activities
in a single area of like conditions; and (4) by pollutant to be controlled,
e.g., sediments, acidity/alkalinity, oxygen demanding materials.
B. A BMP should achieve water quality "compatible with water
quality goals11 ""
Through analysis of existing water quality data and of newly acquired
data where necessary, target levels of abatement should be chosen for each
planning area in the State. The BMP should be selected in terms of
meeting these targets. The pollutants that must be controUed should be
determined. While BMP will normally prevent or reduce several
pollutants, the final selection of BMP should be related to those pollutants
that must be controUed to achieve water quality goals.
-------
-4-
C. A BMP should be "most effective in preventing or reducing
the amount of pollution gene rate cT
The State should select criteria against which the effectiveness
of the BMP can be related. These criteria (Ibs/tons per day/week/
month/year, Ibs/tons per acre/square mile/basin, etc. ) should be
related to the reduction of pollutants and achievement of water quality
goals. The effectiveness of the BMP in reducing pollutants should be
fully evaluated in terms of the selected criteria.
The reduction or elimination of pollutants in the runoff, seepage,
and percolation from nonpoint sources can materially contribute
to the protection of the quality of the Nation's waters. In general,
there are two options for accomplishing the needed reductions and/or
eliminations, namely; (1) Collection and treatment of the pollutants
and, (2) reduction and/or prevention of the formation, runoff, seepage,
and percolation of the pollutants.
Collection and treatment of the runoff, seepage and percolation
of pollutants from nonpoint sources may be necessary in some cases.
However, the collection and treatment of pollutants from nonpoint
sources is generally complex and expensive. Because of this,
collection and treatment is considered to be a final measure to be
utilized where other preventive measures will not reach the necessary
water quality protection goals.
The BMP must be technically capable of preventing or reducing
the runoff, seepage, or percolation of pollutants. First consideration
should be given to those preventive techniques that have been shown
to be effective during their past use. New and innovative techniques
should be fully analyzed as to their technical capability of preventing
or reducing pollutants prior to their consideration for incorporation
into the BMP.
While one practice (measure) may be adequate in some cases,
BMP will generally consist of a combination of practices. The various
alternatives should be fully evaluated. In choosing among the alternatives,
the BMP that most effectively achieves the desired level of water pollution
control should be chosen. If more than one alternative will achieve
the level of effectiveness necessary to reach water quality goals, the
least costly alternative should be chosen.
D. A BMP should be "practicable"
Implementation of the BMP should be feasible from not only the
technical standpoint but also the economic, legal, and institutional
standpoints. The practicality of securing early implementation should
be evaluated in the selection of the BMP.
-------
-5-
The primary goal of BMP is the protection of water quality.
However, expensive preventive techniques that will result in little
water quality benefits should be avoided. The BMP must be capable
of being implemented within the financial capability of the area, and
of the owners or operators of the various sources. Side benefits as
well as the installation and operational costs should be included in
the evaluation. The final selection of the BMP should take into
consideration both the costs of the preventive techniques and the
economic benefits (water quality or otherwise) to society that will
result from their use.
A number of the preventive techniques that may be incorporated
in the BMP are already in widespread use within various source
categories. These techniques should receive first consideration in the
selection of the BMP. Techniques that will require material operational
changes in the source management should be avoided unless they are
necessary for water quality protection. Insofar as is possible, the
initial implementation of the BMP should be accomplished with the
existing legal and institutional framework of the State. However, if
additional legal authority is needed, steps should be taken at an
early date to secure the needed authority.
Full consideration should be given to the total effect on the
environment in the selection of the BMP for water pollution control.
BMP applied to prevent or reduce water pollution could result in
adverse effects on the other portions of the environment such as the
creation of air pollution or solid waste disposal problems. Adverse
effects on other portions of the environment are not only undesirable
but also will delay the implementation of BMP to control water pollution.
1.5 Sources of Information on Techniques
In general, a great body of knowledge concerning the management
techniques already exists in the manual and other publications of various
Federal, State and local agencies currently operating programs related
to the nonpoint source field (e.g., the U.S. Soil Conservation Service
and various Soil Conservation Districts manuals and publications; the
manuals and other publications of the U.S. Forest Service). EPA
encourages the use of such techniques once they have been reviewed and
evaluated, and found to have a significant favorable impact on the ecological
quality of the waters of the Nation.
Such information will be supplemented, by EPA and other Federal
agencies, as additional knowledge becomes available.
In those areas where organized bodies of information do not exist
(e. g., urban drainage), EPA is to provide potential users with as much
information as is possible regarding state-of-the-art techniques for control.
-------
-6-
1.6 Source Category BMP
Information on BMP as applied to a source category is contained in the
BMP papers that follow.
-------
DRAFT
12FEB 1976
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
URBAN RUNOFF SOURCES OF WATER POLLUTION
Urban runoff pollution 1s the result of precipitation washing the
surface of a city—the pollution associated with this runoff being
Inevitably a consequence of human activity. Urban runoff contributes
significant amounts of pollution to receiving water. These sources
may be either point or nonpolnt, or combinations of the two. In
meeting this problem, this guidance is intended to provide Information
regarding the management of pollution from urban runoff and to supplement
Information regarding control of urban runoff under NPDES requirements.
Introduction
Pollution from urban runoff occurs when precipitation flushes the
urban environment and carries pollutants to receiving waters. As surfaces
are flushed, the polluted water flows overland toward the collection
systems. The Initial collection systems are the land surface, roof tops,
parking lots, and the like, which slope toward secondary collection
systems (roadways, streets, gutters, and drains). It Is there that
surface water concentrates as it flows Into the sewerage. .These
systems are of two general types: seperate or combined. Separate
storm sewers carry, 1n addition, untreated municipal and Industrial
wastewater. On the other hand, separate storm sewers discharge directly
other hand, usually have flow-splitting devices which, during high flows,
bypass a high percentage of untreated combined sewage directly to the
receiving waters. The remaining smaller fraction receives some treat-
ment before being discharged.
Polluted runoff contains substantial amounts of organic material,
inorganic solids, and collform bacteria. Other pollutants Include
nutrients, pesticides, and heavy metals. Clearly, these pollutants
degrade the receiving water quality. This degradation often results 1n
decreased dissolved oxygen levels and high turbidities. Collform bacteria,
Indicate the presence of pathogenic bacteria which are pollutants.
Moreover, nutrients, 1n the form of nitrogen and phosphorus, contribute
to Increased eutrophlcation rates. Although runoff contains pesticides
and heavy metals, their Impact on the aquatic environment 1s as yet
largely unknown, though recent evidence suggests that the presence of
heavy metals decreases the diversity of aquatic biota.
-------
-2-
Problems related to water quality degradation resulting from
unregulated, or poorly regulated runoff are accelerated erosion of
land area and stream banks, sediment deposition in channels, increased
flooding, increasing potential for public health problems and deter-
ioration of aesthetic quality. Indeed, the total pollutant loads of
stormwater, during storm runoff periods, can exceed by many times
that of municipal treatment plants. This condition could very well
preclude meeting water quality standards—regardless of the degree
of treatment afforded dry weather wastewater flows.
Nature of the Problem
If one word can describe the nature of the urban runoff problem,
that word would be variability. For example, the quantity and
quality of storm overflows can vary with respect to storm character-
istics, antecedent conditions, time, location,'degree of urbanization
or even other factors.
While stormwater runoff problems may be characterized by their
variable nature, the ultimate cause of this pollution may be traced
to the activities of man. Four examples are:
1. Fallout from the Air- Fallout or washout from the air contri-
butes substantial amounts of particulate matter. Winds carry dust and
dirt into and out of an area, but leave large amounts trapped within
the area.
2. Residue from Transportation- Automobiles, trucks, and buses
remain a major source of suspended solids, chemical oxygen demanding
material, and heavy metals, especially lead.
3. Debris from Man's Carelessness- Street litter—an accumulation
of trash—is a major source of organic material.
4. Washoff from Construction- Runoff from urban construction sites,
whether it Is from new developments, or redevelopment, contributes sig-
nificant amounts of sediment.
Sediment remains the most common pollutant which results from these
activities. It exists ubiquitously 1n an urban area. Recent evidence
Indicates that heavy metals, nutrients, and some pesticides may adsorb
or cling to sediments.
-------
-3-
Concept
The object of nonpolnt source controls is to protect the beneficial
uses Intended for receiving waters. While treatment appears an availa-
ble means to achieve this end, Its cost remains prohibitive. A less
costly alternative is, then, to address the sources and causes of
pollution. Best Management Practices achieve this goal through the
reduction and prevention of pollution. Such is the principal focus of
the BMP concept.
Management practices may be divided Into two groups: those most
useful for existing or developed areas and those more applicable to
new or developing areas. Problems of developed areas occur where
structures and pavements are in place and where drainage is accomplished
primarily through sewering. In the densely populated commercial, and
industrial subareas, management techniques such as Improved sanitation
practices and Improved maintenance practices are most effective. Such
techniques reduce the amount of pollutants, that can enter the drainage
system.
The "preventive" concept best applies to developing urban areas,
for these are areas where man's encroachment 1s minimal and drainage Is
essentially natural. These areas offer the greatest flexibility of
approach 1n preventing pollution. What 1s required, therefore, is to
manage the development in order to maintain a runoff regime as close to
natural as possible. It 1s 1n these new areas where proper management
practices can prevent long term problems.
The philosophy of flow attenuation underlies the preventive objective
of the BMP concept. Flow attenuation, as an approach to controlling the
rate of urban runoff, is well documented. It is concerned directly with
runoff as 1t moves over the surface of the urban area to the Initial
collection system. Flow attenuation, 1n an hydrologlc sense, means to
Increase the time of concentration and decrease the magnitude of the peak
runoff. Less erosion results because reduced runoff velocity reduces the
erosion force. Furthermore, with this technique large volumes of water
are not allowed to rapidly accumulate at constructions, but flow at
reduced rates over a longer period of time, thus diminishing the possi-
bility of localized flooding. Management practices focus on the sources
of pollutants and their means of conveyance. The Improvement to water
quality 1s a result of reduced loadings to the receiving water.
ment to water quality is a result of reduced loadings to the receiving
water.
