iq



PO



93



ue ep



\!



cy



es



TD



424.8



-V55



1993

i

TD

i AIA 8

\ ek

i [45 2



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS



The First Annual Virgin Islands Conference on Nonpoint Source

Pollution would not have been possible without the generous support

of the sponsors listed on the Title Page. The Planning Committee is

grateful for the willing help from a number of persons: Lillian

Moolenaar and Fern LaBorde for handling the registration; Edelta

Webbe and Alma Wells for their advice on financial matters; Joan

Harrigan-Farrelly for advice on planning and Barbara Kojis for

editorial assistance.



Planning Committeee



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA

COASTAL SERVICES CENTER



2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE

CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413



1

oo ye cas pee eet mT 4 "]

ty of tac Library



4



WW



Janice D. Hodge, Chairperson

—



NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION



PROBLEMS / SOLUTIONS

October 4-5, 1993



SPONSORS



The Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources,

Coastal Zone Management Program



The University of the Virgin Islands,

Cooperative Extension Service and Eastern Caribbean Center



The Virgin Islands Resource Conservation & Development Council

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency



The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management



The U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Soil Conservation Service



Virgin Islands Conservation District



PLANNING COMMITTEE



Janice D. Hodge, Chair/Coordinator

Julie Wright, Co-Chair

Olasee Davis

Bruce Green

Lynne MacDonald

Mario Morales

Algem Petersen

Marcia Taylor

TABLE OF CONTENTS



SECTION TITLE



PAGES



PLENARY PRESENTATIONS



I 1-26



URBAN SOURCES OF NONPOINT POLLUTION



II 1-36



(LAND USE PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION)



URBAN SOURCES OF NONPOINT POLLUTION



III 1-44



(STORMWATER RUNOFF AND POLLUTION PREVENTION)



Iv 1-36



ONSITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS (OSDS)



Vv 1-40



MARINAS, BOATING AND HYDROLOGIC MODIFICATION



AGRICULTURE AND WETLANDS



VI 1-24



VII 1-8



WINNING STUDENT ENTRIES AND CLOSING REMARKS



The presentations in this collection were prepared camera~ready by the authors; they



have not been reviewed nor edited. This collection was compiled by Janice D. Hodge.

PLENARY PRESENTAT:



ONS.



Honorabl



rred



Introductron



tora



ules: and<Re



at



Over



Source



g. Nonpo



Deon



Bénja



ed



al: Rule



d Reg



ons. Governing Nonpoint



Our



Ma



enniyA



15



LaVerne Ragster



Responsib



CO.



VEL



pmen

t



WELCOMING REMARKS



Honorable Alexander A. Farrelly,

Governor of the United States Virgin Islands



Commissioner Roy Adams, visiting guests and delegates, it is

a pleasure for me to welcome you to our First Annual Virgin

Islands Conference on Nonpoint Source Pollution. For those of

you visiting us for the first time, I hope you can take a few

moments from your busy schedule to enjoy what nature has

blessed us with. For those of you who are from here, Please

take some time to enjoy some of the beauty with our guests.



Nonpoint Source Pollution... what is it? If you are like me,

someone not used to the latest environmental jargon, you also

might be wondering what Non Point Source Pollution is. Over

the past year or so, I have heard the term mentioned numerous

times. I have been fortunate enough to have received a brief

description from my wife, ‘the CZM Program Manager of the

Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources.



I now know that these pollutants, which are an everyday part

of our lives affect each of us on a personal level. Rainwater,

seems harmless enough and something we all need. However,

rainwater picks up pollutants from our well kept lawns, from

our streets and farms and from construction sites. It is

carried into our wetlands and oceans as well as our ground

water. These days, I cannot look at the rain falling and enjoy

it, because I now think of its effects as it cascades down the

mountainsides and roads, wondering what is being picked up and

where it will be deposited.



Construction practices also contribute to the degradation of

our coastal waters and drinking water. A degraded ocean means

a reduction or elimination of our fish habitats, degraded

coral reef systems, and a reduction in plant populations.

Cloudy polluted waters, also mean a reduction in recreational

activities, since no one wants to swim in unsafe, unappealing

waters.



Today's conference, "Non Point Source Pollution, Finding

Solutions to Environmental Pollution", gives us all an

opportunity to learn more about the problem. But even more

important it enables us to come up with solutions. However, a

two day conference can only begin to scratch the surface. I

commend Commissioner Adams and the CZM Program for taking the

first step in bringing these issues to the forefront for us to

give them deep thought, and I hope all of us, particularly

those in the building trades, and in agriculture, as well as

all of our Government Departments, take heed and begin to plan

their activities with this new awareness. ~



I-1

My administration has always been and continues to be

committed to ensure our waters are clean, our beaches remain

beautiful and we all enjoy a healthy environment. Through the

Department of Planning and Natural Resources, we continue to

put in place the mechanisms for managing, enhancing, and

protecting our natural resources and coastal areas.



Last week, the CZM Commission voted to approve management

plans for eighteen Areas of Particular Concern (APC's). This

was no easy feat, and I wish to commend all those involved in

this effort. The management plans and boundaries are being

reviewed by my office, and will be forwarded to the

Legislature for their approval and adoption. But, because the

Senate is currently absorbed in consideration of the Fiscal

year 1994 budget of the Virgin Islands, I requested they

extend the time frame for their final approval of the 18

APC's. Deliberating over the budget is a process that is

likely to extend to December. It is my belief a date of

January 31, 1994, for APC approval is realistic and fair.



Our Land and Water Use Plan, our Territorial Park System, are

all part of a major effort in ensuring a continuation and an

enhancement of what we all call " Paradise." If we all commit

ourselves to work together for the good of our beautiful

islands, we can still preserve and protect the good we have.



Again, I welcome you to the conference, and I hope the

information we share here will be of practical use to us all.

Thank you.

ie



¥



INTRODUCTION



Honorable Roy E. Adams, Commissioner

Department of Planning and Natural Resources



As part of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of

1990, Congress enacted a new section 6217 entitled "Protecting

our Coastal Waters". This provision requires states with

coastal zone management programs that have received Federal

approval under section 306 of the Coastal Zone Management Act

to develop and implement coastal nonpoint pollution programs.



Because the coastal nonpoint pollution control program must be

approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the

Virgin Islands, as well as all other territories and states,

must comply with mandates set forth by these federal agencies.

Some of these mandates will require statutory changes in the

VI code in order to make our program acceptable.



A Virgin Islands Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution Committee

consisting of federal, territorial and local agencies has been

established to address nonpoint source pollution. The

Committee will review the various mandates of EPA and NOAA as

they pertain to the virgin Islands and develop and implement

Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control NPS pollution.



At this point in their progress, the NPS Committee finds it

necessary to conduct this conference so that information about

nonpoint source pollution can be shared with the public.



Through this conference we hope to provide the general public

and specific groups, such as contractors, architects, farmers

and marina operators with sufficient information so that they

can begin to focus on the various methods by which they can

each reduce or eliminate nonpoint source pollutants and so

help to satisfy the requirements of the nonpoint source

pollution control program. It is very important for us to have

the full participation of all concerned as early in the

development of this program as possible so that any

amendments to the existing VI code or program recommendations

will have the necessary cooperation of all who will be

affected.



We do realize that nonpoint source pollution cannot be

eradicated within a year or two. Effective management of NPS

pollution is essential to maintain the high water quality that

currently exists in the Virgin Islands. The major sources of

pollutants that impair our waterbodies are erosion and

sedimentation from site development, urban runoff, vessel

wastes disposal, and failing septic systems.



I-3

As you will discover when you attend the various

presentations, nonpoint source pollution impacts our

environment in many ways. Loss of fishing, loss of habitat

(for some endangered species), human health risks, and loss of

tourism - our primary industry are just a few.



Because of the importance of our natural resources to our

economy, and because we all strive for a clean healthy

environment, it is imperative that we begin to address our

environmental problems now. We in the Virgin Islands enjoy an

environment that is’ far superior to many others, let us do

what we can now, while we still have a chance, to maintain it

and where possible improve it. Keep in mind that the purpose

of this conference is to share ideas and information so that

we can work cooperatively to maximize our efforts.



ROAGSE  tod peas s

J



%



TERRITORIAL RULES & REGULATIONS

GOVERNING NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION



Benjamin [. Nazario



Division of Environmental Protection

Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources



Non-point source is defined as pollution sources which are diffuse and do not have a single

point of origin or are not introduced into a receiving stream from a specific outlet. The

pollutants are generally carried off the land by stormwater runoff. The commonly used

categories for non-point source are: agriculture, forestry, urban, mining, constructions, dams

and channels, land disposal, and saltwater intrusion.



The first opportunity and consideration in any non-point source effort is source control.



By their nature laws and regulations are normally addressed at a specific source. The Virgin

Islands laws that are affected in the control of non-point source pollution are part of Titles

12, 19 and 29 of the Virgin Islands Code and its rules and regulations and are as follows:



TITLE 12___ CONSERVATION:

CHAPTER 3 "TREES AND VEGETATION ADJACENT TO WATERCOURSES"



Establishes policy for the cutting or injuring of certain trees within certain confines

to a watercourse and institutes a permit requirement for said activity and provides for

enforcement by DPNR Environmental Enforcement Officers. Permits are issued by the

Commissioner of the Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR).



CHAPTER 5 “WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION .



Establish policy and regulations for the protection, conservation and development of

the water resources, both surface and underground water of the U. S. Virgin Islands.

Applications and plans for groundwater use are reviewed and permits issued by the Division

of Environmental Protection (DEP) of DPNR.



CHAPTER 7 “WATER POLLUTION “*



Establish policy and regulations to conserve the waters of the VI, to protect and

maintain, and improve the quality thereof for public water supplies, for propagation of

wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for domestic, recreational and other legitimate beneficial



uses; to provide that no waste be discharged into any waters of the VI without first

receiving necessary treatment or corrective action to protect the legitimate beneficial use

of such water; to provide for the prevention, abatement and control of new or existing

water pollution; to authorize the implementation of the Federal Water Pollution Control



I-5



ri

NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONFERENCE

St. Thomas, US. Virgin Islands



Territorial Rules and Regulations Governing Nonpoint Source Pollution



Act (FWPCA) and other amendatory acts.



Territorial Pollution Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) - a system of

requirements to obtain permits for commencement or continuation of any discharge of

pollutants to surface waters. Applications and plans are reviewed and permits issued by

DEP. ;



Water Quality Certification (WQC) - Certifications are issued by DEP.



This chapter needs to be revised and updated to address the federal requirements

of the National Storm Water Program which complements the TPDES permit system. The

system focuses on the municipal and industrial pollution prevention to help control storm

water pollution and involves issuing permits to certain municipalities and industries to

control storm water pollution.



CHAPTER 13 " ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION “



Earth Change plans and permits required before any real property is cleared, graded,

filled or otherwise disturbed for any purpose or use including but not limited to erection of

any building or structure, the quarrying of stone or the construction of roads and streets.

Plans are reviewed and permits issued by the Permits Division of DPNR.



CHAPTER 17 “OIL SPILL PREVENTION & POLLUTION CONTROL "



Establish policy to regulate the transfer, storage and transportation of pollutants and

other such products that pose threat of great damage and damage to the environment, to

owners and users of shore front property, to public and private recreation, to citizens of the

territory and other interests deriving livelihood from marine related activities and to the

beauty of the territorial shoreline. The provisions of this chapter are administered by DPNR.



This statute and its rules and regulations need to be revised and updated to include

the requirements of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the Underground Storage tank (UST) and

Above-ground Storage Tank (AST) provisions.



CHAPTER 19 “ PESTICIDE “



Establishes policy to regulate the use and application of pesticides to control pests.

Pests are defined as any insect, rodent, nematodes, fungus weed or any other form of

terrestrial or aquatic plant or animal life or virus, bacteria, or other microorganisms (except



I-6



2

NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONFERENCE

St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands



Territorial Rules and Regulations Governing Nonpoint Source Pollution



viruses, bacteria, or other microorganisms on or in living man or the living animals) which

is declared by the Commissioner. Provision of this chapter are administered by DPNR.

Certification is issued by the Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) of DPNR.

This statute and its rules and regulations need to be revised and updated.



CHAPTER 21 “COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT "



The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZM) mandates by policy to protect, maintain,

preserve and where feasible enhance and restore the overall quality of the environment, to

provide economic development and growth; to assure orderly balanced utilization and

conservation of resources, etc., to conserve ecologically significant resource areas, and

preserve the function and integrity of reefs, marine meadowlands, saltponds, mangroves and

other significant natural areas; to maintain or increase coastal water quality through control

of erosion, sedimentation, runoff siltation and sewage discharge. Applications and plans are

reviewed by the Permits Division of DPNR and permits are approved by the island CZM

Committee or the Commissioner of DPNR depending on whether the application is for a



major or minor permit.



TITLE 19 _ HEALTH:



ALLS 1 eee



CHAPTER 53." SANITATION "



Provides policy for the regulation of discharges from building or premises to existing

sanitary sewers or public sewers, the contents of cesspools or septic tanks into public gutters;

the collection and/or treatment of refuse deposition of materials or waste products that

cause the surrounding air, Jand or water to be contaminated or polluted in such a manner

as to injure public health, design, location and installation of sewage treatment systems.

This statute and its rules and regulations need to be revised and updated. Applications and



plans are reviewed and permits issued by DEP.

CHAPTER 55 “SEWAGE DISPOSAL "



Establishes policy to regulate design, location and installation or sewage disposal

systems. Institutes 4 Sanitary Facilities Fund and promulgates the collection of fees for the

use of the public sewer system.

NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONFERENCE

St. Thomas, U-S. Virgin Islands



Territorial Rules and Regulations Governing Nonpoint Source Pollution



CHAPTER 56 “SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT "



Establishes policy and regulation for the proper storage, transportation and disposal

of solid and hazardous waste in the Virgin Islands; to promote and facilitate, wherever

possible, resource conservation and recovery; to impose the duty of contribution to public

cleanliness and appearance in order to promote public health, safety and welfare. this

chapter provides for the proper disposal of derelict vehicles.



This chapter is presently being revised and up dated to reflect the requirements of

the new federal landfill criteria.



TITLE 29 _ _ PUBLIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:

CHAPTER 3 * VIRGIN ISLANDS ZONING AND SUBDIVISION “



Establishes standards and policies concerning development of land which may be

used in achieving the goals of the General Development Plan of the Virgin Islands. the

purpose is to promote health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community by

establishing regulations and conditions governing the erection of buildings, structure and use

of land and water.



CHAPTER 5 “BUILDING CODE "



Establishes policy and regulations to safeguard life and limb, property, and public

welfare, through the establishment of minimum building requirements for structural strength

and stability. Has specific provisions for flood control and protection,sanitary sewage

systems, etc. Plans are reviewed and permits issued by the Permits Division of DPNR.



All of these statutes and Rules and Regulations are of the 1970’s vintage. They require

revision and updating to reflect present amendments and state of the technology. We in

DEP are present working to address some of these short comings for instance we’re working

to revise the Pesticides laws, the solid waste to comply with the federal laws for landfills, the

Air pollution laws to comply with the Clean Air Act of 1990, the Oil Pollution Act 1990.



Non-Point Source Program - DEP is presently working with the VI Soil Conservation



District on a project partially funded by EPA to study storm water and septic tank

regulations.

* * *

4 5



2s regen



ENE AI



Federal Rules and Regulations Governing Nonpoint Pollution.

Malcolm L. Henning

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II



New York, New York



In 1987 when Congress amended the Clean Water Act (CWA), it

was clear that one of their goals was to establish a

national policy on the control of Nonpoint Source (NPS)

pollution and that a national Nonpoint Source pollution

control program be developed and implemented in an

expeditious manner so as to enable the goals of this Act to

be met through the control of both point and nonpoint

sources of pollution.



Section 319 of the Clean Water Act, is the national program

enacted by Congress to control nonpoint sources of water

pollution.



Section 319 required two major reports to be completed by

the States/Territories: A state/territory Assessment Report

describing the State's NPS problems and a state/territory

Management Program explaining what the state plans to do in

the next four fiscal years to address their NPS problems.

The U.S. Virgin Islands has an EPA approved Assessment

Report and Management Program.



What is Nonpoint Source Pollution?



For the purpose of implementing the NPS provisions in the

CWA, NPS pollution is. defined as follows:



Nonpoint Source Pollution: NPS pollution is caused by

aiffuse sources that are not regulated as point sources and

normally is associated with agricultural, silvicultural and

urban runoff, runoff from construction activities, etc.

Such pollution results in the human-made or human-induced

alteration of the chemical, physical, biological, and

radiological integrity of water. In practical terns,

nonpoint source pollution does not result from a discharge

at a specific, single location (such as a single pipe) but

generally results from land runoff, precipitation,

atmospheric deposition, or percolation. It must be kept in

mind that this definition is necessarily general; legal and

regulatory decisions have sometimes resulted in certain

sources being assigned to either the point or nonpoint

source categories because of considerations other than their

Manner of discharge. For example, irrigation return flows

are designated as "nonpoint sources" by Section 402(1) of



T=9

the Clean Water Act, even though the discharge is through a

discrete conveyance.



Examples of NPS Pollution



1 Nonpoint Sources



10 Agriculture

11: Non-irrigated crop production

12: Irrigated crop production

13: Specialty crop production (e.g.,

truck farming and orchards)

14: Pasture land

15: Range land

16: Feedlots~ afl types

17: Aquacutture

18: Animal holding/management areas



20 Silviculture

21: Harvesting, reforestation,

22: Forest management

23: Road construction/maintenance



30 Construction

31: Highway/road/bridge

32: Land development



40 Urban Runoff

41: Storm sewers (source control)

42: Combined sewers (source control)

43: Surface runoff



50 Resource

Extraction/Exploration/Development

51: Surface mining

52: Subsurface mining

53: Placer mining

54: Dredge mining

55: Petroleum activities

56: Mill tailings

57: Mine tailings



60 Land Disposal (Runoff /Leachate From

Permitted Areas)

61: Sludge

62: Wastewater

63: Landfills

64: (ndustrial land treatment



I-10



70 Hyde t_ Modification

71: Channelization



72: Dredging



73: Dam construction



74: Flow regulation/

modification



75: Bridge construction



76: Removal of riparian

vegetation



77: Streambank modification/

destabilization



80 Other



81: Atmospheric deposition



82: Waste storage/storage tank



83: Highway maintenance and

runoff



84: Spills



85: In-Place contaminants



86: Natural



90 Source unknown

= a



65: On-site wastewater systems (septic

tanks, etc.)

66: Hazardous waste



Nonpoint Source Financial Provisions



The CWA of 1987 provides four new sources of funds in the

CWA, on an annual basis, to support the implementation of a

State's nonpoint source Management Program.



(1) Section 319(h) authorize grant funds to support

protection of both surface and ground water quality.

These funds are not to be used as a general subsidy or

for cost sharing to support implementation of best

management practices by individuals, except for

demonstration purposes.



(2) Section 205(j)(5) provides a set-aside of 1% of

each State's annual construction grant allocation or

100,000, whichever is grater, to be used for the

preparation and implementation of the State's

management program. Section 205(j)(5) funds are now

provided under Section 604(b) funding requirements.



(3) In addition, nonpoint source control efforts may be

financed thought the Governor's 20% discretionary set-

aside of construction grant funds under amended section



201(g) (1).



(4) Finally, new State revolving funds established by

Title VI may be used for loans, including loans to

public agencies or individuals, to implement NPS

management programs, for instance, 601 and 603 water

pollution Control funds.



The use of each funding source is subject to certain

statutory restrictions and limitations. The flow of Federal

funds in support of State management program activities

under section 319 is conditioned based on the EPA approval

of the State's Management Program. The single exception to

this rule are funds set-aside from construction grant

allocations under Section 205(j)(5). These funds may be

used to develop the management program and then, later, to

help implement the State's management program.



The Federal share of implementing a nonpoint source >

management program under Section 319(h) shall not exceed 60%

in any fiscal year. Section 319(h) funds may not be awarded

unless the State has demonstrated satisfactory progress in

meeting the schedule set out in the approved nonpoint source

management program.



In addition to Section 319, the Clean Water Act of 1987 also

included Nonpoint Source provisions in other CWA programs.



I-11

Section 314 Clean Lakes Program is to protect the quality of

the country's publicly owned freshwater lakes by controlling

sources (point or nonpoint) of pollution affecting them and

by restoring lakes which have deteriorated in quality.



Lakes are funded under three mechanisms. They are:



1. State Lake Classification Study: The state classifies

by trophic condition all its publicly owned. freshwater lakes

needing restoration-and protection. Then the state lists

these lake projects in order of priority. Funding

assistance may go to $100,000 or 70% of the cost.



2. Phase I Diagnostic Feasibility Study: This study

determines the cause of the lake problems, evaluates

possible solutions, and recommends the most feasible program

to protect and restore the lake's quality. Again, the

funding assistance is 70% federal and 30% territory or

local, to a maximum of $100,000.



3. Phase II Implementation: The implementation phase put

the recommendations into operation. The funding of phase II

is 50/50, however, the state/local share can include in-kind

services.



Section 320 National Estuary Program is to restore and

maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of

an estuary by addressing both point and nonpoint sources of

pollution.



The Governor of any state/territory may nominate to the

Administrator of EPA an estuary of national significance and

request that a management conference develop a comprehensive

management plan for the estuary.



Other Federal Rules and Regulations Governing Nonpoint

Source Pollution.



We have talked a little about the Section 319 Nonpoint

‘Source program and other Sections under the CWA, now I will

discuss some of the other federal laws that governs Nonpoint

Source pollution.



1. The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1984: The Safe Drinking

Water Act required that national standards be established

for drinking water. The law requires two things for all

community drinking water systems: (a) Routine monitoring

for several pollutants, and (b) Compliance with minimum

standards. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is

required to set standards for 100 pollutants, including

several toxic chemicals.



2. EPA Stormwater Runoff Rules and Regulations of 1990:

This program is known as the National Pollutant Discharge



I-12



rr a ee oe oe eo ee ee: ee ee

Elimination System (NPDES) which waS amended by Congress in

the CWA of 1987. The amendment required EPA to establish



- phased NPDES requirements for storm water discharges. To



implement these requirements, EPA published: the initial

permit application requirements for certain categories of

storm water discharges associated with industrial activity,

and discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems

located in municipalities with a population of 100,000 or

more.



3. The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990: The pollution

Prevention Act identifies pollution prevention as EPA's

environmental management approach of choice, and requires

the incorporation of pollution prevention into EPA

activities beginning in the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 1994

State/territory grants cycle.



4. The Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendment of 1990:

This amendment was intended to strengthen the links between

Federal and State coastal zone management and water quality

programs and enhance State/Territory and local efforts to

manage land use activities that degrade coastal waters and

coastal habitat. States/Territories with approved coastal

management programs are required to develop Coastal .Nonpoint

Pollution Control Programs. The programs must be submitted

to EPA and NOAA for approval. The coastal nonpoint

pollution control programs will be implemented through both

State coastal zone management programs and State NPS

management programs.



5. The Federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency

Act of 1991: The Federal Intermodal Surface Transporation

Efficiency Act (ISTEA), established the Surface

Transporation Program (STP). ISTEA also created a

transportation enhancement activities program as a component

of STP. Ten percent (10%) of the funds apportioned to a

state for the STP is only available for these enhancement

activities. Eligible transportation enhancement activities

consist of the following:



* Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles



* Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic

sites



* Scenic or historic highway programs



* Landscaping and other scenic beautification



* Historic preservation



* Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation



buildings, structures or facilities including historic

railroad facilities and canals



I-13

* Preservation of abandoned railway corridors including

the conversion and use thereof for pedestrain or

bicycle trails



* Control and removal of outdoor. advertising

* Archaeological planning and research

* Mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff



6. USDA 1990 Farm Bill or the Food, Agriculutre,

Conservation and Trade Act of 1990: This farm programs law

reinforces USDA commitment to protecting the nation's

natural resources. It expands the conservation provisions

under the Food Security Act of 1985. It encourages the

reduction of soil erosion, the retention of wetlands and

protection of other environmental sensitive cropland. The

provisions include: ,



(a) Conservation Compliance: Discourages the production

of crops on Highly Erodible Lands (HEL) cropland unless the

land is protected from erosion under an approved

conservation plan or system. The plan or system must be

fully implemented by December 31, 1994.



(b) Sodbuster: Discourages the production of crops on HEL

lands that was not used for crop production between 1981 -

1985 unless the land is protected from erosion under an

approved plan or system. The plan or systems must be fully

implemented before crops can be planted on the HEL land.



(c) Swampbuster: Discourages the alteration of wetlands

for agricultural purposes.



(d) Conservation Reserve Program: Offers long-term rental

payments and cost-share assistance to farm owners or

operators to establish permanent vegetative cover for land

that is HEL or contributing to a serious water quality

problem.



(e) Wetlands Reserve Program: A voluntary USDA easement

program to restore and protect wetlands.



7. The Clean Vessel Act of 1992: Although this is not a

NPS federal law, it is a Federal law that you may want to

become familiar with. This law allows States to apply to

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for grant funds to

construct pump out stations and waste reception facilities.

A total of 12.5 million was made available during the first

open period ending on August 31, 1993.



I-14

SAFEGUARDING OUR FUTURE RESOURCES



LaVerne E£. Ragster



Bastern Caribbean Center, University of the Virgin Islands

St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands 00802



There is a growing school of thought that says there will be poor, or no

prospects for the future of humanity and the world's natural resources if

individuals, communities, and governments do not quickly begin to

recognize that conservation and development are essential parts of one

indispensable process. This would mean the challenge implied in the title

of this talk is the need to change (where necessary) attitudes and

behaviors of people at all levels of organization. This change is

necessary to realize development that concentrates in an integrated

fashion on improving the human condition and maintaining the diversity and

productivity of nature. Caring for the Earth (7) describes a strategy or

guide for achieving sustainable societies and proposes this solution as

the rational option open to humanity.



The nine principles proposed for a sustainable society are not new to some

cultures of the world, but they would require significant changes in the

behavior of people and institutions in most societies today. The

principles are based on the need for cooperation and caring among people,

on the acknowledgment of limits in nature, and on an ethic that recognizes

nature has to be cared for in its own right, not just as a means of

satisfying human needs. The deliberations that will occur at this

conference run the risk of being self-serving to a small part of society -



the converted speaking to the converted for reassurance. It would also

miss an opportunity to move the US Virgin Islands ahead in its quest for

a rational future, if the principles listed below (or some other similar

conceptual guide) are not used as benchmarks for a code of belief and

proposed actions.



A World Conservation Strategy

Principles of a Sustainable Societ 7



Respect and care for the community of life.



Improve the quality of human life.



Conserve the Earth's vitality and diversity.



Minimize the depletion of non-renewable resources.



Keep within the Earth's carrying capacity.



Change personal attitudes and practices.



Enable communities to care for their own environments.

Provide a national framework for integrating development and

conservation.



Create a global alliance.



.



o « @



wo OWAUW PWN



The aforementioned principles imply that the existence and good health of

future natural resources of the Virgin Islands require present-day efforts

to focus on dialogs and actions which result in the Virgin Islands

community living sustainably. Clearly, this is no small challenge for an

urbanized, multi-cultural political dependency with a small land mags, a

high population density, mass tourism as the main economic activity, and

limited, vulnerable natural resources. The USVI has begun to address the

changes necessary to view and implement development and conservation as

part of the same process, but like most of the rest of the world, we have

much to do to make discussions and small initiatives toward sustainable

development grow into a way of life.



It is useful at this point to share two versions of the definition of

sustainable development.



I-15

Sustainable development is: ; , ;

a) improving the quality of human life while living within the

carrying capacity of supporting ecosystems (7); and it also is



b) a process in which qualitative development is maintained and

prolonged while quantitative growth in the scale of economy becomes

increasingly constrained by the capacity of the ecosystem to perform

over the long run two essential functions: to generate the raw

Material inputs and to absorb the waste outputs of the human economy

(2).



It follows from these definitions that a sustainable economy becomes the

product of sustainable development. Then, it is logical that a

sustainable economy must maintain its natural resource base and continue

to develop by adapting and improving using knowledge, organization,

technical efficiency and wisdom. Therefore, one of the challenges to the

realization of a sustainable economy is the increasing levels of pollution

{in the world) which impact human and environmental health in a negative

manner. In the waters surrounding the Caribbean archipelago, wastes

produced continuously and often imperceptibly by land-based activities,

contaminate and adversely impact marine ecosystems (and the



health of marine resource users). The most evident sources of this

nonpoint pollution in the region include (14): agriculture and forestry;

construction works; urban run-off; atmospheric fall-out; ground water

seepage; oil and other chemical spills and disposal; solid-waste disposal

and its leachates; sub-surface disposal of sewage and other wastes; and

mining operations.



Today we live in a world where some economists argue that pollution

control involves establishing a balance between the use of the environment

for waste disposal and its use for all other purposes (5). The conflicts

that often result among the different parties concerned with pollution of

an area or resource have helped to foster the development of policies and

mechanisms (from a number of conceptual frameworks - mostly rooted in

economic theory) for conflict resolution and prevention of pollution. The

USVI has benefited from this ongoing process. However, there is still a

need to customize mechanisms for prevention and control. Therefore, the

formulation and implementation of policy on pollution prevention and

control appropriate for the USVI would be assisted by considering some of

the questions that pertain to ‘safeguarding future resources' within the

context of achieving sustainable development in the territory.



The determination of the types and levels of resources that should be

protected for the future is tied to the environmental ethic we accept and

practice. The list of natural resources (including habitats) we believe

should be protected or conserved would probably be most diverse and most

numerous if we agreed that all natural resources have intrinsic value. On

the other hand, if other organisms have no rights to life and their

*purpose" on the planet is to be fully exploited for human derived

benefits, we are likely to have low numbers and kinds of resources

available.



The natural resources in the USVI that are viewed as having high value, as

is the case in much of the Caribbean region, include marine ecosystems -

coral reefs and seagrass beds; coastal ecosystems - mangrove forests and

lagoons and salt ponds; and terrestrial ecosystems - dry to moist

evergreen and rain forests, especially those associated with watersheds.

(Refer to Table 1.) The value of these resources as habitats, as food and



raw Materials sources, as structural protection and as contributors to the.



quality of life continues to be demonstrated and studied. The question is

whether we want to pass on some, all, or none of these resources and their

value to future generations.



Another part of the question relates to the condition or health of the

resources that are available to future societies. Ecosystems found in the



I-16

Virgin Islands and other Caribbean islands are usually connected to each

other and surrounding human built systems through the movement of water,

air and organisms. (Refer to Figure 1.) Hence, pollutants and disease

vectors can move with energy and materials between systems in an

opportunistic manner, to the detriment of the physical and biological

capacity and diversity of the impacted areas. This situation presents a

major challenge to management of these areas and the control of pollution,

especially with regard to nonpoint sources of pollution. Consequently, an

exploration of “safeguarding of resources" must address current activities

of human societies and their potential to influence the health and

Stability of natural resources.



The question of who is to be responsible for the type and level of

societal impact on natural resources is one that has received

international attention. An increasingly popular position is that a

sustainable society will depend on new partnerships of local people,

citizens' groups, businesses and governments. In this case, it is

essential to have early substantive input by partners into development

plans which strive to be equitable, sustainable, practical, sensitive to

local norms and cultures, and are welcome to the people concerned. The

implication here is that everyone has a stake and an opportunity in the

process of addressing the management and conservation of natural

resources. Clearly, there would be a need for information on the resource

and its current or potential uses and users, open dialog between partners,

and new roles in research, monitoring and management for various partners.

The skills needed to undertake the group dynamics associated with multi-

disciplinary teams and innovative problem-solving will have to be crucial

elements of the training of citizens, politicians, urban and rural

managers, as well as of educators and other professionals. Therefore, the

answer to who will safeguard our future resources should be everyone who

could possibly help - all of us.



Suggestions and recommendations concerning steps that should be taken to

move Caribbean societies toward sustainable living have come from many

individuals and groups, including many at the regional and international

levels. The nine principles of the World Conservation Strategy (1980)

developed by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), The World

Conservation Union (IUCN), and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), have already

been mentioned, and are mirrored in the outputs of the United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) - Agenda 21, the

Biodiversity Convention, the Framework Convention for Climate Change, and

the Declaration of Principles on Forests. Within the region, the Port of

Spain Accord on the Management and Conservation of the Caribbean

Environment (1989), The Caribbean Action Plan of the Caribbean Environment

Programme (1981) and the Report of the West Indian Commission - Time For

Action (1992), have all presented concerns and strategies related to the

implementation of sustainable development in the region.



Generally, the following approaches (modified from the Port of Spain

Accord) are included in strategies proposed as appropriate ways to

address present development challenges and the achievement of sustainable

societies.



a) Provision of training and the development of human Resources

to produce appropriately trained professionals and experts as well

as an informed and active citizenry.



b) Collection, management and dissemination of information

required for policy formulation and decision-making within the

conceptual framework of sustainable development.



c) Formulation of policies and plans that integrate



economic, social and environmental issues through the use of

interdisciplinary teams at all levels.



I-17

d) Development of legal frameworks and institutional arrangements

which facilitate environmental management and rational development.



e) Promotion of economic pursuits which acknowledge and respond

to environmental parameters and limits.



£) Inclusion and harnessing all available political,

institutional and community-based resources in the process of

development and problem-solving for society.



Locally, the Comprehensive Water and Land Use Plan , the development of 18

Areas of Particular Concern uhder the Coastal Zone Management Program, and

legislation related to endangered species and the Territorial Park System

identify and begin to shape the Virgin Islands' vision of living

sustainably. When the discussions at the local and regional levels

concentrate on pollution as an issue, the specific recommendations for a



strategy include a) pollution prevention methods, b) effluent limitations;



c) water quality limitations; d) environmental planning; and e) the use of

best management practices (6).



Clearly, there are gaps and areas of weakness that must be confronted if

reality in the future is to match the vision of the territory and the

region. Three major concerns are the establishment of policies and groups

of people and/or institutions which will facilitate 1) the integration of

economic, social and environmental planning within a framework that

specifically addresses sustainability; 2) the development of mechanisms

which will more effectively incorporate various interests of Virgin

Islands society into planning and management associated with development;

and 3) the formulation of education and awareness programs (formal and

informal) that would provide everyone with the appropriate conceptual

framework and the problem-solving and group dynamic skills needed to

individually construct and implement a sustainable lifestyle.

Implementation of strategies to address these concerns, challenges

governments and institutions in the Virgin Isiands and the region to

significantly adjust institutional attitudes and arrangements as well as

the way funds are currently directed.



A reminder is perhaps appropriate at this point. We humans have a

difficult time accepting and implementing change, especially the far-

reaching type proposed in the concepts of sustainable development. The

recommendations made require all of us to re-examine our values and alter

our behavior - at the individual and institutional levels. Hence, any

negative (physical or mental) responses you may experience in reaction to

ideas mentioned concerning sustainable living may be signs of personal

discomfort with the idea of change. It is my sincere hope that over time

the dissemination of information and guidance through formal and informal

education activities, as well as incentives from society to make changes

in how we address development, will move us to formulate and implement the

policies and systems needed for the survival of our natural resources,

ourselves and our society.



How we handle nonpoint pollution today will be one of the determinants of

whether the next generations of Virgin Islanders have thriving coral

reefs, watersheds with clean ground water, healthy versions of Magens Bay

and Trunk Bay, populated seagrass beds in the inshore waters of St. Croix

and a functional mangrove lagoon on St. Thomas to manage and enjoy. The

challenge to us concerning the safeguarding of future resources must be

confronted within the context of resolving our development and quality of

life issues as we strive to achieve a sustainable society.



I-18

ns



a



—



ete



ctacs



2A



Rea Sa



Figure 1



— Erosive Energy Buffer Systems on Islands



\"



Freshwater



vy



ES =



ana



Fs:



fx¢



f



flood buffer



ye 78>



‘se



Atlas



system



fo has,



AON



tae



Reece Aw



oY CoS:



&



gs te



fy



i.



—,



Ears



she os



‘aaa, *



wn



oy



ve



"ae



Oe



fd a



ariak



ed



ree



Dorp



Pera



| .



