Implement effective runoff control strategies
which include the use of pollution prevention activities and the
proper design of hull maintenance areas. Reduce the average annual
loadings of total suspended solids (TSS) in runoff from hull
maintenance areas by 80 percent. For the purposes of this measure, an
80 percent reduction of TSS is to be determined on an average annual
basis.
This management measure is intended to be applied by
States to new and expanding marinas, and to existing
marinas for at least the hull maintenance areas. If boat
bottom scraping, sanding, and/or painting is done in areas other than
those designated as hull maintenance areas, the management measure
applies to those areas as well. This measure is not applicable to
runoff that enters the marina property from upland sources. Under the
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, States are
subject to a number of requirements as they develop coastal nonpoint
source programs in conformity with this measure and will have some
flexibility in doing so. The application of management measures by
States is described more fully in Coastal Nonpoint Pollution
Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance,
published jointly by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the
U.S. Department of Commerce.
2. Description
The principal pollutants in runoff from marina parking areas and hull
maintenance areas are suspended solids and organics (predominately oil
and grease). Toxic metals from boat hull scraping and sanding are part
of, or tend to become associated with, the suspended solids (METRO,
1992a). Practices for the control of these pollutants can be grouped
into three types: (1) filtration/infiltration, (2)
retention/detention, and (3) physical separation of pollutants. A
further discussion of storm water runoff controls can be found in Chapter 4.
The proper design and operation of the marina hull
maintenance area is a significant way to prevent the entry of toxic
pollutants from marina property into surface waters. Recommended
design features include the designation of discrete impervious areas
(e.g., cement areas) for hull maintenance activities; the use of
roofed areas that prevent rain from contacting pollutants; and the
creation of diversions and drainage of off-site runoff away from the
hull maintenance area for separate treatment. Source controls that
collect pollutants and thus keep them out of runoff include the use of
sanders with vacuum attachments, the use of large vacuums for
collecting debris from the ground, and the use of tarps under boats
that are being sanded or painted.
The perviousness of non-hull maintenance areas
should be maximized to reduce the quantity of runoff. Maximizing
perviousness can be accomplished by placing filter strips around
parking areas. Swales are strongly recommended for the conveyance of
storm water instead of drains and pipes because of their infiltration
and filtering characteristics.
Technologies capable of treating runoff that has
been collected (e.g., wastewater treatment systems and holding tanks)
may be used in situations where other practices are not appropriate or
pretreatment is necessary. The primary disadvantages of using such
systems are relatively high costs and high maintenance requirements.
Some marinas are required to pretreat storm water runoff before
discharge to the local sewer system (Nielsen, 1991). Washington State
strongly recommends that marinas pretreat hull-cleaning wastewater and
then discharge it to the local sewer system (METRO, 1992b).
The annual TSS loadings can be calculated by adding
together the TSS loadings that can be expected to be generated during
an average 1-year period from precipitation events less than or equal
to the 2-year/24-hour storm. The 80 percent standard can be achieved,
by reducing over the course of the year, 80 percent of these loadings.
EPA recognizes that 80 percent cannot be achieved for each storm event
and understands that TSS removal efficiency will fluctuate above and
below 80 percent for individual storms.
The 80 percent removal of TSS was selected because
chemical wastewater treatment systems, sand filters, wet ponds, and
constructed wetlands can all achieve this degree of pollutant removal
if they are designed properly and the site is suitable. Source
controls can also reduce final TSS concentrations in runoff.
The 80 percent removal of TSS is applicable to the
hull maintenance area only. Although pollutants in runoff from the
remaining marina property are to be considered in implementing
effective runoff pollution prevention and control strategies for all
marinas, existing marinas may be unable to economically treat storm
water runoff by retention/detention or filtration/infiltration
technologies because of treatment system land requirements and the
likely need to collect and transfer runoff from marina shoreline areas
(at lower elevations) to upland areas for treatment. Also, marina
property may be developed to such an extent that space is not
available to build the detention/ retention structures. In other
situations, the soil type and groundwater levels may not allow
sufficient infiltration for trenches, swales, filter strips, etc. The
measure applies to all new and existing marina hull maintenance areas
because it allows for runoff control of a smaller, more controlled
area and also because the runoff from these hull maintenance areas
contain higher levels of toxic pollutants (CDEP, 1991; and METRO,
1992a).
