Sheetflow Erosion Control Erosion Control for the CESCL

October 29, 2020

Turbidity Barrier

This is a turbidity barrier, also known as a turbidity curtain. We are using it to contain sediment during a riverbank restoration project.

Photo: David Jenkins-Sheetflow Erosion Control
Photo: David Jenkins-Sheetflow Erosion Control

July 7, 2020

Sed Cage

Photo: David Jenkins

Sed Cage is a catch basin protection best management practice that seems to work well at ponding water so sediment can settle out. The Sed Cage filters sediment but plugs up, becoming a barrier. It can an be reused if taken care of and cleaned after each use.

June 30, 2020

Sand Bag Berm Around Catch Basin

Photo: David Jenkins

You can’t get a good seal with a sand bag berm. Dirty water down the drain.

February 24, 2020

Clean Up and Restoration of Lora Lake

Video: David Jenkins

I took this after the clean up and restoration of Lora Lake. The lake wasn’t a lake but a water-filled hole created from peat mining. Contaminated stormwater runoff impacted the bottom sediments.

March 8, 2019

Curb Inlet Protection

According to the Minnesota Stormwater Manual:

“Curb Inlet protection devices intercept and/or filter sediment before it can be transported from a site into the storm drain system and discharged into a lake, river, stream, wetland, or other waterbody.

These devices also keep sediment from filling or clogging storm drain pipes, ditches, and downgradient sediment traps or ponds.

Inlet protection may also include placement of a barrier to create a bypass of an inlet transferring flow downstream to a sediment trap, basin, or other inlet discharging to a non-critical area.”

Nothing wrong with sediment control BMPs, as they are necessary tools in an effective erosion and sediment control system.  However, these do not “filter” sediment. 

When properly installed, these allow for ponding of water which allows larger sediment to settle out, keeping it out of the storm system.  This is a good thing, but doesn’t necessarily prevent water quality non-compliance.   

I do like this statement in the manual : “Caution: To the extent feasible, erosion prevention practices such as stabilization are preferred to sediment control practices.”

In my world, where we have to meet a turbidity effluent limit of 25 NTUs, stabilization and stormwater management are the primary methods used to meet strict turbidity limits.  

Photo: David Jenkins

February 1, 2014

Polymer Use and Testing for Erosion and Sediment Control on Construction Sites

January-February 2001
Erosion Control Magazine

Polymer Use and Testing for Erosion and Sediment Control on Construction Sites
By Scott Tobiason, David Jenkins, Ed Molash, Stacey Rush

Tested in the soggy La Niña weather conditions of the Pacific Northwest, chemical polymers promise a cost-effective, safe way to prevent soil erosion and remove suspended sediments from construction-site runoff.

References
Azzam, R.A.I. “Agricultural Polymers, Polyacrylamide Preparation, Application and Prospects in Soil Conditioning.” Commercial Soil Science Plant Analysis. 11:235-243. 1980.

Betz Laboratories. Material Safety Data Sheet for Betz Polymer 1190. PFW 2819101. Betz Industrial Laboratories, Macon, GA. 1995.

Bremerton Sun. “Giant Retailer Pledges to be OGood Neighbor.'” West Sound, Section B. February 3, 1996, p. 1.

Calgon Corporation. Material Safety Data Sheet for Cat-Floc 2953 Liquid Cationic Polymer. Bulletin No. 12-485. Calgon Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA. 1997.

King County. Surface Water Design Manual. King County (WA) Department of Public Works. Revised November 1994.

Minton, G. “Use of Polymer to Treat Construction Site Stormwater.” Proceedings of Conference XXX. International Erosion Control Association, Steamboat Springs, CO. February 22-26, 1999, pp. 175-188.

Roa, A. Screening of Polymers to Determine Their Potential Use on Construction Sites. Publication No. 101-96. University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. 1996, pp. 77-83.

Sojka, R.E. and R.D. Lentz. A PAM Primer: A Brief History of PAM and PAM-related Issues. Publication No. 101-96. University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. 1996, pp. 11-20.

University of Georgia. “Georgia Adopts New Turbidity Standard.” Waterwise. University of Georgia, College of Environmental Sciences, Athens, GA. January 1998.

Washington Department of Ecology. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Publication No. 91-75. 1992.

January 27, 2013

EPA Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control

Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control

Poorly maintained BMPs can result in significant quantities of sediment being discharged to storm drains.  Uncontrolled storm water runoff from construction sites can significantly impact rivers, lakes and estuaries. Sediment in water bodies from construction sites can reduce the amount of sunlight reaching aquatic plants, clog fish gills, smother aquatic habitat and spawning areas, and impede navigation.

Phase II MS4s are required to develop a program to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff to the MS4 for construction sites disturbing one or more acres. This primarily includes developing:

An ordinance,
Requirements to implement erosion and sediment control best managment practices (BMPs),
Requirements to control other waste at the construction site,
Procedures for reviewing construction site plans,
Procedures to receive and consider information submitted by the public, and
Procedures for inspections and enforcement of stormwater requirements at construction sites.
In addition to the stormwater requirements that Phase II MS4s place on construction sites, construction operators must also apply for NPDES permit coverage if their project disturbs at least one acre and discharges to a waterbody.