Seagrass



Sa



ae



meadow



Ry re



~



Por



ea Se



—



Reet



4=



a3



woe,



fo



Seagrass



meadow



—_ *



Aeef



|



Saltwater



i



|



and



storm surge



FT



‘



|



|



ouffer svstem



i SLURCE. Office of Tecrnaiags agisssment 1966



i



I-19

Table 1 —Ecosystems Present on the U.S.-Alfillated Islands



6 Aress Pueno Rico usvi A Semnce Quam CNMI

a forest Present on May here been Undisterded forme- Possibty on top at Mount Tapacnau,

mountain tos Present on tion en too of Ta'u Mount Lamiamn Saipan; other 1

Mountain tops fanas unknown

nentane fruity Zormerty on higner None Midetevation rages None None

n mountams ang @3 secondary

Qrowth

9nd rainiorest =itle remains None Remans on steeo Scattered remains of Lava forest on north:

stones ftereatona, apectes- ern istand

nen foreat

ne and swamo = ™1eO Extent None Lumited amount Present siong rivers. = in favines on smaiter

it *amarns aresent siong manst ravines: rslanas

‘atreama mostly in soutn

repeal mor =the remains <amitea areas tn None None None

one: foreat mountsns of remote

areea

ropetei ary S-eyzent. witte of Present, consiiera- “ane None None

" orginal ecesystem = bly reauced from

onginal extent

wns and rensweranie man. Present in former S-esent £3 aany Extenswe tire- Extensive natural

slands ave areas man: — agneuitural areas sere after aia: scented areas in formation Ih Morin:

“ned #8 oaature turbance soutn em isianas, met

"2° Grauna cover mace on Sai0an and

; others

i) Seesent.cxen as Present Present onan Mate «= On rocky timestone Coastal volcanre

seconaary Stowin a0 ana Piao moun =: coat and soma foek HA NOMA and

sans, Tututa southern areas limestone coast In

outa

lence Some mvert. ano Saltwater oonas in Streama and coasts «= Some atreerns ang Saitwater ana frean-

arsne4. ana some Days vening man- Marsnes: (axes OF tivers: reed swamps; «= water Marshes,

iatweter arsnes = groves “au ana Anv'y sattwater and freah- freanwater taxes on

sCtur Bening man- water marsnes: man. = Saipan and Pagan,

loves made lake Dracxish of Pagan

grove terest <2 mf seattereo Forests ony on St. Poias Smal areas. particu. = Limited areas 1n

s’Ouna ccast aa ana St. igtreaseai on Tutuila. = lanty Apra Habor soutnem imanas

ang on Aufue

Ubeacn forest Sragent 11 some Fresent apectas = & Present on some of

sera seas 14908 09 Rose Alot = some encemics ihe soutner istanas

ano Swan § sane

oonmanatiow Zening camer reeta Extenarve in Oavs. ~agcant on Aose Cocos lagoon Shatlow 1agoon in-

ome 876 offer Otfsndrea = ingroe feet and ston, Sagin'’s israna sige some aon

“yates along sneit ano Futuna Sarwan ano Tinan

MH reets Sarner, “Aging ana Bane oamer reet ‘San ssanas largely’ | Jarret feet near Fanging reers Com:



TATEN feet areas



ana aigel node: ag0



taraeted av traging



Cocos island, vanety



Mon in sOutnem i4-



ssbamegion 20°78



“3a! Camaged ‘anging Oarner ang sqara: some St gareh ana fnng. «anos, aome

Osten ree? comoier- samaced AQ reete qisewnere. zamaqged

ea: some camagea some aamaged

a" teens ame Ecsavatems ane t 3 Systen a Aw we he US Ath ‘anas, STA commissioned



Table 1 —Ecotysteme Present on the U.S.-Atfitlated Istands—Continued °



: . Federated Stetes of Mictonetia

terenatts Paw Kosree Songer Yeo Truk

None None Present on mountain = At Mignest efe- None None

top - atone .

None Mone At micetevations. At midetevations None Limited area on top

sone cisturded . of one votcanie

mountain

None umestons. Present with many Present. most arene = SOecieatioh forems. Present, disturbed

soecree-nen endetues. neany ut = Sitturbed Moot are ateturbed

disturbed Cd

‘ione Along fvers ana = Along nvets ana i sense slong vers, Present, intand of Present, intend of

ane of tana of mangroves atana ot mangroves = mangroves mangroves

mangroves:

None one None “one None None

None ‘tone None Note None None

On amaster slats ot = user on cry Present Sener often from Now orecominant Present

some ataits foNe, Gg where surmng On ctay sorts. oF

‘qenmentanved where trequentty

Some on nortnem Cunet eoges of Present of rocny coests ana = Present in some Present

wien uemestons forest. rome ravines degraded arees

“Otny onasta eng

sine menes araan

Freshwater ponadon = Atreeha, fvera. Shon streams. ane Streame, rvers. Freshwater streams. «Low swamps and

Lit: (raat saltwater ‘ees, ponds, other (resnwater canes, poncE, bonds, ewanps, and = marshes

mersnes swange, freon hatntat swames, and marenes

ahet ene Sartwatet arenes .

~wnee —_ . .

ia ceorestiona cna |= “1.513 sere 2.258 acres around °3.562 acres along 2.894 acres. on Yao. = ..318 acres around

fem stots qeiwares ofa along tsiena coast ena ettuaries. and some on man istence

cceets of aren some on Pingetan ane Wolee Atotts

snags 4tont

Largery replaces oy = “1.4 few arose OG = Present Denind SA tugn telende, On atons and be On atolts, islets; ana

SOCOM end praad: oma beecnes ana = bescnes argery reciaced oy fied Beeches. often in some coast areas

‘curt, except on 39 Reyange: Aton slanted trees fepteced by Coconut

some ators

Large open lagoons. — . 89007 enthin Some shaitow ta Extensive legoon Some snstiow le- Over 2.000 emi

s:0¢00 (agoon in sarmer reet. 2180 Q0ons inside teat aan mi goons within reef Inetuding atott

Namorte <ayengel Atott enc 4G atoll teqoons ana stoi tagoons tagoons

een Reet

‘s1anae Dutit by Samer, tnaging Largety surrounces Extentive Berner Wide, tanging rete, = Maror cerner tect

corel reat eco. sa anten reets: By franging reat ent encigging i Outer eter tstance ‘with istet enclosing

svatemna. some On ane Grveree: goon with {egoon wrth comptes

camaged ee same ators; 8g O@ten ceets. and Structures, outer

ome arena cuter mot lstencs atolt isianes: cof

samageo Srderante cemage

1993 NPS Pollution Conference



HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THIS? !!



1. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS MOST CLOSELY MATCHES YOUR

POSITION OR PHILOSOPHY? Circle the letter of your choice.



A. Future generations should not expect development

activities of today to consider their needs.



B. Substitution of resources and technology will provide the

answer to concerns about the loss of habitats and biodiversity to

future generations.



Cc. Humans are the only organisms with a right to access and

exploit the Earth's resources.



D. When, despite technological assistance, the capacity of

a natural system is overcome by waste and byproducts of human

society, humanity will find other resources to meet its needs.



E. The loss of most resources only have a limited negative

impact on the planet's natural systeme, and in the long-term these

losses will not matter to the survival of human-built systems.



F. None of the Above.



2 What resources do you see as being necessary for the future of the

Virgin Islands?



3. Who should be responsible for efforts to sustain long-term levels

and the health of the Virgin Islands‘ resources?



4. If your position or philosophy was not included in number 1 on

this sheet, please indicate it below in one sentence.



5. Which of the following is the most important for obtaining a

development approach that provides future generations with the highest

number of options regarding development and quality of life.



a) Financial resources



b) Technology investment



c) Economic reform



a) Directed research and monitoring



e) Institutional reform (private and public)

f) Educational reform



g) All of the above



h) None of the above



I-21

10.



11.



12.



13.



14.



15.



16.



REFERENCES



CARICOM. 1989. The Port of Spain Accord on the Management and

Conservation of the Caribbean Environment. Port of Spain,

Trinidad and Tobago.



Daly, H. 1989. Sustainable Development: Towards An Operational

Definition. Draft paper.



de Albuquerque, K. and J.L. McElroy. 1992. Caribbean Small-

Island Tourism Styles and Sustainable Strategies. Environmental

Management, 16(5): 619-632.



Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).

1991. Rapporteur's Report on the Round Table Meeting on Human

Resource Development Strategies. December 2-5, 1991. Havana, Cuba.



Gardner, L. 1992. Planning and Pollution Control. Paper

prepared as part of M.Sc. in Rural and Regional Resource Planning

at University of Aberdeen.



Gelabert, P.A. and N. Singh. 1992. Strategy for the Control of

Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution in the Wider Caribbean.

Chemistry and Ecology, 0: 1-4.



IUCN/UNEP/WWF. 1991. Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for

Sustainable Living. Gland, Switzerland.



IUCN. (The World Conservation Union) 1993. Parks and Progress.

Ed. Valerie Barzetti. IUCN, Washington, D.C., USA



IUCN. 1993. First Systematic Review of National Strategies

Points to Need to “Target a Few Things and do Them Well".

Environmental Strategy: Newsletter of the IUCN Commission on

Environmental Strategy and Planning, Vol. 5.



Ludwig, D., R. Hilborn and C. Walters. 1993. Uncertainty,

Resource Exploitation, and Conservation: Lessons from History.

Science 260: 17 and 36.



Ragster, L. 1992. Contribution to the Meeting of Experts on

Land-Based Sources of Pollution: Training, Education and

Awareness. Veracruz, Mexico. July 6-10, 1992. UNEP



UNEP. 1989. The Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment

Programme: Evaluation of its Development and Achievements. UNEP

Regional Seas Reports and Studies No. 109. UNEP. :



Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1987. Integrated

Renéwable Resource Management for U.S. Insular Areas, OTA-F-325.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.



U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program. 1989. Puerto Rico Workshop

on Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution in the Wider Caribbean.

August 7-9, 1989. San Juan, Puerto Rico. U.S. MAB, U.S.

Department of State, Washington, D.C. U.S.A.



U.S. Virgin Islands Areas of Particular Concern Management Plans.

Prepared by Island Resources Foundation for the Department of

Planning and Natural Resources, U.S.V.I. Government.



(The) West Indian Commission, 1992. Overview of the Report of the

West Indian Commission: Time For Action. Black Rock, Barbados.



I-22

a ee ee



RESPONSIBLE ECOTOURISM DEVELOPMENT



Stanley Selengut



MAHO BAY CAMPS, INC.



Ecotourism, a relatively new idea in the travel industry, is

an outgrowth of the increasing awareness that environmental

responsibility is a global concern. The ecotourist seeks

destinations that reflect this widening international ethic.

The new breed of traveler tends to be well educated,

adventurous and skeptical. An ecotourism resort that offers

only environmental window-dressing will not survive the

scrutiny of such an ecologically sensitive clientele.



My experience as builder, owner and operator of Maho Bay Camps

convinces me of this. When I first opened for business 17

years ago, the environmental movement was just beginning to

stir and the term ecotourism did not exist. My original

intent was simply to offer an inexpensive vacation that was

close to nature but provided a degree of comfort and

convenience not found in a traditional campground.



The Maho Bay site presented a unique opportunity. Its 14

acres are located within the U.S. Virgin Islands National Park

on St. John. The hillside setting overlooks. one of the

Caribbean's most beautiful beaches, one of the many that

scallop the island's north coastline.



Since the land I leased was an erosion-prone hillside, site

disturbance was to be avoided. With New York architect Jim

Hadley, I designed a community of three-room “tent cottages"

set on platforms cantilevered on the hillside. The 114 units

are arranged in clusters. To further minimize site

disturbances, the clusters are connected by raised walkways

joined by stairs. Guests can reach virtually any part of Maho

without ever disturbing the ground. cover. Bathhouses,

containing toilets, sinks and showers are located in various

sections of the grounds.



Construction techniques at Maho restricted the need to clear

trees and vegetation. Footings for the posts that support all

the elevated walkways and platforms were dug by hand. When

completed the tent-cottages appeared to have been built in the

trees that grew on slopes. Each tent-cottage is furnished

with beds, chairs, a table .and.bottled-gas cooking stove.

Occupants have unobstructed: views of sea and distant islands

while the units are scarcely visible to boats cruising off the

beach.



The inconspicuous infrastructure of Maho was also designed for

low environmental impact. Electrical cables and water



I-23

pipes were attached to the undersides of the walkways,

eliminating



the need to dig trenches. Puli-chain showers and low-flush

toilets reduced fresh water use in the bathhouses. A

centrally located aluminum-can compactor increased the

efficiency of the our recycling program. The profusion of

native trees, plants and flowers thrive on “gray water" that

is recycled from our treatment facility and distributed

through an irrigation system. Birds, bats, lizards and tree

frogs flourish under these conditions and keep insect

populations in check while providing entertainment for the

guests. Nature can be a rewarding stage, if only we keep our

props and directions from altering the original script.



Maho also has two large pavilions where guests can gather to

see films, attend lectures by Park rangers and visiting

wildlife experts, hear live music or eat at our self-serve

restaurant which offers fresh vegetables, fish and a variety

of foods from a health-conscious menu. Since eating is a

universally understood cross-cultural experience, many of

Maho's dishes are prepared from local island recipes.



Educating by example is central to the Maho concept. The more

I learn about getting the most from nature with the least

environmental cost, the more I want to expand the example. I

am currently building a research/resort adjacent to the Maho

campground. It is called Harmony and is designed to take

ecotourism to its next logical level: a resort dedicated to

the principles of sustainable development. Environmental

scientists and government agencies define this concept in

varying ways. Basically, sustainable development is the

practice of using natural resources no faster than they can be

regenerated. In short, Do Not Kill the Goose That Lays Golden



Eggs.



Harmony will be a small community built from recycled

materials. Wood scraps, plastic bottles, crushed glass and

ground tires are now the "raw materials" for sustainable-

development construction products. The living spaces are

designed to maximize comfort with the least amount of energy.

Harmony will run “off the grid." All electricity will be

generated by sun and wind, using solar panels, a windmill and

storage cells. Each unit will also contain a computer so that

guests can monitor and adjust their energy use according to

prevailing conditions.



Most of the planning for Harmony comes from discussions and

workshops with environmentalists, engineers and administrators

from the U.S. National Park Service and the U.S. Virgin

Islands Energy Office. Sandia Laboratories of Albuquerque,

N.M. is providing know how and experimental hardware, such as

a solar powered ice machine. In a real sense, Harmony is a

proving ground for the latest sustainable development ideas

and technology. Practical data, including input from guests,



I-24



.

|

xu



| '

(a ne es



oor raph



will be fed back to Sandia and environmental agencies.



The



i.



resort will also function as an educational facility,



attracting specialist and school children alike.



The goal of Harmony is to demonstrate that an ecotourism



facility can balance both nature and culture -- can, in fact,



be mutually enhancing.



If my experience in the field has



taught me anything, it is that we are not separate from but



part of our ecosystem,



and with that privilege comes the



responsibility to nurture it.



1-25

It

URBAN SOURCES OF NONPOINT POLLUTION

(LAND USE PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION)



General



How Erosion from Construction Projects Harms the Environment

Ralf BOULON .e cc ccc ccc cece nance rene enews rneteessvces II-1



What You Can Do to Minimize or Prevent Erosion

Victor GITaud .. cee csc c reece ccc ner vane ress cccecerscsveees TI-6



The Benefits of Planning Development to Fit Into the Landscape



Keith Richards .. cece ccc ccc cece ens e sana ce rennet seeeaaeeene *

Technical a

Vegetative Erosion and Sedimentation Control Practices



Dale MOLton . occ ccc cece ence wwe tener e scarce neeersevesse II-12



Structural Erosion and Sedimentation Control Practices

Werner Wernicke ...ccscuacnuvrecsccee Dee eec ence eset ete aenee II-15



How to Prepare an Effective Erosion and Sedimentation

Control Plan



William F. MCCOMD .. ccc essere cence ence ses tccvcnses eee £1725



* Paper not available at time of printing.

EFFECTS OF EROSION ON TERRESTRIAL AND MARINE ECOSYSTEMS



Ralf H. Boulon, Jr.



Division of Fish and Wildlife, Dept.of Planning and Natural Resources,

6291 Estate Nazareth 101, St. Thomas, V.I. 00802-1104



As most of us are very aware, the Virgin Islands are a

beautiful and relatively healthy place to live. We have clean air, clear

water and examples of nearly every tropical ecosystem found in the western

Atlantic region. Oe



However, all is not well. Our natural systems, while still

relatively healthy and productive, are gradually losing the fight against

man’s activities. This paper will discuss our major natural ecosystems in

terms of their value to us and to each other, what is happening to them

due to development induced erosion in particular and what it means to us

and our quality of life here in the Virgin Islands. Development as

discussed in this paper can range from a single family residence to a

major hotel.



Erosion can be defined as the disturbance or destabilization

of soils or marine sediments which enables them to be moved’ from their

point of origin by external factors such as rain, waves or currents and

which can result in a detrimental effect on natural living systems.

Disturbance or destabilization results from any activity which removes

vegetation and/or penetrates the soil or sediment surface. The steep

slopes found in the Virgin Islands greatly increase the propensity for

erosion and significant soil loss.



While many aspects of development have detrimental effects on

our environment, this paper will be limited primarily to the effects of

erosion on our natural systems. The major natural systems that will be

discussed in this paper include terrestrial forests, saltponds, beaches,

mangroves, seagrass beds, coral reefs and algal plains.



Terrestrial forests - We have a variety of terrestrial forests here in the

VI. Many species of birds and animals live in them, they make oxygen for

the air we breath, they provide food for us and animals, they make our

soil, and they hold the soil where it belongs with their roots.



Through development, both residential and commercial, we have

bit by bit lost considerable amounts of our terrestrial forests which has

led to erosion and sediment washing into the ocean where it has affected

Mangroves, seagrass beds and our coral reefs. This loss of topsoil has led

to changes in the types of forest capable of being supported by our land.

Thinner soils cannot support as large trees nor can it hold the moisture

necessary for the growth of many of our indigenous tree species.



Many of our guts contain rock pools that support a variety of

freshwater fish and shrimp species. The sediment produced by erosion

clouds the water and kills these animals. We have probably already lost

most of this small but important ecosystem to development.



Through proper sediment control practices and rapid

replanting, much of this soil loss can be controlled and reduced to

tolerable levels for our coastal and marine systems. Another related

problem is that of septic tank effluent and nutrient loading in our soils.

The creation of shallow soils through erosion reduces the capacity of the

soil to absorb the effluent. This enriches rain runoff and may cause

eutrophication of our nearshore waters which affects all of our marine

communities. Septic systems utilizing leach fields should not be allowed

under certain soil types and conditions.



TI-1

Saltponds - Saltponds provide food (crabs, shrimp) for many species of

birds. They are also the front line defense in trapping soil that escapes

from the hillsides which can smother our corals, seagrasses and fish. In

fact, most of our upland watersheds end in saltponds which trap sediment

in runoff through settling action and filtration through the berm which

separates the pond from the sea. Under natural conditions, the filling of

a saltpond with upland soils takes many thousands of years, about the same

rate as which new saltponds are formed.



Historically, saitponds have been viewed as smelly areas good

for either filling in to build on top of or dredging for marinas. Either

scenario destroys wildlife habitat and causes many tons of sediment to

reach our ocean waters.



As upland sources of sediment erosion have increased we are

finding that our saltponds are filling in with this sediment at a rate far

exceeding the natural one. As this happens, the salt ponds lose much of

their retention capability and more sediment ends up reaching the sea. As

the ponds fill in with sediment, conditions become favorable for

successional colonization by wetland and terrestrial vegetation and the

size of the ponds is further diminished. Over time, our ponds may become

filled in before new ones are created and nearshore marine communities

will become smothered with sediments and die. We need to explore ways in

which natural sediment reduction systems can be enhanced, supplemented or

even replaced by man-made systems. This may become absolutely necessary if

we are going to save our nearshore marine ecosystems.



Beaches - Our shorelines contain a variety of beaches, from small pocket

coves to long open beaches. They serve as filters for rain runoff, nesting

habitat for turtles and some birds, and critical habitat for many species

of crabs and other invertebrates. Our economy also depends on beaches for

many of our tourism dollars.



Development here has certainly affected many, if not all of

our beaches in one way or another. A number of beaches have been seriously

altered through sand mining activities and erosion due to coastal

modifications such as rock groins. Increased wave erosion after

destruction of the offshore protective reefs during dredging activities

has also caused beaches to all but disappear.



Increases in terrestrial soils and organic matter from upland

erosion and runoff can lead to increased vegetative colonization of our

beaches. More soil in the sand permits more plants to grow. As more

vegetation grows on our beaches, it reduces the available habitat for

turtles and seabirds to nest. It also leads to increased root growth and

makes it harder for turtles to dig and hatchlings to survive.



Placing of sand on beaches as a beach creation project or

renourishment program can be devastating to nearby marine ecosystems if

the sand being placed on the beach is of a smaller grain size than what

was originally there. All beaches are in a state of natural equilibrium

with the wave and energy environment at that beach. Placing of finer sands

on the beach will result in the waves removing it from the beach and

depositing it on other nearshore marine ecosystems. Any project of this

nature must have grain size and composition analyses done prior to

selecting a source of sand for the project. Another mistake is when

someone wants to create a beach where there was no beach before. The

reason no beach was there before is that the energy environment will not

allow one to accrete there. Any attempt will be met with disaster, both

for the developer as well as for the nearby marine ecosystems.



Mangroves - Many of our deeper bays and larger watersheds end in mangrove



stands. These mangroves filter sediments and chemicals from rain runoff,

Stabilize our shorelines, provide nesting habitat for many species of



II-2

t Bs

3

3

2

‘

ax

.

‘



birds, and provide nursery habitat for juvenile fish where they grow up in

the submerged roots. Mangroves are also a source of carbon based

nutrients for other nearshore ecosystems.



Mangroves are another habitat that many feel are much better

suited for cutting, filling and building on. But, in fact, they are a

habitat whose importance touches most of our lives. We estimate that we

have lost approximately 50 percent of our mangroves here in the Virgin

Islands to development activities during the last 40 years. Most of this

has resulted from large scale destruction such as Krause Lagoon on St.

Croix or the Mangrove Lagoon on St. Thomas. Not as obvious, but also

significant, the cutting of several trees here and there for such things

as docks has eliminated much of our mangroves. And we have paid the price.

Fishermen in St. Croix tell us that fishing declined significantly after

Krause Lagoon was destroyed. Nearshore reefs in southwestern St. Croix

have been overwhelmed with sediment and have all but died. Species of

wildlife that depend on mangroves for nesting habitat where they can be

safe from predators have to deal with less safe areas to nest in, and as

a consequence, their populations decline.



' The increases in upland erosion have led to changes in the

hydrodynamics and soil conditions necessary for mangrove health and

survival. As more soils are deposited over mangrove areas, soil salinity

and moisture decreases and the vegetation changes to more terrestrial

species. Species of crabs that depend on the saturated soil for refuge and

the birds that depend on the crabs for food likewise suffer for the worse.

Sediments in the water clog the gills of juvenile fish and invertebrates,

causing them to die or leave. The increase in nutrients from the soils

causes algal blooms which reduces available habitat for fish. The result

is the elimination of the nursery value of the mangroves and consequently,

the reduction of fish in nearby marine ecosystems.



Our mangroves are now protected by law and cutting or damaging

them is illegal. Mangroves can be successfully replanted in areas where

they have been removed as long as environmental conditions necessary for

their growth have been restored. However, it is very hard, if not

impossible, to establish a viable mangrove ecosystem in an area where they

have never been.



Seagrass beds - Many of our coastal bays are carpeted with seagrass beds,

the marine equivalent of a lawn. Much as a lawn will keep soil from

eroding during rain, these seagrasses stabilize the sea bottom during

periods of high waves or strong currents. They are important foraging

areas for turtles, conch and urchins, and are nursery habitat for many

juvenile fish, lobsters and other animals. Calcareous algae from seagrass

beds is the major component in beach sand here in the VI. Recovery from

damage to a seagrass bed may take decades.



The major threat to seagrass beds here in the VI has been from

dredging in the past for sand, either for construction or to fill

saltponds on which to build developments or for channel widening or

deepening. With very limited exceptions, dredging should no be longer

permitted in the VI due to the serious effects it has on all marine

ecosysytems. Replanting of seagrasses is a costly and time intensive

project but can be done with some success.



_- Upland erosion of soils and the introduction. of these

sediménts into our marine waters has subtle but serious long-term

consequences for our seagrass beds. This sediment reduces water clarity

which diminishes the amount of sunlight penetrating the water. Seagrasses

require sunlight to photosynthesize and a decrease in light penetration

causes seagrasses in deeper areas to die off. This destabilizes the seabed

which leads to greater suspended sediment and a further decrease in water

Clarity, thus increasing the problem. This naturally then has a



II-3

trickle-down effect on all other marine ecosystems.



Coral reefs - We have considerable amounts of coral reef habitat here in

the VI, from nearshore fringing reefs to offshore bank and shelf edge

reefs. They are very important in protecting our shorelines from wave

erosion. And, like a tropical rainforest in their diversity, thousands of

species of fish, plants and invertebrates live in coral reefs, many of

which are eaten by man. Coral reefs are also an important source of beach

sand and are vitally important to our tourist based economy.



Development has taken a serious toll on our reefs. Sediment

and nutrient runoff from land as well as past dredging activities has

caused a serious decline in health of our reefs. In fact, several noted

Marine scientists have determined that Puerto Rico has lost nearly 100

percent of its nearshore coral reefs over the past 50 or 60 years due to

sedimentation from upland erosion.



Reefs require a very narrow set of environmental conditions to

grow and maintain their health. Sediment in the water smothers the coral

polyps and restricts feeding and photosynthetic activity necessary for

their survival. Without a reversal in water quality trends and increased

effort to restore the natural baiance I fear that we will see a gradual

decline and eventual loss of our once productive reef areas. Establishment

of marine reserve areas with anchoring and harvest restrictions for marine

species can provide significant protection to key examples of our marine

ecosystems. These can also potentially create areas that provide a source

of recruitment of marine organisms including fish and corals to nearby

non-protected areas.



Algal plains - A habitat that few people are even aware of is the algal

plain. These are deep water areas with high algal diversity that cover

extensive portions of our insular shelves. They may be important juvenile

habitat for some species of fish (Queen Triggerfish) and lobster.



To our knowledge, development has had little to no direct

affect on algal plains but, as the overall health of nearshore habitats

and water quality declines, the delicate balance of our algal plains can’t

help but be threatened as well.



Of course there are countless other ways in which erosion is

affecting our natural systems, many. of which we are probably unaware of.



Conclusion - One very important concept that needs to be remembered is

that all of these animals, plants and ecosystems, both terrestrial and

marine, interact with each other and are interdependent on each other for

their health and their very existence. No one ecosystem or animal should

be considered all by itself. Each one depends on the others for such

things as energy flow, maintenance of water quality, nutrients, shelter,

etc. But this only works if the systems are in balance. Any disruption in

the interactions between animals, plants and ecosystems can throw the

whole process out of balance.



Through effort and careful planning, we can save, protect and

enhance what we have left and possibly recover some of what we have lost.

The control of erosion and the resultant sedimentation should be one our

top goals. The effects of erosion will lead to the loss of most if not all

of our nearshore marine ecosystems. Sediment control practices must be

instituted whereever the soil is to be disturbed. These sediment control

practices must be enforced and monitored if they are going to be

effective. Replanting of disturbed soils must be done as soon as possible

to reduce the chances of soil loss. Projects requiring major soil

disturbance should also be timed to coincide with periods of least

rainfall where possible and practical.



TI-4

Tatas



_—



a



We must all endeavor to learn more about and try to understand



the problems that are facing our environment and ourselves. For the more



we understand, the greater will be our ability to make the right decisions



to solve those problems.



fe.



Sie



“Bc



se



TI=5

WHAT YOU CAN DO TO MINIMIZE OR PREVENT EROSION

Victor Giraud



Department of Planning and Natural Resources, St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands



A major problem faces us here in the Virgin Islands. A problem, I would dare say, is as

serious as a heart attack. That problem is soil erosion. A heart attack is normally a final

result of an ongoing disorder. Just as we change our diets when we have been told that

we have a heart condition is the same reaction we need to take when we are told that our

bad construction habits are the direct result of soil erosion. Otherwise, the final

result will be a fatal heart attack or a damaged ecosystem whenever the problems leading

up to destruction go unchecked. —



Soil erosion is caused by the wind, rain, surface runoff of storm waters, and by man, who

just happens to be the greatest offender. The word erosion includes all of the processes

by which soil or rock material is loosened and removed, and then transported.



The energy of raindrops displaces soil particles from unprotected or non-vegetative areas.

Water running on the surface of the ground picks up these detached soil particles and

carries them along as it flows towards a stream system. As the volume and velocity

increase, additional particles are picked up and added to the sediment load.



Eroded soil being transported by water is termed sediment runoff. Excessive sediment

runoff in the Virgin Islands is caused primarily by increased development of previously

undeveloped lands on mostly steep slopes. Construction activity disturbs the soil by

stripping vegetation and altering natural land forms and drainage patterns. The effects

of sediment runoff are particularly noticeable in the bays and harbors adjacent to

watersheds that are being developed immediately following a heavy rainfall. The greater

the distance the water runs uncontrolled, the greater its erosive force and the greater the

damage.



Deposition occurs as the water slows down. The coarsest and heaviest particles are

transported short distances. Smaller particles stay in suspension over longer distances by

rolling or bouncing along, or stay in suspension while water velocity is fairly high.

Because of slow setting rates, fine silt particles remain im suspension for hours and

contribute to water turbidity.



Erosion in most instances is a slow but continuous removal and transportation of top soil

by the forces of nature. When assisted by man, that process is dramatically accelerated.



It is estimated that 5.4 billion tons of top soil are lost every year in the United States

alone.



In the absence of current statistical information, I would venture to say that in the

Virgin Islands, our loss to erosion is proportionately less than that of the continental



II-6

United States. However, our problem is significant enough to merit serious territory-wide

concern. |



Principles Forming the Basis for_an Effective Conservation Program in Land



Development



1.



Fit the development to the topography and soils as closely as possible. Don't cut

more than you have to.



Save trees and other natural vegetation wherever possible. Do not clear the

entire site.



Avoid unnecessary disturbance of the soil; confine construction activities to the

least critical areas.



Install permanent storm drains and roads as early as possible to direct storm

waters.



Protect denuded soils with mulch or grass where permanent protection is

delayed.



Install permanent vegetation immediately after final grades are established.

Use basins to trap sediment on-site.



Schedule the construction operations so as to only expose that area of land at a

time that can be developed in a reasonable length of time.



Minimize impervious areas; create lawns or gravel areas.’



The application of these principles to fit the particular type of development will result in

a practical program of environmental protection acceptable to the industry and to the

Virgin Islands Government.



' Environmental Protection Handbook, V.I. Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs



and the Department of Public Works, 1976.



II-7

Conservation Practices



Many conservation practices have proven effective in avoiding or lessening damage from

sediment or runoff. These include:



1. Careful land clearing and protection of desirable shade trees and other plants;

2. Proper land grading with maximum slopes;

3. Constructing retaining walls and slope stabilization structures where needed;



4, Rapidly applying permanent vegetation to critical areas following the

establishment of final grades;



5. Mulching;



6. Construction of waterways, diversions, and outlets;



7. Construct sediment basins;



8. Water storage structures (Ponds and Gray water cisterns).



Methods That are Used to Minimize Erosion ”



Depending on the type of project, slope, and soil conditioning, a combination of one or

more of these methods should be utilized in an effort to control erosion and sediment

runoff.



Silt Fences



A temporary sediment barrier consisting of filter fabric used to trap sediment while

allowing water to flow through.



Brush Berms



Temporary sediment barriers made up of uprooted trees, brush, and grass used to trap

sediment in a similar fashion to silt fences. Brush Berms are bio-degradable.



? Environmental Protection Handbook, V.I. Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs



and the Department of Public Works, 1976.



II-8

Sediment Basins (Ponds)



A sediment basin, or pond, is created by the construction of a barrier or dam across a

drainage way, by excavating a basin, or by a combination of both to trap and store

sediment and water borne debris. The trapped water is allowed to overflow through a

filtering system - mainly gravel - onto undisturbed areas.



Mulching



Wood chips or cut grass spread evenly over disturbed ground to prevent direct impact by

raindrops.



Level Spreader



A level spreader is a flat depression constructed at grade across a slope to slow the

velocity of a concentrated runoff into a level sheet flow which is likely to cause erosion.



Vegetative Cover



Planting of grasses, vines, shrubs, and trees on exposed areas to stabilize the soil and

reduce damage from sediment and runoff to downstream areas. Generally, vegetative

cover is used to enhance the natural beauty of the site.



Rip Rap



A permanent erosion resistant ground cover of large loose stones installed over an area

subject to erosive conditions, e.g. stream banks and drains.



Gabion Baskets



A system of wire baskets filled with rock placed strategically against cut banks to protect

the cut where soil conditions or water turbulence and velocity are such where soil may

erode,



Retaining Wall



Retaining walls are walls constructed of masonry, timbers, rock, etc., to assist in the

stabilization of cut or fill slopes and embankments.



To control or minimize erosion, one must implement a thorough maintenance and follow-



up program. A site cannot be effectively controlled without thorough, periodic checks

of erosion and sediment control practices. These practices, like the ones mentioned



II-9

earlier, must be maintained just as construction equipment must be maintained and

materials checked and inventoried. Two examples of applying this principle would be to

start a routine “end of day" check to make sure all control | practices a are working properly

and clean after every heavy rainfall. .



In most cases, however, a combination of limited grading, limited time exposure, and a

judicious selection of erosion control practices and sediment-trapping facilities (like the

methods described earlier) will prove to be the most practical method of controlling

erosion and the associated production and transport of sediment. *



In other words, use a common sense approach to control erosion. Look at erosion the

same way you would if you had a problem with your body; with your body being the

total ecosystem with live parts. Whenever those parts are affected, your entire body

becomes affected - sometimes to the point of disability or even death!



> Erosion and Sediment Control on Urban Areas, Oklahoma County Conservation District and

Oklahoma Conservation Commission & Soil Conservation Service.



II-10



~ Bs

Setas



BIBLIOGRAPHY



Checklist for Erosion and Sediment Control, Northem Virginia Soil and Water



Conservation District and Fairfax County, Department of Environmental Management,



1988.



Environmental Protection Handbook, The Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and



Cultural Affairs and the Department of Public Works, 1976.



Erosion and Sediment Control on Urban Areas, Oklahoma County Conservation District



and Oklahoma Conservation Commission & Soil Conservation Service.



4



Programmed Demonstration for Erosion and Sediment Control Specialists, Office of



Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C.,



1974.



IT-11

VEGETATIVE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PRACTICES



Dale E. R. Morton



Cooperative Extension Service, University of the Virgin

Islands, St. Thomas, VI 00802-9990



Soil - this is the medium in which plants grow and obtain

most of their nutrients. The soils in the Virgin Islands are

varied in nutrient content, pH, etc. The Virgin Islands, being



hilly and small in size, easily lose soil from the land to the

sea by means of erosion.



Soil erosion is the loss of soil from an area by the

forces of wind and water. Sedimentation, on the other hand

refers to the transport and deposit of soil particles due to

erosion. Since soil. is formed very slowly over many decades

and can be lost overnight, it is imperative for us to do all

within our means to conserve and protect this limited



resource. Therefore, some type of soil conservation practice

should be implemented by all.



However, one must be aware that erosion and soil

formation take place all the time. It is when erosion occurs

at an accelerated rate, producing large quantities of sediment

that we usually express concern. The loss of soil from

croplands, homesites, construction areas etc. is hazardous to

marine life and costly to those who have to pay for the

removal of sediments from public places.



These costs and the environmental impact of soil erosion

can be greatly reduced by using vegetative control measures.

Once the vegetation is established the roots hold the soil in

Place and the canopy of the plant protects the soil from the

force of the rain and reduces the velocity of the wind. It is

very important to remember to avoid leaving soil exposed for

an extended period of time. When it is absolutely necessary



to remove vegetation, make sure that the smallest possible

area is disturbed.



There are several ways in which to use vegetation to

control soil erosion - establishment of lawns, grasslands and

pasture, contour farming, grass terraces and windbreaks. In

selecting which option is best for a particular situation,



consideration should be gqiven to slope, soil type and

maintenance and labor.



Many Virgin Islanders use grasses to make lawns. In

choosing the type of grass one has to take into consideration

the fertility of the soil, the availability of water, and the

Slope of land. Once selection is made establishment can



II-12

be by seed, sprig, plugs or sod. The latter two are not very

common here. To establish the lawn one can broadcast the seed

and mulch the area. For further guidance to the selection of

grasses for lawns, you may obtain a University of the Virgin

Islands Extension Service Booklet entitled “ Virgin Islands

Home Lawns".