In addition, many of the available practices are
currently being employed by States to control runoff from marinas and
other urban nonpoint sources (Appendix 5A).
As discussed more fully at the beginning of this
chapter and in Chapter 1, the following practices
are described for illustrative purposes only. State programs need not
require implementation of these practices. However, as a practical
matter, EPA anticipates that the management measure set forth above
generally will be implemented by applying one or more management
practices appropriate to the source, location, and climate. The
practices set forth below have been found by EPA to be representative
of the types of practices that can be applied successfully to achieve
the management measure described above.
a. Design boat hull maintenance areas to minimize
contaminated runoff.
Boat hull maintenance areas can be designed so that
all maintenance activities that are significant potential sources of
pollution can be accomplished over dry land and under roofs (where
practical), allowing the collection and proper disposal of debris,
residues, solvents, spills, and storm water runoff. Boat hull
maintenance areas can be specified with signs, and hull maintenance
should not be allowed to occur outside these areas. The use of
impervious surfaces (e.g., cement) in hull maintenance areas will
greatly enhance the collection of sandings, paint chips, etc. by
vacuuming or sweeping.
b. Implement source control practices.
Source control practices prevent pollutants from
coming into contact with runoff. Sanders with vacuum attachments are
effective at collecting hull paint sandings (Schlomann, 1992).
Encouraging the use of such sanders can be accomplished by including
the price of their rental in boat haul-out and storage fees, in effect
making their use by marina patrons free. Vacuuming impervious areas
can be effective in preventing pollutants from entering runoff. A
schedule (e.g., twice per week during the boating season) should be
set and adhered to. Commercial vacuums are available for approximately
$765 to $1065 (Dickerson, 1992), and approximately one machine is
needed at a marina of 250 slips or smaller. Tarpaulins may be placed
on the ground prior to placement of a boat in a cradle or stand and
subsequent sanding/painting. The tarpaulins will collect paint chips,
sanding, and paint drippings and should be disposed of in a manner
consistent with State policy.
c. Sand Filter
Sand filters (also known as filtration basins)
consist of layers of sand of varying grain size (grading from coarse
sand to fine sands or peat), with an underlying gravel bed for
infiltration or perforated underdrains for discharge of treated water.
Figure 5-2 shows a conceptual design of a sand filter system.
Pollutant removal is primarily achieved by "straining" pollutants
through the filtering media and by settling on top of the sand bed
and/or a pretreatment pool. Detention time is typically 4 to 6 hours
(City of Austin, 1990), although increased detention time will
increase effectiveness (Schueler et al., 1992). Sand filters may be
used for drainage areas from 3 to 80 acres (City of Austin, 1990).
Sand filters may be used on sites with impermeable soils since the
runoff filters through filter media, not native soils. The main
factors that influence removal rates are the storage volume, filter
media, and detention time. Three different designs may be appropriate
for marina sites: off-line sedimentation/filtration basins, on-line
sand/sod filtration basins, and on-line sand basins. Performance
monitoring of these designs produced average removal rates of 85
percent for sediment, 35 percent for nitrogen, 40 percent for
dissolved phosphorous, 40 percent for fecal coliform, and 50 percent
to 70 percent for trace metals (Schueler et al., 1992).
Sand filters become clogged with particulates over
time. In general, clogging occurs near the runoff input to the sand
filter. Frequent manual maintenance is required of sand filters,
primarily raking, surface sediment removal, and removal of trash,
debris, and leaf litter. Sand filters appear to have excellent
longevity because of their off-line design and the high porosity of
sand as a filtering medium (Schueler et al., 1992). Construction costs
have been estimated at $1.30 to $10.50 per cubic foot of runoff
treated (Tull, 1990). Significant economies of scale exist as sand
filter size increases (Schueler et al., 1992). Maintenance costs are
estimated to be approximately 5 percent of construction cost per year
(Austin DPW, 1991, in Schueler et al., 1992).
