THE PROCESS OF ESTIMATING EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL w CASE STUDY
Let's face it, the process of estimating erosion and sediment control costs can be challenging. The attached presentation, as provided by the University of North Carolina, can help guide you through this process.
|
We ALL Live Downstream, So Let's Work Together!"
Click Here for
|
Fiber Check Dams and Polyacrylamide
for Water Quality Improvement
Construction site ditches can be transformed from sediment sources to areas for sediment retention and turbidity reduction by using a system of fiber check dams (FCDs) and anionic polyacrylamide (PAM).
Careful attention to the design and installation will result in less sediment in the sediment basins and discharges with much less turbidity.
This system can save money and reduce construction site impacts on nearby surface waters.
MORE |
|
US EPAs DISCHARGE MONITORING TOOL
by STATE
The Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Pollutant Loading Tool is a new tool designed to help people determine who is discharging, what pollutants they are discharging and how much, and where they are discharging. The tool calculates pollutant loadings from permit and DMR data from EPA's Permit Compliance System (PCS) and Integrated Compliance Information System for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (ICIS-NPDES).
It's an impressive tool, but it's like any other....it works as well as the data that's entered into it. We'll see if it really does take off!
MORE |
|
YOU DECIDE
(Is this good for Georgia's water?)
 FACT: GDOT is suporting an amendment to HB137 (the first one being HB 131), that reduces existing requirements of paying fines for clean water violations for their projects.
FACT: In his testimony before the House Transportation Committee, EPD Director, Allen Barnes said that these provisions would restrict EPD's ability to administer the Clean Water Act in Georgia
FACT: The bill is now in the Senate Transportation Committee and has to go through the Senate Rules Committee, and then to the Senate floor for a full vote.
FACT: The current language of the bill allows GDOT to receive two written warnings for violations before any enforcement action can be taken. GDOT and its contractors would receive a written warning with a minimum of five days to cure, for their first two violations at a single site in one calendar year. Only on the third violation at that site during the same calendar year can GDOT and its contractors be fined.
 FACT: A private citizen or business would immediately be subject to at least a $32,500 fine for the same violation that GDOT is asking to be exempt from. GDOT projects have paid approximately $2 million in clean water fines over the last 10 years.
MORE |
 MS4s Liable for Others' SW Releases The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for California has ruled that a county flood control district is liable for stormwater discharges that originate from sources other than the district's. In Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), et al. v. County of Los Angeles, the court said a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permittee is responsible for permit exceedances that are discharged into rivers at monitoring stations owned by the MS4, regardless of the source of the discharge. Holding an MS4 responsible for all pollutants channeled into a waterbody, even those collected from stormwater that originates outside the MS4, was Congress' intent, according to the court's ruling. It also cited legislative history that MS4s were to be treated the same as traditional NPDES permit holders for stormwater discharges under the Clean Water Act. The court said that "the Clean Water Act does not distinguish between those who add and those who convey what is added by others - the Act is indifferent to the originator of water pollution." Citing a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case, South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, the court noted that that the definition of a discharge of a pollutant "includes within its reach point sources that do not themselves generate pollutants." |
