Getting BMPs Applied on NPDES Permit Sites
An onsite review and implementation process.
Getting the proper erosion and sediment control measures applied to urbanizing sites in Illinois has been a continual problem. In the past, developers would apply for and receive National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permits, pay their fees, and start construction. The general contractor would then proceed with earthmoving activities. Frequently, the planned erosion and sediment control measures would either be ignored or put in improperly. In many instances, the wrong practice would be put in. The deep loess soils in southwestern Illinois are extremely erosive. Urban development activity has lead to some massive erosion and huge sediment yields.
In early 2000, a large influx of new construction work began occurring in the section of southwestern Illinois, just across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, MO, commonly known as the Metro East area. Counties began to experience a considerable increase in development, primarily on land previously used for agriculture. That increase in construction activity has continued almost unabated to this day. This includes commercial and residential development as well as construction or additions to schools, governmental buildings, and churches. What appears to be driving this activity are low land and housing prices and easy access to the downtown St. Louis area.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) is responsible for administering and enforcing NPDES stormwater permits. In the summer of 2003, the IEPA and six Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) discussed the possibility of having SWCDs in rapidly urbanizing areas, with a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC) on the staff of each, who would be available to conduct onsite permit reviews. In August 2004 the IEPA and the six SWCDs signed a pilot agreement. Having a CPESC on staff was critical in getting it signed; it was recognized that these conservationists had the necessary experience and expertise to properly address the problems that were occurring on construction sites.
Current Illinois stormwater rules require that a stormwater permit be obtained if 1 or more acres of land are to be disturbed in conjunction with any construction project. Prior to 2003, a permit was not required unless at least 5 acres or more were disturbed. As a result of this change and the trend of ever-increasing development, the IEPA experienced a large increase in stormwater permits being applied for and issued.
The procedure agreed on by the IEPA and the SWCDs set up a framework for each SWCD to meet regularly with its local IEPA staff person and review the current and new NPDES permits. A schedule would then be set to start the review process. A reporting method and checklist was agreed upon to maintain consistency during the program.
Madison County
Madison County is in the St. Louis metro area, on the east side of the Mississippi River.
One responsibility of the local IEPA field office in Collinsville, IL, is to perform routine stormwater inspections of construction areas, as well as to respond to citizens’ complaints about conditions at the sites. With the large number of permits being issued, the IEPA realized that staffing at the local office was inadequate to inspect more than a token number of sites.
There are about 140 active NPDES permits at any given time in Madison County, ranging in size from 1 acre to 80 acres. After prioritizing the permits, the SWCD and the local IEPA office decide which sites to inspect. The permittee is notified in writing that an appointment has been made for an inspection. We remind the permittee with a phone call the day before. We make it a point to invite any and all relevant parties to be present. The first few inspections that were completed had in attendance the permittee, the engineer, the general contractor, the developer, attorneys, and a representative from the city or village where the site was located. NPDES permits must comply with all local ordinances.
The local municipal officials are appreciative of the chance to be part of this process and often discover that their erosion and sediment control ordinance is being violated. The local inspectors frequently struggle with getting contractors to comply with their ordinances. They often do not have the necessary expertise to address specific erosion and sediment problems. Local politics frequently get in the way of enforcing their own ordinances.
The Inspection Process
Once we arrive on the site, we give a brief summary of why the SWCD is involved and what we will be inspecting. We review the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and the self-inspection reports and finally take a walk or drive around the site. In reviewing the site, we almost always include additional measures that are necessary to adequately control erosion and catch sediment. Perhaps the most meaningful part of this whole process is the education of the contractors, engineers, and developers as to why we are recommending the practices that are best suited to the particular situation. We usually discuss the erosion process and sediment control process and why a particular practice will work in this situation.
There is a huge lack of knowledge and understanding on proper uses of erosion and sediment control measures on construction sites. Early in the process, several developers were still using straw-bale dikes, a practice we do everything possible to discourage.