d. Wet Pond
Wet ponds are basins designed to maintain a
permanent pool of water and temporary storage capacity for storm water
runoff (see Figure 5-3). The permanent pool enhances pollutant removal
by promoting the settling of particulates, chemical coagulation and
precipitation, and biological uptake of pollutants and is normally 1/2
to 1 inch in depth per impervious acre. Wet ponds are typically not
used for drainage areas less than 10 acres (Schueler, 1987). Pond
liners are required if the native soils are permeable or if the
bedrock is fractured. Design parameters of concern include geometry,
wet pond depth, area ratio, volume ratio, and flood pool drawdown
time. Ponds may be designed to include shallow wetlands, thereby
enhancing pollutant removal.
Removal rates of greater than 80 percent for total suspended solids
were achieved in many studies (Schueler et al., 1992). Pollutant
removal is primarily a function of the ratio of pond volume to
watershed size (USEPA, 1986).
A low level of routine maintenance, including tasks
such as mowing of side slopes, inspections, and clearing of debris
from outlets, is required. Wet ponds can be expected to lose
approximately 1 percent of their runoff storage capacity per year as a
result of sediment accumulation. To maintain the pollutant removal
capacity of the pond, periodic removal of sediment is necessary. A
recommended sediment cleanout cycle is every 10 to 20 years (British
Columbia Research Corp., 1991). With proper maintenance and
replacement of inlet and outlet structures every 25 to 50 years, wet
ponds should last in excess of 50 years (Schueler, 1987). A review of
capital costs for wet ponds revealed costs of $349 to $823 per acre
treated and annual maintenance costs of 3 percent to 5 percent of the
capital cost (Schueler, 1987).
e. Constructed Wetland
A complete discussion of created wetlands can be
found in Chapter 7.
f. Infiltration Basin/Trench
Infiltration practices suitable for storm water
treatment include basins and trenches. Figures 5-4 and 5-5 show
examples of infiltration basins and trenches. Like porous pavement,
infiltration practices reduce runoff by increasing ground-water
recharge. Prior to infiltration, runoff is stored temporarily at the
surface, in the case of infiltration basins, or in subsurface
stone-filled trenches.
Infiltration devices should drain within 72 hours of
a storm event and should be dry at other times. The maximum
contributing drainage area should not exceed 5 acres for an individual
infiltration trench and should range from 2 to 15 acres for an
infiltration basin (Schueler et al., 1992).
Pretreatment to remove coarse sediments and PAHs is
necessary to prevent clogging and diminished infiltration capacity
over time. The application of infiltration devices is severely
restricted by soils, water table, slope, and contributing area
conditions. The sediment load from marina hull maintenance areas may
limit the applicability of infiltration devices in these areas.
Infiltration devices are not practical in soils with field-verified
infiltration rates of less than 1/2 inch per hour (Schueler et al.,
1992). Soil borings should be taken well below the proposed bottom of
the trench to identify any restricting layers and the depth of the
water table. Removal of soluble pollutants in infiltration devices
relies heavily on soil adsorption, and removal efficiencies are
lowered in sandy soils with limited binding capacity. Schueler (1987)
reported a sediment removal efficiency of 95 percent, 60 percent to 75
percent removal of nutrients, and 95 percent to 99 percent removal of
metals using a 2-year design storm.
Infiltration basins and trenches have had high
failure rates in the past (Schueler et al., 1992). A geotechnical
investigation and design of a sound and redundant pretreatment system
should be required before construction approval. Routine maintenance
requirements include inspecting the basin after every major storm for
the first few months after construction and annually thereafter to
determine whether scouring or excessive sedimentation is reducing
infiltration. Infiltration basins must be mowed twice annually to
prevent woody growth. Tilling may be required in late summer to
maintain infiltration capacities in marginal soils (Schueler, 1987).
Field studies indicate that regular maintenance is not done on most
infiltration trenches/basins, and 60 percent to 70 percent were found
to require maintenance. Based on longevity studies, replacement or
rehabilitation may be required every 10 years (Schueler et al., 1992).