Ground covers such as Ground Orchid or Air Plant Catopsis

morreniana, Oyster Plant Rhoeo bicolor, Wandering Jew Zebrina

pendula, Wedelia Wedelia trilobata, are sometimes used in

those areas where the slopes are too steep for the

establishment of lawns. Ground covers also have to be

selected based on the soil condition, the effect desired, and

the availability of water. For those persons living on or

near coastal:areas, the Beach Morning’ Glory Ipomoea pes-caprae

is an excellent choice to control erosion. All of these

ground covers have to be dense in order to provide the best

erosion and sediment control. Therefore, close planting and

fertilization are recommended to hasten the thickening and to

prevent the formation of gullies.



The practice of planting vegetation on the contour of

hills is a practice that should be encouraged. Another

vegetative practice is grass terracing. The grass Khus Khus

Vetiveria zizanioides is planted on the contour in strips. As

a result, the flow of water is reduced; the sediments become

trapped behind it. The areas in between are then cultivated

and have the advantage of better water infiltration and

percolation. These practices are not commonly implemented

here, but I think it is one to be advocated in agricultural

areas; it would be less labor intensive compared with the rock

terraces which are more commonly used in the V.1.



Another vegetative means of erosion and sedimentation

control is the practice of using windbreaks. In many

Caribbean islands along the coastal area there are plantings

of Australian Pine Casuarina equisetifolia, as wind breaks.

These reduce the force of the wind, thereby reducing erosion.

These particular pine trees also drop needles and cones which

cover the soil and protect it from further erosion. Hedges of

Tan Tan Leucaena glauca can also be used to make windbreaks in

areas further inland.



Finally, the best and easiest means to control soil

erosion is by allowing areas to remain established in their

natural, vegetation. These plants are usually well adapted to

the area and generally thrive. They maintain a good level of

erosion control by the canopy and leaf litter protecting the

soil from the impact of the rain and reducing the velocity of

the wind.



II-13

Dee etel



:



De La Od EDEL. eit PELE One tye te pelebaey Daeie e



2



DELTA SD DTT ae Tne TT a a



Dpuene an WSS AS DUSEEY tee gD eee



reared



i



Wt peters



bs



ates



For further information on vegetative means of controlling



soil erosion contact any of the following local offices - USDA



Soil



Conservation



Service,



,



Agricultural



Stabilization



Conservation Service, V.I. Department of Planning and Natural



Resources, U.V.I Cooperative Extension Service.



'



“TI-14 |

STRUCTURAL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL METHODS



Werner Wernicke



Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority



A. OVERVIEW



Soil erosion is a. natural process which takes place over

geologic time. It has shaped the land masses. Over millenniums

it wears down mountains and interacts in slow equilibrium with

other natural forces. It is a natural resource which

rejuvenates the fertility of the land, rivers and oceans.



Man made erosion takes place at a vastly accelerated pace

counted in years, months and days. It is a resource displaced

thereby becoming a pollutant. Natural ecosystems are unable to

respond to the rapid change imposed on it. Man made erosion

becomes highly destructive and costly both to natural and man

made environments.



Erosion strips land of is fertile soil layer, it ruts

roadways, natural and man made channels are filled with

sediment, near shore marine environments are destroys and

marine facilities are shoaled to name only a few effects.



A balance needs to exist between development and the health of

our environments as well as save guarding the value of our man

made facilities, our property and quality of-life. Most if not

all of us have witnessed the destruction brought by the. floods

over the past two decades here in the islands. Much of that

damage was due to erosion and sediment damage.



B. APPROACH TO THE PROBLEM.



Soil erosion and sediment deposition in this region is largely

the result of the action of rainfall and subsequent runoff.

The tools we possess to control erosion and sediment are

numerous and other presenters have covered important facets.

The basic goal is to minimize. soil.erosion from occurring and

to stabilize sediment which is generated. Structural methods,

the topic of this paper, is utilized in concert with other

approaches. The spectrum of erosion and sediment control is

briefly listed below: Sp eta



1. Design and plan a project. with soil erosion and

sediment control as a design objective - do not view it

as a quick fix. just to get: permits. In.all cases design.

a project with ‘the minimum area of. disturbance.



II-15

2. For larger projects or those situated in sensitive

environmental areas, phasing of site work and exposure to

seasonal weather patterns can be critical. The site's

degree of exposure to erosion‘both in area and time needs

to be minimized.



3. Rapid stabilization of disturbed areas is necessary to



limit the exposure risk of erosion. Here structural

' methods begin to interact with vegetative methods in



stabilizing and protecting soil from water erosion.



Structural methods are an integral part of the comprehensive

soil erosion and sediment control program. The three

overriding principles of erosion and sediment control are:

|



1. Minimize the soil erosion process from occurring at

the construction site on area which must be disturbed. This is

accomplished by protecting exposed soil from rainfall impact

and controlling water run off.



2. Sediment control is a backup for erosion control

measures, it is a second line of defence to capture soil which

could not be successfully retained by erosion control methods.



3. The coordination of erosion and sediment control with

water flow/storm water management both on site and leaving the

site to obtain a comprehensive and well managed program.



A number of specific structural methods are discussed below

which is followed by graphic examples after the text and cut

sheets from manufacturers. Illustrations are taken from the

Urban Land Institute publication Residential Erosion and

Sediment Control, 1978. The cut sheets are referenced in the

text by their manufacturers name which however does not

endorse the product. Other manufactures not listed produce

similar products.



C. STRUCTURAL METHODS



Structural methods are presented in three categories: 1.

Erosion control, 2. Sediment control and 3. Disposal

structures. All methods are not applicable at every site and

careful planing and design is crucial for the steep terrain

encountered on many Caribbean islands.



C.1. EROSION CONTROL



After site planning and design to minimize soil erosion, the

treatment of areas which are disturbed by earth moving

activities through erosion control methods is necessary. These

fall into two basic and interrelated methods, vegetative and



II-16



ds eee?

structural.



Structural erosion control has a basic objective -



Prevent or minimize rain fall run off from dislodging

soil particles either from direct rail drop impact and

from the scouring action of running water over vulnerable

soil.



Shielding of exposed soil is accomplished by vegetative

measures, which is the topic of other papers presented at this

conference, and by artificial or structural means. Literature

on some commercial soil protective coverings are included at

the end of this pater. A variety of several artificial soil

coverings are listed below:



1. Straw mulch of chopped straw will protect soil

surfaces from direct rain fall impact and keep moisture

to foster vegetative growth. It is available commercially

in rolls and reinforced with either natural or artificial

webbing or mesh to hold the straw in place. It requires

pinning to the ground. It is easily applied and is

limited to areas which are not subjected to large volumes

of concentrated water flow. Various thickness and mesh

strengths, including shredded coconut fiber, can be

applied as soil stabilization liners in small ditches.

(American Excelsior Co.,North American Green, Enka)



2. Hydro mulch is a liquid suspension sprayed from a

pressure sprayer. A mix of paper strips or straw chips,

water, grass seeds and a binder is projected from a

sprayer over exposed soil surfaces. It is a quick and

efficient method of protecting exposed soil surfaces. It

is limited to areas where protection from rain drop

impact is needed and is not applicable for swales or

drainage ways subjected to concentrated water flow. Due

to the expense of mobilizing this equipment it is limited

to larger construction jobs. It had been used for the St.

Thomas Hospital renovation several years ago. Prices

range from $0.10 to $0.40 per square foot.



3. Other proprietary fibrous applications of woven jute

mesh, stranded fiberglass applied by air pressure,

shredded wood held together with paper net and similar

material combinations are available as commercial

products. For island applications, shipping cost and

local availability are critical factors, especially for

small construction works.



The other critical consideration in erosion control is to



prevent water run off from reaching exposed soil areas or to

prevent the accumulation of run off which can seriously damage



II-17

exposed soil areas. This is accomplished by a variety of water

diversion structures which drain water towards stable areas or

existing water ways. Detailed design criteria can be found in

the V.I. Environmental Protection Handbook, manufacturer's

literature as well as text books on the subject. Structural

erosion control methods can be described as follows:



1. Diversion berms and or ditches constructed at the top

of exposed slopes to intercept and divert water flow

towards stable receiving areas. These structures can

either be temporary for the duration of critical soil

exposure or permanent to provide long term erosion

protection. It is constructed along the contour with a

slight slope in the range of 2 to 5 percent, to prevent

erosion in the ditch. Inspection after storm event is

necessary to spot and repair weak areas.



2. Temporary filter berms are stepped down a cleared



slope to shorten the vertical runoff flow distance. They |



are-similar in function to diversion berms in that they

intercept runoff. The are constructed on the contour or

at a slight grade to channel runoff onto stable receiving

areas. Temporary filter berms have found broad

application in the islands where mechanical brush

Clearing is done. A mixture of a soil and brush is

scraped into berms parallel to contours at interval of 50

to 100 feet. The soil/brush berms retain sediment as well

as filter runoff to some extent. Such temporary

structures are reasonable effective for average storm

events. A field study performed on St. Croix on a

cleared 13.4 acre site protected with temporary filter

berms, with a land slope of 25 percent, showed erosion

production of 0.018 tons per acre. This sediment yield

was low compared to other study sites. If sensitive areas

lie down slope of such cleared zones then additional

protection will be needed. More permanent variations of

the same concept are farm terraces found in mountainous

area such as the north slopes on St. Thomas.



3. Wattling is a special manual method of stabilizing

steep slopes. Closely spaced (1 to 3 foot spacing) hand

dug furrows are constructed parallel to contours. Tied

bundles of green brush, such as Tan Tan, are placed into

the furrows and staked into the ground making a

continuous row of bundles. Earth is back filled into the

brush bundles leaving them as ridges along the contour.

The green brush cuttings will soon sprout adding to the

structural stability of the slope. This method is labor

intensive and is limited to steep slopes where machinery

cannot operated and other erosion control methods may not

work. Locally available resources are used for this

method. Such application was successfully used to



II-18



'

eae iS ttt DC ems easiest



stabilize steep slopes in the Bordeaux housing development on

St. Thomas. ( ASCE, 1980)



4. Diversion dikes are constructed across graded roads or

minor drainage ways to intercept runoff and direct it to

stable receiving areas or towards sediment control

structures. They require frequent inspection and

maintenance due to damage from vehicular traffic. They

are intended as temporary measures until disturbed areas

are stabilized or in case of roads, paved. A note of

caution, never attempt to interfere with or disturb the

steep natural water ways or guts found in the mountainous

areas of the islands. Only well engineered and

constructed structures will withstand the flash flooding.



5. Road Bed Paving. Dirt road ways, in land subdivision

and other developments, particularly in steep terrain,

are a major soil erosion sources. Usually roads are steep

and act as water interceptor structures from uphill

drainage areas thereby accumulating large runoff

quantities. Paving of road ways, stabilizing of ditches

and installation of drainage structures are important

structural erosion control measures. It is probably safe

to say that on islands of steep terrain, dirt road ways

without well designed drainage facilities are major

sediment contributes. A soil erosion investigation on St.

Thomas/St. Croix showed that steep dirt roads generate 10

times the quality of sediment compared to a housing

construction site. Sediment produced by a freshly graded

road generated 197 tons per acre, an old (not fresh

graded) dirt road produced 25 tons per acre while a

housing construction site produced 19 tons per acre.

(DCCA, 1986).



Variations of erosion control methods is only limited by

inventiveness. New products are coming on the market which

make erosion control efforts more effective and lower cost.

But as with any new product, the manufactures claims must be

tried in actual field conditions. Careful evaluation of such

products that they live up to their claims is always

warranted.



C.2. SEDIMENT CONTROL



Erosion control attempts to protect existing disturbed soil

areas from erosion. This is frequently not entirely effective

and backup sediment control structures must be employed.

Although such structures are generally thought of as applying

to larger projects, they are also effective for small

developments even house lot construction.



The basic mechanism of sediment structures is to slow down the



II-19

water flow allowing sediment to settle. Larger particles

settle more quickly than smaller ones due to their greater

mass. Very small particles like clay will stay in suspension

due to electrostatic charges for time spans much longer than

can be practically achieved with sediment structures. Sediment

control is also achieved by filtration through fabrics. A

listing of basic sediment control methods is given below, and

here again is not an exhaustive list as many variation are

possible both in choice of material and design.



1. Inlet Barriers. Gravel or straw bales are placed in

front of storm drain inlets in order to trap sediments

and prevent their passage into the drainage system.

Reinforcement of gravel barriers with hollow concrete

block will improve the stability and prevent gravel from

being washed into the drains particularly if large water

flows can be expected. Straw bales are an option and must

be staked to the ground. Embedding of the bales a few

inches into the ground will prevent piping of water and

sediment below bales. Both measure are temporary, must be

inspected after storm events and be removed when soil

areas are stabilized.



2. Rock Check Dams. Usually temporary installations

placed in road side ditches or other small ditches to

slow the velocity of water flow thereby reducing its

scouring capacity and providing some sediment retention.

Rocks range in size from 4 to 12 inches. diameter

preferable well graded with placement intervals at 50

feet or less. Maintenance checks and repairs are

necessary after storm events and due to vehicle damage as

well as cleaning out accumulated sediment. Check dams are

particularly useful as temporary erosion/sediment control

on dirt roads until paving stabilized the road bed.



3. Straw Bale Sediment Barriers. These are temporary

installations which retain sediment by retarding runoff

and filtration. They can be used in combination with

gravel filter outlets and are useful as a perimeter

enclosure for disturbed areas where erosion control is

not possible. Bales are firmly pinned to the ground, and

a shallow trench into which bales are placed will prevent

piping of runoff below bales. Use of untreated wood

stakes for fastening the bales to the ground will

eliminate the need and cost of removal, both bales and

Stakes will deteriorate and be merge into the

environment. Frequent inspection is necessary to ensure

their effectiveness. Straw bales are inexpensive and

available in agricultural regions and hence not readily

available for areas like St. Thomas. They are usually



shipped into the islands with other materials for larger

jobs.



II-20



Aue at SL aaa

4. Silt Fences. Preconstructed or job fabricated silt

fences have come into common use in this area. They are

compact when stored and do not degrade like straw bales.

Their function is similar to straw bales except removal

is necessary after use. Various fabrics are in use to

retain sediment and filter runoff. Most manufactures

provide installation instructions. Key elements are

sturdy supporting stakes and burial of the bottom edge in

the ground. The failure to provide the latter is

frequently observed and it allows escape of sediment

runoff below the fence, making the entire effort a futile

gesture. Silt fences can also act as water diversion

structures to channel runoff to specific areas. (Geofab,

Moore & Assoc, Amoco)



5. Sediment Traps. Traps are pits of various sized dug

into the ground at strategic locations to trap sediment

from runoff. With excavation equipment they are easy to

construct and several on one site can substitute for a

larger, more expensive sediment basin. Sediment must be

periodically removed to maintain efficiency of the

structure. When sixty percent of the original volume is

filled, the structure needs to be cleaned out. Although

their most effective use is on relatively gentle sloped

sites where rock is not present to impede excavation,

they also have a place on steeper sites, where smaller

well placed pits can effectively trap the coarser

gradation of sediments and prevent their discharge off

site. The VI Environmental Protection Handbook recommends

a minimum sediment storage volume of 0.5 inches over the

drainage area. If external runoff is diverted from the

site with diversion berms or ditches and runoff from a

site is limited to the disturbed area, then a 1/4 acre

construction site will need a trap of 17 cubic yard

minimum volume. This is a pit 3 feet deep, 10 feet wide

and 15 feet long.



6. Sediment Basins. These are fairly large and specially

designed structures primarily . limited to larger

construction sites. In some cases they also function as

fiood mitigation structures. Specific design criteria are

found in the V.I. Environmental Protection Handbook. Some

of the major design criteria are:



Drainage area from 20 to 200 acres



design storm frequency to 25 years _



Dam height maximum of 20 feet



Emergency spillways ,



Minimum storage capacity of 0.5 inch of drainage

area



II-21

Larger basins have a pipe spillway which drain

basin dry whereby limited flood storage is also

achieved.



C.3. RUNOFF DISPOSAL STRUCTURES . oe



Runoff must always be routed either through the site of from

the site. Temporary and’ permanent water- ways, channels and

ditches can serve this function without erosion if adequately

protected. Permanent structures are intended to outlast the

construction phase of a project or are installed to solve a

particular soil erosion problem. The protective liner of

permanent structures depend on the volume and velocity of

water expected to be carried. This protection is either by

vegetation of artificial means or a combination thereof.



1. Vegetative liners are usually limited to slope ranges

from 0.25 % to 2%. Maximum water velocities range from 3

to 7 feet per second depending on the erodability of the

soil which can be found in the Soil Survey for the Virgin

Islands. These limiting parameters make vegetative liners

suitable only for flat flood plains on the mostly steep

islands of St. Thomas and St. John and for large gentle

sloped areas of St. Croix. Detailed design tables and

procedures are found in the V.I. Environmental Protection

Handbook and other literature sources. For steep sloped

channels, liners must be of man made materials designed

to resist the scouring velocity of fast flowing

runoff.(American Excelsior Co., North American Green,

Enkamat, Greenstreak)



2. Artificial liners are produced to supplement

vegetative covering or entirely made of man made

materials. The latter include concrete, asphalt, metal,

stones, gabions (rock filled wire baskets), plastics and

Similar durable material. The cost are higher than other

coverings and their application is limited to sites where

less durable liners would fail. Frequently combinations

are possible to reduce cost. A channel with it lower

portion of concrete and upper side slopes vegetated will

cost less than paving the entire channel. Hydraulic

evaluation is needed to determine the level to which

paving must be used.



Between the soft natural vegetative liners and the hard

man made ones, there is available a variety of soil

reinforcing fabrics and coverings which will tolerate

greater water depths and velocities. These are briefly

listed below and copies of manufacture catalog cuts are

attached at the end of this paper:



II-22



el ee ee ee ee: ee mn

. : f

. Ps



Erosion control matting is produced both from

manufactured materials such as nylon fabric fibers



or similar materials or from processed natural sources

including paper, straw, jute, wood excelsior and other

biodegradable materials. Netting is commonly. used to hold the

fibers in a blanket which is rolled over the soil. Embedding

of edges and staking a intervals is necessary to hold the

matting in place. Proper installation is. critical to

satisfactory performance of the materials. According to

information presented by manufacturers, maximum water

velocities of 17 feet per second and water depths of 2.5 feet

can be sustained by the nylon matting (Enkamat). These

materials are light weight, although bulky, and are easily

applied. Some manufactures produce matting with embedded grass

seed.(American Excelsior Co., North American Green, Enkamat,

Greenstreak)



‘Geoweb'is a trade name of a cellular confinement

structure made of a plastic. Attached cells with

open top and bottom are filled with soil or gravel

to provide a erosion resistant blanket. Experience

with this product is limited but it may have

potential applications. (Presto Products Co.)



A variety of structural erosion control and sediment control

methods have been presented. Where soil must be disturbed for

construction or other activities, erosion needs to be

minimized from taking place and that which does occur be

retained with sediment control structures. The objective is to

keep erosion rates to natural levels. Accelerated soil erosion

is detrimental and costly to natural environments and man made

facilities.



I-23.

REFERENCES



1. The Urban Land Institute, ASCE, NAHB. Residential Erosion

and Sediment Control - Objectives, Principles & Design

Considerations, July 1976.



2. Virgin Islands Conservation District, VI Dept. of

Conservation and Cultural Affairs, VI Dept. of Public Works.

Environmental Protection Handbook, Third Ed. 1976.



3. Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs. Sediment

Study in St. Thomas, St. Croix Areas on the United States

Virgin Islands. June 1986.



4. U S Environmental Protection Agency. Erosion and. Sediment

Control, Surface Mining in the Eastern U.S., Planning and

Design. EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication. October

1976.



5. Virgina Soil and Water Conservation District. Comprehensive

Erosion and Sediment Control Program for Engineers, Architects

and Planners. March 1976.



Civil Engineering Magazine - ASCE. Combined Vegetative -



Structural Slope Stabilization, January 1980.



TE Ae nea ae

HOW TO PREPARE AN EFFECTIVE EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN

William F. McComb, P.E.



W. F. McComb Engineering, P.C., 129 Sub Base - Chinnery Building,

- St. Thomas, USVI . Boe.



The preparation of an effective erosion and sédimentation control

plan (ESCP) -is not only based on engineering and scientific

Principles but also.on the experience and knowledge of the

designer. There can be several approaches to and designs of a good

ESCP, all of which will be acceptable and achieve the desired

results. Thus the evaluation of any ESCP must be done with an open

mind and no pre-conceived ideas.



One thing that you must remember is that an ESCP is just part of

the Earth Change Permit Application. The ESCP deals only with the

control of erosion and sediments. It does not dictate the extent

of earthmoving, site disturbance, building location, etc.. These

aspects are within the realm of the Designer. It is hoped that the

designer will take erosion and sediment runoff into consideration,

but there is no guarantees.. In big projects it is likely that

someone other than the designer will do the ESCP and that person is

not apt to have much control on site design. For smalier projects

it is likely that the same person will do both and this should be

reflected in the impacts that the site plan will have on the ESCP.

The Govt. review of the Earth Change Permit Application is

important in that the reviewer can assess the impacts of the site

design on erosion and sediment generation and suggest to the

designer changes that will lessen this before it is approved.



All ESCP's want to:



a. Reduce erosion to a minimum and minimize the time period

for this to occur.



b. Control the direction and if possible the Elow and,

velocity of runoff.



c. Keep sediment runoff from the site to a minimum.



d. Control stormwater runoff through the site and its

effects on downstream properties.



In order to give some guidelines on how an effective ESCP can be

prepared, I will use a Subdivision that I am designing now as an

example. The parcel is 3.40 acres in size, zoned R-2 and located

in Estate Wintberg. It has been: subdivided into 11 parcels.

Figure 1.



The low point on the property is in the middle of the north

boundary. The total drainage area to this point, including the

parcel itself, is approximately 7.17 acres. Using the SCS TR-55

method to estimate the stormwater runoff in small watersheds, the

peak discharge when the site is fully developed for 50 yr. storm is

124 cfs. Figure 2. I will not review this Method as it will be

described in detail later on this afternoon. These Figures are

important in order to size any drainage structures needed.



EI-25

Lol aD Cr



nan



I



‘



So \™ -



LEMON TRE E



ROA D



peiyy.; 2



—s



—— Exist. Core



mat >



SOS,



2200 ce FTI 6 TOTS



"9



te



Fie rcotaton mel roa



Wessest@eeccuness..



hetnd }



"8



e207



-



POON



N



~ (05o? g——



he aa Ee



4S,



Sas



io %



—"§



Se;



@



(od for, x



i)



\



0374



713



soll



“og



Li]



D>



eee”



>



-



~



<



7



Lato? 4



I



o~



é 79



NON



“~,



83 ¢9,———_—



~~!



we



a ~ i —



JK20,.



=



al



> ™ j NN



ee _e



ee a



oP 15



“ee



—F,



KY,



ee



WOON,



——



——



"%



XN



Liz-e~



eee



~AL



oe



an id



atte



vy



—_



2/2



A,



-- ~ 9/9, &



B



a



o>



~.e



ee



NN



4%



2) —



4



A, %



Lop



28



———



Tye?



%,%



oe =



1B?



52.17"



ie)



een,



ee



~—



+—-..



— a



—— [ie = eo



——



et



73.00:



se



pe sy:



225



7.0.



——_



—_—s



a,



“4



20.06:



EY deed



a a



mane be J



%, 2



~



<a



SIs



Tee



_ |i



=39 &



a=



68.46"



=2396



——



49



ee



%_



.



F260



“99



~~



ty Lo>



%



we



yt



—_



~~.



ual



2230



28



we



Figure 1.



s Vg



TI~26

Re me ee ee



eee



Project



.



*



.



LXi ESTATE WINTRERG



User:



“EM



County



st.



THOMAS



State



vi



Checked:



Subtitles SUBDIVISTON DESTGN



‘Data: Drainage Area



7.17



** Acres



Runoff Curve Number



83 *



Time of Concentration



0.0?



*. Jours



Rainfall Type



Ii



Pond and



Swamp Area



NONE



=



===



=-scfSS=



we we we ew



Brrr ttet tse err ee em wee wee ee



—_——S SSeS SSS STS Sree Tr Tr



Storm Number



ee me ee



eee



Frequency



(yrs)



25



50



24-Hr Raintall



(in).



9.0



10.4



Ia/P Ratio



0.05



0.04



1



Used



0.20



0.10



1



Runoff (in)



6.94



8.29



Unit Peak Discharae



?.083



7.083



(cts/acre/in)



Pond and Swamp Factor



1.00



1.00



0.0% Ponds Used



se te a cee ee eee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee



ee we ee ee ee



ee es oe ee



=



eetinerdinediendectadte ton nae



Peak Nischarae (cts)



104



3274



jenna eenedipeaeaeedliedpeedeendeeedeetieee i a



ieee nee aaa daard



*



- Value(s) provided trom TR-55 system routines



11-27

Erosion and sedimentation control are two different items. Erosion

is the effect of stormwater runoff eating away at exposed surfaces.

Sediments are. the materials which are eroded from the soil and

carried away by stormwater. Both of which are controlled in

Similar and different ways.



EROSION CONTROL



One of the main means of controlling erosion is to divert runoff

from the exposed soil, particularly during construction. After

construction, the best way to control erosion is to have re-

vegetated the exposed soil. For the example given, I looked at the

possibility of diverting the runoff from the construction (cutting

of the subdivision's road). To do this a diversion ditch would

have to be constructed uphill of the road. Because of the slopes,

the extreme difficulty in digging this ditch and the construction

impacts, it was decided that this would not be done. What was done

was to slope the road into the high side of the site, figure 3

(Section A-A), and allow this to become a controlled runoff ditch,

both during construction and afterwards. This also kept storm

runoff from running down the Filled sides of the road which is more

susceptible to erosion than the cut side. Section B-B shows a

situation where the road is completely on fill and a berm was used

to create the ditch. Figure 4.



Another means used to controlled erosion is that all filled slopes

and cut slopes with soil (not rock) would be stabilized with a open

web geofabric and planted with ground cover. The geofabr\ic will

reduce erosion and provide time and a stable soil surface for the

vegetation to grow. See Figures 3 & 4.



The design of the road cross slope and size of the ditch is based

on good engineering design principles for roadways and on the

amount of stormwater that has to be carried. The determination of

the carrying capacity of drainage ditches, channels, pipes, etc.,

can be done using the Manning Equation:



2/3 1/2



90=A1,49 R



A S



in which:



Q = Discharge incfs



R = Hydraulic radius (cross section area of flow

divided by wetted perimeter)



S = Slope in Ft/ff£t



n = Manning roughness coef£icient



Velocity (V) = Q

A



TI-28



Ry

5, iy

| ; | .

|



rr a a ee ee ee oe ee ee ee ee ee



30.00° ROW



a 18.00° pavement ———~e



—— cor (yp.)



Xt



a— 2.00"



AP



3.00"



1775" |



197.25



other



1x



covered with



than rock le to be



5 Conc. w/



Wedella or similiar ground cover



6x6 W1.4 x 1.4



Finish



Be Wie V4



“Fil slopes to be covered



x



with open web geofabric and planted



with Wedella or similior ground



»



SECTION A — A



*



Scale: Horz,



1°= 10°



Vert,



wm 5



;



‘

30.00° ROW



6.00 — >



(yp.)



a 18.00° pavement ———



1.50°



200°



3.00"



fone



142.25



ee A



FTN slopes to be covered



“NF cone



with open web geofabric and planted



yy



Conc. w/



6x6 Wie 1.4



with Wedella or similiar ground cover



bes Wi.4 x 1.4



ee



Sa



Finleh Grade



ee,



SECTION



B-B



Secale: Horz.



1°m 10°



Vert.



rn 5



mmm mmm melee eee eee ee

EEL



dials Gein.



8.00°



Roadway



ower ees



—\__ etna rae



x6 W1.4 V4



SECTION



C-C



Seale: Horz.



"= 10°



Veh ra &



II-31

Based on this equation the carrying capacity of the ditch at

Section B-B is 12 cf£s and the capacity of the ditch and roadway is

132 cf£s which is greater than a 50 yr. storm. If the carrying

capacity was less than the 50 yr. storm, the ditch design and/or

the roadway cross slope would have to be changed. The comparison

of the capacity against the design storm peak discharge is

extremely conservative as the calculated storm discharge was for

all 7.17 acres which is only true for the low point in the site.

The actual discharge at Section B-B is less as the area is smaller

than the 7.17 acres. The capacity of the ditch at Section C -C is

124 cfs, which is okay.



The rate of the velocity of the runoff will also determine what

materials will be required for the construction of the drainage

structures. For ditches/channels with velocity less than 5.0 fps,

vegetated ditches are acceptable. For higher flows, concrete or

other durable materials are required. For Sections B-B& C-C,

the velocities are 18 fps and 21 fps respectively. For the ditch

at Section C - C velocity blocks are recommended. These can

consist of concrete blocks set halfway in the concrete, at random,

about six feet apart.



SEDIMENTATION CONTROL



Some methods of sedimentation control has already been mentioned,

i. e., use of geofabric and velocity reduction. In this example

case, a sedimentation trap will be used at low point of the site,

see figure 1. A trap of 2,200 cu. ft. will be dug (50'x 15'x 3°)

and left in place until the subdivision is completed. It will have

sideslopes of 2 horz. to 1 vert. and the downhill slopes of the

spillway with be covered with nylon matting such as Enkamat. There

will be two diversions ditches, see figure 5, directing storm water

into the sedimentation trap. Upon completion of all construction,

the diversions ditches and sed. trap will be removed. By that

time, vegetation will have re-established itself.



The diversion ditch, figure 5, combines the use of a ditch to

direct runoff to a specific area and the use of a Silt Fence,

figure 6, to control sediments in case the ditch is overtop. For

any project, the installation of silt fences is the minimum control

that should be used. In areas of large flows and/or steep slopes,

it is recommended that the silt fence be supported. In figure 6,

we used metal post and 6x6 WWF for backing of the Fabric itself.



The principles used in this example can be applied to all other

projects including residential construction. The use of diversion

ditches, silt fences, planting, sedimentation traps, etc. can

easily be done. While they have a cost, it must be budgeted for as

we can not continue to pollute our waters.



TI-32

pe ee ee ee



ENVIRDFENCE OF EQUAL



COMPACTED SOIL. WITH



OPEN WEB GEOFABRIC



WU I=IN]



fa Boey



1-0



\=



—)



\\\



lll



Mt



1-6"



it



/\ All



et a me



100



RUNOFF SEDIMENTATION DITC



SCALE) 3/8 = 1/~9"



.

ee



The Envirofence Package _—. Optional Procedures:

s designed for easy... * “The Envirlence fabric and netting can be ef

a . ete foo with a knife or scissors to accommodate

‘ield installation: need for shorter sections. The fabric and net

5 a . should be cut approximately five inches fro

suggested Installation Procedures: fast pole. The pole should be rolled to tuck ha |

: Remove the system from the protective 5" overlap and to gather two wraps of fabric/n



polyethylene bag. ; ‘+’. around the pole before inserting into the a |

: Unroll the package by sections—pole to pole. " “¢ Ametal coupler is supplied with each syste

Dig a'6” x 6" trench around the perimeter of the join the end poles of adjacent sections. The in



g , P | pole of the section to be attached should be



construction area. serted immediately adjacent to and in front

' Place the sedimentation control fabric side of the. end poles of the other section, so that they inte



fence in the direction of the anticipated sediment ‘ 7 lock. The coupler is then placed over and ar



flow (net side of the system away fromthe flow) ° ‘the two poles. 1



and position the poles against the back wall of - . POLES ©



the tench. 6XG WIRE FABRIC - .



. SUPPORT NET , ‘

, . FILTER FABRIC

6X6 WIRE FABRIC >< BACKFILL

SUPPORT NET 3

FILTER FABRIC i

POLE ~ NATIVE SOIL

PLACEMENT OF ENVIROFENCE )

INTO TOE-IN TRENCH r

Use a 5# sledge hammer or similar device to



drive the poles into the ground until the bottom



of the industrial netting is approximately 2” into REE



the trench. " ngs app y : 4 sino FRONT

Lay the bottom 6” of sedimentation control fabric - bee ne > COUPLING OF TWO ADJACENT



into the trench. (The same principle may be ; ENVIROFENCE SYSTEMS

employed siniply by laying the excess fabric on co ROFENCE |



the ground and piling fill at the base.)



Backfill the trench with native soil and compact, , .

making sure the fabric toe is in p'ace. .



Figure 6. . i



TT mAh

CaS SERRE teks



REFERENCES



i



1.



Virgin Islands Conservation District, VI Dept. of Conservation



and Cultural Affairs, VI Dept of Public Works.



Environmental



Protection Handbook, Third Edition, 1976.



2.



US Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.



TR 55 -



Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 1986.



r



|



l



R



II-35

URBAN SOURCES OF NONPOINT POLLUTION

(STORMWATER RUNOFF AND POLLUTION PREVENTION)



General



Pollutants in Stormwater Runoff and Their Effects on

Water Quality



Marcia Taylor



aceon ee ew te ee tw eer ere een etme enone tes eeves TII-1

Good Housekeeping Practices to Minimize Pollution



TIMOCAY CUNNINGHAM .isssesvrcccssccvrccrccvsccvvvevrssvvcscoes III-6

How You Can Reduce Stormwater Runoff and Pollution



Leonard RECd Lic wcc ccc erence eran cere r erasers ener sasssenaes III-11

Technical

How to Estimate Stormwater Runoff in Small Watersheds



Mario MOraleS weve ccc ccc nce teen etna ent e ean nenes III-13

Structural Practices to Control Stormwater Runoff



Warner IriZarry .iccececctceccctcetenrretcctreceressceseee III-23



* Paper not available at time of printing.

*



POLLUTANTS IN STORMWATER RUNOFF AND THEIR EFFECTS ON WATER

QUALITY



Marcia G. Taylor



University of the Virgin Islands, Eastern Caribbean Center,

Virgin Islands Marine Advisory Service, RR #2, P.O. Box

10,000, Kingshill, St. Croix, VI 00850



Stormwater runoff is the water which flows over land during

and immediately following a rainstorm. The types of

pollutants that are carried with stormwater runoff is of

course dependent on the use of the land over which the rain

travels. Rainwater flowing over agricultural land will have

different pollutants than that which flows over driveways and

roads. Naturally, the types of pollutants in stormwater

runoff vary widely. Below I describe the major types of

pollutants found in stormwater runoff, their sources, and

their effect on the marine environment. I also describe how

the pollutant is regulated in the VI, the water quality

parameters which measures it, and discuss local monitoring

data relevant to the pollutant.



1) Solids or Sediment (suspended and deposited)



This pollutant is the most significant and the most damaging

type of water pollutant in the VI. The most common source is

from soil laid bare by clearing and grading. When rainwater

falls on the soil stripped of its vegetation it picks up large

amounts dirt which is carried to the sea.



Many are surprised to learn that naturally occurring "clean

soil", or non-toxic particles are pollutants. However,

especially in tropical waters, the amount of solids suspended

in the water is an important water quality characteristic. In

contrast to northern waters, the amount. of suspended solids in

tropical waters is very low, making water clarity good. Asa

result, tropical organisms have evolved in and require, clear

water.



Sediment in surface waters is measured in several ways, most

commonly by measuring total suspended solids (TSS), turbidity,



light penetration or secchi depth. Most states and

territories have water quality standards for one or all of

these parameters. In the VI there is a water quality



standards for turbidity, measured in Nephelometric Turbidity

Units (NTUs), and secchi depth.



Solids affect marine life in many ways. Dirt and silt

particles that enter the marine environment eventually settle



to the bottom and can smother marine life. Corals are.



especially sensitive to this type of nonpoint source

pollution. Corals have the ability to clean particles off

their surface by secreting a mucous which sticks to the solids



III-1



“~t



Hd

be

and sloughs off. However, this requires the expenditure of a

considerable amount of energy which could have been used for

growth and reproduction. Corals can survive some sediment

stress, but the constant inundation from frequent exposure to

sediment-laden water is fatal.



Particulates suspended in the water can also clog fish gills

and filter systems in filter-feeding animals and reduce prey

capture for sight feeding predators.



Shading is another way sediment affects marine life. Solids

suspended in the water reduce water clarity and therefore the

amount of light available to marine plants. The discharge of

sediment is usually associated with increased nutrients,

discussed below.