-------
-4-
Management Options
Best management practices, within the urban area, are an integrated
approach using source and collection system management. Source manage-
ment is defined here as those measures for reducing or preventing pollution
through good "housekeeping" methods. Examples of "housekeeping" techniques
are:
1) Street cleaning,
21 Sewer flushing,
3) Catch basin cleaning,
4) Improved waste collection,
5) Stock pile covering.
Source management addresses the pollutants where they accumulate, before
they are washed into the receiving water.
Collection system management, as used here, includes all alternatives
pertaining to collection systems which begin from the ground surface and
end with the sewer outfall. Examples include devices such as:
1) Detention basins,
2) Recreation lakes,
3) Debris dams,
4) Playground or parking lot temporary storage,
5) Roof tops, and
6) Use of flow separating devices such as the swirl concentrator,
7) In-systems devices such as
a. Use of existing sewers for storage
b. In-line tunnels
c. Addition of polymers
d. Inflow/infiltration reduction, etc.
8) Groundwater Recharge
Collection" system management is concerned with reducing the amount and
rate of runoff and in addition, the number of overflows in combined sewers.
Reuse of stormwater should be considered as a management option in
those areas of the country that are water deficient. Runoff, from sur-
face storage, can be used for such nonpotable uses as fire fighting or
lawn irrigation. Groundwater recharge should be considered where it is
practicable, and the quality of the recharging water would not pollute
the receiving aquifer.
-------
-5-
An integrated approach would include source management to reduce
pollutant loads and collection system management to reduce infiltration,
overflows, and rate of runoff. BMP's should thus stress both source and
collection system management. The management goal is to reduce or prevent
pollution in order to meet water quality objectives at a minimum cost.
Developed areas are subject primarily to housekeeping type techniques
—reduction of loadings being accomplished by actual sweeping after the
fact. Preventive approaches such as increasing percolation into the soil,
and attenuating runoff through surface storage, are possible and should
be considered when redevelopment occurs. The highest degree of flexibility
of approach and probability of sucess is in the developing areas as control
can be built into the project. The opportunity to contain the urban runoff
problem and avoid long term problems is such that high priority should be
given to planning and implementation of management programs in all areas.
Information Sources
Information on load estimating, management techniques, and tech-
nology assessment for the reduction and prevention of pollution from
urban runoff can be found in the following publications:
1. "Interim Report on Loading Functions for Assessment of Water
Pollution from Nonpoint Sources", EPA-Project #68-01-2293, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 20460, November 1975.
2. "Water Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff", EPA-440/9-75-004,
U.S., Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460
December 1974.
3. "Practices in Detention of Urban Stormwater Runoff", Herbert
Poertner, Office of Water Resources Research and Technology, U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., June 1974, NTIS order
number: PB 234554.
4. "Water Resources Protection Measures in Land Development - A
Handbook", Office of Water Resources Research and Technology, U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., April 1974, NTIS order
number: PB 236049.
5. "Urban Stormwater Management and Technology - An Assessment",
EPA-670/2-74-040, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C., 20460, December 1974.
-------
DRAFT
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ^ * * *M* '37 §
TO MINIMIZE WATER POLLUTION DUE "
TO RESIDUAL WASTES
The other nonpoint source categories of agriculture, silviculture,
mining, construction, urban runoff, and hydrologic modification often
produce residual wastes through their activities. These discarded
materials must be properly handled to provide for our health and
environmental protection. Our choices in problem solution are
limited. Wastes may be disposed of, recovered for some use, or
reduced at the source of generation.
Millions of tons of residual wastes are disposed annually,
generally by burying or burning and burying; this results in various
degrees of environmental harm to air, land and water. Surface and
ground water damage result when the pollutants from these residual
wastes are conveyed to waters by run-off and infiltration. Using
the residual waste generated by wastewater treatment plants as a base
factor of one, residential and commercial sources generate about 17
times as much waste as generated by wastewater treatment plants, and
industry produces about 35 times the base amount. Agriculture pro-
duces 2 1/2 times the waste produced by industry, and mining produces
7 times that amount.
The following guidance is intended to provide information regarding
the control of pollution from nonpoint sources of residual wastes and
to supplement information regarding control of residual waste pollution
associated with discharges regulated under the requirements of NPDES.
Introduction
Residual wastes are defined as those solid, liquid, or sludge
substances frcm man's activities in the urban, agricultural, Industrial,
and mining environment not discharged to water after collection and
necessary treatment. Residual wastes include, but are not limited to:
Sludges resulting from water and domestic wastewater treatment,
industrial processes, utility plant processes and mining
processes;
Solids resulting from industrial and agricultural processes
and from nonprocess industrial and commercial activities
(demolition wastes, mine tailings, incinerator residues,
dredge spoil, crop residues, feedlot wastes, and pesticide
containers);
Liquids resulting from industrial side streams and from agricul-
tural product processing.
-------
-2-
Residual wastes must be considered as largely untapped resources
with unrealized potentials for beneficial uses. The minimal use of
residual wastes has primarily resulted from the traditional considera-
tion of such wastes as a problem rather than as potential assets. The ocean
and land have been the final resting places for societies* residues/
because they have been the most economical. This attitude has resulted
in dumps with few siting considerations, a lack of site maintenance
and no emphasis for resource recovery.
As treatment requirements become more stringent with further
implementation of the Federal Water Pollution Control and Clean Air
Acts, residual wastes will greatly increase and will contain a wider
range and greater concentration of pollutants.
Management programs for handling vast quantities of residuals
often fall short of providing adequate protection of water quality.
Frequently, procedures intended to abate air and water pollution problems
worsen residual waste problems. Since residual wastes are the end-
product discards of all processes, the management of residual wastes
clearly cannot continue to be considered separately from the overall
management processes and systems that produce the wastes. Just as
the environment -- air, water and land — must be considered a
continuous whole, and be treated as such, residual waste problems
cannot be successfully segregated into individual components for
separate particularized handling. All considerations must be inte-
grated into a problem-solving approach that will achieve total waste
management, on an areawide basis, with emphasis upon (1) recovering
the resource values contained in any such wastes, and (2) the satis-
factory, sanitary disposal of any element or portion of the residual
wastes not amenable to resources recovery processing or without
economic value for such processing.
Identification of Pollutants
The types of wastes and their composition have changed greatly
over the past three decades, due largely, to changes in lifestyle
and to the great diversity of new products on the market. The wastes
society generates are conveniently classified into hazardous and
nonhazardous. The biological, chemical, and physical actions of
the environment can, with unacceptable control measures, act on these
residuals to release their hazardous and undesirable constituents to
the environment.
-------
-3-
Water quality problems which can result from the released waste
constituents exceeding the assimilative capacity of the receiving
water include: aesthetic deterioration, dissolved oxygen depletion,
bacteria/virus contamination, suspended solids, dissolved solids,
nutrients, and metals/pesticides/persistent organic toxic compounds.
All of the above problems are directly or indirectly associated with
precipitation, which provides mobility to the waste constituents.
For the most part, nonhazardous residual wastes are a local or
regional problem. The Federal role has been to Identify and test
possible solutions, with State and local governments responsible for
implementation. Hazardous residual wastes are a problem of national
scope, with Federal laws controlling the storage and disposal of
waste pesticides and containers, and radioactive wastes. This limited
Federal authority leaves many gaps in the disposal of hazardous wastes.
Concept of Best Management Practices
While the residual waste situation is technologically, economically,
governmentally and socially complex, it can be made to succumb to a
sound, results-oriented program of conceptualization, investigation,
analysis and evaluation, planning and programming and (most importantly)
the exercise of capable leadership and strong resolve to implement
areawide programs and systems.
This approach infers that residual waste problems can best be
corrected by the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMP)
which can be expected to result systematically in flow attenuation
of waters, waste stabilization, waste reduction, and resource recovery
and recycling. BMP approaches cannot be established and utilized
individually, but must be integrated into an overall system for the
effective management of residual wastes. Everything works interdepend-
ently. Flow attenuation, while reducing entrained run-off pollutants,
can actually increase infiltration and increase the requirement for
waste stablization. Reducing wastes at the source by preventing the
production of wastes, and, at the disposal end, through the'"resource
conservation can either eliminate the residues from many manufacturing
processes, before they appear as wastes, or prevent the residuals from
coming Into extensive, d1s-beneficial contact with the environment.
Management Techniques
Many techniques can be applied to'the management of residual wastes,
and the alternatives can be divided into two general categories:
(1) Innovation. This would include, particularly, the development
of source Feduction techniques (basically administrative) and systems for
the recovery or recycling of residual wastes (basically technological
and Institutional). Reference must be continually made to the total waste
management system, Including in-process treatment;,or containment pro-
cedures .
-------
-4-
(2) Application of existing techniques. This would involve the
utilization of demonstrated state-of-the-art techniques to remedy
problems; basically, this would be an extension of the present process.
A BMP might be included in either of the above categories.
However, EPA encourages the first: innovation. Over the long term,
the innovative approach will result in accomplishing the greatest
source reduction and the greatest recovery of resources, as well as
the abatement of pollution. Actually, pollution abatement is achieved
almost as a by-product of the innovative process.
However, both approaches are equally amenable to standard admin-
istrative and regulatory practices. The end goal of the approach
should be to provide sufficient reduction in pollutants to enable
the meeting of designated water quality objectives at minimum cost.
Any BMP should consider thatvcost considerations are vital and
that treatment alternatives will be used only when lower cost
alternatives fail to provide the required reduction in pollutants.
The greatest degree of freedom in alternative selection will be under
new source conditions where existing decisions and capital investments
will not be overriding factors. These new source condition controls
will permit the greatest short-term accomplishment. The implementation
of BMP's under existing source conditions cannot be accomplished
overnight. The key to successful existing condition control is orderly
transition. It is necessary that any action be phased in over time
in such a way that adverse consequences are minimized or eliminated.
The BMP concept must recognize that capital investments and Individual's
jobs must be counted and no change should be implemented until all
the benefits and costs have been weighed. These criteria must1be
weighed against the urgency of water quality requirements and objectives,
which are insistent that certain ameliorating actions be taken.