Proper maintenance of pretreatment structures may result in increased
longevity. Reported costs for infiltration devices varied
considerably based on runoff storage volume. Annual maintenance costs
varied from 3 percent to 5 percent of capital cost for infiltration
basins and from 5 percent to 10 percent for infiltration trenches.
g. Chemical and Filtration Treatment Systems
Chemical treatment of wastewater is the addition of
certain chemicals that causes small solid particles to adhere together
to form larger particles that settle out or can be filtered.
Filtration systems remove suspended solids by forcing the liquid
through a medium, such as folded paper in a cartridge filter (METRO,
1992b). A recent study showed that such treatment systems can remove
in excess of 90 percent of the suspended solids and 80 percent of most
toxic metals associated with hull pressure-washing wastewater (METRO,
1992a). The degree of treatment necessary may be dependent on whether
the effluent can be discharged to a sewage treatment system. The cost
of a homemade system for a small boatyard to treat 100 gallons a day
was estimated at $1,560. The cost of larger commercial systems capable
of treating up to 10,000 gallons a day was estimated at $3000 to
$50,000 plus site preparation. The solid waste generated by these
treatment systems may be considered hazardous waste and may be subject
to disposal restrictions.
h. Vegetated Filter Strip
A complete discussion of vegetated filter strips can
be found in Chapter 7.
i. Grassed Swale
Grassed swales are low-gradient conveyance channels
that may be used in marinas in place of buried storm drains. To
effectively remove pollutants, the swales should have relatively low
slope and adequate length and should be planted with erosion-resistant
vegetation. Swales are not practical on very flat grades or steep
slopes or in wet or poorly drained soils (SWRPC, 1991). Grassed swales
can be applied in areas where maximum flow rates are not expected to
exceed 1.5 feet per second (Horner et al., 1988). The main factors
influencing removal efficiency are vegetation type, soil infiltration
rate, flow depth, and flow travel time. Properly designed and
functioning grassed swales provide pollutant removal through filtering
by vegetation of particulate pollutants, biological uptake of
nutrients, and infiltration of runoff. Schueler (1987) suggests the
use of check dams in swales to slow the water velocity and provide a
greater opportunity for settling and infiltration. Swales are designed
to deal with concentrated flow under most conditions, resulting in low
pollutant removal rates (SWRPC, 1991). Removal rates are most likely
higher under low-flow conditions when sheet flow occurs. This may help
to explain that the reported percent removal for TSS varied from 0 to
greater than 90 percent (W-C, 1991). Wanielista and Yousef (1986)
stated that swales are a useful component in a storm water management
system and removal efficiencies can be improved by designing swales to
infiltrate and retain runoff. Swales should be used only as part of a
storm water management system and may be used with the other practices
listed under this management measure.
Maintenance requirements for grassed swales include
mowing and periodic sediment cleanout. Surveys by Horner et al. (1988)
and in the Washington area indicate that the vast majority of swales
operate as designed with relatively minor maintenance. The primary
maintenance problem was the gradual build-up of soil and grass
adjacent to roads, which prevents the entry of runoff into swales. The
cost of a grassed swale will vary depending on the geometry of the
swale (height and width) and the method of establishing the vegetation. Construction costs for grassed swales are
typically less than those for curb-and-gutter systems. Regular
maintenance costs for conventional swales are minimal. Cleanout of
sediments trapped behind check dams and spot vegetation repair may be
required (Schueler et al., 1992).
j. Porous Pavement
Porous pavement has a layer of porous top course
covering an additional layer of gravel. A crushed stone-filled
ground-water recharge bed is typically installed beneath these top
layers. The runoff infiltrates through the porous asphalt layer and
into the underground recharge bed. The runoff then exfiltrates out of
the recharge bed into the underlying soils or into a perforated pipe
system (see Figure 5-6). When operating properly, porous pavement can
replicate predevelopment hydrology, increase ground-water recharge,
and provide excellent pollutant removal (up to 80 percent of sediment,
trace metals, and organic matter). The use of porous pavement is
highly constrained and requires deep and permeable soils, restricted
traffic, and suitable adjacent land uses. Pretreatment of runoff is
necessary to remove coarse particulates and prevent clogging and
diminished infiltration capacity.