The effect of introducing solids to the marine environment is

not just a short-term threat. Although solids suspended in

the water settle and the water becomes clearer, these solids

can easily remobilize when disturbed, causing additional

impact to the marine biota.



The amount of solids in coastal waters has increased

Significantly over the last decade. After heavy rains many of

the bays have a muddy color which persist for hours or even

days. Much of our nearshore coral has been hurt from the

increased solid loads which enter our waters.



2). Nutrients and Organic Materials



When organic material is introduced into surface waters they



increase the amount of nutrients, or nitrogen and phosphorus



in the water. This occurs when rain water runs over failed



septic leach systems or other areas where there are nutrients



er organic wastes such as livestock areas, and fertilized



areas. Although marine plants and animals like other living



. things need nutrients, an excess can be harmful. Tropical



marine life has evolved to live in nutrient-deficient waters

where even small increases in nutrients can be harmful.



The additional nutrients can drastically upset the water’s

chemical balance which can result in blooms of fast-growing

species such as algae. The growth of these species can impair

growth and reproduction of the naturally occurring species

such as coral, which competes with algae for space.



The addition of nutrient and organic material can also affect

marine life by decreasing the amount of oxygen available.

During the breakdown of organic matter by microorganisms,

exygen is used, making it less available to fish and other

organisms who need it. Dissolved oxygen levels can be reduced



IIT+2

i .



to levels lethal to marine life causing massive kills of fish

and other species.



Nutrients in the water can be measured by several water

quality parameters such as nitrite, nitrate, ammonia, and

phosphorus. Most states have standards for at least one of

these parameters. In the VI there is a water quality standard

for phosphorous.



Excessive nutrients are a problem in many of our bays, however

there is little water quality data which shows this. Standard

methods of measuring nutrients are not always sensitive enough

to show the increases in nutrients in our waters. More

sensitive methods should be employed when analyzing tropical

waters for nutrients.



3) Heavy Metals



Heavy metals are often introduced ‘into through stormwater

runoff. The heavy metals having the highest concentration in

urban runoff are copper, lead, and zinc, with cadmium being a

distant fourth. In industrial areas and areas where sanitary

and storm water get mixed, other metals such as chromiun,

mercury, nickel and selenium, arsenic can be commonly found.



Heavy metals are of concern because of their toxic affect on

many marine organisms, and those who eat them, including man.

They can affect the reproduction of fish, and accumulate in

their tissues.



Metals are not routinely monitored in the VI largely due to

the cost. The VI does not have numeric water quality

standards for heavy metals, unlike all other states and

territories. However, the US EPA has monitored the water and

sediment in the VI and identified several areas where levels

are high. Bays with marinas often have high levels of copper,

zinc and lead. Industrial areas also tend to have elevated

levels of many of these metals. In many cases the levels

found in these areas exceed National guidelines.



4) Hydrocarbons (oil and grease)



Hydrocarbons, such as oil and grease, are picked up when

stormwater runs over parking lots, roadways, and industrial

sites. It can also be introduced when there is illegal

dumping of waste oil. These substances are often toxic to

many organisms in low concentrations, and other organisms

assimilate it into their tissues, tainting it for human

consumption. Floating oil decreases the amount of light to

benthic organisms and cuts down the amount of oxygen transfer

across the air-water interface.



III-3



Et eee



fone wey

PY

3 .



poe



oo

Oil and grease are measured in a laboratory in milligrams per

liter (mg/l). Although the VI does not have a numeric water

quality standard for hydrocarbons, at many of the industrial

facilities their discharge permit requires that their

stormwater cannot exceed 15 mg/l.



Although hydrocarbons entering the sea through stormwater have

not been shown to caused significant destruction of our marine

resources, in several areas it is a problem. Oil sheens are

commonly evident around industrial areas after heavy rains.

Some are obvious by the rainbow colored sheen, although some

hydrocarbons do no leave a sheen.



5) Pathogens (Coliform bacteria and virus)



Pathogens can be introduced into the surface waters when

stormwater runs across failing septic systems or land with

animal wastes. Or there can be leakage from sewer lines which

can be washed to sea.



To detect the presence of bacterial contamination we test for

the indicator organism fecal coliform. To determine if the

source of the contamination is from human or animal waste, we

test for both fecal streptococcus and fecal coliforn. To

protect public health, the VI has a water quality standard for

fecal coliform.



Increased levels of pathogens can pose a health risk and close

or restrict use of shellfish beds. We have seen an increase

in bacterial contamination as more and more land is being

developed. It is not uncommon for coastal waters to exceei

bacterial levels for swimming after heavy rains. This occur.

commonly in many bay around the Territory.



6) Toxic Organics



Toxic organics such as pesticides and polychlorinated

biphenyls (PCBs) can be extremely damaging to marine

organisms. In addition, they can accumulate in tissues and

cause it to be unfit for human consumption.



The VI does not have numeric water quality standards for these

substances, nor do they routinely monitor for them. Federal

monitoring studies have not identified these pollutants as

causing significant degradation in the VI.



In general the effect of pollutants on the marine environment

depends on many things such as their toxicity, the

concentration, and where they are discharged. -Because of our

tropical environment, local plants and animals tend to be more

sensitive to some types of pollutants than plants and animals

in colder areas.



TII-4

Planning is necessary in order to protect water quality from

the pollutants in stormwater runoff. _The waterbody’s

watershed must be carefully studied, identifying drainage

ways, flow patterns, and geologic features such as permeable

soils, and bedrock. The sources of pollutants and the

resources affected by runoff must be identified. Once this is

done, Best Management Practices (BMPs) which are appropriate

for the conditions and concerns should be identified and

installed. Monitoring of stormwater and ambient water quality

should be implemented to check the effectiveness of the

methods.



III-5



rm

‘

4



or



Pecunt ey

Bebe fat



“



Epa



eae



Fateneenper



Sarat



ne



a

GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES TO MININIZE POLLUTION

Timothy J. Cunningham



Office of the Governor; Virgin Islands Energy Office

St. Croix, -U.S. ‘Virgin Islands 00820



We cannot wait for an emergency to act on our management of

what we consider to be "waste." Waste is defined by Webster’s

dictionary as "to fail to take proper advantage of:



There are many inexpensive and proven methods by which we can

manage our “resources" in a responsible and advantageous

manner. The methods by which we discard our resources are

placing our land, our sea, our tourism and our health in

jeopardy. By irresponsibly discarding that which can be

reused or recycled, we are increasing the size of our dumps,

contributing methane (greenhouse gas) to our atmosphere, and

contaminating our groundwater.



In the Virgin Islands, we have the opportunity to use proven

methods from around the world to recover our resources and

prevent pollution. Basically, we need to re-think how we

define sustainability. We can promote jobs and awareness of

our wasteful habits hand-in-hand.



The Virgin Islands Energy Office Resource Recovery Program

provides technical support to the private sector and

government agencies on reusability, recyclability, and

financial opportunities. Working closely with local agencies,

federal agencies, the private sector, and non-profit groups

information is obtained and disseminated throughout tr

territory.



I am going to provide you with current "waste management

problems and their solutions being addressed by the Virgin

Islands Energy Office in conjunction with other agencies. In

addition to the government solutions, you will be provided

with techniques that can be applied at home and work to

minimize pollution.



One such government project involves Energy Office financial

and technical assistance to the Department of Public Works

Environmental Services Division in establishing composting

demonstration sites at nurseries and providing a limited

number of homeowners with composters throughout the territory.



In addition, VIEO has identified FEMA matching funds that will

assist DPW in acquiring equipment for a large scale composting

facility proposed for the Anguilla Dump. These projects will

demonstrate the feasibility of recycling food, yard, wood, and

paper wastes as a means of conserving water, fertilizer, and



III-6

valuable landfill space. An estimated 23,000 tons of paper

waste; 15,000 tons of food waste; 5,000 tons of yard waste;

3,000 tons of wood waste; and 2,200 tons of miscellaneous

organics is generated on St. Thomas annually. An estimated

2,000 tons of paper waste; 350 tons of food waste; 114 tons of

yard waste; 80 tons of wood waste; and 26 tons of

miscellaneous organics is generated on St. John annually.



At home and work the problem can be addressed by composting

our food, paper, yard, and wood wastes. In April, the Energy

Office hosted a series of composting workshops in both

districts. The workshops defined the methods, benefits, and

importance of composting as an integrated waste. management

strategy. Workshop packets are available free of charge. The

widespread use of composting as a means of minimizing

pollution can be facilitated by enacting a ban on yard and

wood wasté disposal at the dumps, and by amending the VI Clean

Air Act to ban the practice of openly ‘burning wastes as

permitted by the VI Fire Service. ;

The Used Oil Interagency and Ad Hoc Committee has been meeting

monthly since February to establish a permanent Territorial

used oil management plan. The improper storage and disposal

of used oil poses a threat to our soil, groundwater and sea.

By dumping oil on the ground we reduce soil productivity and

threaten groundwater. One gallon of oil can contaminate one

million gallons of water. The Energy Office will be

establishing two demonstration sites on each island for a

total of six sites that will demonstrate the reusability of

used oil as a fuel extender. A portable machine will be

placed at each site that will filter used crankcase oil and

blend it at a ratio of 5 percent with diesel fuel to be burned

within the engine. In addition to using used oil as a fuel

extender, it can be used as boiler fuel for power generation

and as an additive in asphalt paving.



At home and work we can address the problem of crankcase oil

by changing our oil in a responsible manner. Avoid spilling



oil or mixing it with any other liquids or dirt. Pour oil



into a clean, sealable container, preferably metal. Do not

allow anything else besides crankcase oil to be mixed with the

oil. Store in a cool place away from direct sunshine and

heat. If oil is accidentally spilled, do not wash off ground

with water, it will only compound the problem. Soak-up the

oil with either kitty litter or another material on the

market. To obtain information on how you can participate in

the Used 0il Program contact Department of Planning and

Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection, Laura

Hassell.



Aluminum cans are the most widely recycled item throughout the

territory. An estimated 1,000 tons and 50 tons of aluminum



III-7



—



peoreens

cans are generated annually on St. Thomas and St. John

respectively.



The Anti-Litter and Beautification Commission should be

commended on their work in promoting aluminum can recycling

and for their perseverance during difficult financial times.

At home and work, a separate bin can be placed for the storage

of aluminum cans for redemption. By recycling one aluminum

can, you eliminate 90 percent of the energy it would take to

manufacture a can from virgin materials.



The incredible amount of energy expended on aluminun

manufacturing, and the waste generated during manufacturing,

is typified by visiting the Virgin Islands. Alumina

Corporation. Fortunately, there are many things that can be

done with bauxite tailings (red mud). Since May, VIEO has

been working closely with Terra Technology to expose them to

the US Bureau of Mines, US Small Business Administration

Pollution Control Loan Program, the Industrial Development

Commission, and the National Institute of Standards and

Technology. Terra Technology is a company that has been

researching the potential of manufacturing ceramics, floor

tiles, roofing tiles, and cement bricks from VIALCO’s waste

strean. Terra Technology was pleased to discover, through

VIEO, that bauxite tailings have been used for many years in

ceramics, as a concrete pigment, PVC strengthening agent, road

bed surface, as filtration for septic systems, construction of

wastewater ponds, and in the construction of low income

housing as is being done in Jamaica.



The photocopier toner cartridge is receiving increasing

attention as a recyclable item because of its need for

periodic replacement. The photocopier toner cartridge

recharging market has greatly expanded throughout the United

States and Puerto Rico. Most people consider the cartridges

as disposable and discard then. Toner cartridges can be

recharged at locations on all three islands. Recharging the

cartridge costs half as much as a new cartridge and eliminates

the bulky plastic cartridges from ending up in the dump.



Our dependence on batteries poses another type of problem. An

estimated 76 tons and 4 tons of batteries are generated on St.

Thomas and St. John respectively. If not recycled, batteries

can be a source of potential groundwater pollution.

Disposable batteries can be replaced with solar powered items

that do not require a replaceable battery. If you must

purchase batteries, rechargeable Nickel Cadmium and a new

generation of environmentally benign batteries are readily

available. They have a much longer life than disposable

batteries and save the user money in the long run. K-Mart

Department Stores are accepting used 6 Volt and 12 Volt

batteries to be shipped off-island for recycling.



III-8

Purchasing water in refillable three or five gallon bottles,

or better yet purchasing a water filter will alleviate plastic

waste disposal. It will save you money and eliminate the one

gallon jugs from going to the dump. If you choose to purchase

water in a one gallon jug, refill it at a water dispensing

machine, or reuse the jug for used oil storage.



This leads me to the concept of waste reduction through

selective purchasing. If consumers are educated on the

benefits of purchasing products manufactured from recycled

materials versus virgin materials, consumers prefer to

purchase products made from recycled materials. Assume a

basic supply and demand principle: the more we demand, the

more..products will be available. This will allow competition

to drive the prices down to be competitive with products made

from virgin materials. Re-refined motor oil, recycled paper



products, factory reconditioned items, and retreaded



automobile tires are just a few examples of products that both

the Department of Property and Procurement and the private

sector can be supplying to stimulate the recycled products

market.



In keeping with the presentation title, I will mention

techniques to minimize water-borne pollution. Faucet

aerators, flow restrictors, low-flow shower heads, low-flush

or composting toilets, grey water systems, and on-site sewage

treatment are just a few examples. A publication for those

interested in minimizing pollution is entitled, “Nontoxic,

Natural, and Earthwise" by Debra Lynn Dadd. It contains the

most comprehensive listing of healthful products available and

uses a rating system that indicates both safety and

environmental impact. It evaluates air and water filters,

biodegradable cleaners, pest controls, gardening supplies, and

more. Another publication entitled "Clean and Green" by Annie

Berthold Bond is an encyclopedic source of solutions to 485

household problems.



The Virgin Islands is fortunate enough to have two financing

mechanisms that encourage the private sector to establish

waste management/recycling businesses. The U.S. Small

Business Administration Pollution Control Loan Program

provides financial assistance to small businesses for the

planning, design or installation of a pollution control

facility. Another opportunity to lure private companies into

the Territory is under section 936 of the United States

Internal Revenue Code. U.S. corporations receive federal tax

exemption on their profits generated in the Territory for

operating sewage, solid waste and water treatment facilities.



It is an important first step in addressing our nonpoint



source pollution problems by attending and establishing

contacts at a conference such as this. I would like to



III-9



toe

ties



ries



,



ee



aaa lia



Ks



i



el elesesare



chao taes



Renee Netegste



Delete



er



inte



:



rd



pte lene co ayelegeta



abate



express my sincere thanks to Joan Harrigan-Farrelly and Janice



Hodge for inviting me to be a presenter at this conference.



On behalf of Claudette Young-Hinds, Director of the Virgin



Islands Energy Office, I extend an invitation to everyone to



attend the Florida Solar Energy Center workshops on Oct.:. 22,



23, 28 and 29, and the First Caribbean Energy Conference and



Trade Exposition to be held at Sugar Bay Plantation from



25 - 28.



. Oct.



“Yrr-io”

HOW YOU CAN REDUCE STORMWATER RUNOFF AND POLLUTION

Leonard Reed



Division of Environmental Protection, Department of Planning and Natural

Resources, St. Thomas, United States Virgin Islands 00802



INTRODUCTION :

Stormwater runoff occurs as a result of rain events. The runoff of stormwater

causes soil erosion and water pollution. Soil erosion and water pollution quite



often’ go hand in hand. Water pollution is manageable through’ design and

conservation practices.



SOURCES OF RUNOFF AND POLLUTION



The sources of runoff and pollution are varied and numerous. They include the

following:



o Construction and Development Activities

- land clearing

erosion and gullying due to improper changes in drainage patterns

increase in runoff due to additional impermeable surfaces

changes in peak runoff volumes

widespread encraochment into gut areas

filling and development of of flood plains and wetlands

denuding hillsides for "weed control" and cleanliness



e bt bo eve



o Agricultual Activities

- nutrient loading from fertilizer use

- pesticide runoff



o Roads, Parking Lots and other impermeable surfaces

- changes in peak runoff volumes

- oil, transmission fluids, radiator coolant, brake fluids and other products

from vehicles dripping on to the ground



o Wastewater Treatment

- storm waters that are being routed into sewer systems.

- storm water intrusion into sewer systems

- Girect discharges of treated wastes from treatment plants into water courses



o Solid Wastes/Dumps

-lack of liners and deposition of dump material below water table



CONTROL OF RUNOFF AND POLLUTION , ‘



The control of stormwater runoff and the resulting pollution is well within man's

reach. The pollution from stormwater runoff occurs because it requires thinking and

money. The following is a list of some of the things that we can ‘do to control

stormwater and the pollution it may cause:



o Construction and Development Activities

- The practice of clearing a whole site should be discouraged, only those

portions of land that are needed for development should be allowed to be

cleared.



- Clearing should not be permitted during the rainy season. The rainy season

increases the probability of soil erosion and pollution of the waters of the

Virgin Islands.



- Currently Earth Change field inspections are performed only prior to land

clearance. A second Earth Change inspection is needed after land clearance

and prior to any construction activities.



A third inspection should be performed at the completion of construction



with a final inspection one year after occupancy to determine compliance

with the Earth Change Plan and the Earth Change Permit.



ItI-11



Pteaenee



Fea pitt



Fimo



cee’ |

‘



we snare

, |



prvmone



acne

6



Reet



ok |

- Those areas that are disturbed during land clearing should be immediately

mulched and seeded. .



- The proper use of silt fencing, diversions such as swales, retention and

detention basins should be mandatory in order to preserve the resources of

the Virgin Islands.



- Those established or natural drainage patterns should be maintained where

at all possible in order not to cause additional soil loss and pollution.



- When and where practicable, the maintenance of the maximum flow of

stormwater off site prior to land clearing and development should be

maintained during the life of the development.



© Roads, Parking Lots and other impermeable surfaces :

_* Permeable pavers, green areas for absorbtion, level spreaders should be used

to minimize the volume of water that will flow off site during and after a

storm. Retention and Detention structures should be the standard for large

impermeable sites such as parking lots.



- Regulating restrictive encroachments into our guts appears to be urgently

needed as less natural areas are available to detain stormwater runoff.



- O11 Water Separators should be used prior to the discharge of stormwater

from impermeable surfaces such as parking lots that can accomodate 59 or

more vehicles.



- The need to limit development of flocd plains and wetlands is equally

important. Flood plains and wetlands naturally lend themselves to retention

and detention of stormwater.



o Agricultural Activities

- The use of fertilizers that will be absorbed readily by the leaves of the

plants or applied below the surface of the soil should be encouraged. We

May limit the use of fertilizers by rotating our crops.



- We may also limit the use of pesticide by crop rotation, the use of pest

resistant plants and other natural controls such as predatory insects and

repellent plants.



o Wastewater Treatment

- We need to modernize our sewer systems. Our sewer systems allow stormwater

to intrude thereby causing water pollution as they over-flow. The

intentional routing of stormwater into the sewer systems should be

discouraged. The construction of the Mangrove Logoon treatment plant shoild

be accelerated. This single plant will eliminate 5 sewage treatment plants.



© Solid Wastes/Dumps

- The hardest stormwater related problem to solve is that of the solid wastes

facilities in our islands. The damage has been done and therefore use of

liners and stopping the practice of placing dump material below water table

is not practical for existing facilities. All future permit for solid waste

sites will require liners and design to control stormwater.



In conclusion, stormwater and the its resulting pollution are controlable. We must



therefore dedicate ourselves to improve our environment by all means of pollution

prevention.



ITI-12

HOW TO ESTIMATE STORMWATER RUNOFF IN SMALL WATERSHEDS



MARIO A. MORALES



United States Department of Agriculture

Soil Conservation Service

Resource Conservation & Development

United States Virgin Islands Field Office

St. Croix, USVI 00851



Precipitation is the potential source of stormwater runoff in all

watersheds. But precipitation alone does not determine the amount of

stormwater .runoff that may occur. Other factors important to estimating

stormwater runoff include: peak discharge, size of the watershed, soils,

hydrologic conditions and topography. Each plays a very important part

in stormwater runoff and if‘we are to estimate the amount of stormwater

runoff that may occur, all factors must be considered. Most of the

information that I will be presenting today is available in Chapter Two

of the USDA Soil Conservation Service Engineering Field Manual.



First, we probably need to understand why we need to know how to

estimate the amount of stormwater runoff. Estimating stormwater runoff

is required information before any type of soil and water conservation

practice or stormwater runoff control measure is implemented. The need

to determine the adequate size a structure is required, before a

detention pond, a diversion, a drop structure or any other stormwater

runoff controlling structure is designed and constructed. Stormwater

runoff estimates provide us with a starting point for structural design.



Let us look at the, above mentioned, factors individually. Peak

discharge is the peak rate of runoff from a particular drainage area for

a given rainfall. Peak discharge is usually caused by intense rainfall.

This information is available in a synthesized form (Figures 1 & 2).

Rather then having to use different rainfall intensities for each

drainage area, 24-hour storm charts have been developed. There are

four different types of 24-hour storm distributions. The 24-hour storm

charts were developed by the Soil Conservation Service from U.S.

National Weather Service data for typical storms. The developed storm

charts are associated to climatic regions. This information includes

short-duration intensities with those of longer duration. In the Virgin

Islands, our storms are classified as Type II storms. The Type II storm

is the most intense short duration rainfall classification.



The size of the watershed is important because it provides us with a

potential idea of the amount of runoff. The larger the watershed, the

larger the potential for greater amounts of stormwater runoff and higher

peak discharges. Determining the size of a watershed can be

accomplished by actual measurement. But, normally it is measured off of

a map, after the watershed has been plotted. The easiest method to

determine the area is by planimeter. What a planimeter does is measure

the square inches of the plotted watershed. That figure is then

multiplied by the coefficient for that scale of map. Other methods may

be used, but measurement by planimeter is the most common.



III=13



RCE omy



Pin



Prom te]

4



oo a



pases

Soils are also important in estimating stormwater runoff (Figure 3).

Soil texture and inclusions are relevant to the permeability and

infiltration rates, as well as surface intake rates. Soils have been

Classified into four Hydrologic Soil Groups (A, B, C and D). Group A

consists of soils with high infiltration rates, even when wet. Please

notice that there are no soils in the Virgin Islands that are in Group

A. (Figure 4) Group B consists of soils that have moderate infiltration

vates when wet. Group C consists of soils with low infiltration rates

when wet. Group D consists of soils with very slow infiltration rates

when wet. .



Hydrologic conditions on most sites affect the volume of runoff more

then any other single factor. Hydrologic conditions are a combination

of vegetative cover and conservation practice influences (Figure 5).

Any soil disturbance can significantly affect infiltration rates.

Urbanization (Figure 6) effects runoff rates because impervious surfaces

increase runoff rates, very little to no infiltration occurs.



Curve Numbers have been developed by examining rainfall runoff.

This Curve Number index is of runoff potential depending on specific

conditions.



Vegetative cover is important in estimating runoff. Vegetation and

“litter” maintain soil infiltration potential by limiting the impact of

raindrops on the soil surface. Vegetation also slows the rate at which

runoff travels across the land and allows additional time of

concentration. Vegetation also reduces peak discharge.



Established conservation practices are also important in estimating

runoff and peak discharge. Mechanical practices such as contour farming

and terracing and/or management practices such as crop rotations and no

or reduced tillage allow for additional soil infiltration potential. By

Slowing the rate at which runoff travels and increasing the time of

concentration stormwater runoff maybe reduced. Cultivated land,

although easier to be dislodged, also increases the soil infiltration

potential. :



Topography affects stormwater runoff and peak discharge. The slopes

of a watershed have a major impact on runoff velocity and time of

concentration, thus affecting soil infiltration rates. Additionally, we

all know that in most cases the steeper the slopes, the shallower the

soil profile, which affects soil water holding capacity.



Stormwater runoff is expressed in inches. Or rather in average

depth of water that would cover the entire watershed. The volume of

runoff is computed by converting the depth over the entire watershed to

volume and is usually expressed in acre-feet. When the Curve Number and

rainfall have been determined for the watershed, runoff can then be

determined by using Figure 8.



As we have seen, many factors affect stormwater runoff. By taking

these factors into account and using the technical knowledge that is

available, we can estimate stormwater runoff in small watersheds. By

using this information and applying it at the design stage of a

development, we could minimize the effects of stormwater runoff. Proper

planning, design, and construction is much more cost effective when done

correctly the first time. The costs of correcting a poor plan, design

and/or construction can be enormous. Estimating stormwater runoff is

essential to proper planning, design, and construction.



TII=14

ae



oes



lana’



bats



Cal alr ps



a or oA



I iviatenet,



ee



References:



USDA Soil Conservation Service - Technical



Bulletin 55, Urban Hydrology for Small



Watersheds.



June 1986.



USDA Soil Conservation Service - Agriculture



tr



Handbook Number S590, Ponds-Planning, Design,



Construction.



June 1982.



.



y



USDA Soil Conservation Service - Engineering



Field Manual Chapter 2: Estimating runoff and



peak discharges.



Revised.



[



L



{



a oe



donee



Le



III-15

eed



Threat



en



wtere



pai



waists



+ oatere’



a



ANN aw



ae



-



¢



—.



vr.



“=~



A4PriLiAwPrLHEY



iS



SPs fess LAM



aT com Bla



mah



dea aw?



|



.



’



— an om



4



ye



wee



Uhm o:



ae



{* *



&-



bs mee



oo



wry



me



Cand



Precipitation values for the U.S. Virgin Islands - 2-year 24-hour rainfall (inches)



—



—



La



SF cron %t4ano



bee



Som



-



=



ome



aaah, 8d, 2.9



a a ww,



aT



t .



Caeteeean



Ss € A



‘



(



1...



we



w—



—



Figure 1



28



-_N



a



wren



ac



et



'



%



'



x



4°Té aw ride



Oc Ef 4



“ye



«



Qos



FeOMa$ i$ aHe



{



as



—},



~



*.



Sf some = $L4ng



My maw DS.



Hs ae |



ad



Shen samme



,



Oe ee



2



a ame



0



. ibs xf



woh 4



‘



‘ed T=



'



'



a



2.



one ee eo



ee



Li



—"



Poecpicacion wahans for che U.S. Virgin Telanda = 10-year 24-hour rainfall (inches)



——



—_



sr



CaOIr Lane



been



—



0 8 erence”



—



mone



ane on on



‘om ae



— a



4A



®eeasade



S € a



rd



pin ied



owes *



III~16



oy

on



cca



is arcim



vay oearad



=!



weetrt



Salsa ain



teen.



aos



—



~w,



—



—w



—w



F



RS argcauwri¢e ocean



Fuawa$ LAO



re



ST. det SLANO



ae



jet ee”



bomen oe



4



+



frda



= eet



ty



¢



—t



é ar



i fe



&.



i.



ey



i



Precipitation values for the U.S. Virgin Islands - 25-year 24-hour rainfall (inches)



—~



wn



“Ww



e



on



ft



i)



cron



sane



.



ace



awe meee



ta



a ee oe



s$é&aA



am |



Ccanteaetane



i.



one



oat



—



a



-—



?



Figure



=



re



—



sr



=e



ae



S



&



artawrite



o¢ & 44



e



.



Q sr feamaS CANO



aq



Monn EL AND



aS



a ee



33



henimem ce,



4,



——_



as



-



i - wy *}



|



Sa



ws



L.



Precipitacton values for the U.S. Virgin Islenis - S0-yeer U-howr rainfall (inches)



—



-«



wna



—



av



io



il



att Ser tase



.



a



# we



tes



pn



=



oauwen



-



tanee, aa...



¢a4atre#é#e€EA tt



$£& a



—



L



—



Z



‘we



—



ome



III-17



afl

HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUPS



PUERTO RICO - VIRGIN ISLANDS



Revised March 1972 Figure 3

A “3B. Cc D

Aguadilla Aceitunas Adjuntas Aguirre

Arenales Aguilita Aibonito Ba jura

Catafio Alonso Anones Caguabo

Cuyon. Anelia Cabo Rojo Camaguey

Espinal Bayamon Callabo Cartagena

Jaucas Bejucos Candelero Ciales

Heros Caribe Cayagua Cintrona

Reilly ' Catalina ‘Cidral Coloso

Rio Lajas * Colinas Coam> Constancia

Comerio . Céorcega Cramer

Consumo Corozal Cuchillas

Cornhill Cotito Descalabredo

Cortada - Coto Diamond

Delicias Daguzo Fe.

Dique’ Daguey Fortuna

Ensenada Dorothea Fraternidad

Guamani . Fajardo Gudnica

Guandbano Fredensborg Guayabota

Guayabo Giynn Guayama

Humacao Guana jiba Gurabo

dJacaguas Guerrers Hesselbers

Jagueyes Ingenio Igualidad

Juana Diaz . Isaac Jacana

Iavallee Jovos Juncos

Limani Juncal Mabi

Limones Junquitos — Machuelo

Lirios Lares Maguayo .

Magens Lianes Malaya’

Maleza Los Guineos Maunats

Maraguez Machete Moca

Maresua Many Montegrande

Maricao Mariana Micara

Matanzas Morado Pandura

Mayo Naranjito Farcelas

' Nipe Naranjo Paso Seco

Parasol Palmarejo _Perchas

Patillas Picacho Pitiones

Pellejas Quebrada Ponceiia

Plata Rosario Reparada

Pozo Blanco Santa Clara Rio Arriba

Rio Piedras Santa Marta Sabana

San Antén Humatas

III~18

Hydrolagic sail groups



Sails have been classified into four hydrologic soil groups



as shown in table 2-1. The four groups are defined by

SCS soil scientists as follows:



Group A soils have low runoff potential and high infiltra-

tion rates even when thoroughly wetted. They consist

chiefly of sands and gravels that are deeo, well drained

to excessively drained, and have a high rate of water

transmission (greater than 0.30 in/hr). |



Group B soils have moderate infiltration rates when



thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of soils that are

modefately deep to deep, moderately well drained to

wail drained, and have moderately fine to moderately



coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of

water transmission (0.15 to 0.30 in/shr).



Group C soiis have law infiltration rates when thorough-

ly wetted and consist chiefly of soiis having a layer that

impedes downward movement af water and soils of

moderately fine to fine texture. These soils have a slow

rate of water transmission (0.05 to 0.15 in/hr).



Group O soiis have high runoff potential. They have

very low infiltration rates when thoraughly wetted and

consist chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling poten-

tial, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with

a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shai-

low soils over nearly impervious material. These soils



have a very low rate of water transmission (0 to 0.05

infhr).



Figure 4



I1I-19

seen et



Runoff curve numbers for other agricultural lands‘



.. Cover description



Curve numbers for



hydrologie soil group—

Hydrologic

Cover type condition A B c

Pasture, grassland, or range—continuous Poor 68 73 36

forage far grazing.? Fair 49 69 ve]

Good 39 61 74

Meadow—continuaus grass, protected from - 30 ss 71

grazing and generally mowed for hay.



Brush—brush-weed-grass mixture with brush Poor 48 67 77

the major element.? Fair KO] 56 7

Good 430 42 63

Woods—grass combination (orchard Poor Yi 3 a

or tree farm)$ Fuir 8 65 76

Good S2 5S 72

Woods.* Poor 45 66 Te

Fair 36 60 73

Goad 430 55 70

Farmsteads—buildings, Janes, driveways. _ 59 74 g°



and surrounding lots.



‘Average runoff condition, and I, «# 02S.



Pour: <50% ground cover or heavily grazed with no mulch.

Faw: 50 ta 75% groumd cuver aid not heavily grazed.



fou <S0% ground aver.

Fauz 3 to TSS ground cover.

Graal? > T3% ground cover.



>%3% ground cover and lightly ur unly uccasiunally graced.



Actual curve number ia lex than 30; une CN = 30 fur runoff computaciuns.



CN's shown were cumputed for areax with SUZ woods and 507 grasa (pastures cover. Other cumbdinatuns of coundiuuns may de oun:



cum the CN's for wouds and pasture.



Coer Furest litter, amall wes. and bruxh are dertruverl by heavy grazing or reguiar burning.

“ure | Wiens are grazed but now burned, and some (ores litter covers the suil.



aed: Wouds are protected frum grazing. and litter and brush adeauately cover the sui.



III~20

Figure 6

Curve numbers for

Cover description hydrologic soil group—

Average percent

Caver type and hydrotagic condition impervious area? A a Cc 2)

Fully developed urban areas (vegetation established)

Open space (lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, etc.P: -

Poor condition (grass cover < S0%)..2.....-...... de eeeeee 68 73 86 a9

Fair condition (grass cover 50% to 75%) ......... eaeeteeeee 49 63 73 B4

Good condition (grass cover > 75%)... 22.060. cece eee eens a9 61 74 80

impervious areas: :

Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. (exciuding right-ot- .

way). .... tases senseeens sanaee beac cence ne es esas esees 98 98 ‘98 98

Strests and roads:

Paved; curts and storm sewers (excluding right-of-way) ...... $8 98 98 98

Paved: open ditches (including right-of-way) .............--. a3 89 92 93

Dirt Gneluding right-of-way)... 2.2... cece cece ese eeeneeetes 72 82 a7 ag

Western desert urban areas:

Natural desert landscaping (pervious areas only)“ ........-... 63 V7 8s ° 88

Artificial desert landscaping (pervious weed barrier, desert

shud with 1- to 2-inch sand or gravel mulch and basin bord-

OOS)... cee eee vac e cece c wwe emcee cern eset aeeteecs 96 96 96 96

Urban districts:

Commercial and business ............. ween eeeee eee eee 6s 69 92 94 95

Inagustriaf . 0. ccc twee ence ees ee re 72 81. 88 91 93

Residential districts by average tot size:

1/8 acre of fess (town houses)... ee eee eens 65 7 as 390 92

14 acre .. 0... ae ee etc c ew aneee ee ee re 38 61 75 83 87

V3 acre 2... eae eee cece craw nceee eee cea w wen ec nee 30 57 72 81 86

V2 ACT® Leen ena e teen eee e atest eneneeees 26 S4 70 80 as

TV ACTS coc ccc ese r ncn cccnncesccnawencanncsneeensennsaccsces 20 §1 68 73 84

2 ACES © eee eee bec e ween cewncere eee e wae e econ eres 12 46 65 7 82

Develcoing urban areas

Newly graded areas (pervious areas anty, no vegetation)® ........... 77 86 91 Q4

Idie lands (CN's are determined using cover types similar to those



in tapie 2-2a}.



‘Average runoff concitian.



7 The average percent impermous area shown wea used 16 de-

velop the composite CN's. Other assurnptions are as follows: im-

parvous arses are directty connected to the drainage sysiam,



I1lI-21



ran

be



ferntaty



fang nt



Paras ~ oe be 4



poses



pe CSTE



eo



~~



ree? setae



pe eS

Figure 7



| | y

P a "A

L

; Curves on this sheet are for ‘ y, ra ,

the case |, = 0.25, so that ‘4 .

gu tP-028) g

“Pees a

J) y,

wer 4. M A g

6 ny oP Y "7 a

© f “4m FP. y. )

ote CJ Y y,

3 § 4

5 1 ao

£ x a

at

: 4 - Z A ya

; A ya an A

Cs) —

Hd y.

wy a - yd & Fd

P di “a = we ry,

it

3 Ae Pa sf

va

, enna

~ wa

a -. -

0 .

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12



Rainfall (P), inches

STRUCTURAL PRACTICES TO CONTROL STORMWATER RUNOFF



Warner A. Irizarry, PE



United State Department of Agriculture

Soil Conservation Service

Caribbean Area

P.O. Box 364868

San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936-4868



III-23



Anseem



cena

4



nn



Peay



merc



arse Ga



ae es

Boot 4



po



Lae ae]



saree



Los



Fone oes



Loe



hey Nena RP ae te

ee bean eee he



Pitt. eo rey

Roof Runoff Management (No)



Definition



A facility for collecting, controlling, and disposing of

runoff water from roofs.



Scope



This standard establishes the minimally acceptable

requirements for design, construction, and operation

of roof management facilities. Such facilities include

but are not limited to erosiod-+esistant channels or

subsurface drains with rock-filled trenches along

building foundations below eaves, roof gutters,

downspouts, and appurtenances.



Purpose



To prevent roof runoff water from flowing across con-

centrated waste areas, barnyards, roads and afleys,

and to reduce pollution and erosion, improve water

quality, prevent flooding, improve drainage, and pro-

tect the environment.



Conditions where practice applies



This practice applies where: (1) a roof runoff manage-

ment facility is included in an overall plan for a waste

management system; (2) roof runoff water may come

in contact with wastes or cause soil erosion; and (3)

barnyard flood protection or improved drainage is

needed.