A description of these requirements is available at EPA’s stormwater construction website.

October 26, 2012

Prominent Pierce County Developer Pleads Guilty To Criminal Violation Of Clean Water Act

Filed under: Article — Tags: , , , , , , , — Sheetflow @ 2:20 am

United States Attorney Jenny A. Durkan
Western District Of Washington
Prominent Pierce County Developer Pleads Guilty To Criminal Violation Of Clean Water Act
Bryan Stowe and Stowe Construction Agree to $750,000 in Fines and Community Service Payments

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 12, 2012
A prominent Sumner, Washington developer and his construction company have pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to felony violations of the Clean Water Act. The charges filed against BRYAN STOWE, 65, and STOWE CONSTRUCTION Inc., are the first storm water pollution criminal charges brought in Western Washington.

Under the terms of the plea agreements, STOWE and STOWE CONSTRUCTION will pay $650,000 in criminal fines and will make a $100,000 payment to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for environmental projects targeting resources impacted by the illegal discharges. STOWE could be sentenced to up to three years in prison. Both STOWE and the company will be subject to a court imposed storm water compliance plan for all current and future development sites.

In their plea agreements, the company and STOWE, as president and co-owner of the company, admit they knowingly violated the Construction General Storm Water Permit for the project known as the Rainier Park of Industry, located on West Valley Highway in Sumner, Washington. Permit violations contributed to two major landslides at the project site in the winter of 2011. Both slides forced closure of the West Valley Highway.

Stormwater has been recognized as one of the biggest threats to the health of Puget Sound. Rainwater runoff from developed properties and construction sites contribute a significant amount of pollutants to the wetlands, streams, and rivers that comprise watersheds feeding into Puget Sound. Runoff from construction sites in particular can compromise the essential filtering functions of wetlands if developers fail to implement and maintain required measures to minimize and prevent pollutants from leaving the site.

“In the face of all the political will and economic investment to restore the Puget Sound, this rogue developer knowingly, and repeatedly, chose profit over protection,” said Tyler Amon, acting Director of EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division in Washington D.C. “For more than three years, Mr. Stowe and his construction company ignored the law, devastated salmon habitat and created nightmarish conditions for area drivers. This plea serves as notice to our regional developers … these are serious environmental crimes that will be vigorously pursued.”

According to various records filed in the case, BRYAN STOWE, acting on behalf of STOWE CONSTRUCTION, obtained coverage under the Construction Storm Water General Permit for the West Valley Highway site in October 2006. The permit required STOWE CONSTRUCTION to prepare and implement a plan to prevent the discharge of pollutants through use site improvements and practices designed to minimize and eliminate the migration of pollutants from the site to nearby waters. STOWE admits in the plea agreement to failing to install adequate improvements and practices between 2007 and 2011.

These failures led to significant discharges of pollutants from the site to adjacent wetlands and streams. In addition, the plea agreements acknowledge that weekly site inspection reports and discharge sampling reports intended to assist regulators in assessing the adequacy of site improvement and practices were falsified. State and federal regulators monitoring the West Valley Highway site issued several administrative compliance orders in an unsuccessful effort to bring STOWE and the company into compliance.

These pleas are the second and third pleas entered in connection with this investigation. In December 2011, STOWE CONSTRUCTION employee Timothy Barger pleaded guilty to making false statements to government officials. Barger admitted to falsely representing that site improvements and practices had been adequately installed and maintained at the West Valley Highway site. Barger is scheduled for sentencing in September 2012.

The case was investigated by the Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigations Division (EPA-CID) with assistance from the Washington State Department of Ecology and the City of Sumner, Washington. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Matthew Diggs and Jim Oesterle.

February 25, 2011

Construction Stormwater General Permit

Construction Stormwater General Permit

Construction site operators are required to be covered by a Construction Stormwater General Permit if they are engaged in clearing, grading, and excavating activities that disturb one or more acres and discharge stormwater to surface waters of the state. Smaller sites may also require coverage if they are part of a larger common plan of development that will ultimately disturb one acre or more. Operators of regulated construction sites are required to:

  • Develop stormwater pollution prevention plans.
  • Implement sediment, erosion, and pollution prevention control measures.
  • Obtain coverage under this permit.

NEW! - 01/29/09 Ecology issues the Construction Stormwater General Permit December 1, 2010

WebDMRs and PARIS

Contact Us – Contact your Permit Administrator for permit assistance or your Regional Office for site specific questions.

Permit, Forms and Application – Permit, application, forms, and appeal information.

High Turbidity Reporting – Construction projects must report high stormwater turbidity results within 24 hours.  If you get a high result, call your Ecology regional office.

Resources and Guidance – DMRs, Stormwater monitoring,  manuals, 303(d) list information.

CESCL Training and Certification Programs

Historical Information – Pollution Control Hearing Board information, public comments.

Construction Stormwater General Permit.

Powered by WordPress