Solutions, under a BMP, should be directed toward meeting the
following key needs:
. the need to design a workable, flexible system;
. the need to use, establish, or modify appropriate institutional
arrangements (laws, organizations, processes);
. the need to reduce uncertainties, promote actions to implement;
. the need to establish a sense of urgency, improve schedule;
. the need to establish a process of continuous Improvement
through research and development in the local area;
-------
. the need to help people get started on a coordinated basis —•
incentivization;
. the need to give adequate attention to all public information
and education programs.
Any BMP must meet certain general and specific criteria. General
criteria are provided in the States Water Quality Management Guidelines.
The specific criteria for a residual waste BMP follow:
Geographic Situation
The geology of our country can vary widely over short distances,
resulting in numerous soil types and hydrologic profiles. Residual
waste disposal and use alternatives must consider these variables
as they determine the mobility of waste components in this under-
ground portion of the environment. Topography of the sites (terrain
slope, type of surface covering and distance between surface hydro-
logical features) affects waste component mobility. The BMP must
examine these variables to prevent waste from being transferred between
environmental structures, ultimately impacting water quality objectives.
Meteorological Conditions
The frequency, intensity, and duration of precipitation within and
outside of the site will affect the surface water infiltration and
material deposition and movement. Precipitation can be in a number of
forms, but rain and snowmelt account for the major volumes. The ambient
temperature can determine the rate of snowmelt and the biological
activity of a site. The absolute humidity as it affects biological
activity and physio-chemical alterations of nonconservative waste
components can make new products that are more or less environmentally
toxic and mobile than the parent material. As meteorological activity
can directly affect water component mobility, the BMP must be compatible
with these environmental influences.
Demographic Conditions
The practicability of certain BMP's can depend upon high densities
of population or industry(ies) being present or absent in a given area.
Frequently, there are critical limits at which resource recovery and
waste reduction become feasible alternatives. Also, as mentioned
earlier! Spltol iSSStment and individuals' jobs must be weighed when
considering implementation of a given BMP,
Infrastructure
TNhe BMP must address more than the residual wastes, their composition
and thpfr movement.and the . technical or technological problems of
their management. JAny waste management system that is handling a problem
aTi*rvts1?e asthe management of residual wastes must be inlaid into a
socio-economic and socio-politicel "envelope" that has its own problems
-------
in dealing with the type of management system that will ultimately
emerge for the management of residual wastes. These problems will
include the development of areawide (regional) resolve to implement,
and a structure and process through which management may be exercised.
Developing these programmatic elements in the face of interlocal/inter-
governmental political and economic rivalries,and the social differences
that may occur within a given region calls for the development of new
patterns for working together, new programs for promoting public under-
standing and reducing public apathy)and the devising of such instruments
of public policy as strong local and State legislation to establish
viable structure and process and reduce marketing uncertainties.
The following specific examples of alternative strategies are
provided for planning purposes only. They are not recommendations.
Use of any one or more of these specific examples should be based upon
a comprehensive, areawide, interdisciplinary investigation and the
development of specific recommendations from the data.
Source Reduction
The source reduction strategy involves techniques which are
basically legislative and administrative in nature. Examples include:
, Design and use of products that live longer.
. Design and use of products which have less material weight.
. Monetary incentives (beverage container deposits).
Resource Conservation
Source Separation and Centralized Processing. The source separation
strategy involves a system of low technology techniques. Examples include:
. Separation of waste materials in the home.
. Separation of waste materials at commercial establishments.
. Separation of waste materials at industrial establishments.
The centralized processing strategy involves high technology,
capital-intensive systems. Examples include:
. Fuel (solid, gas, liquid) and material (ferrous and nonferrous
metals, glass) recovery plants.
. Energy conversion facilities (retrofits, new boilers).
. Material conversion facilities (de-tinning plants, minimills,
glass products plants, smelters).
• Transportation systems.
-------
-7-
Disposal
The disposal strategy generally involves low-technology systems.
Examples include:
. Construction and demolition waste;
. Lined lagoon and landfill
. Waste stabilization;
. Landfill stockpiling for potential future recovery.
Information Sources
EPA has published numerous reports describing methods for
management practices and preventive techniques for the control of
residual wastes resulting from man's activities. Many of the
practices described above are discussed In some detail 1n the
following publications. This listing is by no means exhaustive
and the user 1s encouraged to look further.
. Residual Waste Management Research and Planning Projects,
EPA-WPD 09-75-01, September 1975.
. Sludge Processing, Transportation and Disposal/Resource
Recovery: A Planning Perspective; EPA-WPD 12-75-01,
December 1975.
. Interim Report on Loading Functions for Assessment of
Water Pollution From Nonpolnt Sources, EPA Project
No. 68-01-2293, November 1975.
. Development of Residual Management Strategies EPA 600/1-76-01
January 1976.
. Residual Waste-Best Management Practices Handbook,
EPA-WPD 02-76-01, February 1976.
Additional Information regarding Institutional structures and
methods of Implementation will be provided 1n later publications.
-------
OEC18
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
TO MINIMIZE WATER POLLUTION DUE
TO HYDROLOGIC MODIFICATIONS
Introduction
Many development activities within planning areas necessitate
hydrologic modifications as an essential feature. These include
(1) channel modifications; (2) construction of dams to impound stream
flows; (3) other types of construction activities; and (4) resource
recovery operations actually located in streambeds. In addition, there
are many land development activities which, if not properly controlled,
may result in unintended, and often undesirable, hydrologic modifications.
In many instances these activities result in topographic and ground cover
changes which could affect surface runoff rates, volume and direction
adversely. Such effects are often experienced in areas undergoing
rapid urbanization.
Hydrologic modifications may be of local or regional scope, and
are being (or have been) implemented in areas extending throughout
the nation, affecting both intra-and interstate waterways.
-------
-2-
Description of Hydrologic Modifications
Hydrologic modifications resulting in nonpoint source pollution are
activities that either directly or indirectly affect, or have affected,
the natural stream-flow and associated groundwater regime detriment-
ally. Pollutants are consequently added to the surface and ground
waters from the diffuse runoff, or by seepage or percolation. The
levels of many of these pollutants are influenced by climatic events such
as rainfall and the seasonal temperature changes, in addition to the effects
of soil types and topography, and operating practices. Reference to
hydrologic modifications as sources of non-point pollution should not be
mis-construed as eliminating them from consideration as point sources
with respect to certain aspects, which require control under the NPDES
and 404(e) permit programs.
Channel Modifications
Channel modifications are implemented primarily for flood control,
erosion reduction or for drainage purposes. Such structural changes
as dikes, levees, piers, docks, bridges and road fills may require or
result in channel modifications which would not otherwise have occured.
There are seven different types of modifications which are potential
nonpoint sources of pollutants. They are:
1. Clearing and snagging operations to restore the former hydraulic
capacity of a streambed. This is basically a periodic maintenance
operation.
2. Channel excavations which enlarge and reshape an existing
channel, or which provide a new channel in its place.
3. Channel realignment to eliminate meanders that have developed
in the natural streambed.
. 4. Construction of floodways to relieve the streambed of excessive
flows of storm water. These are normally dry.
5. Construction of retarding basins for the temporary storage of
excess flows of storm water.
6. Construction of debris retention basins to hold back debris
during periods of high water, which might otherwise result
in extensive downstream erosion and pollution.
7. Construction of drainage ditches or deepening existing ditches.
-------
-3-
Impoundments
Dams are constructed to impound surface waters for water supply,
flood control, fish and wildlife, hydropower, navigation, irrigation,
flow diversion, low flow augmentation, and combinations of some or all
of these reasons. They are usually assigned to'one of the two following
categories:
1. Run-of-the-river impoundments, which characteristically have
low heads and water detention times limited to a few days.
2. Storage reservoirs, which are usually located on tributaries,
with high heads, and encompassing an extensive area outside the
original channel.
Various Construction Activities
All types of ground-disturbing construction activities result in
modifications to existing drainage flows, and if not given adequate design
consideration, such hydrologic changes may become sources of water
pollution. Construction nonpoint sources of pollution are the subject
of a separate guidance document, and will not be covered here in detail.
When a construction project includes potential nonpoint sources result-
ing from hydrologic modifications, those best management practices
recommended in that document need to be implemented.
Resource Recovery Operations
The resource recovery activity of primary importance is that of
the sand and gravel operation. However, mineral recovery operations
of any kind which will disturb the existing streambed must be considered,
as well as should oil and gas wells (exploratory and production), located
in bodies of water.
Withdrawal and Recharge Activities
Surface and ground water withdrawal and recharge activities may
produce undesirable effects such as reducing waste assimilative capacity,
damage to fisheries, saltwater encroachment, surface subsidance, induced
recharge, and mixing of water in aquifers of differing water quality.
Other Types of Activities
Concurrently prepared best management practices guidelines are
available for activities incorporating hydrologic modifications in
agriculture, silviculture and other categories, in addition to construction.
However, best management practices should be applied for all other
activities involving hydrologic modifications, even if they are not
specifically identified by guidelines.
-------
-4-
Identification of Pollutants
Six general types of nonpoint source pollutants that result from
hydrologic modifications are:
1. Sediment - Sediments are one of the most prevalent non-point
source pollutants, occurring as a result of most types of hydrologic
modification activities to varying degrees. The degree of pollution
from sediments will vary with streamflow, snowmelt and rainfall runoff,
soil types, and bedload characteristics, and will be most intense during the
period when construction activities have removed vegetative cover,
until it can become re-established. Since they are a naturally occuring
phenomenon, present due to erosional processes, they will normally be
evident to some degree even with application of best management practices
to control manmade sources. Where the sediments settle, bottom organisms'
can be smothered, and spawning beds can be destroyed. The increased
turbidity during the transport phase will interfere with ligh penetration,
hindering photosynthesis, and is a hazard to boaters, swimmers and
water skiers. Sediments are also carriers of nutrients and pesticides
which may have become adsorbed to their surfaces.