Design criteria

Capacity. Design of roof runoff management facili-



ties shall be based on the runoff from a 10-year fre-

quency, 5-minute rainfall except that a 25-year fre-



III-24 .



Roof Runoff Management 558-1



quency, S-minute rainfall shall be used to design



‘such facilities for exclusion of roof runoff from waste -



treatment tagoons, waste storage ponds, or similar

practices. Rainfall from figures 1 and 2 or reliable

tocal records may be used for design.



Materials. Roof gutters and downspouts may be

made of aluminum, galvanized steel, wood, or

plastic. Aluminum gutters and downspouts shall

have a nominal thickness of at least 0.07 and 0.05 cm,

(0.027 and 0.020 in), respectively. Galvanized steel

gutters and downspouts shali be at feast 28 gage.

Wood shall be clear and free of knots. A water-

repellent preservative shall be applied to the flow

area of wood other than redwood, cedar, or cypress.

Plastics shali contain ultraviolet stabilizers.

Dissimilar metals shat! not be in contact with each

other.



Supports.Gutter supports shall have sufficient

strength to withstand anticipated water, snow, and ice

toads. They shail have a maximum spacing of 120 cm

{48 in) for galvanized steel and 81 cm (@2 in)

foratuminum or plastic. Wood gutters zshali be

mounted on fascia boards using furring blocks that

are a maximum of 61 cm (24 in) apart. Downspouts

shall be securely fastened at the top and bottom with

intermediate supports that are a maximum of 3m



(10 ft) apart.



- Outlets. The water from roof runoff management



facilities may empty into surface drains or under-

ground outlets, or onto the ground surface. When

downspouts empty onto the ground surface, there

shall be an elbow to direct water away from the build-

ing and splash blocks or other protection shail be

provided to prevent erosion.



Protection. Roof runoff management facilities and

outlets shali be protected from damage by livestock

and equipment. Where appropriate, snow and ice

Quards may be installed on roofs to protect gutters

and reduce the hazard to humans and animals below.

Gutters may be installed below the projection of the

roof line to further reduce gutter damage from snow

and ice.



Plans and specifications

Pians and specifications for installing roof runoff

management facilities shall be in keeping with this



standard and shall describe the requirements for ap-

plying the practice to achieve its intended purpose.



SCS, June 1984

. 4 AT: ' Fa . rns : . Bee

~ asin Berta aig bessite Beer Bernd becteinoe Bowes bee oe Became wash Sey og sed Talay ate



(26/P ‘HAWMV-0T2)



Lemeeinee o Lene ned sense enced ene) brane OE



puod a8e10}s 91S8eM 0}

JauuByd 378I19U0D



adid yiodsue1y,



J@NO punolZ1apuy



qjnodsumoqg



TII=25



ayy



Aemaaye M



| ee

qnodsumop pure Jayng Jooy = [-OT aans1y

oa



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FIGURE 10B~3b SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE



10-YEAR 6-MINUTE RAINFALL (INCHES)

aw srr ay ax aw . a a as

ari |} |



ATLANTIC OCEAN

PUERTO RICO



Sambal weak:



18 16°

ki

Te



N

‘))

}

lv



‘ at

SENET here [PY ta 1a



3

eis tor aa “ax is “an eas :

& 0 or a7 45% ga . sis SWH aso ew Swa

. os] MOKAGUAD js ry 2 cages] sla 2 : Ss vous ave |*

at

Fs n » Yn ~ ‘

g 67 {8 = 70" 2 I,

474° d~—

N eur arass 2600 Sis 0 2 u os

6 to 20 x OME 3 8

t r i . — = asa asx 613°

in 65 os" 6s oy css “as “as “uw ian

we -

2 : ! q :

re y ATLANTIC OCEAN

Sr. Ys. | ST. THOMAS ISLAND ST. JOHN ISLAND

es, “J ™s

- 3 coal ° 6" O _—, Aah og wt? ear, =~

.! . : oe “ ee

o . = oo a . aq 4 e

2 : : cs bees

. +

} 2

bo 6S 05: ‘3 60" “ss #4 50) “44S “ew 2

gw 5s “as 64 64 40 “435 “we

: ba

ST. CROIX ISLAND

eee

ae MN a" a ”

? seme 7 9” i een

3 ; _ "f. : x SY-TS %

Ly oN! -

p—-——~~_____ | i~ + 6"

t —

~ A

NO ae ee RY

el ot en CARIBBEAN SEA a

+ ~ } ~

2 oss “50 rr e440" 435° 305

SOURCE:

DATA PROVIDED By SCS FIELD PEASONKEL. o 5 10 a5 20 wits

WAP PREPARED USING AUTOMATE) MAP L £ 1

CONSTRUCTION. NATIONAL CARTOGRAPHIC

CENTER, FORT WORTH, TOAS 199;. APRA 1991 1095767



III-26

a .

soe *,



Diversion (Ft)



Detinition



A channel constructed across the slope with a sup-

porting ridge on the lower side.



Scope



This standard applies to the installation of all diver-

sions except floodwater diversions (400) and diver-

sion dams (348).



Purpose



To divert excess water from one area for use or safa

disposa! in other areas.



Conditions where practice appiles

This practice applies to sites where:



1. Runoff damages cropland, pastureland, farm-

steads, feedicts, or conservation practices such as

terraces or stripcropping. .



2. Surface flow and shallow subsurface flow caused

by seepage are damaging sloping upland.



3. Runoff is in excess and available for use on near-

by sites.



4. A diversion is required as part of a pollution

abatement system.



5. A diversion ts required to control erosion and

runoff on urban or developing areas and construction

or mining sites.



Design criteria



Capacity. Diversions as temporary measures, with a

life span of fess than 2 years, shall carry as a



III-27



Diversion 362-1



minimum the 2-year, 24-hour-duration storm. Diver-

sions that protect agricultural land and those that are

part of a pollution abatement system must have the

capacity to carry the peak runoff from a 10-year-

frequency, 24-hour-duration storm as a minimum. —

Diversions designed to protect areas auch as ur-

ban areas, bulidings, and roads, shall have enough

capacity to.carry the peak runoff expected from a

storm frequency consistent with the hazard Invoived

but not fess than a 25-year-frequency, 24-hour-

duration storm with a freeboard not fess than 0.3 ft.



Cross section. The channel may be parabolic, V-

shaped, or trapezoidal. The diversion shall be

designed to have stable side slopes. The ridge

height shall include an adequate settlement factor.

The ridge shall have a minimum top width of 4 ft at

the design elevation. The minimum cross section

shall meet the specified dimensions. The top of the

constructed ridge shail not be lower at any point

than the design elevation plus the specified overfill

for settlement.



Grade and velocity. Channel grades may be

uniform or variable. Channel velocity shall not ex-

ceed that considered nonerosive for the soil and

planned vegetation or lining.



Location. The location of the diversion shail be

determined by outlet conditions, topography, land

use, cultural operations, and soil type. A diversion in

a cultivated field must be aligned to permit use of

modern farming equipment.



Protection against sedimentation. Diversions

should not be used below high-sediment-producing

areas unless land treatment practices or structural

measures, designed to prevent damaging accumula-

tions of sediment in the channels, are installed with

or before the diversions. {f movement of sediment in-

to the channel is a significant problem, a vegetated

fitter strip shall be used where soil or climate does

not preciude its use. Then, the design shall include

extra capacity for sediment and be supported by

supplemental structures, cuttural or tillage practices,

or special maintenance measures.



Outlets. Each diversion must have a safe and stable

outlet with adequate capacity. The outlet may be a

grassed waterway, a vegetated or paved area, 4

grade stabilization structure, an underground outlet,

a stable watercourse, or a combination of these

practices. The outlet must convey runoff to a point

where outflow will not cause damage. Vegetative

outlets shail be installed before diversion construc-

tion to insure establishment of vegetative cover in



SCS, October 1985 .

eee



——-



DIVERSION



SSSR



* 4



TSS



SS



See



e



ft



/



ase



==>



Neve ene



ange"



SSS



ee



0 amet



eerete CE weEE



owe



raat gee



Noe



aT on eS a



cane See Y-



board.



XY



ace 10g mens wo



<=>



a



g



k



SP ere rte se



eeenirere: yee 8: samen



A



q Tp



* e



e?



width



TRAPEZOIDAL CROSS-SECTION



SS



te



SSS



aN



IRAQHY



Se



SS



SS



SOS.



r



ry



Qe



SSS



x



MS



Se



sat



=



S



BSS



=



Dy D/



SSS



j



T/2. |



wid



NS



ay



PARABOLIC CROSS-SECTION



Ki



,



mH Hmmm mE HEHE Hm HE HE HE EE

USDA-Soil Conservation Service:



DIVERSION DIKE

Definition



A temporary ridge of compacted soil immediately above cut or fill slopes

and constructed with sufficient grade to provide drainage.



Purpose



The purpose of a diversion dike is to intercept storm runoff from small

upland areas and divert it from exposed slopes to an acceptable outlet.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



The diversion dike is-used for the period of construction at the top of

newly constructed slopes to prevent excessive erosion until permanent

drainage featvres are installed and/or slopes are stabilized.



- DIVERSION DIKE”



2!



ig" min.



“t—— Stone stabilization,

‘ min. ° if required



zl slope or flatter



Cut or fill slope——



Existing ground



CROSS_SECTION



Positive drainage. (Grade

sufficient to drain)



iu AA AA A_A A_A



Cut or fill slope



III-29



#



Cart|



Yrewes mtn

“4

2 a

tak



USDA-Soil Conservation Service.



INTERCEPTOR DIKE



A temporary ridge of compacted soil, located across disturbed areas or

rights-of-way.



Pu se

The purpose of an interceptor dike is to shorten the length of exposed

slopes, thereby reducing the potential for erosion, by intercepting storm

runoff and diverting it to a stabilized outlet or sediment trapping device.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



interceptor dikes are constructed across disturbed rights-of-way such as for

pipe lines and streets or disturbed areas such as graded parking lots or land-

fills. The dikes shall remain in place until the disturbed areas are

permanently stabilized.



INTERCEPTOR DIKE*

(not to scale)



cal |



18" min. at————— Flow

fam ones ome —% eS or

— 1 Graded Right-of-Way



2:1 slopes or flatter



CROSS SECTION



__ __ YA 2" min.

Right —~——-———— Flow

of ~ -£

— Flow

Upslope Toe

Property Line or hk, Outlet onto stabilized area or into

Limits if Right-o f-Way Sediment trapping device, as required.

PLAN VIEW



III-30



.

J

.)

. ee

_ USDA~Soil Conservation Service. to

‘STANDARD AND SPECIFICATIONS -

i FOR obs

PERIMETER DIKE -

i bss

| Definition ge

A temporary ridge of compacted. soil located along the perimeter of the site

.or disturbed areas. ~

i Purpose

The purpose of a perimeter dike ‘is to prevent offsite storm runoff from i

entering the disturbed area and to prevent sediment laden storm runoff from

leaving the construction site or disturbed area.

i Conditions Where Practice Applies . FE

+

The perimeter dike is used for the period of construction at the perimeter of {

| the disturbed area to transport’ sediment laden water to a sediment trapping L

device such as a sediment trap or sediment basin. This dike shall remain in ,

place until the disturbed area is permanently stabilized. The storm runoff .

i prevented from entering the disturbed area by the perimeter dike shall be [

adequately handled to prevent damage due to flooding or erosion to, adjacent e

property. ne

i L

*

PERIMETER DIKE r

i (not to scale) | i :

i rn

| 2:1 slope or flatter

CROSS SECTION ;

i Positive drainage. (Sufficient Z

grade to drain.) r

i Upslope toen. ~—_—— —— Lb

_A.. AA AA AA. A}

| PLAN VIEW iz

aceadaialabalasiac lis



INTERCEPTOR SWALE



Definition



A temporary excavated drainageway located across disturbed areas or rights-

of-way.



Purpose



The purpose of an interceptor swale is to shorten the length of exposed

slopes, thereby reducing the potential for erosion, by intercepting storm

runoff and diverting it to a stabilized outlet or sediment trapping device.



a



Conditions Where Practice Applies



Interceptor swales are constructed across disturbed rights-of-way such as

for pipe lines and streets or disturbed” areas such as graded parking lots or



land fills. The swale shall remain in place until the disturbed areas are

permanently stabilized.



INTERCEPTOR SWALE



(not to scale)

2:1 or flatter



Graded Right-



1° min. of-Way

Level

7'min. |

1

CROSS-SECTION 7

—_—— — f™ 7! min.

Right Flow

-~—oFf. - - - -—— e—

Way 1% to 3%

PLAN VIEW Outlet onto stabilized area

III~-32

PERIMETER SWALE



A temporary excavated drainageway located along the perimeter of the site or

‘disturbed areas.



ose



The purpose of a perimeter swale is to prevent offsite storm runoff from

entering the disturbed area and to prevent sediment laden storm runoff: from

leaving the construction site or disturbed area.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



The perimeter swale is used for the period of construction at the perimeter



of the disturbed area to transport sediment laden water to a sediment trapping



device such as a sediment trap or sedimént basin. This swale shall remain in

place until the disturbed area is permanently stabilized. The perimeter

swale also is used to prevent storm runoff -from entering the disturbed area.



This runoff shall be adequately handled to prevent damage due to flooding

or erosion to adjacent property.



PERIMETER SWALE*



(not to scale)

2:1 or flatter



ee ONY ~N.

Existin round

NG 1" min. g g.



| 7* min. 7

' level -

Flow - CROSS-SECTION Flow

1% or steeper, dependent on topography @

aaa ne

; a x x x x ue ; a. ye ©

Outlet as required. |" PLAN VIEW



See item 6, below.



Construction Specifications



ee



ILI-33



shore any



a

a



t



FR,



Berane st

i



oy

i



poo oo

‘ >



rete AD



ee ene



penn oem



heey or anne



pecs

Grassed Waterway (Acre)



Definition



A natural or constructed channel that is shaped or

graded to required dimensions and established in

Suitable vegetation for the stable conveyance of

runoff.



Scope



é

This standard applies to natural or constructed chan-

nels that are to be established to vegetation and

used for water disposal. Grassed waterways with

stone centers are also included.



Purpose



To convey runoff from terraces, diversions, or other

water concentrations without causing erosion or

flooding and to improve water quality.



Conditions where practice appiles



All sites where added capacity, vegetative protection,

or both are required to control erosion resulting from

concentrated runoff and where such control can be

achieved by using this practice alone or combined

with other conservation practices. This practice is not

applicable where its construction would destroy im-

portant woody wildlife cover and the present water-

course is not seriously eroding.



Planning considerations

The most critical time in successfully installing



grassed waterways is when vegetation is being

established. Special protection such as mutch an-



Grassed Waterway 412-1



choring, straw or hay bale dikes, or other diversion

methods are warranted at this critical period. Sup-

plemental irrigation may also be warranted. Tha -



vegetation should be well established before large

flows are permitted in the channel.



Design criteria - ao



Capacity. The minimum capacity shall-be that re-

quired to convey the peak runoff expected from a

storm of 10-year frequency, 24-hour duration. When

slope is less than 1 percent, out-of-bank flow may be

permitted if such flow will not cause excessive ero-

sion. The minimum in such cases shall be the

capacity required to remove the water before crops

are damaged. :



Velocity. Design velocities shall not exceed those

obtained by using the procedures, “‘n'’ vaiues, and

recommendations in the Engineering Field Manual or

SCS-TP-61, Handbook of Channel Design for Soil

and Water Conservation.



Width. The bottom width of trapezoidal waterways

shall not exceed 100 ft unless multiple or divided

waterways or other means are provided to contro!

meandering of tow flows.



Side slopes. Side slopes shall not be steeper than a

ratio of two horizontal to one vertical. They should

be designed to accommodate the land user's

equipment.



Depth. The minimum depth of a waterway that

receives water from terraces, diversions, or other

tributary channels shall be that required to keep the

design water surface elevation at, or below, the

design water surface elevation in the terrace, diver-

sion, or other tributary channel at their junction when

both are flowing at design depth. “



Drainage. Subsurface drains (606), underground

outlets (620), stone center waterways, or other

Suitable measures shall be provided for in the design

for sites having protonged flows, a high water table,

or seepage problems. Water-tolerant vegetation such

8S reed Canarygrass may be an alternative on some

wet sites.



Outlets. All grassed waterways shall have a stable

outlet with adequate Capacity to prevent ponding or

flooding damages. The outlet can be another

vegetated channel, an earth ditch, a gtade stabiliza-

tion structure, or other suitable outlets.



SCS, October 1985



ILTI-34

GRASSED WATERWAY



Ie Se



poe



_ ene



Vivan_y



ee



~TSSSSS



“Sr



Sail



—_ awe



SS



ao he omy ee 6 CIT IE



ee



T™ “to 7



SS



nny le Pe ae ee te



oem



aan ob errr liatng,



RS eee, Se ele en eee.



os & ee ead



CS hates



ils



im:



| Z



=



b



TRAPEZOIDAL CROSS-SECTION



age (oe



SS



SS



SS



ao



~~



oe



o*



meen: om dh, ‘



=



— 52s menses sean vam



ne



EZ



SS a



3



SF



Zz



eee



=



rey



Salon Toy



Zo,



oe



Lo SES



“ay



=



=e



b/d "1773



PARABOLIC CROSS-SECTION



eo



mide



Pom ey



ee oes



nee,



ey



Cee]



co



pomenens



nate



as



~~



am:



resend



REAR



thames



EG



i



|

ee. ce eee nt sine tem cans ie



USDA~Soil Conservation Service

STANDARD AND SPECIFICATIONS

FOR.



LEVEL SPREADER



‘Definition



An outlet constructed at zero percent grade across the slope whereby concen-

trated runoff may be discharged at non-erosive velocities onto undisturbed

areas stabilized by existing vegetation.



Purpose



The purpose of the level spreader is to convert a concentrated flow of sedi-

ment-free runoff (e.g. diversion outlets) into sheet flow and to outlet it

onto areas stabilized by existing vegetation without causing erosion.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



The level spreader is used only in those situations where the spreader can be

‘constructed on undisturbed soil, where the area directly below the level lip

is stabilized by existing vegetation, where the drainage area above the

spreader is stabilized by existing vegetation, and where the water will not

be reconcentrated immediately below the point of discharge.



LEVEL SPREADER

Last 20' of (not to scale) =~ *

diversion not to ;

exceed 1% grade



mag! ;

- - Cott

wo = d

oe thee Tevel Sprea fer

Diversion a - 7 A ~-- -

-  « Eb fh- i. , i ’ ~_ Stabilized slope

oo » Ea. ad a

. oe NEN ze -°

” vel 74 we et _ .

ot tip * ig F . Lo on 7

_—_ fe ‘ iy ; - Chanrel grade 0%

— ee —_ _-

Dee gels, Oh _-7 -

‘ wh: ‘4 . . . _

gist - oer -_

~ aon - “7 - \ ~- 7”

Undisturbed outlet ™ oat war 7

. - . —— - _

rad

- - a —_ wn -



Both strips of protective

material over erosion stop

ts - 4" min.

6" min. |- 4



First strip of



protective materi a |



TI 7 Second strip| _—

—_ | For staple requirements see

Standard & Specifications

for Protective Materials

Level lip

of spreader



—_—



loerglass matting erosion stop

CROSS-SECTION

STONE OUTLET STRUCTURE



ae:

i:

Definition c-

rl f

A temporary crushed stone dike installed in conjunction with and as a part L

of a diversion dike, interceptor dike, or perimeter dike. .

i

;

Purpose h:

The purpose of the stone outlet structure is to provide a protected outlet

for a diversion dike, interceptor dike, or perimeter dike, to provide for i!

diffusion of concentrated flow, and to allow the area behind the dike to

dewater. [

Conditions Where Practice Applies :

\ vn '

Stone outlet structures apply to any point of discharge where there is need - f.

to dispose of runoff at a protected outlet or to diffuse concentrated flow =;

for the duration of the period of construction. When the entire drainage

area to the structure is not stabilized, a sediment trap must be provided in L

conjunction with the stone outlet structure (See Standard and Specifications be

for Sediment Trap).

STONE OUTLET STRUCTURE“

(not to scale) re



ate



7

Level crest | 7

6" min.| i.

H = 16" min. .

12” min. . j

| | @ = L



ee Nm em mre rrr rer eer d line



Stone embedded: 4 min. {" PROFILE round li



III-37

GRADE STABILIZATION STRUCTURE



(PAVED CHUTE OR FLUME)



Definition



A temporary channel lined with bituminous concrete, portland cement concrete,

or comparable non~erodible material placed to extend from the top of a slope

to the bottom of a slope. -



.



Purpose



The purpose of the paved chute or flume is to convey surface runoff safely

down slopes without causing erosion.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



A paved chute or flume is to be used where concentrated flow of surface runoff

must be conveyed down a slope in order to prevent erosion. The maximum allow-

able drainage area shall be 36 acres.



~L—+__ Top of earth dike & PAVED CHUTE.OR ‘|. Dinen- |__>/Ze Croup

‘s top of lining FLUME Sion A B

isl jvm Fue

i ‘ Hmin| §.5' | 2,0

= ep Slope varies, not d.. 8" 10"

a W2F steeper than 1.5:1 L a” Ss! 6'

mn



& not flatter than

20:1



WISTS

j | sn" S 2

S



Undisturbed soil or

compacted fill



PROFILE



Place 3" layer of sand:

for drainage urder outlet as shown

for full width of structure



. Riprap is 9” layer of



_ 6" min. rock or rubble



Top of dike

=a no oo oo oo



t | sans 478 | 7

£4 YY Y V —_ ; rasa a

r t t 1 Min stope } ' mo

iin i* per tt } t|Sepods b 3

mH =. Z K a — I



x pet frond,



. ;



a a Nee of slope



PLAN VIEW ° 1 b |



{ }.



“SWE hae QQ

“min

SECTION 8-8-



ITI-38

mmm mmm mmm EA Em HH HE HF FE HE HE EF Ee



GRADE STABILIZATION STRUCTURE



(PIPE SLOPE DRAIN)



Definition



A flexible tubing and/or rigid pipe with prefabricated entrance section ten<

porarily placed to extend from the top of a slope to the bottom of a slope.



Purpose



The purpose of the pipe slope drain is to convey surface runoff safely down



slopes without causing erosion.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



Pipe slope drains are. to be used where concentrated flow of surface runoff

must be conveyed down a slope in order to prevent erosion. The maximum



allowable drainage area shall be 5S acres.



4



PIPE SLOPE DRAIN (RIGIO)*



(not to scale)



Discharge into a



stabilized watercourse,

Sediment trapping device,

or onto stabilized area.



Cutaway used

to show inlet



Earth Dike



Length as necessary to go



Diameter (D)



PROFILE

L repair _ Riprap shall consist of 6"



€ less than 1% slope Depth of apron shall equal the



be a minimum of 12” in thick-

ness.



NOTE: Size designation is: PSD-Pipe Diam.



(ex., PSD-l12=Pipe Slope Drain with 12“ diameter pipe) RIPRAP_APRON PLAN



aun



diameter stone placed as shown.



pipe diameter and riprao shall:



TTT 349



be ey



heer



1



cy



eon



rey

a



L



haan



oe ate

t

.



Fam sry

:



4



ames PR tent



eee



Byoen ae



Gr ai aay



pres

R.

(PIPE SLOPE DRAIN)



Definition



A flexible tubing and/or rigid pipe with prefabricated entrance section ten-

porarily placed to extend



from the top of a slope to the bottom of a slope.



Purpose



The purpose of the pipe slope drain is to convey surface runoff safely down

slopes without causing erosion. . ,



Conditions Where Practice Applies



Pipe slope drains are to be used where concentrated flow of surface runoff

must be conveyed down a slope in order to prevent erosion.



The maximum

allowable drainage area shall be 5 acres.



1



.



é PIPE SLOPE ORAIN {FLEXIBLE)*

(not to acale)



Discharge into a

stabilized watercourse,

sediment trapping device,

or onto a stabilized area.



NOTE: Size designation is:

PsD-Pipe Diam. (ex., PSD-18=<

Pipe Slope Drain with 18"

diameter pipe)



0?

aoe o



. 33 ‘ate, tteg ©



oe MT EES SS



Septe ="



eS SEE cr hha

+ .



Standard flared



[ Entrance Section



22 1/2° pipe > .



. AGU Hep+12" 6p

Watertight

connecting 6" min.

band 1 cutoff wall



Slope 3% or steeper

Flexible 4 —_

pipe Riprap snall consist of 6

PROFILE diameter stone placed as

q’ min shown. Depth of apron shal}

aed equal the pipe diameter and

@ less than 1% slope ;



riprap shall be a minimum

of 12” in thickness.



Construction Specifications RIPRAP APRON PLAN



TIT-40



ee ee ee ee

SEDIMENT TRAP



Definition



A small temporary basin formed by excavation and/or an embankment to inter-



cept sediment laden runoff and to trap and retain the sediment.



PURPOSE



The purpose of a sediment trap is to intercept sediment laden runoff and



trap the sediment in order to protect drainageways, properties, and rights-



of-way below the sediment trap from sedimentation.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



A sediment trap is usually installed in a drainageway, at a storm drain

inlet, or at other points of discharge from a disturbed area.



EARTH OUTLET SEDIMENT TRAP*



SECTION AWA



EXCAVATED EARTH OUTLET SEDIMENT

: TRAP



excavate, if necessary, for storage

LAE Ne om Mw



— or ones ,



width (ft.) ="



6 x Drainage Area (Ac.)

COTLET SECTION



EMBANKMENT EARTH OUTLET SEDIMENT

TRAP



IIT-41



eS . vey :



Rrra



Pear §



re



..



‘an



een

USDA-SCS~



PIPE OUTLET SEDIMENT TRAP*



ae 8 UTES



ai



Excavate, if necessary



oe ob



a



ae



oo



for storage



oe



=



t+



We ee



ee



"e'



a



ve ic



as



«eho



nae SD



Pape tty.



Gar



wer



SS



“ee



Le eal



HS



“Ke,



or



were



ae EY



“aN



ot



das



Flow



*03%5



bee tr"



ae



yes



ao Be,



3%



>,



eee



ee



+.



+



8.8 t%



*e



te



wy Eo dh



mere)



te



wet



oe



F,



= vt a’



a at



eo



fio



tee



ok



Ry



Barish EMG



“



Se



Fae



2 re,



+o” »



Va,



o



t ad.



rae



An’:



eR ares



eas



WI



me



hey



owe



“as



*



es



we



w



ot



rd



oy



a ore



ee



ow



i



es



nt



oN



+



fer



iF



o



tet <



ss



‘oo



it



i"



ss



a



2b



of aed



me



Fe



Eyer ot



ae,



te



ray



fa %



= 4



cle



Poa



rr)



a



Satter



t.



og Oe



ed



3°°



w~



4t)



re



me



he 2



he



Earth Eabankment



es



7 ot Fe



eS



>



* Me,



ee.



43,



ay



oy



7



*



“3



ae



shee



eee



a6



ot



a



a a ad



RRs =



oe



Outiet Protection



ae



oe



sent



ees



+



3p,



Mot’



4a



All slopes 2:1



or flatter



ao TN



iF



SamG" min.



S‘ max.



Perforated



Ser



pra



Welded all around



EMBANKMENT SECTION THRU RISER



STONE OUT LET SEDIMENT TRAP*



Excavate, if necessa



“™



TY. for



Storage



“



~™



. Flow «g”



"ww



Earth Embankment. .-



“}



. Flow



MA



ww



ads



—



-



~*



dfs,



Bre



ath



ie



.



.



ff



2



fs



Spee



BPs



i.



ve



“a™.



fs *



wea oe



Re



Bg



we °



~e



= «4



._ *



ae



eo 3



ee



4



i



we



7 @



if



PA ALS



~~



»



ot ese!



>



xvas



~



“Sf



*g%5



qh eg



Me



240,



a



is



rks



oe



A+



a)



we



ae



5



Ww



Es



Tee be



o “-



ee



Cutaway to, show straw



Re 5



O%.



reed



ra



bale core



-



at



o's



ae



Feagia



a



Pe?



Cee Eds



eles



“eS



on



er



la Sees:



-



“<



*



Eifiee t?



Stone _*



fe



fie Me



esse



ae



Crys



“



02,



ere,



Aa”



”



Toa



my



See



tae



.



oper



tte



| Length (ft.) =



+t



id



fA =



te



et



“3.



as



ae



or)



6 x Drainage Area (Ac.)



wad pr



“4°



“at



wg!



or



ate anh,



ies



soe



me.



es



+



te



crea



at)



1 ne



Ted



“aL



~ 4,



s



wes,



33



2.3.



ae



*



‘fe



-?



ry



“an



stg



rey



se



4.



| hho dl edad th



fant Sate



ke;



Me.



oe



Pore



Extend core into



att



il ciao s ay



ATA



ead 2



earth embankment

ee ee ee



“+



ae ee



pe



~



4



users



STORM INLET SEDIMENT TRAP™



Block inlet with plywood



«



and sandbags, a5 necessary,



to prevent water fron entering.



Flow



ate



nd



ON,



“fe



ee"



ORAS



ad,



=



ve)



a



8



Plow



wt



4



:



-



‘ua



iN



"an



a.



AS



Sal ed



ome.



ae



”



“ Flow



als!



{Ate



Nt.



«



eet 8 SS



= #



oe



¢ hee



oa



re



vs,



4



‘en



ooh



vn! be



Le,



mw eye.



»*



aN



2°



pan, #



ee



LY



es



wl



+



we



a 8,



Carita Gre, i oan



#



¥ id



«.



NS



yy)



ia. BAS hd



we



a a



eto



Cave’



-*



cory



Lay



on



\\



oe



eh



ae



SS



oe”



a want



LY



AN



. —N



Age



SS



SS



had



“le



SS



SS



» itn £8,



-_



<



LAAN “



+.



ANS



es



“a



woe



ve



--



oe



aed



ga",



ae



‘*e



>



‘S



~~



EAS Ls



SST



SS



Lo ay



eo



~.



A



yn,



eet:



24,



gf



i ed



2



on



Se



QE



to Sw



we



ye



~~



of at



-



wee



Se



a 8



Bay



ee ¢



4



Oe” Moga:



4°



e jae



aie



aA



oN



un



wad



o



Flow



i'w,



oe



+5



ye



ot ™



NS



Se



Kad



Flow



Noe



4¢



off.



~~



-



ed



~~, ™ ~ ™



Pod



easy



0”



$f SESS EN



=~ >



«he



Ses,



wet #4,



oats



fs



2 ae 04



re



Remove bricks or



o*



fe



blocks for outlet



vg



a.



%e



Trap may be placed behind or



woe



at end of inlet.



2:1] or flatter



2:1 or flatter



iad



re remuired 7



Jtecth Mn



tar bay |



ae



a



fa



eae {ip a



ha



=:



1" min



i‘



nd



\



7S



A A ELIIOR



aS



ded



SECTION AA



CROSS-SECTION



CURB DRAIN



YARD DRAIN



NOTE: Where curb is in place, provide



al ft. wide opening in the curb



we



or use a sandbag dam to force



water over the curb to the trap-



me



TII-43



[

SEDIMENT BASIN

Definition



A temporary barrier or dam constructed across a waterway or at other suitable

locations to intercept sediment-laden runoff and to trap and retain the sedi-

ment. '



Purpose



The purpose of a Sediment Basin is to intercept sediment-laden runoff and

reduce the amount of sediment leaving the disturbed area in order to protect

drainage ways, properties, and rights-of-way below the sediment basin from

sedimentation.



‘.



Conditions Where Practice Applies



A sediment basin applies where physical site conditions or land ownership

xestrictions preclude the installation of erosion control measures to adequa-

tely control runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. It may be used below con-

struction operations which expose critical areas to soil erosion. It remains

in effect until the disturbed area is protected against erosion by permanent

stabilization.



PIPE SPILLWAY DESIGN



Anti-vortex Device (see page A-19.17 for detail)



ater surface (design) ; yEmergency Spillway Crest

h Riser . oe

_. Anti-seep collars Free Outlet



} Pipe conduit or barre]



D



p ~~



L

ITI-44



eee eee eee eee ee ee

ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS (OSDS)



General

Operation and Maintenance of Standard Septic Systems

o> ae | ae | a IV-1



Alternatives to Standard Septic Systems

Tom Linnio ......606. seme eee eee sete eeeeones Cece eee cere en sees IvV-5



Technical

Standard Septic System Siting and Design For the

Virgin Islands

Barry W. Kimball .iucc cece ccc c ce csccucccecseees cece cence eee IV-11



Alternative Septic System Design



Douglas White 2. fc ec tee etree ees eee e ee ne ence eee tn eanas *



* Paper not available at time of printing.

SEPTIC SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Julie A. Wright



Cooperative Extension Service, University of the Virgin Islands,

St. Thomas, VI 00802



Introduction



A large portion of the habitable land in the Virgin Islands is zoned for residential use.

Many of the buildings on this land are not connected to a public sewage treatment

system; instead they have individual septic systems. Standard (State-side type) septic

systems currently in use in the Virgin Islands have problems properly treating wastewater

due to both environmental and demographic constraints. This is because our soils are

either too thin (there is not enough soil overlying the bedrock or alluvial aquifers that can

filter pollutants) or too impermeable (the soils do not allow wastewater to filter through

rapidly enough, causing waste to seep to the soil surface). Similarly, development

density contributes to septic system failure by siting systems too close to one another, so

close that there is not enough soil per septic system to properly treat the wastewater.



Public Health officials on St. Thomas and

St. Croix have reported that over 400 |.

septic systems fail per year on each



OOOO EOE 2 O0O5 2 DESEO EEOC EE SHOR EHEDASEEEEASRAHECOONOS



. “ae : e §‘ to property line

island. Failing septic systems can 10° from property



. ; + foundation—~» aia

contaminate both ground and _ surface House] C777

waters with harmful bacteria and viruses =a Septic | b aensnssees

as well as nitrate (a nutrient). In areas ~ yank | 1

where septic systems are located in ci«—100' to private» ienossses



well



fractured bedrock, bacteria and viruses

can be transported very rapidly and

contaminate wells, cisterns, and coastal :

waters. These organisms can cause Figure 1. Example of septic system layout.

human health problems--illnesses such as



gastrointestinal infections, typhoid fever, and infectious hepatitis have been linked to

sewage contamination of drinking waters. Therefore it is very important to make sure

cisterns and well casings are properly sealed and separated from the septic system area.

Figure 1 presents an example layout of a septic system. ;



50‘ to stream



iia



Other chemicals commonly used by homeowners such as pesticides, paints, varnishes,

thinners, and caustic cleaners can also contaminate waters if they seep out of septic

systems. Chemical contamination is especially dangerous since some chemicals. even

in small amounts, are almost impossible to remove from groundwater.



Failing septic systems can also reduce the value of your property and be expensive to

repair. Be aware of the following warning signs that signal septic system failure:



Iv-1

Sewage surfacing over the drainfield (especially after storms);

Sewage back-ups in your home;



Lush, green growth over your seepage pit or drain field;

Slow-draining toilets or drains; and/or



Sewage odors.



eo ees 86



There are some signs that can tell you if contaminants are reaching surface or ground

waters. Look for the following symptoms of sewage contamination:



Excessive weed or algae growth in the water along shorelines;

An increase in infections (like staph infections) or illnesses associated with

swimming in the area; ,



¢ An increase in infections (such as gastroenteritis) or illnesses associated with

drinking contaminated water; or



e Unpleasant odors, soggy soil in the area of the septic system, or liquid waste flow

over the land surface.



What You Can Do



There are many things that homeowners can do to prevent septic system failure and to

ensure that their septic systems work as well as they possibly can. In order to properly

care for your septic system, you first need to know where it is located. Unfortunately,

manholes and/or inspection ports are often buried in the yard somewhere. To locate your

tank, find where, and in what direction, the sewer pipe goes out through the wall in your

home and check for manholes just under the surface of the yard in that direction.



Septic system operation and maintenance practices fall under three general categories:

septic (or holding) tank monitoring and maintenance; absorption field (seepage pit or

drain field) monitoring and maintenance; and system input.



Septic Tanks

Septic systems should be inspected at least once every three years to determine if your



septic tank needs to be pumped. (Figure 2 shows a typical septic tank.) While your tank

is being inspected, ask the contractor to examine the inlet and outlet baffles (or tees).



If either is broken, have repairs done immediately. The inlet should also be checked to .



see if wastewater is continuously flowing into the tank from.previously undetected

plumbing leaks.