The most common BMPs that are included in and added to SWPPPs are
- temporary seeding and mulch on any area to be left bare for more then 21 days (this is the practice we encourage the most);
- proper use and choice of mulch (this includes straw, rolled blankets, and hydoseeding techniques);
- proper timing of seeding and mulch techniques;
- proper selection of seed mixtures;
- grade control structures in areas of concentrated flow (geotextiles, rock riprap, and absolutely no straw bales!);
- sediment retention basins (most municipalities require permanent stormwater storage basins. If designed properly, these are ideal places to install temporary sediment basins. Rock dams and/or slotted risers can trap hundreds of tons of soil. When the construction is complete, these basins can be returned to their permanent function as stormwater facilities);
- sediment trapping devices at the inlets to stormwater drains; and
- silt fence—perhaps the most misused and overused practice.
Again, the explanation of why we are recommending a practice is critical to getting the developer to agree to complete it. We could force the issue; however, it is much more effective if the contractor knows why he is doing a practice rather than doing it for compliance only.
 |
| Storm drain sediment control |
 |
| Good use of seed, mulch, and riprap gully control |
 |
| Rolled blanket on steep slope to highway (with silt fence at base) |
As we complete the site review, we tell the permittee that we will be writing a report to the IEPA about the inspection. I tell the permittee exactly what I will be putting in the report as far as measures that need to be completed to bring the site into compliance. We then verbally agree that these measures are needed and reasonable and that they meet the requirements of the NPDES permit. In every instance, the permittee must agree to the necessary measures and to have them completed within 30 days.
To date we have completed 51 inspections in Madison County. Those sites that are out of compliance during our initial visit are revisited within 30 days. Almost every site we revisit has completed the required erosion and sediment control measures.
Developers and contractors are starting to understand that is in their best interest to comply. What we recommend always requires a relatively minor expense compared to the overall operation. When given proper guidance and an understanding of erosion and sediment control measures, developers will usually agree to install them. In complying, they satisfy us as well as the IEPA. Providing education to general contractors and developers has been a major accomplishment so far.
An interesting observation has been the buzz of this process within the development and general contracting community. Permit holders are aware that someone is inspecting their work and doing so in a reasonable, competent, and fair manner. We have on several occasions visited a site to do an inspection and observed several erosion control measures that were completed within two days prior to our visit.
Mike Fruth, Madison County’s stormwater coordinator, feels the program is well worth the time and expense. He states, “Working closely with the SWCD has been a great partnership. Having an erosion control inspector in the field has had positive results. The contractors, developers, and property owners know that someone is making sure the regulations are being followed. We have had better compliance and reduction of sediment loads through this program. My hope would be that the IEPA, Madison County, and the SWCD can continue to partner for the betterment of the water quality.”
McHenry County
Ed Weskerna, CPESC, is the district manager for the McHenry County Soil and Water Conservation District. He has been involved in the inspection program from the start and has seen some significant progress. He describes the process and his county’s involvement:
“McHenry County is located approximately 60 miles northwest of the city of Chicago. In the early 1980s one could describe the county as mostly rural with agriculture as the mainstay industry. Now the county has the dubious distinction of being one of the fastest-growing counties in the state of Illinois. The land grab is in full swing, with municipalities jockeying for control of as much land as they can before their neighbors seize control of it. The attraction of open spaces, willing sellers, unrestricted (treeless) farmland, and the surge of homebuyers fleeing the crowded suburbs are just a few of the reasons cited for the growth.
“As in any other part of the US, growth brings with it all of the associated problems, such as increased stormwater runoff and erosion, and northern Illinois is no exception. For the past 20 years, McHenry County had little or no regulations or enforcement concerning the control of soil erosion from construction sites. As recently as June 2004, the county passed a comprehensive stormwater ordinance, which now addresses those pollution issues associated with unregulated development. In McHenry County inspections and enforcement are now under local control. This is certainly not the case in the rest of Illinois, where many counties rely on regulations under NPDES to help stave off the pollution generated from developments. In July 2004, the McHenry County SWCD signed onto the IEPA pilot program with five other SWCDs to assist the IEPA with inspections of construction-site activity and to help educate developers, contractors, and engineers on proper erosion control techniques.