2. Nutrients-Where Hydrologic Modifications located in agriculture -
intensive areas result in increase runoff rates and streamflow velocities,
the natural level of nutrients may be increased. In urban areas, similar
circumstance will increase nutrient levels as a result of fertilization of
lawns and gardens, but the amount of increase will be lower. Soil
erosion also contributes to the problem by carrying adsorbed nutrients
well beyond the areas that would normally be affected.
3. Pesticides- A similar pollution problem may be experienced with
respect to pesticides as was described for nutrients, unless integrated
pest management has been instituted.
4. Thermal- This form of pollution may result from channel mod-
ifications or impoundment construction. Not only is the temperature
change that might occur a problem by itself with respect to sensitive
aquatic life, but it can lead to serious changes in the dissolved oxygen
level in the water body. As an example of the type of problem that might
be experienced in channel modification, if the normal tree cover is
removed, and the channel is widened to handle design flood flows, the
resulting shallow normal flow will be exposed to increased solar radiation*
with attendant temperature increases, and a reduced capacity for dissolved
oxygen. Impoundments that become stratified during the summer and
winter may become oxygen deficient, which can, in turn, cause low
dissolved oxygen problems downstream of the discharge.
-------
-5-
5. Chemicals- Hydrologic modifications such as dredging, with the
attendant necessity to suitably dispose of the spoil, may result in
release of pollutant chemicals from the spoil through leaching
or percolation. The fines re-suspended in the streambed are another
potential source of pollution if adsorbed chemicals are released. Changes
in pH and dissolved oxygen levels that may occur in impoundments may
cause release into solution of certain types of chemicals previously
insoluble. Modifications that lowered the groundwater table sufficiently
in coastal areas could result in saltwater intrusion into a freshwater
aquifer, with attendant salinity degradation.
Chemical stabilization techniques applied for control of fugitive
dust and/or nonpoint source pollution will require coordination.
Techniques selected must be complementary, rather than conflicting, with
the choice of action selected being that which produces the best total end
result, with respect to control of both nonpoint source pollution and
fugitive dust.
6. Microorganisms - Modifications could result in pathogenic
micr©organisms entering the water from runoff or percolation and
seepage. Changes in the existing flow regime must consider the effect
on potential sources of such organisms.
Considerations For Best Management Practices Selection
Best Management Practices for hydrologic modifications is the most
practical and effective measure, or combination of measures, which
will prevent or reduce the generation of pollutants, upon implementation,
to a level compatible with water quality goals.
The BMP selected for a specific hydrologic modification will not
necessarily be the same in different areas of the country. Soil types,
topography, climate, existing condition, local zoning and land use
regulations, etc., must be considered in assessing the problem. The
final determination of which BMP alternatives to apply in any specific
case must suit the site conditions, and include appropriate public part-
icipation. BMP must be considered at the earliest stage practicable,
and throughout the problem identification and analysis planning, design
and construction phases.
The principal emphasis should be placed on measures that will
prevent, or minimize nonpoint source pollutants which would be
generated by the specific hydrologic modification. All preventive measures
must be fully integrated into the total management system for every
hydrologic modification. In brief, the changes introduced should
produce conditions similar to those existing in nature which past
experience has proved will effectively control the potential pollutants,
and maintain or improve the water quality, while avoiding changes which
would be detrimental.
-------
-6-
As in other areas of nonpoint source pollution, erosion control
measures are an essential feature of most hydrologic modifications.
Controlling sediment-bearing runoff will reduce the amount of adsorbed
nutrients, pesticides and other chemicals that reach the nation's
waters. Designs for modification must recognize this problem and
provide suitable construction provisions as a part of the project.
(With respect to pesticides, integrated pest management must be
given suitable consideration. ) Subsequent operation and maintenance
activities must continue to apply best management practices to assure
the continued success of the pollution prevention measures.
The potential for thermal pollution problems must be assessed
for some types of hydrologic modifications, and suitable control
measures must be applied. The choice of type of modification may
even be determined by the need to control pollution of this type.
Prevention and Reduction Measures
The measures which can be applied to hydrologic modifications to
prevent or reduce pollutants from reaching surface or ground waters
may be vegetative, structural or institutional or a combination, in
addition to those mentioned for agriculture, silviculture, etc., in the
documents developed for pollutants related to those activities. Institut-
ional measures relating to land use should not be overlooked, but will
be more easily applied in non-urbanized locations. The variety of
structural and vegetative control measures will be discussed in detail
in applicable sections of this handbook.
-------
DRAFT
1 8 DEC 1375
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
MINING NONPOINT SOURCES
WATER POLLUTION
Mining activities in the United States have affected approxi-
mately 13 million acres of land according to estimates by the U. S.
Department of the Interior. This acreage includes almost 7 million
acres which have been undercut by mining activities, and more than
3 million acres disturbed by surface mining activities. The remaining
acreage represents land used for containing mining-related mineral
waste accumulations. By the year 2000, the Department of the Interior
estimates that 30 million acres will be affected by mining operations.
While the land area presently affected by mining represents only about
0.5% of the United States, the effects of mining upon water quantity
and quality are spread over large regions.
Introduction
Pollution from mining operations arises because the hydrology of
surface and subsurface waters is altered when the earth's crust is
disturbed to gain access to mineral values held within. The quality
of these waters very often deteriorates, and the quantity is often re-
disturbed as a result of mining operations. Water quality deteriorates
when water supplies are contaminated with soluble products present in
or generated from mining wastes. Water quantity is affected because
natural drainage patterns for surface and subsurface waters are altered.
Any-disturbance of the earth's crust will alter the environment in the
vicinity of the disturbance. The degree to which the environment is
altered depends upon the size and depth of the disturbance, the method
of the disturbance, and the nature of the disturbed materials. The
purpose of disturbing the earth in mining is to extract mineral deposits.
Methods used are determined by the placement of the minerals in the
earth. Similarly, size and depth of the mine are determined by the
distribution of the mineral at the mining site.
The extraction of minerals from the earth's crust can be accomplished
by a variety of techniques. For minerals deep in the earth, mine shafts
are sunk to gain access to the deposit. This method is usually not
used if mineral deposits are available for recovery by surface mining
techniques. Underground mining techniques tend to retrieve most of
the values in the deposit compared to surface mining techniques.
Surface mining creates more visible defacement of the earth's surface,
and results in disturbance of large land curves.
-------
DRAFT
1 8 DEC 1975
The most serious pollutant arising from mining activities is the
mine drainage generated by oxidation of pyritic materials with air in the
presence of water; this drainage is an acidic mixure of iron salts,
other salts and sulfuric acid. Mine drainage arises from both
underground and surface mining sources, and from coal and many
metal mining operations. Coal deposits and so-called hard rock mineral
deposits are commonly associated with pyrite and marcasite, which are
disulfides of iron. Acid mine drainage can find its way into surface
waters, where the acid and sulfate may result in severe deterioration
in stream quality. The acid can react with clays to yield aluminum
concentrations sufficient for fish kills, and with limestone to yield
very hard waters expensive to soften. The acid can also selectively
extract heavy metals present in trace quantities in mineral and soil
formations, resulting in toxic conditions in lakes and streams.
Mining refuse waste materials left near the mining site after
raw minerals have been cleaned or concentrated is another source of
pollution. Much of this refuse contains pyritic material which can be
oxidized to acidic substances. The resultant acid water may remain
in the pile until a rainstorm, at which time it is flushed into nearby
watercourses. Mine drainage "slugs" during storms are very detrimental
to aquatic life in surface waters.
Mining operations also generate wastes, commonly called spoil, in
the form of disturbed rock and soil. If this spoil is left in piles, erosion
and runoff will carry sediment into streams. This sediment is capable
of destroying life in streams, results in decreased capacity of streams
and reservoirs, and destroys fish and wildlife habitats.
Improperly impounded sediment may be released suddenly as a
mud slide and thus poses a direct threat to life and property.
Mining activities have a pronounced effect on groundwater supplies.
The various operations used to mine the mineral deposits can result
in alteration of groundwater distribution patterns. Aquifers containing
good water can become contaminated because some mining may
disturb bedrock formations, which permit mixing of contaminated water
with good.
Description of Mining Pollution
Water pollution caused by drainage from mining activities occurs
when dissolved, suspended, or other solid mineral wastes and debris
from mining and related operations enter receiving streams or ground
water. Mine drainage includes both water flowing by gravity or pumped
from underground mines, and runoff or seepage from surface mines
and from excavated waste materials. Polluting drainage is often corrosive,
highly mineralized, toxic to aquatic life, and may be laden with chemical
and/or soil sediments.
-------
DRAFT
1 8 DEC 1975
Pollutants may be generated during all phases of the mining cycle
whether the commodity is coal, sand and gravel, uranium, metallic ore
or nonmetallic ore; exploration, development, mine operation, closure,
and reclamation. In many cases, water pollution can continue long
after a mine has ceased operation. Pollution caused by inactive or
abandoned mines ("orphans") presents special problems of abatement.
Mine drainage pollutants include such dissolved and suspended
constituents as acid, alkali, iron, copper, arsenic, cadmium, nickel,
phosphate, sulfate, chloride, radioactive minerals, sediment, and colloidal
contaminants. The acids, alkalies, metals, and other minerals in mine
drainage affect water quality and water use in various ways. To many
the most dramatic effects of mine drainage pollution are the destruction
of fish and other aquatic life and impairment to aesthetic features. Mine
drainage pollution may affect the use of water for municipal, industrial
and agricultural water supply by increasing the costs for water treatment.
Identification of Sources of Pollutants
Various active unit operations within a surface or underground
mining operation produce pollutants that can ultimately enter both
surface and ground waters causing a lowering of water quality. The
discharge of pollutants from certain of these unit operations have been
classified as point sources by EPA, and certain of them have been classified
classified as nonpoint sources. Inactive and abandoned mine sites
can be considered nonpoint sources.
Nonpoint pollution from mining activities are strongly dependent on
precipitation events although there may be a significant response delay
when the ground water is the source of seepage water. The sources may
be intermittent or continuous in nature. The nature and amount of pollutants
are dependent on such factors as soil type, topography, geology, method
of mining, and hydrologic characteristics of the site.