Your septic tank should be designed to have enough space for solids to accumulate for

at least three years. However, how often you need to pump your septic tank depends on:



The size or capacity of the tank;



Wastewater flow (which depends on the amount of water used); and



The volume of solids in the wastewater (for example, a garbage disposal can increase

the amount of solids in wastewater by up to 50%).



IV-2

The contractor hired to inspect your

septic tank should use the large

manhole when pumping the tank. If ;

the inspection port is used to pump inspec orts

septage the baffles in the septic tank 1

could be damaged. The use of

biological or chemical septic additives

will not eliminate the need for

pumping your septic tank. Some

chemical additives can actually harm

your septic system by killing the

bacteria that break down (digest) the

solids in the septic tank.



Outlet



It is very important to ensure that Figure 2. Cross section of a septic (or holding) tank.

there are no cracks or leaks in your



septic tank. Septic tank water-tightness is critical to efficient reduction of solids. Leaky

tanks allow water to seep in, causing less efficient solids reduction and, therefore, the

need for more frequent pumping. Leaking septic tanks also have less storage volume for

surface scum (oils, grease and other materials that float on top of the wastewater in the

septic tank) and sludge (solids that settle to the bottom of the septic tank). This disrupts

the normal solids sedimentation and separation of fats, oils and greases from the

wastewater. It also causes loss of bacteria that biologically break down and reduce the

volume of solids in the septic tank.



Septic tanks are usually constructed of pre-cast concrete. However, fiberglass and

polyethylene tanks are also available. Fiberglass and polyethylene resist erosion and

decay and are lighter and easier to transport than pre-cast concrete, but are also more

expensive. Whatever material is used for your septic tank, you should make sure taht

your tank is properly sealed. A well-designed tank should last at least 50 years.



Absorption Fields

The absorption field of your septic system (the area where the seepage pit or distribution

lines are buried) should be routinely checked for sogginess or flooding. These conditions

usually indicate:



Improper drainage;



A clogged system; and/or



e Excess water use.



The following is a list of some fairly common-sense do’s and don’ts that will help your

absorption field have a longer life span.



¢ Don’t drive over your absorption field with cars, trucks, or other heavy

equipment.



IV-3

¢ Don’t plant trees or shrubs in your absorption field—plant only grasses or other

shallow-rooted plants (such as banana trees).



¢ Don’t cover your absorption field with pavement, concrete or any other

impervious surface. .



© Do divert stormwater runoff away from your absorption field so that it will not

flood.



System Input



What you put into your septic system will directly affect the system’s health and

durability. Many common household chemicals and items can harm your septic system:



¢ Do not dump toxic or hazardous chemicals in the toilet or down the drain.

Even small amounts of paints, varnishes, thinners, waste oil,. photo chemicals,

and pesticides can kill the beneficial bacteria in your septic system that treat

wastewater through biological processes. Caustic cleaners and drain openers (like

Draino) can also harm your septic system. Instead, use boiling water or vinegar

and baking soda to keep your drains unclogged, and use biodegradable cleaners.

(A mixture of ‘4 cup white vinegar, ‘4 cup ammonia, % cup baking soda, and

% gallon water is a cheap, effective and non-harmful cleaner.)



¢ Do not throw cat litter, plastics, cigarette butts, sanitary napkins, disposable

diapers, paper towels, or tissue in the toilet or down the drain. These

products do not readily degrade and can block septic tanks and clog pipes.



¢ Do not dump grease, fats or oils down your kitchen drain. These products

will also clog pipes and block your septic system.



Another way to increase the life-span of your septic system is to conserve water. Repair

dripping faucets and leaking toilets; avoid long showers; do not run water in sinks and

showers while soaping up, shaving or brushing teeth; use water-saving devices like

aerators in faucets and showerheads; install water-saving devices (like a brick or

weighted plastic bottle) in toilet tanks; and don’t flush toilets unnecessarily. The less

amount of water that flows through your system, the less work your septic system has

to do. These practices will also help you save money on your water bill!



In summary, failing septic systems can cause a serious. health threat to your family and

neighbors and can degrade both surface and ground waters. However, there are some

simple, easy, and low-cost practices that individual home owners can adopt to minimize

the risk of septic system failure. Prevention of septic system failure is ALWAYS less

expensive than replacing a failed septic system!



For more information on the septic systems in the Virgin Istands and ways to prevent water pollution,

please contact the your local Extension office (St. Thomas-St. John: 774-0210; St. Croix: 778-0246); the

Department of Planning and Natural Resources (St. Thomas: 774-3320; St. Croix: 773-0565); or the

Department of Health (St. Thomas-St. John: 774-6880; St. Croix: 773-0565).

ALTERNATIVES TO STANDARD SEPTIC SYSTEMS

Tom H.Linnio



Department of Planning and Natural Resources,

St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands



On site treatment of domestic and commercial wastewaters has

been and is today a major topic involving the health and

environmental well being of the community The United States

Virgin Islands has tremendous contribution to non-point source

pollution from the current treatment or lack of adequate

treatment of domestic and commercial waste water. Of

Particular concern for the Virgin Islands is the excessive

nutrient loading from phosphates and nitrates of the costal

waters resulting in the death of reef systems due to algal

growth.



The de facto “standard septic system" in the United States

Virgin Islands is a septic tank with a minimal if not totally

unacceptable leach pit. Leach fields are very rarely used, to

the point of being almost unheard of. The dominant soils of

the Virgin Islands are clays or soils with a high clay

content, often with moderate to steep slopes. Although the

Virgin Island Rules and Reguiations has a section on

Percolation tests, specifically 7.19, Section 1404-91,

percolation tests are rarely if ever performed. This lack of

performance of percolation tests results in improper

evaluation, design, sizing, and placement of on _ site

wastewater treatment. One could say with a fair degree of

confidence that the majority of the "standard septic systems"

in the Virgin Islands are not functioning properly, if

functioning at all, as far as treatment of waste waters are

concerned. With the majority of soils in the Territory being

thin with very poor adsorption qualities and moderate to steep

Slopes, no development involving proposed on site wastewater

treatment should be permitted without verifiable percolation

test, proper design and siting of wastewater’ treatment

structures. The need for percolation tests and proper

wastewater treatment design, sizing and placement based on the

test can not be over stated.



Another factor that compounds the wide.spread-improper use of

leach pits is the lack of maintenance of the. septic tanks.

The normal maintenance of a septic tank requires periodic

Cleaning to remove solids. This is not a standard practice in

the Territory. When solids move into the leach pit, the pit

becomes clogged and stops functioning as an absorption

structure and becomes a cess pool. This results in an increase

in down slope nutrient loading, contamination of ground water

and a potential major health risk.



IvV-5

This problem is not limited to leach pits alone. Generally all

systems with septic tanks and absorption structures must have

the tanks maintained and cleaned to avoid movement of solids

to the absorption structures. Failure to properly clean out

septic tanks will cause clogging and plugging of the

absorption structure which are then ruined and must be

replaced, often at a great. expense.



There are no maintenance free wastewater treatment systems.



Having so far discussed some aspects of the “standard septic

systems" current in the Territory, I shall now discuss briefly

some alternatives. I must begin by stating the obvious that

the best alternative is a well run and maintained system of

sewers and treatment plants. But since that is not

foreseeable, I will focus on some on site alternatives. A

review of existing resource materials available in the

territories was to say the least, rather disappointing.

Luckily there is the EPA Small Flows Clearinghouse. The Small

Flows Clearinghouse was established in 1977 by legislation

under the Clean Waters Act as a national information center

for {among other related topics) alternative sewage

technologies. You can find in the back of this presentation a

current listing and order form for Small flows products. Also

in the back you will find a short glossary of terms often used

in septic wastewater treatment.



Serial Distribution for sloping ground.



This is a modified tile field system, where based on

percolation test results a series of absorption fields are

laid laterally with slope contours and tied together with a

series of distribution drop boxes. This system has the

advantage of being able to adjust to site conditions, the

leach lines can be of varying lengths. The trench increase

absorption areas versus a leach pit. This system can be seen

as a demand system since the various absorption trenches come

in to play as a function of the load on the system. In the dry

season only the upper trenches may be in use, where as in the

wet season the whole system might com into play. This allows

at least part of the system some resting periods. The system

is easily expandable by the addition of drop boxes and

trenches. The system is fail-safe. If the septic tank is not

properly clean only the first trenches will plug and fail, the

whole system will not be ruined. I feel this system has great

potential in the Territory, if properly designed to, the soil

condition on site. ;



Wisconsin Mound or Transvap Soil Absorption System



This system is a modified tile field system that is placed

above existing grade. This system might be of use where soil



and or site conditions restrict use of sub-surface absorption

systems.



The system relies on selected sand and soil fill to treat



IV-6

septic tank effluent. Basically a tile field is laid ina

sand and soil bed above original grade. The amount and depth

of bed area required depends on site soil conditions and

depth, depth of water table and or bedrock, quality of the

fill material, waste water volume (loading), and other site

and use related factors. The bed or mound should be long and

narrow. This system may have the disadvantage of needed a sump

pump, if the septic tank is below the mound or bed elevation.

This system may have some positive limited use in the

Territory for some very difficult sites.



Sand Filtration



The use of sand filters may be adapted for many types of

systems such as surface, subsurface, intermittent, and demand

flow. All system must have properly selected sand beds of 24

to 30 inches deep to filter, oxidize and degrade the secondary

treated sewage. Surface sand filters generally are a system

that irrigate the secondary treated sewage (grey water) over

a sand bed. Subsurface filters are generally a tile field over

the sand bed, this system may have a separate lower tile

field under the upper tile field and sand filter leading toa

separate leaching field or even to a sewer. Intermittent sand

filter feed the sand bed in controlled doses, by timed

pumping, dose buckets, siphons or other methods. Intermittent

system can be either surface or subsurface type. Sand filter

can be very useful in soils where percolation tests show

restrictions. The sizing and siting of the sand filter will

be determined by the site soil characteristics, depth to water

table, use, and loading among other factors. The proper

selection of sand in size and type is critical as in the use

of filtration matting to avoid clogging by particles from

surrounding soils. The use of sand filter has high potential

in the Territory.



Composting Toilets



The composting toilet system is a self contained system which

is usually dry with some models using a foam flush. The

wastes is collected inside the composting unit, or goes to an

outside composting tank. Some units with outdoor composting

tanks are designed so as to be solar driven. In either system

the composting tank is vented to minimize odor. With the use

of selected microbes, the waste is degraded te a humus. This

system has been successfully used in the Territory,

particularly on St John. One draw back seems to be a problem

with cockroaches, therefore I would recommend if the system is

to be used that the outside composting tank type with a good

seal between outside and inside be used.



Aerobic Digester



Aerobic digester are generally special subsurface

secondary treatment tanks into which ambient air is



IV-7

pumped or compressed to supply respiratory oxygen for aerobic



bacteria. The function of the aerobic bacteria is to degrade

the secondary wastewater. The systems can be as simple as

just an air pump and an emitter, or can have rotation

biological contact drums, paddles, impellers, which are

powered by the air pump or compressor before the air goes to

the emitters. Aerobic digester can be very useful in

decreasing the biological oxygen demand (BOD) before the

wastewater goes to“the leach field or pit. This can allow, if

properly designed and sized a smaller leach field than might

be otherwise required. Aerobic digesters also can be used

increase the useful life of a leach field. Many of these

digester come as pre-made packages, often made of fiber glass

for ease of installation. They do require a power source to

run the air pumps or compressors. Some unit use solar panels

and batteries to supply the power to the pump or compressor.

This type of technology has good potential for use in the

Virgin Islands.



Anaerobic Digesters



Anaerobic digesters relay on anaerobic bacteria to degrade the

wastewater. Anaerobic bacteria generally must have an

environment lacking in “free" of molecular oxygen. This type

of digester often is a below ground treatment tank which is

packed with a contact medium, often red wood bark. Anaerobic

digester can also be above ground, indeed this type of

digester is common used in marine service on boat, ships, off

shore drilling platforms ‘etc. One advantage for costal or

marine use in the anaerobic bacteria are capable of

denitrifaction, the is to say they can degrade common nitrogen

compounds. Nitrogen compound such as nitrates and nitrites

are very harmful sources of nutrient loading, killing reefs by

causing algal blooms. Aerobic bacteria are not known for

denitrifaction where as anaerobic bacteria are. This system

is not uncommon in the Territory though one can not say it is

widely used. Some years ago the Government did use this system

for facilities near the coast and off the sewer lines. It had

good initial success, but failed in the end from lack of

proper maintenance. This system has great potential in the

Territory for areas with clay soils, coastal area, areas with

high water tables, and small lots. This type of system does

require some more ongoing maintenance than some other systems.



Subsurface Emitters with Trees



This system uses a modified leaching and irrigation system

where emitters packed with red wood bark are place and a

tree is planted above. This system works with



the



evapotranspiration increase that the planted trees supplies.

The redwood bark packing from reports not only increases the

biological contact area, but also appears to prevent the tree

roots from growing into the emitter and clogging the system.



IV-8

This is a fairly new system with good results so far.

This system may be a good alternative to the current

practice, particularly of hotels, of using sprinkler for

irrigation of gray water. ,



Wetlands Systems



This is another fairly new technology that has been

tested and proven on both large and small scale. This is

a secondary treatment where the primarily treated waste

water is feed into an artificial wetland system. For

residential or small scale commercial uses a two cell

wetland with liners is currently used for treatment. The

cells have specialized distribution, gravel or gravel and

sand bed and use reeds and other wetland plants. Another

cell which is not lined can be used for leach or the

treated water may go to a leach field, or even be

discharged in to a waterway if permitted. This system is

solar driven, that is to say the sun supplies the energy

to run this system This system works with biological

degradation, biological uptake, evapotranspiration and if

properly maintained should decrease nitrogen and

phosphate compounds. If the system is properly designed,

sized and maintained there is no ponding, so mosquitos

should not be a problem This system is currently under

study by EPA and the Tennessee Valley Authority and has

been successfully used in many areas.. I feel this

system has great potential for use in the Territory.



Green House Ecosystems



This system can be viewed as a combination of a marsh or

wetlands with aquiculture and is another solar drive

system which also uses pumped or compressed air. In this

system wastewater is first equalized, then clarified and

oxygenated. The wastewater is then pumped to a series of

solar silos, then to marsh cells from which the water is

treated by ultra violet lights and finally discharged.

The plants are run in parallel in case of failure due to

poisoning from improper chemical that might be place into

the waste water. With a parallel system if one leg is

knock out the other leg can supply the end microorganism,

organism and plants. This system uses biodegradation,

biological uptake evapotranspiration and should be able

to treat nitrogen and phosphate compound if properly run.

This system has been proven on both fairly large and

small scales and may have good application in the

Territory. It is not though a system for the average

single homeowner.



Incineration



Incineration of toilet waste product has some

limited application, in this system toilet wastes



IvV-9

are incinerated using LP gas, propane or electricity. It is

not meant to deal with other bathroom or kitchen waste water.

Most often used in summer camps and similar applications, this

system invented in the 1930's has never been widely used.



There are some other types systems such as recirculating

toilets, electrolysis, water hyacinth basins which are used

sometimes. I mention these here in passing. The systems that

I have presented I feel have better chances of application in

the Territory.



IV~10



i | ;

TI-AT



SEPTIC SYSTEM STUDY

FOR THE VIRGIN ISLANDS



Non-Point Source Polution Committee



Virgin lalands Department of Planning and Natura! Resources

Virgin islancis Conservation District



Virgin lalande Conservation and Development Project Council



INTERIM REPORT PAAT 1 (Revised)

INTERIM REPORT PART 2 (Drett)



BRAFT ABRIDGED EDITION



For Presentation at the First Annual Virgin

Islands Conference on Nonpoint Source Pollution

October 5, 1993 mo



Presented ky Barry W. Kimball P.E.

EXCERPTSFROM SEPTEMBER 1993 REPORT



——nES



Engineering @ Surveying Lond Plonaing & Design t

Rophune HM

te 501 fis4



SL Thomnoa, U.S.V.I. 00802



INTRODUCTION



Man’s carelessness in the management of his own excreta can result in a number of diseases

as pathogens from an Infected person find their way by water, food, or soll to another

human being. The first ine of defense would appear to be simple; manage our waste so

that none of {t reacties drinking water or food supplies and {solate it from the ground

surface where {t {s accessible to animals, including insects and birds, which can be direct

carriers of pathogens.



Since its introduction in the United States in 1880, septic tank systems have become the

most widely used method of on-site sewage disposal. Although the concept and design of

the septic tank/soil absorption system are relatively simple, the system involves complex

physical, chemical, and biological processes, Performance is essentially a function of the

design of the system components, construction techniques employed, characteristics of the

wastes, rate of hydraulic loading, climate, aerial geology and topography, physical and

chemical composition of the soit mantle, and care given to periodic maintenance (USEPA,

1977), :



The septic system’s recent reputation as a major contributor to environmental pollution is

not the result of the system’s inadequacies, but rather the result of a misuse of this disposal

practice. The septic tank system is a combination of unit processes which were initially

intended for rural farm families. Its widespread use in suburban areas has resulted in many

installations where the septic system has been squeezed onto small lots, in soils of limited

suitability and has been neglected by the home owner, The septic tank/soil absorption

system has demonstrated to be ill-fitted under these adverse circumstances,



For residences on the U.S. Virgin Islands, the conventional septic tank/soil absorption

system consists of two (2) major components, a water tight compartment (septic tank) and

a provision for liquid effluent discharges to the subsoil (leaching trenches or seepage pits),

The septic tank serves simultaneously as a separation unit and as a storage and digestion

unit for the retained scum and sludge. A leaching structure is used to dispense the liquid

septic tank effluent into the soil, and therefore must be constructed in soils capable of

accepting and dispersing the liquid. .



The original intent of this study was to find ways to improve upon the conventional septic

tank/soil absorption system and septic system regulations to bring them into compliance

with the usual standards for design and construction for on-site disposal of sewage effluent.

The strategy in performing this study was to assume that subsurface soil absorption (disposal

trenches, beds, seepage pits) is the preferred on-site disposal option because of its reliability

with a minimal amount of maintenance. The process was then to analyze the soils,

topography, geology, and other characteristics of the Islands so that the regulations could

be customized to fit the specific circumstances. In those areas where the site characteristics

éI-Al



are unsuitable for soil absorption systems, alternative methods would be investigated as a

last resort for on-site disposal since these alternatives are typically the most costly to

construct and require a great deal more maintenance and supervision than soil absorption

systems,



Now that the analysis of the Islands characteristics is completed, we have found that the vast

majority of the Islands’ land areas are unsuitable for soil absorption systems. We have also

found that thousands of the septic systems currenuy in operation have been located in areas

that are inappropriate for subsurface disposal and represent not only a hazard to the



environment, but more importantly, a risk to the public's health. There is a great lack of-



understanding among regulators, home owners, developers, and contractors about how septic

systems operate. Examples of this misunderstanding is the acceptance of seepage pits

constructed directly in fractured bedrock and leaching trenches installed in impervious clays,

both of which are located on small lots in densely populated neighborhoods. Very few

people on the Islands understand, that for soil absorption septic systems to operate properly,

septic tank effluent must be filtered through at least 2 to 4 feet of pervious soils before it



can be discharged to the environment. This basic tenet of septic system design is what



makes the traditional soil absorption system unsuitable for almost ail locations on the Virgin

Islands. Most of the land surface does not have 2 to 4 feet of soil or, in areas where there

are deep soils, it is typically impervious.



The focus of this report is now to explain and justify the reasons why the conventional

subsurface disposal’ system is inappropriate for almost all developable areas and offer

alterative disposal options that may be suitable.



The report’s recommendations are expected to stimulate discussion on the different

approaches for regulating the installation and use of sewage disposal systems. Readers are

encouraged to express their views and opinions in writing to the Department of Planning

and Natural Resources. The Department has indicated that it will fully evaluate all

comments prior to formulating revisions to the Regulations. Comments may be submitted

to the following: an



Adrian Schottroff, Chairman NPS

DPNR/DEP



Mario Morales

RC&D.Coordinator, SCS



PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE

U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS



TOPOGRAPHY



St. Thomas



St. Thomas has an extremely irregular coastline and is very hilly with practically no flatland.

The highest hills are generally found near the center of the Island, with Crown Mountain

at 1,550 feet the highest point. The Island is relatively small and many of the peaks rise .

above 1,000 feet This results in rather steep slopes over all the Island, so that rainfall

runoff is quite rapid and there are no permanent streams or rivers.



St.John



Like St. Thomas, St. John has an extremely irregular shoreline and a very hilly topography.

Ithas a umber of peaks over 1,000 feet, topped by Bordeaux Mountain at 1,297 feet in the

eastern portion of the Island. Slopes are quite steep over all of the island, and there are

very few areas of flatiand. There are no permanent rivers or creeks.



St. Croix



St. Croix is the largest of the three U.S. Virgin Islands. The topography is somewhat

different from the other two with a broad expanse of low, relatively fladand running along

the southern two-thirds of the Island. The North End Range, a series of hills, ranging in

elevation from about 500 feet to more than 1,000 feet, topped by Mount Eagle at 1,165 feet,

runs along the northern coast. East End Range of St, Croix is another group of slightly

lower hills with ¢ maximum elevation of about 860 feet found on the eastern end of the



istand. The area covered by hills on St. Croix results in rather steep slopes down to the

Caribbean in the north and to the level areas to the south.



GEOLOGY



The U.S, Virgin Islands are located at the eastern end of the Greater Antilles island chain.



and are comprised of the three major islands of St. Croix, St. Thomas and St. John as well

as some 50 smaller islands and cays, St. Croix is the largest of the islands (85 square miles).

It lies about 40 miles south-southeast of Puerto Rico and about 40 miles south of St.

Thomas (30 square miles). St. Thomas lies approximately 40 miles east of Puerto Rico and

25 miles west of St John (19 square miles).

€T~AL



The Eagle Mountain Volcanics of St. Croix has been intruded by a large mass of j



the Fountain Valley region of the North Side Range and by a similar.mass or donne inthe

East End Range between Great Pond and Southgate Pond During late Cretaceous or Early

Tertiary age. _Up to this time The Mount Eagle Volcanics was one continuous ridge.

Sometime during Early to Middle Tertiary age St Croix’s central valley was created by a

downthrown block (grabben) as a result of normal faulting and St. Croix consisted of pvo

islands separated by a decp marine basin in which as much as 7,000 feet of clayey

sediments known as the Jelousy Formation. Alternating deposits of planktonic material and

sediment - gravity fows which accumulated in deep water during Oligocene and Miocene

age form the limestones and marls of the Kingshill Formation. The Kingshill Formation

(mown locally as Caleche) extends actoss the south and central plains of St. Croix. Along

he rea pin nem coastal plain, thin deposits of shallow water benthic organisms overlap the



Recent geologic processes Occurring on the U.S. Virgin Islands consist primarily of

a \. surf;

weathering of the bedrock formations, erosion, and the deposition ‘of alluvium along

intermittent stream channels, in coastal embayments, and as alluvial fans along the

the lentsoare base of the North End Range of St. Croix. These processes have configured

of toe islands and has formed the parent material b i i

of the U.S, Virgin Islands have developed. , ase pon whieh the soils



SOILS



Soils of the U.S. Virgin Islands have been characterized by SOIL SURVEY, VIRGIN

ISLANDS OF THE UNITED STATES published by the United States Department of

Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in August of 1970. ‘This publication contains

descriptions of the soll types identified and mapped by the soil survey, physical data,

interpretations of their suitability for various uses, and maps at a scale of 1:15840 depicting

helt ateral enent ' qihough his document has been a valuable tool for Jand use Planning.

iO is old and has become outdated with respect to the cu ’ i

of the U.S. Virgin Islands soil resources, Trent understanding



The USDA Soil Conservation Service is currently in the process of a re-classificati



correlation of the soil resources of all the islands, Some of the soil series recognized by ‘he

1970 publication will continue to be recognized through this process. Many of the old soil

Series, however, will be discontinued and new series formulated to more accurately describe

the characteristics of these Tesources. Field mapping of St. Croix and St. John bas been

completed and mapping is in process on St. Thomas at the time of this report.

Unfortunately, detailed maps will not be completed or available ‘for use in this study.

Indications are that they will be available for use in the near future. In anticipation of the

availability of this information, this study will use the information that is currently available

for the new Soil Survey. Table 1 lists the names of the soil series proposed for this survey,



Jaucus and Sugar



Soil Wetness:



Soil wetness conditions or drainage classes refers to the depth within a soil that saturation

Or near saturation by the ground water table is encountered and {s an important design

consideration for septie systems in may parts of the country. Due to the hydrogeologic

conditions of the U.S. Virgin Islands however, ground water tables rarely approach the

ground surface and {snot an important tool in land use planning decisions with the

exception of a few sofl series which will be noted later in this section.



Analysis of the physical characteristics of the Virgin Islands soil resources indicates three

major categories of soll groupings which, with a few exceptions, should act similarly with

respect to the design and operation of septic systems. These categories are closely related

to the parent materials in which the soils have developed and are designated as Volcanic,

Calcarious Marine Sedimenss, and Alluvium. Table 2 presents a soil catena relationship for

the proposed soil series in which they have been sorted based on their parent materials and

then arranged with ct to thelr typical landscape position. It should be noted that the

serfes have been placed in the Alluvium category for the purposes

of this discussion. Jaucus consists of beach deposits of calcarious marine sands while Sugar

Beach develops on deep organic (muck) deposits. Generalized soil maps showing the

distribution of these categories for St. Thomas, St. John and St. Croix are presented as

Figures 1, 2, 3, respectively, As the new soil survey maps are not available, these maps have

been prepared using geologic maps of the islands showing the spatial relationships of the

parent material groups.



Volcanic Soils:



Soils developed from volcanic parent materials are the most wide-spread category on St.

Thomas, St. John and in the North End and East End Ranges of St, Croix. For the most

part they have formed in thin mantles (jess than two feet) of materials weathered from the

underlying volcanic bedrock formations and occupy slopes of up to 75% or more with slopes

in excess of 35% being very common. The volcanic parent materials weather to form highly

structured soils with textures of clay and clay loam, usually with a gravelly or very gravelly

component.



Montmorillonite clays (high shrink swell capacities) are minerological components of the

Jelousy, Parasol, Sussannaberg and Fredriksdal series. Areas of volcanic parent materials

with Montmorillonite clay minerology are noted on the generalized soil maps.



Permeability for the soils in this category is reported to be moderate with the exception of

the soils with Montmorillonite clays which have slow permeabilities. Exceptions within this

category are the Parasol and Jelousy soils which have developed over the gabbro and diorite

intrusions on St. Crofx and are deep and very deep, respectively, to the underlying bedrock

formations.

VI-AI



Calcarious Marine Soils:



Soils developed from calcarious marine sediments are Arawak, Sion and Hessleberg. They

have developed in parent materials derived from the calcarious marine sediments of the

Kingshill Formation found on St. Croix. Arawak is a shallow soil located on the summits

and upper side slopes of the limestone hills and are gentle to very steeply sloping (up to

7$%). Sion found on the lower side slopes and valley Qoors of the limestone deposits, is

very deep and gentler sloping (0-12%). Hessleberg has developed on shallow marine

terraces along the southeastern shore of St. Croix and is distinguishable due to a hard

petrocalcic layer present within 20 to 30 inches of the soil surface, These soils are underlain

by a soft limestone mar! which is known locally as Caleche. Permeability of these soils is

moderate. Textures are clayey.



Alluyium:



Soils which have formed in recent alluvial deposits on the islands can be separated into two

gtoups, those having development potential and those that do not. The latter group is

comprised of soils associated with natural resources that have significant value to the benefit

of the general public and should be preserved. These ares include mangrove swamps, salt

marshes, salt ponds, tidal flats, beaches, and areas with high water tables adjacent to these

resources and in gut Ooodplains. Soil series typically found in these areas include Sugar

Beach, Sandy Point, Jaucus, Solitude, Comhill, and Carib respectively. Any of the other

series in the alluvium category may also be included in this group when they are located

within or directly adjacent to drainageways, locally known as “guts”.



The remaining soils in this category have developed in sediments on alluvial fans, terraces,

plains and lower side slopes. Cinnamon and Glynn are formed in fine textured sediments

from extrusive volcanic rocks which overly stratified fine to coarse textured sediments.

Hogensborg is formed in clayey sediments with Montmorillonite mineralogy derived from

intrusive volcanic rocks, specifically the gabbro and dorite intrusions found in the North End

and East End Ranges respectively on St. Croix.



ST. THOMAS



General Soil Map

Aluviom Sols

Limestone Sols

Volconle Sots



Femme 4



Clay Hi



Volcanic ier oloay with Montmor@onite

(oO



Y.



2%



QJovvsseee



Lop



OTA:



a



yu



PLL



Le.



Sy



WY,



rt



Oy gent



av eee al



sesee



ZY



CE)



are



rats



r>



“oy



%



S



SN



fhe



“Ly,



Senne



NS



4,



N



Wi



Ws



\



Vila



Sy



LY,



Ly



4



\



\\



HUE



V2



ST. CROIX



ST. JOLIN



General Soil Map



LEGEND:



General Soil Map



UY, Aluvum Soils



LEGEND:



WSS Limestone Soils



Aluviem Sofs with Montimorifionite



YWuuy Alluvium Sols _



IEEE HE



Clay Mineralogy



Volcanic Soils



Volcanic. Sols



Volcanic Soils with Montmoriionte



Figure 2



Clay Minerology



Volcamic Soils wilh Montmorillonite



Figure 3



Clay Minerology

9T-AI



GROUNDWATER:



Groundwater in the U.S. Virgin Islands is a limited resource which has been estimated by

the U.S. Geological Society to supply approximately 20% of the total water needs of the

islands population and industry (Torres-Sierra and Rodriguez-Alonso 1986). The

development and operation of groundwater production wells has been recognized as the

most cost effective source of drinking water available on the islands (C2HM Hill, 1983) and

as water demand increases it is likely that pressured to develop groundwater sources to their

fullest capacity will also increase. Investigation into the extent, quantity and quality of

groundwater aquifers has received considerable attention by the U.S. Geological Survey, the

Water Resources Research Institute of the University of the Virgio Islands and several

private consulting firms in conjunction with governmental agencies,



Concerns for public health have prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to

establish primary and secondary water quality standards for drinking water supplies.

Contaminants of primary concern that are :introduced into the environment from the

application of waste-water are pathogenic organisms (bacteria, viruses, and parasites), nitrate

nitrogen, and synthetic organic compounds, Pathogenic or disease causing organisms are

introduced through the feces of individuals who are either infected with the disease or are

carriers. Nitrates are formed from the mineralization and nitrification of organic

compounds found in wastewater by aerobic microbes. Synthetic organic compounds are

contained in cleaning agents and other man-made products which are being commonly used

in the house-hold. A more thorough discussion of these contaminants, their modification

and disposition through septic system operation is contained elsewhere in this report.



The proper design and construction of septic systems is effective in the removal of

pathogens through soil treatment of waste-water prior to its discharge to the underlying

water table. The presence of fecal bacteria within a groundwater aquifer is a prime indicator

that direct connection/s between the aquifer and inadequately operating septic system/s

can exist, A saturated flow zone between the disposal mechanism (trench, seepage, etc.)

and the water table or fractured bedrock formations are the most common avenues cited

in the literature for the migration of pathogens over long distances, The maximum

contaminant level established for bacterial in dtinking water is one colony per 100

milligrams of water. °



Nitrates, on the other hand, are generated from the application of waste-water through

conventional septic system operation, regardless of design and constriction considerations,

and surface discharge of improperly treated waste-water. Nitrate levels within an aquifer

is determined by the density of development which discharges Its waste-water within the

catchment area supplying recharge to the aquifer and the amount and quality of water

recharging the aquifer. Nitrate nitrogen levels within a aquifer, therefore, is a useful tool

in assessing development impacts to groundwater quality and the level of development

controls necessary to maintain groundwater quality level within acceptable standards. The

maximum contaminant level for nitrate nitrogen in drinking water has been established at



10 milligrams per liter (mg/l). Nitrate nitrogen levels above 1 to 2 mg/I are typically

considered to be clevated above natural background levels.



Investigation into the groundwater quality of the U.S. Virgin Islands has been conducted by

Geraghty & Miller (April, 1983), the U.S. Geological Survey (Garcia and Canoy, 1984 and)

and others. Geraghty & Miller collected and analyzed inorganic chemical quality date

from several sources within the Fairplains and Barron Spot weil Gelds as well as from 78

private wells on St Croix. Inorganic chemical quality was also gathered from several wells

in the Turpentine Rua basin on St. Thomas. They reported nitrate nitrogen levels of 3.5

io 4.6 mg/l] in the Fairplains wells, 3.8 to 7.4 mg/l in the Barron Spot wells, and several

other areas on St. Croix with levels which approach and in some cases exceed the 10 mg/l



" maximum contaminant level establish by EPA. Four wells in the Turpentine Run Basin on



St. Thomas were reported to have nitrate nitrogen levels {n excess of 10 mg/l with four

of the other wells sampled having levels between 3 and 5 mg/l.



Garcia and Canoy collected and analyzed water samples from 8 wells on St. Croix, 7 wells

on St. Thomas, and 4 wells on St John for inorganic chemical quality as well as fecal

coliform and fecal streptococci bacteria. Nitrate nitrogen exceeded 1.0 mg/l in ten of the

wells sampled with two of the wells being in excess of 5 mg/l, and all of the samples being

below 10 mg/l. Fecal bacterial were detected In all but one of the wells with fecal

streptococel being detected as high as 5,800 colonies per 100 milliliters of sample.



In 1986 Knudsen conducted a study to evaluate the presence of water bome pathogens in

the various drinking water sources of the U.S. Virgin Islands and the ability of standard

testing requirements to detect them. Samples were collected from cisterns, wells and points:

along the public water system. Human pathogenic bacterta were found to be present in all

of the 16 sampling points with fecal streptococcus being present in all but one sampling

point. 7



In 1986 the U.S, Geological Society compiled chemical water quality analyses of water

samples collected between 1965 and 1985 trom the principle aquifers of the U.S. Virgin

Islands (Zack, Rodriguez-Alonso and Roman-Mas, 1986). A total of 169 samples were

analyzed for nitrate nitrogen; 21 from the Kingshill aquifer on St. Croix, 140 from volcanic

bedrock aquifers, and 8 from coastal embayment aquifers, 75% of the samples collected

from the Kingshill aquifer are reported to have nitrate nitrogen levels in excess of 2 mg/l

with 509% being in excess of 8 mg/l and approximately 40% exceeding 10 mg/l. Of the

volcanic bedrock samples, 50% exceed 2 mg/l and approximately 30% exceed 10 mg/L

Coastal embayment aquifers exhibited better water quality with respect to nitrate nitrogen

with less than 20% of the samples exceeding 1 mg/l.



Most authors reviewed have cited septic system practices in the U.S. Virgin Islands as

contamination sources anda threat to the quality of the islands groundwater resources.

ee7 ar.



EVAPORATION



The Bethlehem Upper New Works, St Croix, gaging station is the only location found on

the Virgin Islands that measures evaporation with any consistency. Data from this station

shows that average monthly evaporation varies from 4 1/2" per month in the winter to

almost & in the summer months. The yearly evaporation average is close to 80 inches per

year. Normal rainfall usually equals or exceeds evaporation in the months of October and



November.



TOTAL EVAPORATION AMOUNTS (inches)

BETHLEHEM UPPER NEW WORKS, ST. CROIX, U.S.V.I.



RAINFALL



Annual rainfall values differ from location to location with higher elevations generally receiving

greater amounts. On St. Thomas and St. John, annual averages of between 40 and 60 inches,

On St. Croix, there Is a more noticeable variation from place to place, This island has the

greatest annual rainfall, in excess of 50 inches in the northwestern comer, A nartow finger of

between 25 and 35 inches extends northeast to southwest over the flatlands south of the hills in

the western portion of the Island. Records available for the three islands indicate a relatively

wet-relatively dty season distribution, but it is not sharply defined. . The relatively dry period '

extends from sbout December through June. Occasionally, quite heavy rainfall occurs during

the so-called drier months. The driest month on St, Thomas and St. John usually is February

ot March and the wettest month September or October. On St. Croix, the month with the

heaviest rainfall, on the average, ranges from September through November.