“One of the best things that has come out of the IEPA pilot program is that Illinois Soil and Water Conservation Districts are finally involved (directly) in urban-related erosion control issues. For the past 20 years, many SWCDs saw the need to broaden their influence in urban erosion control. However, they faced resistance from partnership agencies that historically concentrated funding, policies, and technical assistance solely on agricultural water-quality and erosion problems. Those agencies are now beginning to be more supportive of urban involvement.
“Frustration is one way to describe what many SWCDs experience when witnessing the blatant disregard of construction-site erosion control and not being able to do anything about it. The IEPA pilot program has turned that around. Because the SWCDs have become the eyes and ears for the IEPA, we now have the attention of developers, municipal inspectors, consulting engineers, and contractors. SWCDs are finally part of the process of reviewing erosion control plans, conducting site inspections, providing alternative BMPs, recommending corrective actions, and, most importantly, providing education about construction-site erosion control issues. Illinois SWCDs have been afforded the best opportunity in 50 years to make an impact on urban environmental issues. With the support of the IEPA, partnership agencies, municipal inspectors, and even the development community, we may be able to finally get our arms around a major pollution contributor.”
Macon County
Shannon Allen, CPESC, is a watershed specialist with the Macon County SWCD and was the driving force in getting the pilot program started. He summarizes the project to date:
 |
| Temporary riprap sediment control basin in a permanent stormwater basin. |
“For several years prior to the [NPDES] Phase II rules coming into effect, we at the Macon County Soil and Water Conservation District worked with developers in the county to provide reviews for erosion control plans. Many times, this was just a paper exercise and filed away. We needed to find a way to convince our developers that they needed to start implementing their plans before the IEPA found them out of compliance. We did not want to see any developer fined if we could prevent it. With a good educational program, we felt we could achieve this goal. This is why we participated in the pilot project.
“The project allowed us the opportunity to meet face-to-face with developers and explain the Phase II rules for construction sites over 1 disturbed acre. Our fist site visit was on a site that was drained into Lake Decatur, a large municipal water-supply lake. We met with the developer and explained the situation. The site was currently not in compliance with the Phase II law. There was no SWPPP onsite, and it appeared that no measures were being implemented. The whole site was bare. We gave the developer seven days to implement our recommendations and the plan. We offered additional assistance if needed. The next time we visited the site, the plan was available. Erosion and sediment control measures were being implemented along with other recommended practices. This particular developer went on to appoint one person from the firm to handle all the Phase II rules.
“The news got out quickly that the IEPA and the SWCD were serious. The next few permits that we did were pretty much the same as the above example.
 |
| Rolled erosion control blanket and riprap outlet control. |
“Then something unheard-of happened. We inspected a site that was in complete compliance the first time out! We did not have to do a follow-up inspection. Then we had a second site that was in compliance. Not all sites have been in compliance since, but all of them have at least made an attempt to comply with the law. We continue to work very hard to make sure that developers stay in compliance with the Phase II regulations by continuing to make inspections and offering educational workshops.”
Advertisement
Summary
To date, this contractual arrangement has worked exceedingly well. Designated inspectors from SWCD field offices serve as the “eyes and ears” for IEPA for ongoing construction activity. If complaints or concerns are received on active sites, the inspectors can and do inspect these sites. With rare exceptions, the inspector recommendations have been complied with a good spirit of cooperation on both sides. It should be pointed out that any and all enforcement authority for those few recalcitrant developers rests solely with the IEPA.
Another important function of these inspectors is to advise the local IEPA office if land has been disturbed at a site and there is no evidence of a permit. Lastly, it is believed that the word has gotten around about the additional inspectors in the field. As a result, the rate of compliance with good erosion and sediment control practices, as well as the administrative requirements of the permit, are ever increasing. The IEPA is hopeful that this one-year contract will be extended for another 12-month period and even expanded to other counties where extensive development is occurring.