Mining Activities
The basic mining activities that are potential causes of nonpoint
pollution sources are:
Exploration is conducted to locate a seam or other economic
deposit and to obtain quantity /quality data on that deposit. Site access,
-------
DRAFT
1 a r.rp
A w J.Y. Ij
excavation, and drilling activities can cause surface denudation and
erosion, mineralized ground water discharge, leaching of exposed
mineralogic materials, and chemicals seepage or release.
Construction of the mine and support facilities including roads
can be a major generator of pollutants.
*
Runoff and seepage of ground or surface waters may contact mineral
matter exposed by the operation and result in mineralized drainage. Slides
of unstable spoil piles or disturbed steep slopes can occur causing further
landscape and stream damages.
Following the mining operation the improper sealing of underground
mines as well as unsucessful revegetation and reclamation of inactive
surface mines.
Pollutant Generation and Their Causes
Land disturbed by surface mining is a major source of sediment in
mining regions. Studies have shown that erosion and sedimentation rates
on strip-mined land are 500 times as great as those on neighboring land
that has not been stripped. Overburden dumped on the downslope areas
is one of the largest sources of sediment. The post-operative mining
period can be the period of most severe erosion. When eroded sediment
is transported to a receiving stream it can smother bottom organisms,
interfere with photosynthesis by reducing light penetration, and contribute
to flooding by filling stream channels.
Acid mine waters result from oxidation of pyrite and other iron-bearing
minerals in deposits of anthracite and bituminous coals. The reaction
of these exposed sulfur-bearing minerals (usually sulfides) with
atmospheric oxygen and water frequently forms a sulfuric acid solution
that reacts with soil and rock materials to leach out other pollutants,
commonly metals. The acidic water can be toxic to aquatic life and corrosive
to manmade structures.
Dissolved minerals contained in mine waters can be present in sufficient
concentrations to be toxic to aquatic life. Heavy metals such as copper,
nickel and zinc may be present in toxic concentrations, as well as chloride,
sulfate, or other troublesome ions. Even though one or more constituents -
is not present in toxic amounts considered singly, toxic conditions can
result from synergestic effects among various constituents.
The total mineralization, total dissolved solids content, of a water
can present a salinity problem. It normally occurs when salts contained
in geologic formations are penetrated by mining and the resulting saline
mine runoff waters enter into receiving streams or ground waters.
Aquatic life can be harmed and expensive treatment may be required
for certain uses of that water.
-------
-5-
1 8 DEC 1S75
The control of water pollution from mining activities is achieved
through proper operational management and utilization of preventive
techniques, and by mine water treatment. Control of mining nonpoint
pollution sources is best achieved through prevention or avoidance. The
utilization of preventive and management techniques is the primary thrust
for the control of nonpoint mining pollutants.
There are four premises upon which mining pollution control of
nonpoint sources is based:
1. That any disturbance of the earth for mineral extraction alters
the hydrologic environment to form some amount of water pollutants;
2. That each mine site represents a unique set of chemical/physical
and hydrologic conditions;
3. That effective and efficient environmental protection from mining
impact requires a total mining plan before extraction occurs that covers
management control and preventive measures implementation throughout
the mining cycle. Thus, the plan must cover activities initiated and
implemented during the pre-extraction and extraction phases, and
conclude after extraction has terminated and adequate restoration of the
site has been accomplished;
4. That a combination of several management and engineering techniques
is usually required to effect a complete pollution control plan that prevents
or minimizes pollutants reaching ground or surface waters.
Basis For Best Management Practices Development for Mining Activities
"Best Management Practices" (BMP) means a practice, or combination
of practices, that is determined after problem assessment and examination
of alternative practices, to be the most effective, practicable (including
technological, economic, and institutional considerations) means of preventing
or reducing the amount of pollution generated by nonpoint sources to a
level compatible with water quality goals.
Best Management Practices for mining activities are the most practical
and effective measures, or combination of measures, which when applied
to a mine production sit^will prevent or reduce the generation of pollutants
to a level compatible with water quality goals.
Each identified BMP will differ with the kind of mining, geographic
area and conditions, and the extent and age of the mine. A new mine may
have a different BMP than an older mine in the same locale. BMP
judgements for any specific site will recognize special problems such
as poor soils, unstable slopes, toxic conditions, and unfavorable geologic
structure. Existing regulatory requirements, future land use, and economic
effects will influence BMP developments.
-------
-6-
1 8 DEC 1975
There are a wide variety of measures available that will materially
reduce the amount of pollutants generated at a surface or underground
mine site. Selection and blending of the appropriate measures through
the mining cycle can be categorized in terms of four objectives.
1. Prevention of an increase in the mineralization of the ground or
surface waters intercepted by earth disturbance activities:
The quantity and quality of mine water produced can be greatly influenced
by various techniques of surface diversion, subsurface dewatering and
collection, segregration of toxic mineral matter, and proper management
and handling of intercepted water.
2. Minimization of erosion and sediment transport from all
surfaces necessarily removed of cover:
Erosion and sediment transport are problems of surface mining and
surface facilities of underground mining. Measures to mitigate these
phenomena should include grading, compaction, sediment traps and early
revegetation of disturbed areas.
3. Careful residuals management of all mining wastes to prevent
leaching and erosion:
Measures to control the adverse affects of residual materials stored
on the land surface are generally the same as those used in water diversion
and erosion control.
4. Prevention of post-operative pollution via proper mine closure
and/or reclamation measures:
Mine closure and land reclamation are critical processes in the total
mining plan. Closure of underground mines to prevent continued polluting
drainage is more difficult than surface activity but a number of sealing
and diversion techniques are effective in preventing or reducing continuing
problems. A multitude of surface reclamation practices are effective
and available. They can be classed as measures to segregate overburden
and bury toxic materials, return topsoil, control erosion and sedimentation,
moderate topography, stabilize disturbed areas, and permanently revegetate
the area.
Information Sources
EPA has published various reports describing methods for management
practices and preventive techniques for the control of pollutants from
mining activities. The titles of current publications include:
-------
-7-
DRAFT
1 8 DEC 1375
o Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control Pollution
from Mining Activities, EPA-430/9-73-011, October 1973 .
o Methods for Identifying and Evaluating the Nature and Extent
of Nonpoint Sources of Pollutants, EPA-430/9-73-014,
October 197 3.
o Analysis of Pollution Control Costs, EPA-670/2-74-009,
February 1974.
o Environmental Protection in Surface Mining of Coal,
EPA-670/2-74-093, October 1974.
o Inactive and Abandoned Underground Mines, Water Pollution
Prevention and Control, EPA-440/9-75-007, June 1975.
o Criteria for Developing Pollution Abatement Programs
for Inactive and Abandoned Mine Sites, EPA-440/9-75-009,
August 1975.
o Compilation of Federal, State and Local Laws Controlling
Nonpoint Pollutants, EPA-440/9-75-OU, September 1975.
Additional information on features and design of specific measures
is available in the publications and handbooks of other,Federal and State
agencies and in various mining industry publications.
EPA is committed to the management, prevention and control of
pollutants from mining sources. Authority exists under sections 208, 209,
303 (e) and 313 of P. L, 92-500 for EPA to initiate a program in conjunction
with the States to manage nonpoint sources, although the the primary
responsibility for nonpoint source management rests with the States.
Establishment and implementation of nonpoint source management programs
will be a part of the areawide planning process in designated 208 areas
as well as a part of the State water quality management responsibilities
in non-designated areas.
Point Sources of Mining Pollutants will be controlled thru the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit Program.
-------
Best Management Practices \C>jy
Silvicultural Nonpoint Sources of
Water Pollution
Silviculture is the cultivation and harvesting of timber for commercial
purposes. As such, the term includes all activities related to its
purpose from the planting of seeds, through those involved in the maturing
of the crop, its harvest and transportation from the growing area. In
addition to being performed on approximately 500 million acres of
commercial forest land utilized for the continuous production of marketable
timber, portions of the overall silvicultural activity take place on a number
of lands being transferred from a wooded state to another use.
Introduction
This guidance is intended to provide information regarding the control
of pollution from silvicultural nonpoint sources, and to supplement
information regarding control of silvicultural associated discharges
regulated under the provisions of the NPDES and 404(e) permit programs.
Silvicultural activities can result in the development of significant
sources of pollutants which may reach surface or ground water, most
often due to a climatic event, although certain construction or hydrographic
modification activities have been recognized under the 404(e) program
as being essentially due to a specific activity of man.
While all silvicultural activities are inter-related, those activities
producing pollutants can be divided into four classes: (1) Access systems
(log roads and other access and transport systems); (2) harvesting; (3)
crop regeneration; and (4) intermediate practices and activities. The
amount of pollutants generated by these activities are strongly dependent
upon the magnitude and characteristics of climatic events, the physical
characteristics of the area (soil type, topography, etc. ), and the
characteristics of the individual operations as they are practiced in a
specific area.
Description of Silvicultural Activities
The four general classes of activities associated with silviculture which
may produce pollutants are:
1. Access Systems- The forest access road system is constructed to
provide access for man, materials and equipment to production units
and to serve as routes for transport of harvested logs from the
production unit. Such roads are also used for management and
protection of successive timber crops, and for other access purposes,
including recreation. In terms of construction, these roads range
-------
-2-
from very narrow trails, through unsurfaced roads to higher speed
paved roads. The frequency of use is highly variable ranging from
intensive use to only occasional usage over a number of years.
Nationally, and in certain specifications the forest road system
is the major contributor of sediment to the streams in forested areas.
These sediment loads may originate as a result of road construction
(including stream crossings), direct erosion from the roads, indirect
erosion caused by changes in drainage patterns and systems, and
mass soil movement due to slides and slips.
In addition to the sediment problems, additional pollution problems
may be created due to debris (organic pollution) resulting from construction
and log transport, and from herbicides used to control re-growth in
the right-of-way.
2. Harvesting Systems-- The harvest system includes the process
of felling the tree, preparing it by de-limbing and cutting into desired
lengths, and moving it to a central accessable location for transport
out of the forested area. The four basic harvest systems used in the
United States include seed tree, shelterwood, selection and clear-cutting.