YEAR JAN FER MAR 4PR MAY WN JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV REC

1985 $39) = 6.350 6.76 838 B20 83T 95D me IW ~ 4.57

1986 557) 638 OS e897 O7.73 7.0038 S.TT AS

1987 6.08 4.74 7.60 661 649 —- 684 663 821 650 $28



1988 $160 5.700 7.720 TAS SO DL eee

1989 $360 me BD BOB SL ee



1990 = mee 6.62 6.98 178 eee SR

1991 $430 $28 BATS BAST 0

MONTHLY



AVGS 550 5.69 744°«757 729° «7910 7437.76 6.14 SAS



From Climatological Data Annual Summary, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, years 1985 10



<= Indicates months where information is not available.



4



1991, by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



VIRGIN ISLANDS

IRGIN ISLAND PRECIPITATION NORMALS (INCHES)



STATION | gant ree {nar | ape] nay’ sun | aut |aue | see [oct | nov | oc | ann

AGEs namin ton FLO F448 MOM EY Da a Rast Sy dab tal gad gary gee} ud

anwacr meoran) BSR] CH Reb ER 1 app hag) ctip poy eh dad ha] 2

tmmas Ware meoran | 2c] tS) PTE EARL GARE ESR] Tae sb te bad dee gpd das

AC tw UPPER mew Manus meores] PAR] EAR CSU EEE RTE Samp PP EB pea get] das

carecaracause Ptrrh Me s  SO s Pe ESP ERE eg es deh hap dah) Bat

cmatsrtamsr€O Oat bet BL eC PS BL a Seg ERE gd

saud far More Lg ESP LARD REED bag] Gag] ER bo Baty bey ay teat

a0notmcs acs Meats | RE RD EB BARD dat tag) tap tes) gat tan

Cast wie mee EAT TUR, CH GaP RSD ERUPT Ge Se peed bese] pas ag

ESTATE FORE arenes mfovas | $:82) 288 ( 3:82] 29 PSR CU EAP ae p ah danp aad

rountaln meer SUP EARP EST GSEP SE SSDP Se PR gt ge dae tay

FACOCR ESTED 4 $C mearahy 20h 2p ay b8 STEROL Sp Pap tae ey at

ananang mere SA a a ERP ERD RAT cep el gee) dae] att

mam WLUPE CE Uae ttm mak TARY RL SS aD Lae Ea aap ep tabp tee baad qa) ae

Lartawue gay AT EAP AT) tee PR DM Ep bay bn pen sg) as

Truman FCO F445 48 eT EP AS bay eagh nagd eae gee cgay dae? tag] dag) dead agg

WATER i8ee meer RD ESS CaP PRD GEE RST SE das] ap ded be] gen nag

winTaCng meer | EMRY CARY TSP ES] Sat ESky gb ae gag fab peep pea aes



VI. precipitation normals from “Climatological Data’ as published by U.S. Department of

Commerce, National Oceanographic and Armospheric Administration

8I-AI



GROUNDWATER RECHARGE



The rate of ground water recharge in the U.S. Virgin Islands is an important consideration

in the management of appropriate septic system densities, Rainfall infiltration which is able

to reach the water table is the primary source of replenishment of the various groundwater

aquifers, followed by septic systems operation and surface discharges from sewer treatment

plants.



The U.S. Geological Society has prepared a water budget for the Islands which indicates

that 949 of the rainfall is lost to evaporation and wanspiration by plants. 39% is lost to

surface water runoff with the remaining 3% being discharged to the groundwater table. This

amounts to a litte more than one inch of rainfall per year being introduced into the water

table.



QN-SITE SEPTIC DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

GENERAL



Septic systems have long been believed to be an efficient and cost-effective means of

disposing of domestic wastewater and have been relied on heavily to support residential

growth in urban and rural areas not served by municipal wastewater collection and

treatment systems. Until recently there has been relatively little understanding of the

contaminants present in domestic wastewater and the soil treatment mechanisms that modify

its quality before reaching our ground water and surface water resources. Septic systems

were often thought of as temporary solutions to wastewater disposal that would operate only

unul municipal services were made available, As a result many areas in the continental U.S.

which saw high growth rates and dense development in the 40s, 50s, and 60s have

experienced a serious degradation of the quality of their drinking water supplies from septic

system operation practices.



Within the past 15 to 20 years a tremendous volume of research has investigated these

issues. Although by no means complete, the literature is supportive of the pretext that

septic systems are a viable alternative in areas where public sewers and wastewater

treatment systems are not available or economically feasible. They will operate effectively

if they are properly designed, situated in areas suitable for operation, used only for the

purposes for which they were designed, and given periodic maintenance.



This section presents the current understanding of the treatment mechanisms that occur as

septic tank effluent passes through a soil medium and the resultant effects on ground water



and surface water quality.

WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS



The design criteria for septic systems, effectiveness of the soil treatment mechanisms, and

the resultant pollutant load placed on water resources is in part a function of the

characteristics of the wastewater being applied. Wastewater characteristics should be

evaluated in two categories: quantity of the wastewater generated and its quality. Both

components can vary greauy and are dependent upon the type of use,



Quantity of wastewater has been characterized for a wide variety of uses and can be found

in most manuals or codes which characterize septic system design parameters. It is



important to recognize that the design Oow figures presented in many of these sources a



incorporate peaking factors to insure that a septic system can accommodate short periods

of higher than average water use. While it is important to size the septic system

components to accommodate the occurrence of peak water usage, average daily Now figures

represent long term trends in water use and are mofe appropriate for use in evaluating

impacts from septic system operation. Literature references indicate that the average daily

flow for residential wastewater is in the range of 45 to 60 gallons per capita per day (gpcd).

Ut sha



Synthetic Organic Compounds: Synthetic organic compounds are being detected in

domestic wastewater more frequently than ever before. They are contained in

cleaning agents, gasoline, and other man-made products which are people flush down

toilets and drains. Many synthetic organic compounds are believed to be

carcinogenic, and only require very low concentrations to present a public health

concern. Many authors believe that the introduction of these compounds to our

environment through the use of septic systems may be the greatest threat to our

ground water resources in the future.



Other chemical and physical contaminants: In addition to the wastewater constituents noted

above, chlorides, metals, and specific conductance (an indicator of salts) are

groundwater/surface water quality parameters which are impacted by septic systems and

other development related uses.



SEPTIC TANK



Wastewaters are modified through pretreatment processes which occur in a septic tank prior

to being disposed of in the soil. These processes include physical separation followed by

anaerobic digestion of the waste matter.



Septic tanks are buried, watertight structures designed and constructed to receive the

wastewater and to provide a desired detention time before passing it on to the soil for

disposal. During this detention period the “floatables" in the wastewater (oils, greases, and

some fecal constituents) float to the top, where they undergo some microbial decomposition

and form a floating layer of scum. Settleable solids and partially decomposed sludge

accumulate at the bottom of the tank where they are subjected to microbial decomposition.

The somewhat clarified liquid remaining between the layers of scum and sludge, “septic tank

effluent’, is displaced from the tank as new wastewater is introduced.



The high rate of microbial decomposition or digestion that occurs in the septic tank quickly

utilizes any oxygen present in the raw wastewater and the digestion process operates in an

anaerobic or oxygen free environment. Under these conditions, the organic components of

the wastewater are partially broken down by microbial enzymes, resulting in a chemical

transformation of the nitrogen and phosphorus compounds. The end result being the

formation of ammonia (NH) and orthophosphate (PO,) along with methane gas, hydrogen

sulfide gas and water. At normal pH levels found within septic tank effluent, the ammonia

transforms to the soluble ammonium ion (NH,+)..



Removai of pathogenic organisms in the septic tank processes is a function of detention time and

organism reaction to the oxygen deficient conditions within the tank. Organisms have a

tendency to become associated with solids and can become incorporated in the sludge. This,

coupled with the presence of an anaerobic environment not suited to the survival of pathogens,

has led to reports in the literature of significant removal rates within the septic tank, Although

removal rates in excess of 99% have been reported for some organisms, the high levels of

concentration of pathogens present in the wastes of infected individuals would still result in

extremely high numbers of organisms discharged in septic tank effluent. It must be assumed

therefore, that the septic tank is unlikely to remove any organism completely, and that septic

tank effluent must be considered capable of transmitting any disease whose pathogenic agent is

present in the raw wastewater.



SOIL TREATMENT OF EFFLUENT



After pretreatment, the septic tank effluent is conveyed to a disposal area where it is applied to

the soil. The disposal area can be of several different configurations, I.e., leachbeds, trenches,

seepage pits, etc. The soil treatment processes for each disposal option is the same, differing

only slightly on the method of application used to distribute the effluent over the surface of the

disposal area. The infiltrative surface between the disposal area and the surrounding soil acts

as a filter removing the particulate matter and most of the larger microorganisms (bacteria and

parasites).



As the effluent moves through the receiving soil further treatment is provided through filtration,

adsorption, and microbial utilization, These processes provide the optimum treatment potential

of a soil when the effluent is allowed to pass through the soil under unsaturated flow conditions

and oxygen is present for bio-utilization. At appropriate loading rates the remaining bacteria

and viruses are effectively removed, the soils phosphorus retention capacity is maximized, and

the ammonium ions are converted to NO,-N. Very little treatment occurs when the effluent is

transmitted through the soil under saturated flow conditions resulting in a high potential for

bacterial, viral, and other contaminant transport into our ground water and surface water

resources,



Distribution:



In gravity distribution systems commonly used in the U.S. Virgin Islands effluent is usually

delivered to the disposal area by gravity from the septic tank, The effluent is distributed over

the disposal area by gravity flow through 4° diameter pipes containing large perforations in

trenches filled with crushed stone or through seepage pits surrounded by stone. If sufficient

receiving soil exists, the organic components of the effluent are filtered out and an organic rich

biological mat or crust is developed which reduces the infiltrative capacity of the soil and creates

O¢-AI



a zone of unsaturated flow as the mat creeps across the infiltrative surface. Once full mat

development has occurred the reduced application rate promoted by the restrictiveness of the

organic mat induces unsaturated flow conditions in the surrounding soil and the quality of the

soil treatment process increases greatly. In mature systems the effluent typically becomes

ponded above the mat and the anaerobic environment developed in the septic tank is maintained

in the disposal area.



Bacteria;



Filtration is the prime mechanism affecting the removal of bacteria from the effluent as it moves

through the soil, with the degree of removal being inversely proportional to the size of the soil

particles in the unstructured matrix. The infiltrative surface of the disposal area is very effective

in this regard, especially in mature gravity flow systems with organic mats that reduce the pore

size available for wansmission. Filtration continues to occur within the soil and is assisted by

adsorption in the removal of bacteria. Adsorption occurs when an organism becomes attached

to the surface of a soil particle by chemical bonding between the surface and the organism.

Adsorption takes place on the cation exchange sites present within the soil and the rate of

adsorption is therefore controlled by soil texture and chemistry. Finer textured soils generally

have a greater adsorption capacity than coarser textured soils.



Survival of bacteria within the soil is also an important consideration in the treatment of septic

tank effluent, In order to remove the threat of pathogenic contamination of ground water the

microorganisms must be rendered inactive, Soil temperature, pH, moisture state as well as

antagonistic organisms, soil antibiotics, and the lack of nutrients combine to present a hostile

environment for pathogen survival.



Moisture state is the single most important factor controlling the removal of bacteria from septic

tank effluent within the soil. The processes described above are most efficient when they take

place in aerobic unsaturated soil. Under these conditions the larger pore spaces within the soil

are filled with air and the increased moisture lension holds moisture to the surface of individual

soil particles and within the smaller pore spaces. Septic tank effluent applied to the soil must

flow through the smaller pores and over the soil particles, providing a high ratio of surface area

contact to the volume of effluent applied, This promotes filtration and exposes the effluent to

more cation exchange sites for adsorption to occur. Higher moisture tensions slow the rate of

effluent movement through the soil, resulting in longer residence times for the hostile

environment to work on the bacteria. Labotatory and field studies have demonstrated that flow

through 2 to 4 feet of aerobic unsattrated soil provides near complete bacterial pathogen

removal.



Under saturated soil conditions all or nearly all of the pore space is occupied by water and soil

moisture tensitns are much lower, Water or ¢ffuent applied to a saturated soil moves rapidly

through the larger pores, reducing the ability of all of the treatment processes described to

occur. The application of wastewater in areas with little or no soil treatment zones over

fractured bedrock can also obviate the occurrence of these treatment processes. In nearly all of

the studies reporting pathogen contamination from wastewater application to the soll, the point

of application was directly into saturated soil conditions and/or fractured bedrock where no zone

of unsaturated soil had been provided for treatment.



Viruses;



Because viruses are very small microorganisms, adsorption rather than filtradion fs the primary

soil ueatment mechanism effecung their removal from septic tank effluent. Viruses are

clecurically charged colloidal particles whose charge is negative at most soll pH values. They

are adsorbed by anionic attraction at pH's below and by cationic resins at pH’s above thelr

isoelectric (neutrally charged) points. Negatively charged viruses are attracted to cadons which

in turn occupy cation exchange sites available on the soil particles. Virus adsorption capacity,

therefore, increases as clay content, cation exchange capacity, and specific surface area

increases, Changes in the chemical composition of the soil-water solution, such as lonle

concentration, pH, and organic matter can affect a soils adsorption capability. ‘



As with bacteria, the survival of viruses within the soil is an important consideration in effluent

treatment. Again, the soil presents a hostile environment which works to render viruses

ineffective. Studies indicate that temperature has the greatest effect on survival of viruses with

inactivation rates increasing as temperature increases.



For adsorption to be effective, close contact between soil and virus particles is essential. Waste

disposal in soi] must be done in a manner so that this contact can occur (6). Soil moisture

values and effluent flow velocity or loading rate are the two most important factors in insuring

that adsorption takes place. High moisture tensions associated with unsaturated soils hold-the

effluent in close contact with the soil particles while low loading rates provides longer residency.

times for adsorption to occur. Studies have indicated that unsaturated flow through 1.5 to 2 ft.

of sandy fill at loading rates of 5 em/day will yield effluent which present no health hazard from

human enteric viruses.

be @2a



NO,-N:



The primary treatment processes operating on nitrogen compounds within the soil are

mineralization, nitrification, and denitrification. Nitrogen entering the soil from septic tank

effluent is primarily in the form of the ammonium jon and secondarily in the form of organic

compounds. Organi¢ compounds are mineralized by microbes within the soil, resulting in the

convertion of organic N to the ammonium ion. Ammonium ions are positively charged and are

quickly attached to cation exchange sites within the soll. In unsaturated aerobic soil conditions

nitrifying bacteria oxidize the ammonium ion to niwite and then to the nitrate ion (NO,-).

NO,-N is a highly soluble negatively charged compound which is repelled from the cation

exchange sites within the soil and is free to move with the percolating water to the water table,

Several studies have indicated that there is a nearly complete conversion of the organic nitrogen

and ammonium ion to NO,-N within the first few inches of entering the aerobic treatment zone.



Once created, some of the NO,-N can be removed from the percolating effluent, provided soil

conditions are present which are conducive to the denitrification of the NO,-N. Denitrification

is a process in which NO,-N is reduced to gaseous nitrogen compounds by biochemical

reduction. Two enzymes produced by facultative denitrifying bacteria under anaerobic

conditions (i.¢. dissimulatory nitrate reductase and dissimulatory nitrite reductase) are the

catalysts which permit this process to occur. In order for denitrification to be a benefit in the

treatment process, the percolating effluent must encounter an anaerobic (saturated) soil condition

which has a suitable carbon energy source for the denitrifying bacteria. These conditions are

most likely to occur in soils that are saturated near the soil surface. One study, in fact, reported

very high rates of NO,-N removal from ground water after flowing only a few feet through

wetland soils (poorly drained).



GROUNDWATER IMPACTS



Groundwater is the first recipient of sewage effluent disposed of in properly constructed and

designed septic systems. Although the septic fank/soil treatment system: is effective in

substandally reducing many of the contaminants associated with sewage effluent, the effluent

alters the natural background ground water quality in the vicinity of the septic tank leachfield

system, .



Drinking Water Considerations: ;

Throughout history, poor drinking water quality has led to numerous disease outbreaks. As a

result, the medical profession has promulgated standards for drinking water quality, which offer

protection from waterbome disease. The current drinking water timiting standards for the

"problem constituents described above are as follows:



The drinking water standards and maximum contaminant limits are divided into two separate

categories. Primary and secondary standards have been established because some of the

contaminants listed have been linked to health problems. NO,-N, synthetic organic compounds

and many metals fall into this category.



The secondary standards have been established for reasons of aesthetics, taste, or other

non-health reasons. Iron and manganese cause taste and laundry staining problems fot instance.



a. Bacteria - One colony per 100 milligrams water



b. Synthede Organic Compounds - Although standards for common organic compounds

vary, many of the current recommended limits are below 100 parts per billion in

drinking water, with some recommended limits as low as 5 parts per billion. This is

equivalent to one ounce in about 1.5 million gallons. The current drinking water

standard for benzene, a common constituent of gasoline, is $ parts per billion.



c. Nutrients - The current drinking water standard for NO,-N is 10 mg per liter. There

is no drinking water standard for phosphorus.



d. Other Constituents - Drinking water standards for the other constituents are: Chlorides

+ 250 mg per liter; Specific Conductance - no limit; Toxic metals - varies, but typically

lower than .1 mg per liter

fC7AL



SURFACE WATER IMPACTS



Surface water resources of The U.S. Virgin Islands are comprised of two major categories,

inland or fresh water resources and coastal water resources, Both categories have been

recognized nationally as being vital resources beneficial to the economic and environmental

well being of the country. Past buman activities associated with cultural encroachment on

these resources resulted in wide spread degradation of their quality through the discharges

of pollutants and loss through conversion for urban uses. In response to these activities

Congress enacted the Clean Water Act (CWA) to abate and control sources of water

pollution, The initial thrust of the CWA provided for the regulation of point sources of

pollution through the Nationa! Pollutant Discharge Elimination System of section 402 of the

act and the discharge of dredged and Gill materia! through section 404. In 1987 Congress

amended the “Declaration of Goals and Policy” section of the CWA to include nonpoint

sources of pollution and enacted section 319 to the CWA, establishing # national program

to control nonpoint sources of pollution through tbe adoption and implementation of



, management programs. Additionally, in 1990 Congress enacted legislation (Coastal Zone



Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990) which requires Coastal Zone Management

programs established under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as well as Nonpoint

Source programs established under section 319 of the CWA to address the impact of

nonpoint sources of pollution to coastal waters.



Discharge of domestic wastewater to the environment through the use of septic systems has

been widely recognized as a source of nonpoint pollution which can affect surface water

quality. Pollutants of concern which have been shown to detrimentally impact water quality

are nutrients and pathogens, Nutrients are nitrogen and phosphorous compounds while

pathogens are disease causing micro-organisms that are present in the feces of infected

individuals. The presence, fate and contaminate transport mechanisms of these pollutants

within the subsurface environment is thoroughly discussed elsewhere in this document



Nutrients introduced into the subsurface environment from septic systems are typically

delivered to surface water resources through groundwater discharge with the density of

septic systems adjacent to these resources controlling the level of nutrients being delivered.

Some nutrients and pathogens, resulting from the surface discharge of failed septic systems

built in unsuitable soil conditions, can reach surface water resources through urban ninoff.

Pathogens can also be delivered through groundwater discharge in areas where adjacent

septic systems are built to close to or in highly fractured bedrock formations that do not

have the ability to remove them prior to the waste stream reaching the groundwater table.



All plant growth requires nutrients as energy sources for metabolism. In surface water

environments low Jevels of nutrients from naturally occurring sources, typically less than 0.3



 tog/I for nitrogen and 0.05 mg/l for phosphorous, are the limiting factors controlling aquatic



plant growth. The presence of nutrients in concentrations above natural background levels

as a result of adjacent human encroachments have been shown to induce excessive aquatic

plant growth activity, resulting in a degradation of surface water quality through a process

termed as “cultural eutrophication”. The increased level of organic matter added to surface

water systems through this process can rapidly deplete the resources oxygen supply and



block sunlight penetration through increased turbidity levels. These events result in adverse

impacts to habitat quality for fisheries and other aquatic plants as well as interfering with

recreational activities such as swimming and boating. Phosphorous {s typically the Ilmiting

nutrient of concern controlling aquatic plant growth in fresh water resources while nitrogen

is the limiting nutrient of concern for coastal water resources.



The presence of pathogens in surface water resources is of a concern with respect to health

related issues, Recreational activities such as swimming can be impacted from the closing

of beaches due.to pathogen contamination. Literature review conducted by others report

58 incidences of shellfish waters being closed or restricted in the Mid-Atlantic ocean as a

result of contamination from urban runoff and 11 incidences of closure resulting from

pathogen contamination from septic systems.



Be.

€~al



OTHER ALTERNATIVES FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL



In areas in which an adequate area of suitable soils is not present, or where limiting conditions

occut, alternative disposal systems, including surface discharge, evapotranspiration beds and

sewage lagoons, are, at times, appropriaté.



FILTRATION



Although the use of filtration followed by disinfection and surface discharge is not a

recommended alternative for single family homeowner operated on-site wastewater systems, it

may present an alternative for small community and hotel developments which propose a single

wastewater treatment system to be maintained and controlled by a competent operator.



Single pass surface sand filters are relatively simple mechanical filtration systems which use

approximately 24 inches of sand to provide polishing to septic tank effluent intermittently loaded



to 2 of more filtration units. These systems may present some odor problems and require:



periodic raking of the surface to break-up the hard crust which develops, Buried sand filters

were developed as an alternative in order to minimize the offensive odor oftentimes associated

with surfece filters. These units are typically designed with 1 to 3 gallon per day per square

foot loading rates intended to provide adequate detention times necessary to achieve maximum

suspended solids removal.



AEROBIC LAGOONS



Aerobic lagoons have been proposed for rural areas where conventional septic systems are not

possible. The design of aerobic lagoons is similar to that used for the stabilization ponds,

oxidation ponds and aerobic lagoons utilized in many large wastewater treatment plants. A

municipal oxidation pond will typically use a detention time of approximately 30 days.

Household aerobic Jagoons, due to their much smaller size and increased chance of short

circuiting, are typically sized with a detention time of 100 days corresponding to a surface area

of approximately 220 square feet per person and a liquid depth of 3 feet. The minimum

recommended size of an aerobic lagoon is 900 square feet, with improved operation noted when

a minimum size of 1,050 square feet is used. Anaerobic conditions may result in the bottom

sediments (facultative lagoons) with aerobic treatment layers only present on the surface. This

may lead to increased odor problems, and therefore should be avoided or closely monitored.



The effluent quality of an aerobic lagoon can be generally very good; especially in warm

climates where greater than 90 percent BOD reductions may be accomplished. The unit should

be preceded by a septic tank and should be located 150 to 200 feet downwind of the nearest

residence, open to direct sunlight and wind. Berms and fences shduld be constructed

surrounding the lagoon utilizing proper construction techniques including 3:1 sideslopes, a 4-foot

wide top and 2 feet of available freeboard.



EVAPOTRANSPIRATION



It is estimated that there are approximately 5,000 evapotranspiration units currently in the United

States. Evapotranspiration and evapotranspiration/seepage systems have been proposed as a

simple solution to the widespread wastewater disposal and ground water contamination problems,

Evapotranspiration systems utilize capillary action in shallow sand beds or trenches to draw

liquid up towards the surface and the plant root zone where it is removed by evaporation or

utilized by vegetative transpiration. An evapotranspiration/seepage system uses the limited

infiltrative capacity of the soils surrounding an unlined evapotranspiration bed to provide soil

absorption to aid in the elimination of the applied liquid load.



Many factors affect the rate of evapotranspiration at a particular site including the available solar

radiation, temperature, elevation, relative humidity, wind speed, soil moisture availability, plant

density and species distribution, and bed surface area. Additional factors which need to be

considered in the design and siting of an evapotranspiration bed include the annual and seasonal

temperature patterns and rainfall intensity and duration.



Evapotranspiration beds are best suited for hot, semi-arid regions. The heavy rainfalls that are

typical of the Virgin Islands climate makes evapotranspiration of limited use as a sole treatment

method. While a conventional soil absorption system may actually involve some degree of

evapotranspiration in the removal of nutrients and liquid wastes, this impact is usually neglected

in the design of soil absorption systems.



PEAT BED FILTRATION



Peat moss has proven to be effective in the removal of trace materials (copper, nickel, cobalt,

and zinc) and has been successfully used in the treatment of industrial wastes. Nineteen cities

in Finland use peat bogs for municipal wastewater treatment and studies have been conducted

in Wisconsin regarding the use of peat bogs for the polishing of effluent from sewage lagoons

and secondary treatment plants. Peatlands, peat trenches, and swamplands have been used as

a main form of wastewater treatment, following pretreatment in a septic tank and aerated

receiving pond, in the northern region of NW Quebec.



Studies conducted in Maine on the construction and use of Sphagnum peat beds for wastewater

treatment reveals that these systems may indeed offer some benefits but will need increased study

to prove their worth, and if found to be acceptable will require competent designers and

installers. Peat beds display a range of hydraulic conductivities, depending upon the degree of

humidification, water content, dry density, type of peat and depth of sample. The reported study



utilized a 75 cm (30 inch) deep peat bed and loading rate of 1.5 em/d (0.35 gpd/sf). The results

of the study indicate that the peat bed worked satisfactorily with no problems or odors and no



visible ponding of effluent.

9C~AT



ANAEROBIC FILTERS



Anaerobic filters have since been developed as a pretreatment device for domestic discharges

and for high strength or acidic industrial wastes, and are currently receiving increased attention

as an alternative treatment process designed to anaerobically treat and dentrify aerobic treatment

unit effluent.



Anagrobic plug flow filters are chambers filled with a solid media which promotes fixed film

and interstitial microbial growth. These chambers are usually operated in an upflow mode and

can be as simple 4s a concrete septic tank or water-tight chamber filled with rock. Anaerobic

plug flow filter systems provide many advantages to the use of aerobic filters, including the

removal of organics as gases like methane, carbon dioxide and nitrogen rather than fixed as new

cell material. This results in a decreased sludge volume which is 6-10 times as dense as an

aerobic sludge. Additional advantages include the ability of the system to handle shock loads,

the ability of the system to survive for extended periods on no load at all, an improved effluent

quality wansported to the soil absorption system, and low cost of operation and maintenance.



DISINFECTION



Disinfection of wastewaters can be accomplished by a variety of chemical, physical, mechanical,

and radiation techniques designed to physically trap the bacteria cell of to inactivate the cell by

mechanisms causing damage to the cell wall, aleration of the cell permeability, alteration of the

colloidal nature of the protoplasm or inhibition of the enzyme activity. Disinfection of

household wastewaters has been advocated in many states prior to surface discharge to water

bodies, Simple disinfection devices which have demonstrated some reliability in domestic use

include ultraviolet radiation using mercury vapor lamps and dry feed chlorination systems.

Proper disinfection requires a clarified effluent as suspended solids, metals, and refractory

organics interfere with the process, Because of this need for a highly purified effluent, sand

filters or some other system may be necessary prior to disinfection.



SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES



The preceding sections evaluate non-conventional and modified treatment processes intended to

provide an alternative to the conventional septic system. Many of the weatment options

discussed in the preceding paragraphs have processes which go beyond the scope of the simple

subsurface septic system and would approach being classified as sewage treatment facilitics.

Sewage treatment facilities have been used in the Virgin Islands for many years to treat

wastewater flows from urban areas housing developments, hotels, and other projects.



Sewage treatment facilities generally include primary settling followed by aerobic treatment,

secondary settling, filtration, and disinfection. Effluent disposal is usually accomplished through



ocean outfallirrigation or some form of surface disposal.

J



DISCHARGE FROM PRIVATE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS



Because of reasons outlined elsewhere in this report, it appears that the use of package

treatment plants will be needed to treat sewage generated on the islands, The use of these

plants then leads to the need for treatment and disposal of the outflow from them. The

characteristics of this outflow is shown in the following table:



Septic System Effluent vs. Advanced Wastewater

Treatment Facility Effluent Characteristics



Influent Effluent Quality? 3



BOD, 300 170 15

Suspended Solids 300 60 <10

Total Nitrogen (as N) 45 42 <10

Ammonia-Nitrogen (as N) 12 40 <2

Nitrate-Nitrogen (as N) 0.6 0.04 <10

Total Phosphorus (as P) 25 14 10

Fecal Coliform 3x104 5x106 <100

(coliform/100 ml)



1. Measured prior to land application



2. All values in mg/l except as noted



3. Secondary and treatment followed by identification and disinfection



REFERENCES: (1) Canter, L.W., and Robert C. Knox, Septic Tank Systems Effects -

on Ground Water Quality, Lewis Publishers, Inc, Chelsea,

Michigan 1985. A



(2) Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution Control! File Data.



‘(3) USEPA, Alternative for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems,

EPA-625/4-77-011, 1977.

During the disposal process, the effluent is either discharged directly to surface waters or



ground waters. Depending on which type of discharge is selected, the method of treatment



will vary. Sewage treatment facilities generally include primary settling followed by aerobic



treatment, secondary settling, filtration, and disinfection. Effluent disposal is usually TERRACE FRONT oe



accomplished through ocean outfall, irrigation or some form of surface disposal. SURFACE coat Terrace ORIGINAL GROUND

Sewage treatment facilides have the potential to produce an effluent far superior to that —— + =



produced by conventional septic tank systems. Aerobic biological treatment processes are Ee ay ie $—

capable of removing substantial amounts of BOD and TSS over and above that removed in ss :



the conventional septic tank. More importantly, the process is capable of nitrifying the CONVENTIONAL STEP-UP



ammonia in the wastewater to nitrate-nitrogen, which then can be removed through a TERRACE TERRACE



denitrification process. Disinfection is also typically employee at such facilities providing



significant reduction in the number of pathogenic organisms ia the wastewater prior to its



release into the environment.



Surface Water Discharge:



Surface water discharge will normally be a direct discharge to the ocean. ponds, streams,



guts or other accumulations of waters. This type of discharge is generally associated with



moderate to large waste water treatment facilities serving communities or government



operated, A permit under Chapter 7, Title 12, Section 182 of the rules and regulations of ORIGINAL GROUND



the VI is needed for any surface water discharge. This will normally require at least SURFACE eran TERRACE SURFACE (> 8%)



secondary treatment of the discharge and under some circumstances additional treatment. TERRACE BACK SLOPE TEARACE

() 2=8%i ) ( (2-85)



Ground Water Discharge: a _ =



R % ~—



aoe sae



=



Ground water discharge is accomplished by several methods to include seepage pits, leach s

fields, wetlands, land application and others. In these methods, effluent is applied to the soil



and a combination of natural physical, chemical, and biological processes within the plant- ACERRACE ck STEP-OOWN



soil -water matrix, provide the desired treatment. Again, because of conditions unique to TERRACE



the Virgin Islands, only one system of land application appears to be practical, This system

is called the overland flow system.



Overland Flow System:



The overland flow system functions when effluent is'applied to the upper portions of sloping,

grass covered fields and allowing it to flow over the vegetated surface. These grass covered

fields are normally called terraces. At the bottom of the slope a series of collection ditches

are used to collect the treated effluent, which can be reused or discharged to surface waters.

This process is particularly suited to solls with very flow permeability, in that it is not

dependent on infiltration and the treated effluent is discharged as a point source.



The principle objectives of this system are to achieve secondary efMuént quality when TYPES OF OVERLAND FLOW TERRACES

applying screened raw wastewater and high levels of nitrogen, BOD, and SS removais.

9C-AL



TASTCUAIEE

GRASS ong

_



\ VECETATIVE Gittee



CVAPOTRANSPIGATION



hunoer



ee

a



SHEE Flay

SLOPE 2-08 |



ft

PERcouation



(a) HTORAULIO PATH YT



aUHOFEF

cOLALe LION



(dO) PICTORIAL YICN OF SPRINKLER LPPLICRTioN



OVERLAND FLOW



CURRENT PRACTICES



Several areas of concern have developed through the preparation of this report in which

septic system practices being used in the U.S. Virgin Islands are in direct conflict with the

present understanding of their design, construction, operation and the resultant effect

thereof on public heajth issues and environmental quality. Some of these concerns may

have simple solutions solvable through rule changes while others will require difficult

decisions regarding restrictions on the use of septic systems in certain areas.



Design requirements for septic systems appear to be modeled after U.S. Public Health

Service recommendations of 1960's vintage and have not been reviewed since the 1970's.

They do not provide for the sdequate sizing of system components, adequate assessment of

the suitability of a site for septic system placement, or adequate separation distances from

physical constraints (see Log Size); considerations which can lead to premature failure and

public health risk from inadequately treated wastewater carrying pathogens being discharged

to the surface (see Site Assessment) or into bedrock aquifers (see Groundwater Quality

Protection).

au fhe



EXISTING REGULATIONS .

SEPTIC SYSTEMS



New septic systems are regulated as part of the Environmental Laws and Regulatlons of the

Virgin Islands, Title 19, 1979. This publication describes how septic systems shall be

designed and constructed along with percolation test criteria and dimensional criteria. A

synopsis of the regulations are as follows:



A. — Loration of Sewage Systems



Location and installation of the sewage disposal system shall be such that, with

reasonable maintenance, it will function in a sanitary manner and will not create a

nuisance nor endanger the safety of any domestic water supply. In determining a

tuitable location for the system, consideration shall be given to the size and shape

of the lot, slope of natural and finished grade, depth of ground water, proximity to

existing or future water supplies, and possible expansion of the system.



(1) No part of the system shall be located so that surface drainage from its

location may reach any domestic water supply:



(2) The lot size shail be sufficient to permit proper location, installation, and

operation.



B. Sentic systems or alternative systems are allowed. If a “septic tank system” is

employed, it must consist of a septic tank, subsurface-disposal field, or seepage pits.

or combination of the two,



C. Minimum Distances (in feet) required between septic system components and the

following items:



Subsurface

Septic Disposal Seepage

Tank_ Eield Pits

Property Line . 5 10 10

Any Domestic Water Supply 50 50* 100

Dwellings $ “  10e" 2

Streams ss nnn 9§ ane

Large Trees tte 10 tase

Seepage Pit nn 6, 3 x dia.

ba Shall be increased per Dept. of Health recommendations where existing wells are encountered.



baie May be reduced to 5 feet where proper drainage conditions est.



Septic Tanks

The size of septic tanks is based on the number of bedrooms, the minimum tank size



being 500 gallons for a two bedroom home. The dimensions and construction must

met the following standards:



(1) Tank shall be watertight construction, made of sound and durable materials,

not subject to excessive corrosion or decay.



(2) Tank shall be a minimum of 33 inches wide, with a liquid depth between 4

and 6 1/2 feet,



(3) The inlet and outlet of each tank or compartment shall be baffled to provide

a storage volume for scum.



(4) Access manholes shall be provided over the inlet and outlet of the tank.

Subsurface Di L Field



(1) At least two percolation tests are required at different locations on the

disposal field according to a prescribed method. Where fissured rock

formations are encountered, tests shall be made under the direction and

supervision of the Department of Health.



(2) The total bottom area of the disposal field trenches shall be based on the: (a)

percolation rate of the soil and, (b) number of bedrooms in the dwelling. The

minimum trench bottom area per dwelling unit shall be 150 square feet.



(3) — Soils with a percolation rate over 60 minutes per inch are unsuitable except

for special design with seepage pits.



(4) There shall be a minimum of two @) disposal trenches per field and trenches

shail be:



(a) 18" to 36" Wide.



(b) =——:18" to 36" Deep.



(ce) Between 6 and 9 feet minimum spacing, center to center of trench,

depending on trench width.



(5) Pipe for trenches shall be a minimum of 4 inches in diameter and shall be

perforated or laid with open joints.

BC-AT



(6) Trench fill material shall be crushed stone, gravel, slag, clean under or similar

material acceptable to the Department of Health. Fil shall extend a

minimum of 6 inches below pipe and 2 inches over pipe.



(7) Trenches may be terraced to maintain proper grade and cover.



F. Seepage Pits



(1) “Use of seepage pits with septic tanks is acceptable only when such use is

Necessary because of soil conditions of topography and when such use is

satisfactory to the Department of Health. Seepage pits shall not be used in

limestone areas or in localities where shallow wells are used as a source of

water supply.”



(2) The size of the seepage pits shall be based on the: (a) character of the soil

{i.e., sand, gravel, or sandy/gravelly clay), and (b) the number of bedrooms

in the dwelling.



(3) Seepage pits are unsuitable in "heavy tight clays, hard pan, rock, or other

impervious formation".



(4) Seepage pits shall be lined with brick, stone, block, or similar materials at

least four inches thick laid in cement mortar above the inlet, and dray with

two-to-four-inch open vertical joints below the inlet.