July-August 2005
Getting BMPs Applied on NPDES Permit Sites
An onsite review and implementation process.
Getting the proper erosion and sediment control measures applied to urbanizing sites in Illinois has been a continual problem. In the past, developers would apply for and receive National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permits, pay their fees, and start construction. The general contractor would then proceed with earthmoving activities. Frequently, the planned erosion and sediment control measures would either be ignored or put in improperly. In many instances, the wrong practice would be put in. The deep loess soils in southwestern Illinois are extremely erosive. Urban development activity has lead to some massive erosion and huge sediment yields.In early 2000, a large influx of new construction work began occurring in the section of southwestern Illinois, just across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, MO, commonly known as the Metro East area. Counties began to experience a considerable increase in development, primarily on land previously used for agriculture. That increase in construction activity has continued almost unabated to this day. This includes commercial and residential development as well as construction or additions to schools, governmental buildings, and churches. What appears to be driving this activity are low land and housing prices and easy access to the downtown St. Louis area.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) is responsible for administering and enforcing NPDES stormwater permits. In the summer of 2003, the IEPA and six Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) discussed the possibility of having SWCDs in rapidly urbanizing areas, with a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC) on the staff of each, who would be available to conduct onsite permit reviews. In August 2004 the IEPA and the six SWCDs signed a pilot agreement. Having a CPESC on staff was critical in getting it signed; it was recognized that these conservationists had the necessary experience and expertise to properly address the problems that were occurring on construction sites.
Current Illinois stormwater rules require that a stormwater permit be obtained if 1 or more acres of land are to be disturbed in conjunction with any construction project. Prior to 2003, a permit was not required unless at least 5 acres or more were disturbed. As a result of this change and the trend of ever-increasing development, the IEPA experienced a large increase in stormwater permits being applied for and issued.
The procedure agreed on by the IEPA and the SWCDs set up a framework for each SWCD to meet regularly with its local IEPA staff person and review the current and new NPDES permits. A schedule would then be set to start the review process. A reporting method and checklist was agreed upon to maintain consistency during the program.
Madison County
Madison County is in the St. Louis metro area, on the east side of the Mississippi River.
One responsibility of the local IEPA field office in Collinsville, IL, is to perform routine stormwater inspections of construction areas, as well as to respond to citizens’ complaints about conditions at the sites. With the large number of permits being issued, the IEPA realized that staffing at the local office was inadequate to inspect more than a token number of sites.
There are about 140 active NPDES permits at any given time in Madison County, ranging in size from 1 acre to 80 acres. After prioritizing the permits, the SWCD and the local IEPA office decide which sites to inspect. The permittee is notified in writing that an appointment has been made for an inspection. We remind the permittee with a phone call the day before. We make it a point to invite any and all relevant parties to be present. The first few inspections that were completed had in attendance the permittee, the engineer, the general contractor, the developer, attorneys, and a representative from the city or village where the site was located. NPDES permits must comply with all local ordinances.
The local municipal officials are appreciative of the chance to be part of this process and often discover that their erosion and sediment control ordinance is being violated. The local inspectors frequently struggle with getting contractors to comply with their ordinances. They often do not have the necessary expertise to address specific erosion and sediment problems. Local politics frequently get in the way of enforcing their own ordinances.
The Inspection Process
Once we arrive on the site, we give a brief summary of why the SWCD is involved and what we will be inspecting. We review the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and the self-inspection reports and finally take a walk or drive around the site. In reviewing the site, we almost always include additional measures that are necessary to adequately control erosion and catch sediment. Perhaps the most meaningful part of this whole process is the education of the contractors, engineers, and developers as to why we are recommending the practices that are best suited to the particular situation. We usually discuss the erosion process and sediment control process and why a particular practice will work in this situation.
There is a huge lack of knowledge and understanding on proper uses of erosion and sediment control measures on construction sites. Early in the process, several developers were still using straw-bale dikes, a practice we do everything possible to discourage.