The major advantages of porous pavement are (1) it
may be used for parking areas and therefore does not use additional
site space and (2) when operating properly, it provides high long-term
removal of solids and other pollutants. However, significant problems
exist in the use of porous pavement. Porous pavement sites have a high
failure rate (75 percent) (Schueler et al., 1992). High sediment loads
and oil result in clogging and eventual failure of the system.
Therefore, porous pavement is not recommended for treatment of runoff
from hull cleaning/ maintenance areas. Porous pavement is appropriate
for low-intensity parking areas where restrictions on use (no heavy
trucks) and maintenance (no deicing chemicals, sand, or improper
resurfacing) can be enforced. Quarterly vacuum sweeping and/or jet
hosing is needed to maintain porosity. Field data, however, indicate
that this routine maintenance practice is not frequently followed (Schueler
et al., 1992).
The cost of porous pavement should be measured as
the incremental cost, or the cost beyond that required for
conventional asphalt pavement (up to 50 percent more). To determine
the full value of porous pavement, however, the savings from reducing
land consumption and eliminating storm systems such as curbs, inlets,
and pipes should be considered (Cahill Associates, 1991). Also, the
additional cost of directing pervious area runoff around porous
pavement should be considered. Maintenance of porous pavement consists
of quarterly vacuum sweeping and may be 1 percent to 2 percent of the
original construction costs (Schueler et al., 1992). Other maintenance
costs include rehabilitation of clogged systems. In a Maryland study,
75 percent of the porous pavement systems surveyed had partially or
totally clogged within 5 years. Failure was attributed to inadequate
construction techniques, low permeable soils and/or restricting
layers, heavy vehicular traffic, and resurfacing with nonporous
pavement materials (Schueler et al., 1992).
k. Oil-Grit Separators
Oil-grit separators (see Figure 5-7) may be used to
treat water from small areas where other measures are infeasible and
are applicable where activities contribute large loads of grease, oil,
mud, sand, and trash to runoff (Steel and McGhee, 1979). Oil-grit
separators are mainly suitable for oil droplets 150 microns in
diameter or larger. Little is known regarding the oil droplet size in
storm water; however, droplets less than 150 microns in diameter may
be more representative of storm water (Romano, 1990). Basic design
criteria include providing 200-400 cubic feet of oil storage per acre
of area directed to the structure. The depth of the oil storage should
be approximately 3-4 feet, and the depth of grit storage should be
approximately 1.5-2.5 feet minimum under the oil storage. Application
is limited to highly impervious catchments that are 2 acres or
smaller.
Actual pollutant removal occurs only when the
chambers are cleaned out. Re-suspension limits long-term removal
efficiency if the structure is not cleaned out. Periodic inspections
and maintenance of the structure should be done at least twice a year
(Schueler, 1987). With proper maintenance, the oil/grit separator
should have at least a 50-year life span.
l. Holding Tanks
Simply put, holding tanks act as underground
detention basins that capture and hold storm water until it can
receive treatment. There are generally two classes of tanks: first
flush tanks and settling tanks (WPCF, 1989). First flush tanks are
used when the time of concentration of the impervious area is 15
minutes or less. The contents of the tank are transported via pumpout
or gravity to another location for treatment. Excess runoff is
discharged via the upstream overflow outlet when the tank is filled.
Settling tanks are used when a pronounced first flush is not expected.