The harvesting of timber results in removal of cover, to some degree,
from the forest floor. Improper choice (or performance) of the harvesting
system may seriously increase the erosion phenomena and consequently,
the potential for sediment pollution. Similarly soil movement may occur
due to increased percolation resulting from removal of the vegetative cover.
After felling, the timber is moved (yarded) to a temporary storage site
or "landing" by one of three basic general methods--tractor (on skid trails).
high lead, or skyline cable. Recently, timber producers have also exper-
imented with ballon and helicopter. Obviously, the magnitude, the disturbance
of earth, and vegetative cover would be reflected on the erosive tendency
with its consequent danger of sediment pollution. Each system, when
properly chosen and operated can minimize environmental problems.
In addition to the sediment pollution, the harvesting system can create
organic pollution problems due to debris and slash washed from the forest
floor or otherwise reaching streams, pollution due to various chemicals
used in the growing and harvesting operation, and thermal poUution due to
removal of the canopy over streams.
3. Crop Regeneration- Regeneration of a harvested area includes both
the natural regenerative process and man's activities in preparing and improving
the site followed by planting or reseeding. The major activities include (a)
debris removal to reduce fire hazard and allow use of equipment for sub-
sequent operations, (b) reduction or removal of brush cover and undesireable
species of trees and, (c) cultivation of the soils.
-------
-3-
The use of fire, chemicals and soil disturbing machinery increase
the potential for sediment and other pollution to occur. The time span
for such pollution to occur is variable depending upon the climatic factors
and operational schedule.
4. Intermediate Practices- Other silvicultural processes relating to
thinning of an immature forest, fertilizer application and pesticide treatments
are undertaken during the crop cycle. In general these activities are
infrequent during the crop cycle.
The thinning process involves the removal of selected trees from
an immature forest, in essence a type of harvesting, which would tend to
generate sediment pollution, but at a lesser rate than harvesting.
Chemical application, (fertilizers and pesticides) can result in water
pollution, if improperly carried out or adversely affected by extreme and
unexpected natural event.
Pollutants Originating from Silvicultural Activities
The principle pollutants generated by silvicultural activities are
sediments and debris; chemicals, including nutrients, pesticides, and
fire retardants; and thermal effects. The origin of the pollutants is generally
related to more than one of the activities of the total silvicultural operation.
1. Sediment—Sediments are the most common pollutants resulting
from silvicultural activities. The sediments principally result from the
erosion of soils, but may also include debris and other organic waste.
Sediments upset balanced ecology within streams by smothering bottom
organisms in water bodies through the formation of bottom blankets,
interfere with the photosynthesis processes by reducing light pentration,
serve as carriers of nutrients and pesticides, inhibit fish reproduction of
many important species, and by altering stream flow and speed.
2. Nutrients.-- Nutrients, above the natural levels of an area, generally
result from the application of fertilizers. Soluble nutrients may reach
surface or ground water through runoff, seepage, and percolation. Insoluble
forms may be adsorbed on soil particles and reach surface water through
erosion processes. Nutrients may also reach surface water by direct washoff
of slash, debris, and recently applied fertilizer. Excessive nutrients can
lead to imbalance in the natural life cycles of water bodies and in some cases
can be a health hazard.
3. Pesticides -- Pesticides applied during forest management activites
may be insoluble or soluble. The entrance of pesticides into the surface
or ground waters follows approximately the same pattern as nutrients.
Pesticides may result in acute toxicity problems in the water bodies; or
insidious toxicity problems through the entire food chain from lowest to the
highest forms of life.
-------
-4-
4. Organic Pollutants— Debris,i.e., slash and other non-
merchanable materials, are the principle organic pollutants that result
from silvicultural activities. The pollutants may reach surface waters
through direct dumping, washoff, and leachate from log storage. The
organic materials place an oxygen demand on the receiving waters
during their decomposition. In addition they may lead to other problems
such as tastes, odors, color, and nutrients.
5. Thermal— Thermal pollution from silvicultural activities most
often results from the removal of canopy cover from stream bodies
causing water temperature to rise. Temperature is a significant water
quality parameter. It strongly influences dissolved oxygen concentrations
and bacteria populations in streams. The saturated dissolved oxygen
concentrations in streams is inversely related to temperature.
Best Management Practices for Pollution from Silviculture
Best Management Practices for silvicultural sources is the most
practical and effective measure or combination of measures which, when
applied to the forest management unit, will prevent or reduce the
generation of pollutants to a level compatible with water quality goals.
In BMP selection, it should be recognized that the variability in
sources, topography, climate, soils, etc., will in most cases preclude
a single BMP covering all activities or situations. The BMP must be
tailored to the needs of the particular source and physical conditions.
The principle emphasis should be placed on measures that will
prevent or reduce the pollutants in the runoff, seepage, or percolation
from the forest management unit. The preventive measures must be
fully integrated into the total management system for the particular
forest management unit. In essence, the soils, nutrients, pesticides,
and other chemicals must be kept on the land area where they perform
their intended function of assisting tree growth.
Because of the widespread nature of sediment runoff, erosion control
measures must be a principle thrust of the preventive program of each
management unit. Particular attention must be paid to erosion prevention
measures for logging roads and harvesting activities. In addition to primary
control measures, supplemental measures such as debris and sediment
basins should be included where necessary to further reduce or prevent the
entrance of sediments, slash, and debris into water bodies. Where nutrients,
pesticides and other chemicals cause particular problems in surface or
ground waters, further control measures may be necessary. The measures
would principally relate to the application (timing, method, and amount),
utilization, and management of the fertilizers, pesticides, and fire retardant
chemicals. Care must be exercised to insure that thermal problems in
streams are not created by removal of shade canopy. . Attention to proper
forest management, engineering and harvesting principles can substantially
reduce all pollution attributable to silviculture.
-------
-5-
Prevention and Reduction Measures
The measures which can be applied to a timber management unit
to prevent or reduce pollutants from reaching surface and/or ground
waters can be classified as two (2) general types. These are (1) non-
structural or management decision measures, and (2) structural or
physical measures.
Management decision measures involve incorporation of water
quality protection considerations into the planning and design of activites
within the timber management unit. It is at this stage that logging access
roads locations and design, harvesting methods, and reforestation
decisions must be made. Structural measures generally involve some
physical method or technique utilized to reduce erosion and prevent
sediment runoff.
Nonstructural measures can be effective methods of reducing pollution
generated by silvicultural activities, e.g.:
A. Pollution emenating from access systems may be greatly decreased
by careful location, design, construction and maintance of the roads.
The importance of not utilizing waterways or normally wet areas as
part of the road-access system cannot be over emphasized.
B. Pollution caused by the harvesting operation can be reduced,
under certain soil conditions, by mininizing the disturbance or
compaction of the soil. Careful location and use of skid trails,
particular when the ground is wet, will reduce sediment gen-
eration due to the skidding operation. As in the case of roads,
skid trails should not be located in normally wet areas, nor should
they utilize streams as part of the route. Like road, the trails
should follow the countour of the land rather than provide long steep
grades. Careful handling of debris will prevent accumulation,
which tend to act as dams in streams, and which on breakup, result
in high stream velocities causing channel erosion. Early re veget-
ation of disturbed areas will provide stabilization of the soil, thus
minimizing erosion.
C; Pollution caused by the regeneration activity and intermediate
practices can be minimized by application of proper techniques
under favorable conditions by well trained and supervised
personnel. Additional techniques, such as provisions of buffer
strips along streams may be useful.
-------
-6-
Structural measures are utilized when necessary to further reduce
erosion and prevent sediment runoff. These measures include culverts,
ditches, berms, catch basins, slope stablization, and various road
building techniques.
Information Sources
Reduction measures and preventive techniques are generally
described in "Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control
Pollution Resulting from Silvicultural Activities" , EPA 420/9-73-010*
More Specific information on logging roads is contained in "Logging
Roads and Protection of Water Quality", EPA 910/9-75-008, Region X,
Environmental Protection Agency. Additional information on features
and design of specific measures and management practices may be
obtained from other Federal agencies. State agencies, and various
forestry associations and publications.
-------
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
CONSTRUCTION NONPOINT SOURCES
WATER POLLUTION _
18
DRAFT
^ff\ 4 Q \3'
Construction is a broad category covering the alteration and
development of land for a different use including the installation of
structures on the land. The types of projects within the category
generally have two common characteristics, namely; 0.) They involve
soil disturbance, resulting in modification of the physical, chemical,
and biological properties,of the land; and (2) They are short-lived in the
sense that the "construction phase" closes when the development and
building activities are completed. Storm waters should be controlled
for the life of the facilities to protect downstream areas.
Introduction
This guidance is intended to provide information regarding the control
of pollution from nonpoint source construction activities, and to supplement
information regarding control of construction associated descharges
under the provisions of NPDES and Section 404(e) of the FWPCA.
Construction activities can result in the development of significant
sources of pollutants which may reach surface or ground waters. About
one million acres of land are being disturbed for construction purposes
each year in the United States. Pollution resulting from these construction
areas can be catastrophic in downstream areas, particularly in small
drainages. This statement is intended to provide guidance in the control
of construction nonpoint sources and for the selection of pollution prevention
or reduction measures that are useful in reaching water quality goals.
Construction nonpoint sources are the land development and building
projects that result in the runoff, seepage or percolation of pollutants to
the surface and ground waters. The runoff of pollutants generated by
the project is strongly dependent on climatic events such as rainfall or
snowmelt. In general, the runoff is intermittent and does not provide
a continuous discharge. The nature of the pollutants depends on the
particular activities underway at the time of the rainfall or snowmelt.
Both the nature and amount of pollutants are also dependent on other
factors such as soil types, topography, project characteristics, and the
number of people and equipment involved.
Description of Construction Activities
There are many types of projects that fall within the construction
category. They generally can be classified into the following sub-
categories:
1. Land Development — Land development involves the construction
of housing subdivisions, shopping centers, schools, recreation areas,
and related facilities. The areal extent of the land affected is generally
large although a project may be completed in segments. Topographic
slopes are usually gentle with cut and fill sections relatively minor.