The most common BMPs that are included in and added to SWPPPs are
- temporary seeding and mulch on any area to be left bare for more then 21 days (this is the practice we encourage the most);
- proper use and choice of mulch (this includes straw, rolled blankets, and hydoseeding techniques);
- proper timing of seeding and mulch techniques;
- proper selection of seed mixtures;
- grade control structures in areas of concentrated flow (geotextiles, rock riprap, and absolutely no straw bales!);
- sediment retention basins (most municipalities require permanent stormwater storage basins. If designed properly, these are ideal places to install temporary sediment basins. Rock dams and/or slotted risers can trap hundreds of tons of soil. When the construction is complete, these basins can be returned to their permanent function as stormwater facilities);
- sediment trapping devices at the inlets to stormwater drains; and
- silt fence—perhaps the most misused and overused practice.
Again, the explanation of why we are recommending a practice is critical to getting the developer to agree to complete it. We could force the issue; however, it is much more effective if the contractor knows why he is doing a practice rather than doing it for compliance only.
|
| Storm drain sediment control |
|
| Good use of seed, mulch, and riprap gully control |
|
| Rolled blanket on steep slope to highway (with silt fence at base) |
As we complete the site review, we tell the permittee that we will be writing a report to the IEPA about the inspection. I tell the permittee exactly what I will be putting in the report as far as measures that need to be completed to bring the site into compliance. We then verbally agree that these measures are needed and reasonable and that they meet the requirements of the NPDES permit. In every instance, the permittee must agree to the necessary measures and to have them completed within 30 days.
To date we have completed 51 inspections in Madison County. Those sites that are out of compliance during our initial visit are revisited within 30 days. Almost every site we revisit has completed the required erosion and sediment control measures.
Developers and contractors are starting to understand that is in their best interest to comply. What we recommend always requires a relatively minor expense compared to the overall operation. When given proper guidance and an understanding of erosion and sediment control measures, developers will usually agree to install them. In complying, they satisfy us as well as the IEPA. Providing education to general contractors and developers has been a major accomplishment so far.
An interesting observation has been the buzz of this process within the development and general contracting community. Permit holders are aware that someone is inspecting their work and doing so in a reasonable, competent, and fair manner. We have on several occasions visited a site to do an inspection and observed several erosion control measures that were completed within two days prior to our visit.
Mike Fruth, Madison County’s stormwater coordinator, feels the program is well worth the time and expense. He states, “Working closely with the SWCD has been a great partnership. Having an erosion control inspector in the field has had positive results. The contractors, developers, and property owners know that someone is making sure the regulations are being followed. We have had better compliance and reduction of sediment loads through this program. My hope would be that the IEPA, Madison County, and the SWCD can continue to partner for the betterment of the water quality.”
McHenry County
Ed Weskerna, CPESC, is the district manager for the McHenry County Soil and Water Conservation District. He has been involved in the inspection program from the start and has seen some significant progress. He describes the process and his county’s involvement:
“McHenry County is located approximately 60 miles northwest of the city of Chicago. In the early 1980s one could describe the county as mostly rural with agriculture as the mainstay industry. Now the county has the dubious distinction of being one of the fastest-growing counties in the state of Illinois. The land grab is in full swing, with municipalities jockeying for control of as much land as they can before their neighbors seize control of it. The attraction of open spaces, willing sellers, unrestricted (treeless) farmland, and the surge of homebuyers fleeing the crowded suburbs are just a few of the reasons cited for the growth.
“As in any other part of the US, growth brings with it all of the associated problems, such as increased stormwater runoff and erosion, and northern Illinois is no exception. For the past 20 years, McHenry County had little or no regulations or enforcement concerning the control of soil erosion from construction sites. As recently as June 2004, the county passed a comprehensive stormwater ordinance, which now addresses those pollution issues associated with unregulated development. In McHenry County inspections and enforcement are now under local control. This is certainly not the case in the rest of Illinois, where many counties rely on regulations under NPDES to help stave off the pollution generated from developments. In July 2004, the McHenry County SWCD signed onto the IEPA pilot program with five other SWCDs to assist the IEPA with inspections of construction-site activity and to help educate developers, contractors, and engineers on proper erosion control techniques.