A settling tank is similar to a primary settling tank in that only
treated flow is discharged. The load to the clarifier overflow is
usually restricted to about 0.2 ft3/sec/ac of impervious area. If the
inflow exceeds this, upstream overflows are activated. Settling tanks
require periodic cleaning.
m. Swirl Concentrator
A swirl concentrator is a small, compact solids
separation device with no moving parts. During wet weather the unit's
outflow is throttled, causing the unit to fill and to self-induce a
swirling vortex. Secondary flow currents rapidly separate first flush
settleable grit and floatable matter (WPCF, 1989). The pollutant
matter is concentrated for treatment, while the cleaner, treated flow
discharges to receiving waters. Swirl concentrators are intended to
operate under high-flow regimes and may be used in conjunction with
settling tanks. EPA published a design manual for swirl and helical
bend pollution control devices (USEPA, 1982). However, monitoring data
reveal that swirls built in accordance with this manual should be
operated at lesser flows than the design indicates to achieve the
desired efficiency (Pisano, 1989). Total suspended solids and BOD
concentration removal efficiencies in excess of 60 percent have been
reported, particularly under first flush conditions (WPCF, 1989). In
another report removal effectiveness of total suspended solids from
current U.S. swirls varied from a low of 5.2 percent to a high of 36.7
percent excluding first flush, 32.6 percent to 80.6 percent for first
flush only, and 16.4 percent to 33.1 percent for entire storm events (Pisano,
1989). Removal efficiencies are dependent on the initial
concentrations of pollutants, flow rate, size of structure, when the
sumps in the catchments were cleaned, and other parameters (WPCF,
1989; and Pisano, 1989).
n. Catch Basins
Catch basins with flow restrictors may be used to
prevent large pulses of storm water from entering surface waters at
one time. They provide some settling capacity because the bottom of
the structure is typically lowered 2 to 4 feet below the outlet pipe.
Above- and below-ground storage is used to hold runoff until the
receiving pipe can handle the flow. Temporary surface ponding may be
used to induce infiltration and reduce direct discharge. Overland flow
can be induced from sensitive areas to either sink discharge points or
other storage locations. Catch basins with flow restrictors are not
very effective at pollutant removal by themselves (WPCF, 1989) and
should be used in conjunction with other practices. Removal
efficiencies for larger particles and debris are high and make catch
basins attractive as pretreatment systems for other practices. The
traps of catch basins require periodic cleaning and maintenance.
Cleaning catch basins can result in large pulses of pollutants in the
first subsequent storm if the method of cleaning results in the
disturbance and breaking up of residual matter and some material is
left in the catch basin (Richards et al., 1981). With proper
maintenance, a catch basin should have at least a 50-year life span (Schueler
et al., 1992).
o. Catch Basin with Sand Filter
A catch basin with sand filter consists of a
sedimentation chamber and a chamber filled with sand. The
sedimentation chamber removes coarse particles, helps to prevent
clogging of the filter medium, and provides sheet flow into the
filtration chamber. The sand chamber filters smaller-sized pollutants.
Catch basins with sand filters are effective in highly impervious
areas, where other practices have limited usefulness. The
effectiveness of the sediment chamber for removal of the different
particles depends on the particles' settling velocity and the
chamber's length and depth. The effectiveness of the filtration medium
depends on its depth.
Catch basins with sand filters should be inspected
at least annually, and periodically the top layer of sand with
deposition of sediment should be removed and replaced. In addition,
the accumulated sediment in the sediment chamber should be removed
periodically (Shaver, 1991). With proper maintenance and replacement
of the sand, a catch basin with sand filter should have at least a
50-year life span (Schueler et al., 1992).
p. Adsorbents in Drain Inlets
While there is some tendency for oil and grease to
sorb to trapped particles, oil and grease will not ordinarily be
captured by catch basins, holding tanks, or swirl concentrators.
Adsorbent material placed in these structures in a manner that will
allow sufficient contact between the adsorbent and the storm water
will remove much of the oil and grease load of runoff (Silverman and
Stenstrom, 1989). In addition, the performance of oil-grit separators
could be enhanced through the use of adsorbents. An adsorbent/catch
basin system that treats the majority of the grease and oil in storm
water runoff could be designed, and annual replacement of the
adsorbent would be sufficient to maintain the system in most cases
(Silverman et al., 1989). Manufacturers report that their products are
able to sorb 10 to 25 times their weight in oil (Industrial Products,
1991; Lab Safety, 1991). The cost of 10 pillows, 24 inches by 14
inches by 5 inches (total weight 24 pounds), is approximately $85 to
$93 (Lab Safety, 1991).