-------
-2-
2. Transportation and Communication Networks -- Construction of
transportation and communication facilities involves disturbance of the
land principally in a linear direction. Areas may be quite large but the
width of the disturbed areas is minor compared to their linear extent.
These facilities often are located in areas of high relief where slopes
may be steep and rugged. Climatic differences are extremely diverse
in many of these areas with torrential rains prevalent in higher altitudes.
3. Water Resource Facilities — Construction of water resource
facilities involves disturbing the ground surface for installation of dams,
aqueducts and their appurtenant structures. Dams may be located in
relatively steep river valleys or canyons, or in areas of fairly low relief.
Aqueducts have a great linear extent and are generally located along
valley or foothill areas. Climatic differences at these sites may be
extremely variable with intense rainfall occurring in mountain areas.
Dams in higher topographic areas may be underlain by hard, non-
erodible bedrock. Dams and aqueducts in lower areas generally are
located in erodible soils and/or parent materials.
4. Other -- Construction of factories, major office buildings,
airports, power plants, etc. is included in this subcategory. Except for
airports, the areal extent of these facilities is generally limited and
almost all require extensive subsurface excavation. They are generally
located in areas of fairly low relief with relatively low cut and fill slopes
involved.
Identification of Pollutants
Sediment, resulting from erosion of disturbed soils on construction
sites, is one of the principal pollutants. It includes solid mineral and
organic materials which are transported by runoff water, wind, ice, or
the effect of gravity. Chemical pollutants derived from construction
activities originate from inorganic and organic sources and occur in solid
form such as asphalt, boards, fibers, or metals; or in liquid form such
as paints, oils, glues, pesticides, and fertilizers. Biological pollutants
include organisms resulting from soils, animal, or human origins. They
may be bacteria, fungi, or viruses. Excess storm water runoff can be a
severe cause of pollution. It results from changed conditions due to
construction activities.
1. Sediment -- Sediment exerts physical, chemical and biological
effects on the receiving stream and water bodies. Physical damage
resulting from sediment deposition includes: reduction of reservoir
storage capacity, filling harbors and navigation channels, increasing the
frequency of flooding and causing bank erosion, increasing turbidity in
-------
-3-
water and reducing light penetration, increasing the cost of water
treatment, damaging fish life, destroying and covering organisms on
the bottom of streams, reducing the flowing speed and carrying capacity
of streams, and impairing operation of drainage ditches, culverts, and
bridges, altering the shape and direction of stream channels, destroying
water recreational areas, and imparting undesirable taste to water.
2. Chemicals -- The major categories of chemical pollutants
are: petroleum products, pesticides, fertilizers, synthetic materials,
metals, soil additives, construction chemicals, and miscellaneous wastes
from construction.
Some petroleum products impart a persistent odor and taste to water,
impairing its use for drinking water and contact sports. Many oils have
the ability to block the transfer of air from the atmosphere into water,
resulting in the suffocation of aquatic plants, organisms, and fish. Some
petroleum products contain quantities of organo-metallic compounds
(nickel, vanadium, lead, iron, arsenic) and other impurities which can
be toxic to fish and other organisms.
The three most commonly used pesticides at construction sites are
herbicides, insecticides, and rodenticides. The unnecessary or improper
application of these pesticides may result in direct contamination of water,
or indirect pollution by dirt which settles in surface waters, or transport
off soil surfaces into water.
Nitrogen and phosphorous are the major plant nutrients used for the
successful establishment of vegetation on disturbed soils of construction
sites. Heavy use of commercial fertilizers can result in these materials
reaching water bodies to accelerate the eutrophication process.
The construction industry utilizes many different types of synthetic
products. These include structural frames, window panes, wall board,
paints, and many others. Heavy duty construction materials are synthesized
from nondegradable organic materials. They are little affected by biological
or chemical degradation agents, and are usually designed to withstand the
most severe physical conditions.
The concern over metal pollution of water bodies is associated mostly
with the heavy metals (mercury, lead, zinc, silver, cadmium, arsenic,
copper, aluminum, iron, etc. ). Metals are used extensively in construction
activities for structural frames, wiring, ducts, pipes, beams, and many
other uses. Construction vehicles, gasoline, paints, pesticides, fungicides,
and construction chemicals are also potential sources of heavy metals pollutants,
When these latter materials are weathered, decomposed and disintegrated
by various agents, they ultimately form oxides and salts that can affect
aquatic organisms.
-------
-4-
Soil additives are chemicals and materials that are applied to the soil
during construction activities in order to obtain desired soil characteristics.
Often construction activities cover large areas consisting of several
different types of soils. The nature of soils is dependent on the climatic,
topographic and geological conditions. The type of soil additive applied
depends on the objectives of the construction activities. Soils may vary from
one location to another in the amount of water they contain, particle size
distribution (clays, silt, sand and gravel), water infiltration rate, ability
to support heavy structures, and resistance to compaction by construction
equipment. Soil additives are used to control the amount of moisture
absorbed by roadway surfaces, to reduce the degree of shrinking and
expanding of clay soils in order to prevent structural damage of buildings
and air field runways, and to increase the firmness of soils. Several
materials are used to obtain desired soil properties. Commonly used
materials include lime, fly ash, asphalt, phosphoric acid, salt, and
calcium chloride. The soil additives carried in runoff from construction
sites alter the quality of receiving waters. However, little work has been
conducted to show the net environmental effects of these soil additives.
Many other chemicals are used in construction for purposes such as:
pasting boards together, sealing cracks, surface treatment, solvents for
oils and paints, and dyeing and cleaning. The amounts of chemicals
leaving construction sites as pollutants have not been established. Poor
construction activities that are liable to contaminate water resources include
the following practices: dumping of excess chemicals and wash water
into storm water sewers; indiscriminate discharging of undiluted or
unneutralized chemicals; disregard for proper handling procedures
resulting in major or minor spills at the construction site; and leaking
storage containers and construction equipment.
Miscellaneous pollutants include concrete wash from concrete mixers,
acid and alkaline solutions from exposed soil or rock units high in acid,
and alkaline-forming natural elements. Cuts through coal beds have
resulted in the seepage of mine acids into streams. High lime areas
often increase the alkalinity of receiving waters.
3. Biological Materials — Biological pollutants from construction
include soil organisms and organisms of human and animal origin. They
include bacteria, fungi, and viruses. The majority of biological pollutants
are found in the topsoil layer where they can feed on dead plants, animals,
birds and other organisms.
The biological pollutants resulting from construction activity indicate
that the greatest pollution potential are of animal and human origin. They
are more prevalent on construction sites where improper sanitary
conditions exist.
-------
-5-
Basis For Best Management-Practices Development
Best Management Practices for construction are the most practical
and effective measure or combination of measures which, when applied
to the land development or building project, will prevent or reduce the
runoff of pollutants to a level compatible with water quality goals.
Since the amount of pollutant runoff from construction sites depends
on numerous variables such as the type of construction involved, the
quantity and intensity of rainfall, the soil characteristics, etc., it is
recognized that those particular types of control measures that will pre-
vent this runoff must be installed on the site. The proper mix of control
measures must be established on site-specific basis. Whether they are
properly installed and maintained must be checked by on-site inspection
as there is no way that effluent monitoring can accomplish this.
t
Best Management Practices for construction activities consist of
measures which will prevent the movement of pollutants from construction
sites. While sediment is the principal pollutant resulting from earth-
disturbing construction activities, chemicals, hydrocarbons, solid
wastes, and other materials must also be considered.
Description of Preventive and Reduction Measures
There are essentially three basic measures for controlling the runoff
of sediment from construction sites. They include: (L) preventing erosion
of exposed soil surfaces, (2) restricting the transport of eroded particles,
and (3) trapping sediments being transported. Measures developed for
controlling movement of sediment and other materials by water generally
are also useful for controlling that generated by wind action.
Preventing erosion of exposed soil surfaces is achieved by protecting
these surfaces with such coverings as mulch; sheets of plastic* fiberglass
roving, burlap, rock blankets, or jute netting; temporary growths of fast-
growing grasses; or sod blankets. Mulch consists of hay, straw, wood
chips, bark, or any other suitable protective material. Sheets of plastic
and netting materials are generally used on steep slopes where vegetation
is difficult to establish or erosion rapid. Seeding of temporary fast-
growing grasses is most desirable when final grading cannot be done until
a later date and climatic conditions permit. Sod often is used as a covering
in critical areas susceptible to erosion.
Limiting the areal extent of soils disturbed at any one time is a usable
mechanism for minimizing erosion. It can be achieved by planning and
carrying out the job so that as work progresses existing vegetation is removed
only on that area of soil surface essential to immediate work activities.
Construction activities are completed on each exposed area and revegetation
accomplished as rapidly as feasible.
-------
-6-
Solid wastes should be collected at the site and removed for
disposal in authorized disposal areas. Frequent garbage removal
is essential. Any useful materials can be salvaged or recycled.
Often, borrow pits, or excavations can be filled with inert solid
wastes.
Runoff of construction chemicals resulting from paints, cleaning
solvents, concrete curing compounds, and petroleum products, can
be largely restricted by sediment control measures as many of these
materials are carried by sediment particles. Good "housekeeping"
procedures such as proper disposal of empty containers, prompt
cleanup of accidental spills, and neutralization or deactivation of
excess chemicals and wash waters should minimize runoff of the
remaining materials.
Information Sources
Nonpoint source pollution control practices discussed above in
summary form are described in more detail in the following
publications ?
"Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control Pollution
Resulting From All Construction Activity" EPA 430/9-73-007,
October 1973
"Comparative Costs of Erosion and Sediment Control,
Construction Activities" EPA 430/9-73-016, July 1973
"Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and
Implementation" EPA R2-72-015, August 1972
Additional data regarding design of structures, specifications for
vegetative practices, instructions for installation of surface pro-
tective coverings, and other useful measures are available in
numerous published standards and specifications, manuals, hand-
books, or guides. They are generally prepared and issued in local
areas by States, Counties, or Conservation Districts, with the
assistance of the U. S. Soil Conservation Service.