“One of the best things that has come out of the IEPA pilot program is that Illinois Soil and Water Conservation Districts are finally involved (directly) in urban-related erosion control issues. For the past 20 years, many SWCDs saw the need to broaden their influence in urban erosion control. However, they faced resistance from partnership agencies that historically concentrated funding, policies, and technical assistance solely on agricultural water-quality and erosion problems. Those agencies are now beginning to be more supportive of urban involvement.
“Frustration is one way to describe what many SWCDs experience when witnessing the blatant disregard of construction-site erosion control and not being able to do anything about it. The IEPA pilot program has turned that around. Because the SWCDs have become the eyes and ears for the IEPA, we now have the attention of developers, municipal inspectors, consulting engineers, and contractors. SWCDs are finally part of the process of reviewing erosion control plans, conducting site inspections, providing alternative BMPs, recommending corrective actions, and, most importantly, providing education about construction-site erosion control issues. Illinois SWCDs have been afforded the best opportunity in 50 years to make an impact on urban environmental issues. With the support of the IEPA, partnership agencies, municipal inspectors, and even the development community, we may be able to finally get our arms around a major pollution contributor.”
Macon County
Shannon Allen, CPESC, is a watershed specialist with the Macon County SWCD and was the driving force in getting the pilot program started. He summarizes the project to date:
|
| Temporary riprap sediment control basin in a permanent stormwater basin. |
“For several years prior to the [NPDES] Phase II rules coming into effect, we at the Macon County Soil and Water Conservation District worked with developers in the county to provide reviews for erosion control plans. Many times, this was just a paper exercise and filed away. We needed to find a way to convince our developers that they needed to start implementing their plans before the IEPA found them out of compliance. We did not want to see any developer fined if we could prevent it. With a good educational program, we felt we could achieve this goal. This is why we participated in the pilot project.
“The project allowed us the opportunity to meet face-to-face with developers and explain the Phase II rules for construction sites over 1 disturbed acre. Our fist site visit was on a site that was drained into Lake Decatur, a large municipal water-supply lake. We met with the developer and explained the situation. The site was currently not in compliance with the Phase II law. There was no SWPPP onsite, and it appeared that no measures were being implemented. The whole site was bare. We gave the developer seven days to implement our recommendations and the plan. We offered additional assistance if needed. The next time we visited the site, the plan was available. Erosion and sediment control measures were being implemented along with other recommended practices. This particular developer went on to appoint one person from the firm to handle all the Phase II rules.
“The news got out quickly that the IEPA and the SWCD were serious. The next few permits that we did were pretty much the same as the above example.
|
| Rolled erosion control blanket and riprap outlet control. |
“Then something unheard-of happened. We inspected a site that was in complete compliance the first time out! We did not have to do a follow-up inspection. Then we had a second site that was in compliance. Not all sites have been in compliance since, but all of them have at least made an attempt to comply with the law. We continue to work very hard to make sure that developers stay in compliance with the Phase II regulations by continuing to make inspections and offering educational workshops.”
Summary
To date, this contractual arrangement has worked exceedingly well. Designated inspectors from SWCD field offices serve as the “eyes and ears” for IEPA for ongoing construction activity. If complaints or concerns are received on active sites, the inspectors can and do inspect these sites. With rare exceptions, the inspector recommendations have been complied with a good spirit of cooperation on both sides. It should be pointed out that any and all enforcement authority for those few recalcitrant developers rests solely with the IEPA.
Another important function of these inspectors is to advise the local IEPA office if land has been disturbed at a site and there is no evidence of a permit. Lastly, it is believed that the word has gotten around about the additional inspectors in the field. As a result, the rate of compliance with good erosion and sediment control practices, as well as the administrative requirements of the permit, are ever increasing. The IEPA is hopeful that this one-year contract will be extended for another 12-month period and even expanded to other counties where extensive development is occurring.