-------
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
AGRICULTURAL NONPOINT SOURCES
WATER POLLUTION
Agricultural nonpoint sources are a broad category covering all crop
and animal production activities. Crop production includes both
irrigated and non-irrigated production, such as row crops, close
grown crops, orchards and vineyards, and fallow land temporarily
out of production. Animal production includes such systems as pasture
and rangeland grazing, semiconfined feeding and grazing, and con-
centrated animal feeding operations.
Introduction
This guidance is intended to provide information regarding the
control of pollution from a agricultural nonpoint sources, and to
supplement information regarding the control of agricultural discharges
regulated under the requirements of NPDES. Agricultural production
activities provides, on a national scale, significant sources of pollutants
which reach both surface and ground waters. These may be either
point sources or nonpoint sources, or combinations of the two.
Description of Agricultural Activities
Agricultural nonpoint sources are the crop and animal production
systems that result in diffuse runoff, seepage, or percolation of
pollutants to the surface and ground waters. There are a number of
different activities within each of the systems that may cause water
pollution. The runoff, seepage or percolation of pollutants generated
by the activities are strongly dependent on climatic events such as rain-
fall and snowmelt. In general, they are intermittent and do not represent
a continuous discharge. The nature of the pollutants depends on the
particular activities underway at the time of the climatic events. Both
the nature and amount of pollutants are also dependent on other factors
such as soil types, topography, crop and animal types, and crop and
animal production methods.
Crop Production
There are five general categories of activities associated with crop
production which can produce the potential for nonpoint source pollution:
1. The disturbance of the soil by tillage or compaction by
machinery.
2. The alteration of natural vegetative patterns by substituting
crop plants for natural vegetation or leaving the soil without vegetative
cover.
-------
-2-
3. The increase in available nutrients, over the quantity available
through natural cycles, by the application of fertilizers.
4. The introduction of chemical compounds not found in significant
quantities under natural conditions such as by the application of
pesticides.
5. The application of surface or ground waters for the purpose of
irrigating crops.
Animal Production
There are three general categories of activities associated with
animal production which can produce the potential for nonpoint source
pollution:
1. Concentration of animals (and their wastes) in a particular
location for an extended period of time such as at feeding areas.
2. Overgrazing of range and pasture lands that removes vegetative
cover from the land.
3. Concentration of animals instreams or along stream banks
in such numbers as to cause disturbance of the stream bottoms or banks,
or result in direct deposit of manure into streams.
Identification of Pollutants
Six general types of nonpoint source pollutants that may result from
activities associated with agricultural production systems are:
1. Sediment: Sediments, by volume, are the most serious
pollutants resulting from agricultural production. They include prin-
cipally mineral fragments resulting from the erosion of soils but may
also include crop debris and animal wastes. Sediments can smother
organisms in water bodies by forming bottom blankets, interfere with
the photosynthetic processes by reducing light penetration, and act as
carriers of nutrients and pesticides. Deposits also may fill reservoirs
and hinder navigation.
2. Nutrients: Nutrients, above the natural background levels of an
area may result from fertilizer applications and animal wastes. Soluble
nutrients may reach surface and ground water through runoff, seepage,
and percolation. Ions may be adsorbed on soil particles and reach surface
water through sedimentation processes. Nutrients may also reach surface
water by direct washoff of animal wastes and recently applied fertilizer.
-------
-3-
Excessive nutrients can lead to imbalance in the natural nutrient cycles
and cause eutrophication. In some cases, excessive nutrients can be
a health hazard.
3. Pesticides: Pesticides which are applied in the agricultural
production unit may be insoluble or soluble. The entrance of
pesticides into the surface or ground waters follows approximately
the same patterns as nutrients. Pesticides may cause acute
toxicity problems in the water bodies or insidious toxicity problems
through the entire food chain.
4. Organic Materials: Animal wastes and crop debris are the
principal organic pollutants that result from agricultural production.
They may reach surface waters through direct washoff,
or, in their soluble form, reach both surface and ground waters
through runoff, seepage or percolation. The organic materials place
an oxygen demand on the receiving waters during their decomposition.
In addition, they may lead to other problems such as tastes, odors,
color, and nutrient enrichment.
5. Salinity (TDS): The necessity of leaching to remove, or prevent
the damaging accumulation of salts in the root zone of plants has the
potential of inducing subsequent quality problems in both surface and
ground waters if agricultural waters are not properly managed. Percol-
ating water may reach ground water through further deep percolation,
or move laterally into surface water bodies. The problem becomes
more pronounced when the applied irrigation water initially contains
dissolved solids which will become more concentrated as the
plants remove water for their use. Severity of pollution depends not
only on the nature of the receiving waters but also on the nature of
the uses of the receiving waters.
6. Microorganisms: Any potential disease-causing micro-
organisms (pathogens) in water are a matter of concern to the health
and safety of the water users. Animal wastes are the principal source
of pathogenic microorganisms resulting from agricultural production.
Pathogens reach the water bodies through the same routings as
the animal wastes.
•*.
Basis For Best Management Practices Development
Best Management Practices for agricultural production are the
most practical and effective measure or combination of measures, which
when applied to the agricultural management unit, will prevent or reduce
the generation of pollutants to a level compatible with water quality goals.
They often enhance the productivity of the soil as well as control pollution.
-------
-4-
Because of the variability in production methods, crops and
animals, soil types, topography, climate, etc., the BMP for any specific
agricultural management unit or area will vary. The selection of Best
Management Practices for a particular agricultural management unit or
area is a complex process. Any measure or combination of measures
applied to an agricultural management unit or area which will achieve
water quality goals is a potential BMP. However, the measures are •
generally the type that are incorporated into a soil and water con-
servation plan as developed by a landowner or land user, with the
assistance of a conservation district and/or the Soil Conservation Service,
Extension Service, Forest Service, and others.
The principal emphasis should be placed on measures that will
prevent or control the runoff, seepage or percolation of pollutants
from crop or animal production management units. Preventive measures
must be fully integrated into the total production management
system of the agricultural management units. In essence, the soils,
nutrients and pesticides should be kept on the land where they perform
their intended agricultural function.
Because of the widespread nature of sediment runoff, erosion control
measures should be a principal means of controlling pollution from
each agricultural management unit. Control of erosion not only will prevent
soils from leaving the land, but also will materially reduce the nutrients
and pesticides that reach the nation's waters adsorbed to soil particles.
Where necessary, to further prevent or reduce the entrance of sediments
into water bodies, supplemental measures such as debris and sediment
retention basins should be utilized.
In cases where excess amounts of nutrients, pesticides and animal wastes
cause particular problems in surface or ground waters, additional control
measures may be necessary. These measures might relate, for example,
to the application (timing and amount) of fertilizers and pesticides, the
prevention of the concentration of animals, and the collection and adequate
disposal of the animal wastes. Salinity buildup resulting from irrigation
must be analyzed in terms of the particular problem with subsequent develop-
ment of appropriate measures.
Description of Prevention and Reduction Measures
Measures which can be applied to an agricultural management unit
to prevent or reduce pollutants from reaching surface or ground waters
can be generally classified into four categories. They are: (1) structural
measures, (2) conservation cropping systems and animal management
systems, (3) quantitative and qualitative management of cropping system
inputs, (4) vegetative measures.
-------
-5-
Structural measures generally involve some physical method designed
to reduce erosion or prevent sediment runoff. They include such things
as barriers applied at the source such as terraces, conveyance systems
to enhance non-erodable flows such as waterways and drop structures,
and catchment systems for the final clarification such as debris basins.
Off-stream watering points, controlled access watering points at water
bodies, diversions around feeding areas, and manure trapping basins
are considered to be structural measures.
Cropping systems and animal management systems involve the spacial
and sequential arrangement of crop plant and animal pop-
ulations. The arrangement of crops on a field such as strip cropping,
crop rotation such as sod-forming grass rotation systems, and tillage
methods such as minimum tillage can significantly reduce pollutant trans-
port. Control of animal populations so as to prevent overgrazing or the
concentration of animals in particular locations can reduce erosion,
sediment runoff, and the runoff of concentrated animal wastes.
Inputs into cropping systems which are not efficiently utilized can
become potential pollutants. Nutrient and pesticide applications should
be matched to the immediate needs of the agricultural production
systems. The timing of the applications should take into consideration
external hydrologic forces. The efficient use of irrigation water can
materially reduce the salinity buildup problems associated with runoff,
seepage, and percolation of the water not utilized by the plants.
Vegetative covering on bare, or exposed soils is any crop planted
solely to prevent, or control erosion and sediment runoff. It can be
used during the winter months, between regular crops during the growing
season, or where denuded areas have resulted from overgrazing or
some other activity. The vegetative cover protects the bare ground
from the erosive energy of falling rain and flowing runoff water and filters
out sediment actually being transported in the runoff water leaving the site.
Information Sources
The prevention and reduction measures outlined in the foregoing are
generally described in "Methods and Practices for Controlling Water
Pollution from Agricultural Nonpoint Sources, " EPA-430/9-73-015. Oct 1973.
Data on control of dust is presented in "Investigation of Fugitive Dust,
Volume 1: Sources, Emissions, and Control" EPA-450/3-74-036a
June, 1974, Specific information on the application of the measures for
agricultural nonpoint sources and water quality management is contained in
"Control of Water Pollution from.Cropland, Volume I " USDA, ARS
and EPA, ORD. November 1975. "Interim Report on Loading Functions
For Assessment of Water Pollution from Nonpoint Sources" EPA; ORD.
-------
-6-
November, 1975 provides data for assessing the problem. Information
on specific aspects of agricultural nonpoint source pollutants and their
control can be found in research reports of EPA, USDA, and other Federal
agencies. State and local agencies, colleges and universities, and agricultural
trade associations and in grazing and range management documents by these
groups.
Design information on various conservation methods can be
obtained from Soil Conservation Service handbooks. Specific infor-
mation on particular locations can be obtained from SCS Field Offices,
the Extension Service, soil and water conservation district offices, and
other informed agencies and groups.
* U. 8. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1979 622-389/383
-------