G. Distribution. Box



A distribution box shall be constructed at the head of each disposal field for the

purpose of adequately distributing’ flows between disposal trenches and/or seepage

pits,



WASTEWATER FLOWS



On-site wastewater disposal facilities are designed on the basis of the estimated volume of

wastewater flows, Sanitary wastewater is defined as wastewater discharged from plumbing

fixtures into the private disposal systems that the system will experience, EPA estimates

that the overall average daily wastewater flow from a. typical residential dwelling is

approximately 45 gal/capita/day. While the average daily flow experienced at one residence



compared to that of another can vary considerably, it Is typically no greater than 60 gped

and seldom dxceeds 75 gpcd. Maximum daily flows, on the other hand, are estimated by

multiplying a safety factor to increase the average flow sate, The general practice in the

continental United States is to use a value of 75 gallons per person per day for sewage

disposal design,



In the Virgin Islands, the amount of wastewater Now is dependent upon and related to the

availability and perceived cost of the water supply. During the wet season, when a

household's cistem is near overflowing and more rain is expected, the water use may Jump

to 80 or 90 gal/capita/day. But, during a drought, when the cistern Is almost empty and a

load of a trucked in water is necessary, extreme water conservation methods are usually

employed, The water consumption may drop to 20 to 30 gal/capita/day.



The Virgin Islands Environmental Laws and Regulations do not specify a per capita design

value for wastewater flows to disposal systems. Instead, disposal fields are designed by

correlating the trench seepage area with a percoladon rate and the number of bedrooms

served by the system. Comparing the regulation's absorption area values with similar dan

published by EPA, it can be inferred that the current regulations are assuming a wastewater

flow of approximately 40 to 50 gallons per person per day.

LOT SIZE AND SETBACK DIMENSIONS



Current land development codes allow lots with on-site septic systems,to be as small as one

quarter acre in size. This practice presents two areas of concern. The first relates to the

high density of development allowed on septic systems and the resultant impacts to

groundwater quality. The second concern relates to the lack of sufficient land area to meet

the spatial requirements of the construction of a house, cistern and septic system while

maintaining appropriate separation distances, especially on sloping sites. Setback distances

refer to the horizontal or lateral distance between the various components of the septic

tank/soil absorption system and areas, or items of concern. For the most part, these include

points of possible human contact such as cisterns or dwellings. Generally, the specified

separation distances are intended to provide adequate transport time for the passage of

effluent through the soil where the concentrations of contaminants are expected 10 be

reduced by filtration, straining, physical-chemical processes, biological activity, dilution, and



dispersion.

Title 19 Regulations currently require that in siting septic tanks, disposal fields, and seepage



pits, certain minimum horizontal separation distances be maintained with respect to: water

supply, property lines; and dwellings while the regulations specify that the ten foot



separation be maintained between property line and disposal fields, no consideration is given -



to the fact that there may be a large difference in elevation between the septic system and

the aburting property. It is not uncommon to find a disposal field placed a short distance

away from the top of a one story retaining wall or a very steep slope and the septic system

leaching out at the toe onto the abutting property.



BUILDING ADDITIONS



The Department of Planning and Natural Resources Permit Division reviews new septic

system designs through the “Earth Change" permit application process. During this process,

the Department reviews the septic tank details, drainage trench or seepage pit Jocations, site

grading, number of bedrooms, etc. Based on the apptoved plans, the building and septic

system are built and an occupancy permit is issued.



It appears that, once a building is constructed, any further building additions or alterations

does not necessarily involve the Earth Change Permit process and therefore does not

necessitate a review of the existing septic system to ¢nsure that its size will accommodate

additional bedrooms or other increases in occupancy.



INSPECTIONS



Once septic plans are approved during the Earth Change Permit Process it has been noted

that many times the systems are not located as shown on the plans, Although there are

Many opportunities for inspection by DPNR representatives it has been noted that

inspections are either not as rigorous as one might expect, or the inspections are not

undertaken.



mm mm



SEPTIC SYSTEM FAILURE



In the continental United States, septic system failure is generally considered to have

occurred when the soil absorption system either fails to accept wastewater or fails to

adequately treat the wastewater prior to discharge to the ground water.



In the Virgin Islands, many regulators consider failure of a septic system to occur only when

there are complaints about sewage spilling over to abutters property or when strong odors

are enough to cause neighbors to complain. :



The Health Departments on St, Croix and St. Thomas have indicated berween 300 and 400

septic system failures are reported on each island every year. Although failures aré to be

expecied, these figures appear to be high with respect to the population of the islands which

utilize septic systems and the likelihood that a significant percentage of failures are not

reported. Public health officials attributed the high premature failure rates to the fact that:

(1) construction in soils with low permeabilities; (2) improper construction; (3) small lot

sizes on sloping sites; (4) the fact that there are no requirements in place for septic system

upgrades when the use of an existing structure is expanded; and (5) inadequate design

requirement for septic system components. Seepage pits that are discharging waste water

directly to fractured bedrock are not considered to be a "failure"



Given the information acquired during the development of this report, it is estimated that

the septic system failure rate is significantly higher than currently realized. ‘The

predominant cause of these failures is improper siting. Septic systems cannot operate

properly in impermeable soils nor bedrock. Once a septic system is located in an area that

does not have suitable sofls and that system goes into failure, the only reasonable way to

reduce the impact of the failure is to:



(a) provide holding tank capacity in which to store sanitary waste until the sewage

can be removed by a septage hauler for disposal at a treatment facility. Due

to the high cost, this option is usually only a short term solution.



(b) Limit the amount of wastewater discharged by employing water conservation

techniques. Wash clothes at laundromats.



(c) Connect to public or private sewer.

O€-Al



POLLUTION OF GROUNDWATER



Septic systems are very efficient in removing nearly all of the contaminants present in

domestic waste water when they are properly sited, designed and constructed. Use of septic

systems in areas that have soil conditions which are capable of accepting and transmitting

septic tank effluent through several feet of soil under unsaturated flow conditions is

compatible with protecting groundwater quality for drinking water supplies as long as the

density if installations is controlled to maintain groundwater nitrate-nitrogen levels below

10 mg/l. Use of septic systems which are improperly sited and constructed as well as in

areas with unsuitable soil conditions have been shown to discharge pathogens to

groundwater aquifers and have caused numerous disease outbreaks. The density of septic

systems has been shown to have a direct relationship with the level of nitrate-nitrogen in the

undeflying groundwater table. Although no known studies have been conducted to date to

specifically determine the fate of contaminants introduced into the environment through

current practices on the U.S. Virgin Islands, the routine presence of fecal bacteria and

elevated nitrate levels reported in the existing studies of the islands aquifers clearly indicates

a near certainty that existing septic system practices have already impacted groundwater



quality.

PATHOGEN CONTAMINATION:



Current septic system practice in the U.S. Virgin Islands which is a primary concern with

respect to potential pathogen contamination of groundwater ls the construction of seepage

pits or dry wells in areas with shallow soil depths over highly fractured volcanic bedrock or

limestone formations. These areas comprise nearly all of the existing and/or potential

building sites on St. Thomas and St. John and cover a large percentage of those on St.

Croix. As these sites are also located on steeply sloping landforms, the typical homesite is

created by excavating extensive cuts into the landform and spreading the excavated rubble

to create a level area to construct the home and septic system. Any natural soil materials

present on the site are removed or destroyed in this process. Depending on its location on

the site, the seepage pit used for final disposal of the septic tank effluent is constructed

either directly into the bedrock formation or the rubble derived from that formation used

to create the building site.



This practice allows a direct connection for the septic tank effluent to pass directly into the

bedrock aquifers without the benefit of unsaturated flow through a sufficient soil medium

to effect pathogen removal. While plant uptake by root masses located within the fracture

systems close to the ground surface may account for some removal of the septic tank

effluent, it is unlikely that they are capable of removing the eatire waste stream and

Saturated flow within the fracture system can result in pathogen movement into the

underlying groundwater within the aquifer. This is especially true during periods of heavy

rainfall events which ate the primary source of recharge to the aquifers. Water levels in

bedrock wells have been noted to have wide fluctuations during these events as recharge

waters enter the aquifer at a rate greater than the cracks and fissures are capable of



transmitting them, This results in a flushing action with rapid migration of contaminants

present to the groundwater,



Alternative natural systems which have been used elsewhere to overcome conditions of

sballow soils over bedrock formations primarily consist mound systems. Soil materials

capable of providing suitable treatment capabilities, usually medium to coarte textured

sands, are imported'jo the site to create the necessary separation distance between a

disposal field or trench system and the bedrock formation. In order to control erosion

problems, construction of these systems are typically restricted to slopes of 25% or less.

These systems are not practical solutions in the U.S. Virgin Islands for the following reasons:



° Construction materials necessary to build such a system are not readily

available. Sand must be imported to the Islands and, where available, is very



expensive.

. Slopes of building sites typically exceed 25%,



. The spatial requirements necessary to build such 2 system are not provided

in the current minimum lot size standards.



“ The cost of constructing such a system is estimated to exceed $35,000 for new

construction with the cost of retrofit to an existing developed site being much

higher,



Pathogens are microscopic disease causing organisms that are indigenous to human and

animal digestive tracts. They consist of certain bacteria, viruses and protozoa that are

present in extremely high numbers in individuals who are eltber infected or are carriers of

the disease and are shed through the feces of these individuals. The primary objective of

septic system design and construction is to provide the treatment mechanisms necessary to

effectively remove these organisms from the waste water stream before it reaches an

underlying aquifer formation. Pathogens which are allowed to reach such formations pose

a threat to individuals or populations who rely on them for potable drinking water sources.



A literature review conducted by Marylynn Yates and presented in Septic Tank Density and

Ground-Water Contamination (Vol. 23, No. SGROUND WATER-September-October

1985) reports that "The consumption of untreated or inadequately treated groundwater was

responsible for over one half of all the waterborne outbreaks and 45% of all cases of

waterborne disease in the Unites States from 1971 to 1979. (Disease) causing agent were

determined in 45% of the outbreaks. Only 1196 were caused by toxic chemicals; the vast

majority were caused by pathogenic (disease-causing) microorganisms, The remainder were

classified as acute gastrointestinal illnesses of unknown (cause). It is believed that many of

these were caused by viruses such as the Norwalk virus or rotoviruses, for which detection

methods have only,recently become available. Overflow or seepage of sewage from septic

tanks or cesspools was responsible for 43% of the outbreaks and 63% of the cases of Illness

caused by the use of untreated, contaminated ground water. Thus, septic tanks represent



. po

mH mmm H HH HE EH Hmm EE EO UC

a significant threat not only to preserving the potability of ground water, but also to human

health.”



Removal of pathogeas from septic tank effluent by soil mediums has been widely studied

and shown to be effective when the effluent is able to Dow though & sufficient depth of

aerobic soil under unsaturated flow conditions. The treatment mechanisms involved in this

process are discussed in detail] in Part 1 of this report. Simply stated, pathogens are

removed from the waste stream through filtration and adsorption by soil particles. High

moisture tensions present within the soil under unsaturated flow conditions retain the

pathogens within the soil profile long enough for them to rendered inactive through natural

die off due to hostile environmental conditions. of microbial utilization by other soil

organisms, Soil depth, texture, moisture content and temperature are critical characteristics

in determining the effectiveness of these processes. Insufficient soil depth, coarse textured

mediums, saturated flow conditions and low soil temperatures can individually or jointly

minimize or obviate pathogen removal from a waste stream underneath a septic system.



The Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Lab in Eavironmental Effects of Septic Tank

Systems (U.S. Department of Commerce-National Technical Information Service, PB-272

702, Aug 77) reports "Whether or not pollutants moving from the tile fields through the soil

reach the ground water and subsequently a water supply depends to a large extent on the

type of subsurface material involved and the thickness. Figure 6 presents four common

aquifer types which may transmit pollutants great distances. Conventional septic tank

systems should be avoided in areas where fractured or cavernous formations, such as the

bottom three rock types, are less than a few feet below the bottom of the absorption trench.

Such rock types provide a minimum of the three major processes necessary to retard or

control the movements of pollutants-~filtration, adsorption and microbial degradation.

Generally, the fissures and channels are too large to provide significant filtration. The

detention time and active surface areas available are not great enough for appreciable

adsorption or microbial degradation to occur.” It is important to note that volcanic rock

(the most prevalent rock type in the U.S. Virgin Islands) comprises aquifer type 4 in the

reference figure and carbonate rock (the Kingshill Formation on St. Croix) comprises

aquifer type 2. a, .



Once allowed to enter a saturated aquifer, pathogens have been shown to survive and

remain active for extended periods of time. In Survival and Movement of Fecal Indicator

Bacteria in Soil under Conditions of Saturated Flow (Journal of Environmental Quality,

Vol.7,n0.1, 1978) Hagedorn etal. studied the movement and survival rates of Streptococcus

faecalis and Escherichia coll under saturated soil conditions. Inoculations of both bacteria

1 were introduced into saturated soil conditions and the rate of movement and survival were

monitored through sampling wells place various distances from the inoculation point. They

teport "Three concepts of major importance can be derived from the.data on the presence

of the indicator bacteria in the test wells. First, the bacteria moved long distances in a

relatively short period of time in a soil with a surface gradient of only 2%. Second, the

populations of indicator bacteria in the various wells reached maxima during intervals

closely associated with the rise of the water table following major rainfall periods. Third,

both E. coli and S. faecalis survived in appreciable numbers in the saturated soil throughout



a 32 day sampling schedule, and with the wet and cool soil conditions, it is highly probable

that their survival would extend considerably beyond 32 days.*



Keswick and Gerba conducted a Hterature review of the then avaijable information on virus

contamination of groundwater and reported their findings in Viruses in groundwater

(Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 14, 1980). Although little was known about

virus removal and transport mechanisms at the time, one field study showed virus survival

for at least 28 days in groundwater and laboratory experiments showed virus survival in

excess of 200 days in drinking water. They suggest that “Since the effects of sunlight is

eliminated and the temperature is lower, even longer survival times would be probable in

groundwater’. in 1982 Keswick, Gerba, etal. published the results of a study titled Survival



(. Environ. Health, A17). "In

summary, it was found that human enteric viruses survive longer than 24 days in

groundwater (length of study).”



NITRATE CONTAMINATION:



Second in concern to bacterial and viral contamination from septic systems is the movement

of nitrate-nitrogen into the groundwater. Excessive amounts of nitrate nitrogen in drinking

water can lead to methemoglobinemia, a condition which prevents the normal uptake of

oxygen in blood of young infants, In order to reduce its risk the Environment Protection

Agency has established a maximum contaminate level of 10 mg/l for nitrate-nitrogen in

public drinking water supplies. In addition nitrate-nitrogen has been implicated in the

formation of carcinogen in the digestive system (Cogger, On-site Septic Systems: The risk

of groundwater contamination, Journal of Environmental Health, Vol. 51, No. 1,

September/October 1988).



Cogger, Kerr, Yates and others report numerous references in which septic system practices

have resulted in local and regional nitrate-nitrogen contamination of groundwater supplies.

Long Island, Cape Cod and the Delaware coastal plain are the most notable areas which

have received extensive study. These studies demonstrate that nitrate can reach

unacceptable levels in groundwater beneath soils that are otherwise suitable for treating

septic tank effluent (Cogger). Kerr states that "The most important parameter influencing .

regional contamination from septic tank systems is the density of these facilities in a given |

area, although geology, depth to water table, and climate may effect the nature and degree ©

of the problem’.



Nitrate-nitrogen Is the end product of microbial mineralization of nitrogen rich organic

Products as wastewater passes through an aerobic biologically active soil formation (see

discussion in Part 1). This process occurs in the soil treatment zone underneath a

functioning septic systern as well as in upper soil horizons at wastewater land application

sites and results in a nearly complete conversion of organic nitrogen to nitrate-nitrogen.

Once formed nitrate-nitrogen {s a very stable soluble compound that is not affected by

norma! soil treatment mechanisms and readily migrates into the underlying water table.



Mechanisms which are capable of reducing nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in a waste stream

include plant uptake, microbial denitrification, and dilution. Nitrate-nitrogen is a fenilizer



EE a «

ZE-AL



and can be readily used by plants. Plant uptake can account for nitrate-nitrogen reduction

at land application sites where nitrate formation occurs close enough to the ground surface

to allow contact with plant root masses. Plant uptake, however, is not likely to have an

appreciable affect in reducing nitrate-nitrogen concentration underneath a functioning septic

system (Cogger). Microbial denitrification can result in reductions when nitrate-nitrogen

passes into an anaerobic soil condition which has a suitable carbon energy source to allow

the denitrification process to occur. This process typically bappens in soils with high

groundwater tables and is not a significant factor in soils with no or very deep water tables

as are typically found in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Dilution with groundwater is the most

commonly used approach to control nitrate-nitrogen conceatrations, This method requires

controlling the density of septic systems within a given area to levels at which the

groundwater recharge within the area is capable of diluting the niuate-nitrogen

concentrations generated by the septic systems to concentration below 10 mg/l. When

density of development becomes too high, dilution no longer is an effective means to conuol

nitrate-nitrogen concentrations (Cogger).



“One typical approach used to control septic system density is through minimum lot size



requirements designed to insure that the yearly volume of rainwater infiltration which occurs

on the lot is sufficient to dilute the nitrates generated by the septic system to 10 mg/! or

less. Several mathematical models have been developed to estimate the land area necessary

to accomplish this approach and/or to estimate an appropriate density of development

within a given area. One such model, i i i



was developed by the consulting firm of Geraghty & Miller, Inc and others

through the National Association of Home Builders-National Research Center. This

method has been applied to some areas in the northeast and has resulted in minimum lot

size requirements of between 3/4 and 2 acres depending on soil/slope conditions present

on the lot, Climatic conditions in the U.S. Virgin Islands, however, are considerably

different than in the northeast. Although average annual rainfall is similar, the amount of

recharge to the water table is drastically less, estimates by the U.S. Geological Society result

in about 1.5 inches per year. Applying this information through the referenced model

results in lot size requirements for the U.S. Virgin Istands of approximately 7.25 acres per

home in order to control nitrate-nitrogen contamination (figure GW1). Inputs to the model

to arrive at this figure assume an average occupancy rate of four individuals per home using

55 gallons of water per day and generating 9 pounds of nitrogen per year each (nationally

recognized standards). In addition the average annual recharge rate of one inch per year

is assumed to occur uniformly over the landscape and the nitrate-nitrogen concentration in

the homes drinking water supply is 0 mg/!. While refinements to these assumptions would

need to be made in order to implement minimum lot size requirements in the U.S. Virgin

Islands for the purposes of controlling nitrate contamination, it is obvious that the land area

required per lot would not be realistically implementable. * -



POLLUTION OF SURFACE WATER



te

Fresh water resources of the U.S. Virgin Islands are ephemeral in nature. Due to the

Islands climate and hydrogeology, groundwater tables rarely intersect and discharge to

the ground surface with the primary exception being in areas adjacent to coastal

embayments. Fresh water resources consist of intermittent stream channels, locally

known as guts, and surface impoundments, These features provide important functions

by collecting, storing and transmitting surface water munoff from major storm events,

Runoff which is able to be stored in the guts and impoundments are important water

sources for irrigation/ agricultural uses as-well as a major source of groundwater

recharge to underlying aquifers. Excess runoff which is discharged to coastal

embayments supports their unique ecosystems. As these resources serve as groundwater

recharge sources and are generally not receptors for groundwater discharge, the

operation of septic systems within their catchment areas through practices that do not

result in surface discharge of inadequately treated waste water is not Likely to cause

threats of nonpoint source pollution. Operation of septic systems through practices

which result-in high densities of failures, however, is a concern with respect to nonpoint

source pollution. Pathogens and nutrients present through the surface discharge of

inadequately treated waste water are readily incorporated within the runoff generated by

heavy storm events and are flush into surface water systems. While this may not pose

long therm threats to the guts and impoundment areas which are ephemeral and dry

most of the time, impoundments which have the ability store water on a more

permanent basis and the coastal watér resources which are receptors of pollutant laden

runoff are at risk, The areas of particular concern with respect to this issue are densely

developed areas in the alluvial and deep volcanic parent materials with montmorillonite

clay mineralogy on the Island of St Croix. These areas have large catchment areas and

are reported to have the highest incident of septic system failures.



As previously stated, Montmorillonite clays exhibit a very high shrink/swell capacity and

can absorb water at a rate of twenty to thirty times their own weight. Percolation tests

conducted as part of this study in one such soil, Hogensborg, clearly demonstrated that a

conventional percolation test could greatly over estimate these soils ability to accept and

(ransmit septic tank effluent. The Hogensborg accepted water at a uniform rate of 10

min/in for several hours and would appear 10 have stabilized, meeting the criteria for a

conventional test. In fact this soil continued to accept water 16 hours before enough

water had been applied to satisfy the montmorillonite clays absorption capacity, at which

point the swelling of the clays closed reduced the flow paths available for water

inovement to such an extent that no measurable infiltration was occurring thereafter.

The continuous application of septic tank effluent to these soils will have the same

effect, resulting in failure and surface discharge. Continuing to allow the construction of

septic systems in these areas will increase the nonpoint pollution threat from surface

water runoff generated in these areas.



Coastal waters are the most abundant and valuable surface water resources of the U.S. »

Virgin Islands, They consist of beaches, salt marshes, salt ponds, mangrove swamps,



Dy

ee



coastal embayments and shallow reefs distributed all along the Islands shorelines. Many

of these resources have unique environments that rely on fresh water sources supplied by

groundwater and surface water discharges as well as their adjacent marine environment.

As nitrogen is the limiting nutrient controlling excessive aquatic plant growth in these

environments, the concentration of nitrogen compounds in the fresh water resources

discharging to these environments is a primary concern of management programs to

abate and control nonpoint source pollution. In 1986 the U.S. Geological Service

reported that the median nitrate-nitrogen concentration of groundwater samples

collected from coastal embayment aquifers 0.2 mg/l. Although this is within the range

considered to be naturally occurring, the higher levels of nitrate-nitrogen reported in the

groundwater clearly indicates that coastal resources whose catchment areas are currenily

developed or are slated to be developed with densely placed septic systems are at risk.

This is further demonstrated by the 4.9 mg/l of nitrate-nitrogen concentration reported

in a sample collected from the coastal embayment aquifer adjacent to Cruz Bay on St.

John in 1984 by the U.S.G.S..



"Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Poilution in

Coastal Water" (EPA-840-3-92-002 January 1993) issued by the Environmental Protection

Agency recognizes the threat of nitrogen contamination to coastal waters from septic

system practices and offers general management recommendations to reduce this threat

from septic system practices for new systems as well as from existing operating systems.

Recommendations for new systems that are important considerations in protecting the

U.S. Virgin Islands coastal resources include the following:



» Insure that new On-site Disposal Systems (OSDS) are located, designed, installed,

operated, Inspected and maintained to prevent the discharge of pollutants to the

surface of the ground and to the extent practicable reduce the discharge of pollutants

into groundwaters that are closely hydrologically connected to surface water.



» Direct placement of OSDS away from unsuitable areas and to ensure that they are

designed or sited at a density so as not to adversely affect surface water or

groundwater, Unsuitable areas include ... areas overlying fractured rock that drains

directly to groundwater... Establish protective setbacks



> Where conditions indicate the nitrogen limited surface waters may be adversely

affected be excess nitrogen loading from groundwater, require the installation of

OSDS that reduce total nitrogen loadings by 50, percent...



Recommendations for managing existing operating systems include inspection programs

to insure proper operation and maintenance as well as replacement and/or retrofit of

OSDS components that reduce total nitrogen loading.



All of the discussions and arguments presented in the sections on pollution of

groundwater by pathogens and nitrates as the result of current septic system practices in

the U.S. Virgin Islands are equally applicable to the issue of nonpoint soutce pollution to

coastal waters, Although the Coastal Zone Management program of the U.S. Virgin



Islands has established low density and moderate density zoning districts adjacent to

many of the Islands Sensitive Coastal resources, it is unlikely that they will be able to

appreciably reduce the threat of nitrogen impacts to these resources from septic systems

given the minimal amount of ralowater {ofiltration available on the Islands for dilution.

The same is true when considering the use of denitrification systems as alternatives.



“4

: ¢

VE-AT



PERCOLATION TESTS



The Environmental Laws and Regulations of the Virgin Islands, Title 19, requires that

percolation tests be performed in at least two different locations on the disposal field.



The percolation test, often simply called the pere test, is a measure of a soil’s ability to

drain or “percolate” water into and through the soil. The basic method of conducting the

percolation test is to dig or auger a hole in the soil 6 to 12 inches in diameter to the

depth of the proposed soi] absorption system. Water is poured into the hole to a depth

greater than 12 inches and allowed to drain. This procedure is repeated until the rate at

which the water level drops is more or less constant. The hole is then refilled to a depth

greater than 12 inches and the amount of time it takes for the water level to drop one

inch is determined. The percolation rate, reported in minutes per inch, is used as a

determination of the suitability of the soil for absorbing septic tank effluent and for

determining the size of the leaching structure.



The clay soils in the Virgin Islands make percolation tests very difficult to perform. The

clays are typically so dry and well-structured that initial percolation rates are in the range

of porous sands and gravels (less than 10 minutes per inch), Other contributing factors

to the quick perc rates are worm/insect larvae holes, roots, and the shallow depth to

fractured bedrock. Only after constant refilling of the hole will there be a gradual

swelling of the clay particles and a decelerating pere rate. There are soils such as

Hogensborg on St Croix, that after hours of soaking, will become so impermeable there

is no measurable drop in the hole.



The small size of the disposal fields that have been constructed in areas of clay soils

indicate that one of the following is occurring:



a) Percolations are being performed in a way that does not allow the clay particles to

swell, therefore, do not approximate wet soil conditions, or



b) Percolation tests are not being performed t all and the pere rates'and disposal field

sizes are based on past practice.



RECOMMENDATIONS



RECOMMENDATION #1



Begin the process of ending the construction of septic systems that discharge septic tank

effluent into the ground. This can be accomplished by enforcing the existing US.V.L

regulations as they are now written,



Discussion:



The original intent of this study was to find ways to improve upon the existing septic

system regulations to bring them into compliance with the usual standards for design and

construction of on-site disposal of sewage effluent. The strategy in performing this study

was to assume that subsurface soil absorption (disposal trenches, beds, seepage pits) ie |.

the preferred on-site disposal option because of its rellability with a minimal amount of

maintenance. The process was then to analyze the soils, topography, geology, and other

characteristics of the Islands so that the regulations could be customized to fit the

specific circumstances. In those areas where the site characteristics are unsuitable for

soil absorption systems, alternative methods would be investigated as a last resort for on-

site disposal since these alternatives are typically the most costly to construct and require

a great deal more maintenance and supervision than soll absorption systems.



Now that the analysis of the Islands characteristics is completed, it has been found that

the vast majority of the Islands’ land areas are unsuitable for soil absorption systems, It

has also been found that thousands of the septic systems currently in operation are

located in the areas that are inappropriate for subsurface disposal and represent not only

a hazard to the environment, but more importantly, a risk to the public's health.



The U.S.V.I. Tide 19 Regulations contain some very important passages that, if

interpreted properly, can be used as a means to bring about the necessary change in

regulating septic system construction. These paragraphs are discussed as follows:



"Use of seepage pits with septic tanks is acceptable only when use {s necessary

because of soil conditions or topography and when such use is satisfactory to the

Department of Health.”



This particular regulation is the caveat that allows developers to construct septic systems

oo the Island’s steep hillsides, where shallow clay soils are underlain by fractured

bedrock. It has been demonstrated (refer to section on Ground Water Quality) that the

channels and fissures in fractured rock do not provide the filtration and absorption



mo

oe So



required to treat sewage before it reaches the groundwater. DPNR and the Department

of Health can essentially bring this practice to an end by simply recognizing this hazard

and mandating that it is no longer acceptable.



Once the option of seepage pits is unavailable, there re no reasonable alternative soil

absorption systems that can be reasonably constructed on all hillsides due to the steep

slope, small lot sizes, and cost constraints.



“(4)... Because many seasonal factors affect the results of percolation tests,

judgement is required in analyzing these results. If the tests are not conducted

during a wet season they should be repeated until the moisture conditions of the soil

approach those obtaining during the wet season. In no case shall tests be made in

filled .. .ground. Where fissured rock formations are encountered tests shall be

made only under the direction and supervision of the Department of Health.”



The current practice of constructing relatively small leaching areas in some of the

impervious or slightly pervious clay soils leads one to infer that the required percolation

tests are either not being performed or they are being performed improperly. It is

extremely important that all percolation test holes be soaked for atleast 20 hours before

measuring the percolation rate. Automatic siphons or float valves should be used to

ensure the hole is always kept full during the soaking period. It is imperative that the

soil be allowed to soak for a sufficiently long period of time to allow the soil to approach

wet season moisture conditions and the conditions it will experience if a septic system is

installed in it.



Percolation test should not be performed in areas where there is less than four feet of

naturally occurring soils above the bedrock. Even though these soils may be somewhat

pervious, there is not enough depth of soil to properly separate the bottom of in-ground

leaching trenches from the top of fissured bedrock.



mm



RECOMMENDATION #2



Extend the municipal sewage collection system and treatment plant capacity to all

populated arcas,



Discussion:



Realistically, if a non-rural community does not bave the soils, geology, or other

characteristics that allow the use of low-cost, soil absorption septic systems, the best

proven alternative is t6 create or expand municipal sewers and treatment plants, The

Public Sewer System is particularly well-suited for the Virgin Islands for the following

reasons:



a) Much of St. Croix and most of St. Thomas is densely populated and new

development continues to cause increases on the population of all three islands.



b) The physical areas of each of the Islands is smal! by mainland standards. St. Thomas

and St, John are no larger than many small mainland towns. St. Croix is only the

size of some of the smallest mainland counties. The construction of an island-wide

sewer network is no great feat considering the small land areas involved,



c) Most of the developed land and much of the undeveloped land has already been

subdivided into small, quarter-acre and half-acre lots. Municipal sewerage is the

only option that can adequately deal with environmental effects of these dense

developments. It is too late to institute proper land planning measures to account

for the land areas required for individual sewage treatment systems.



d) Municipal sewerage is the only option that allows the government the ability to

eliminate the problems with existing septic systems. Even if regulations could be

adopted so that all new septic systems would operate safely, those same regulations

would do nothing to address the non-conformance of existing septic systems. It is

extremely difficult (some would say impossible) to impose new mules and regulations

on the present population and force them to upgrade their existing systems when

poor soils, steep slopes, or other site limitations exist. Tieing into a municipal sewer,

however, is a common and politically acceptable method of undoing past problems

and mistakes.



¢) Municipal sewerage is typically the most economical alternative for urban areas. If

treatment capacity exists and only sewer extensions are necessary, costs can run in

order of $5,000 per four-member household. If both sewer and new treatment

facilities are required, these costs can increase to $10,000 to $20,000 per four-

member household. Many times federal funds are available to offset much of these

costs, particularly when potential health problems can be documented.



f) Municipal sewage treatment systems are a proven technology. Treatment plants are

servicing the major population centers on all three Islands. Although there are

9E-ALT



problems inherent in treating and disposing of large quantities of sewage, at least the

problems can be defined, addressed, and resolved in a logical manner. Compared to

the situation where thousands of individual on-site sewage treatment systems are

being operated and maintained by the average homeowner one can appreciate the

rationale for large scale treatment works. New and innovative technology are more

easily developed for larger sewage flows then individual homes, making the

alternatives greater for municipal systems.



RECOMMENDATION #53 - Private Sewage Treatment Plants (3-part recommendation)



3A) In those areas that are remote from municipal sewer, require developers to

construct privately owned sewage treatment plants (STPs) similar to the

facilities in use at the major resorts.



3B) Require that all privately owned sewage treatment facilities be operated and

maintained by certified treatment plant operators that are employees of the VI

government.



3C) Allow developers the option of providing sewer and the funds for expansion of

municipal STPs in lieu of constructing private STPs.



Discussion:



Currently, private community sanitary treatment plants (STPs) are usually owned and

operated by a hotel and condominium developments. The EPA has observed that

typically these associations are notoriously poor managers of community septic systems

(USEPA, 1977). Regulators therefore generally require appropriate assurances that the

system will be properly operated and maintained before a permit of approval is issued

(USEPA, 1977).



Publicly owned and managed community on-site STPs serving small residential

developments have been encouraged: by the United States Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA) as effective, environmentally sound, yet less expensive alternatives to



traditional sewage treatment plants, especially in rural and suburban growth areas (Train,



1976; Staudt and Niehaus, 1982). EPA has encouraged public ownership of such systems

because of the problems inherent in private ownership, which include lack of individual

tesponsibility for a failed system, improper and inadequate maintenance, improper

disposal of household wastes, and lack of alternative sources should the system fail

(USEPA, 1988). When appropriately sited. designed, installed and maintained, multi-

user systems have met with a high degree of success in many situations.



RECOMMENDATION #4



Create & program to provide a method of assuring that public and private sewage

treatment plants (STP) or innovative systems constructed, are operated and maintained

properly using the following approaches:



* Require all STP: and alternative systems be designed by a licensed sanitary engineer

and that the design engineer inspect the construction to certify that the plant meets

all the requirements of the USVI regulations and permit conditions.



Create a formal training course for STP operators that leads to STP operator

certification, Require that all operators of public and private STPs be certified.

Establish licensing fees, study guides and exam requirements.



* Require a guarantee of permanent maintenance for private STP or innovative system

owners,



Establish a program of developing a set of enforceable standards concerning effluent

testing including a strict schedule of sampling and testing by certified laboratories.

V



.



[.



MARINAS , BOATING AND HYDROLOGIC



MODIFICATION



i



General



How to Minimize Pollution from Recreational Boating



Lynne MacDonald



i



V-1



Marina Siting and Design to Minimize Pollution



Nathalie Peter



ee



V-7



Marina Operation and Maintenance



Kim Lindlau



.



osesvewr ere eneawme eee vnevnve



vV-18



Technical



Adverse Effects of Dredging



ee ee ee



V-20



Barbara Kojis and Norman Quinn



How to Prevent or Minimize Shoreline Erosion



V-35



Dennis Hubbard



ed



ia



* Paper not available at time of printing.

i

1.



2



we ee een ter ate aaa a 1 6 atate he or kt e



HOW TO MINIMIZE POLLUTION FROM RECREATIONAL BOATING

Lynne H. MacDonald



Virgin Islands Marine Advisory Service, University of the

Virgin Islands, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00802



INTRODUCTION



Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Reauthorization Act of 1990

(CZARA) requires states and territories with federally

approved coastal zone management programs to develop and

implement Coastal Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution Control

Programs. Requirements for state and territory programs are

described in the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Program: Program

Development and Approval Guidance developed by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). One component that

these programs must address is NPS pollution from Marinas and

Recreational Boating.



The Guidance for "Marinas and Recreational Boating", as with

the guidance for the other four categories of NPS

(Agriculture, Forestry, Urban, and Hydromodification),

identifies management measures to prevent or reduce NPS

pollution, or to prevent pollutants from reaching ground or

surface waters. The management measures are intended to

restore and protect coastal waters through the use of various

management practices. A state or territory's NPS Control

Program must specify the management measures it will implement

and these measures must conform with the Guidance. The

management practices a program uses to address the specific

management measures do not need to be specified; any one or

combination of the practices provided by the Guidance can be

incorporated into a program or other,” equally effective

practices can be used. ‘



The use of a "specific measures, variable practices" approach

to address NPS gives states and territories much needed

flexibility to ensure that each program meets the needs and

circumstances of a particular area. As is an all too familiar

problem in the Virgin Islands, inflexible legislation and

regulation can be extremely burdensome and equally

ineffective. The high degree of flexibility inherent in this

program allows for "tailor-made" NPS control programs that

still conform with the Guidance.



MANAGEMENT MEASURES



The management measures for Marinas and Recreational Boating

are divided into two categories: Siting and Design Management

Measures; and, Operations and Maintenance Management Measures

(fig. 1). The measures apply to:



V-1

Figure 1. Categories for Marina and Recreational Boating

Management Measures



e Any facility that contains 10 or more slips, piers

where 10 or more boats may tie up, or any facility

where a boat for hire is docked;



e Boat maintenance or repair yards that are adjacent

to the water;



e Any Federal, State, or local facility that involves

recreational boat maintenance or repair that is on

or adjacent to the water; -



e Public or commercial boat ramps;



e Any residential or planned community marina with 10

or more slips; and,



e Any mooring field where 10 or more boats are

moored.



Management measures for marinas are applicable to facilities

and shore-based services that support recreational boats and

boats for hire; they do not address specific boats except to

the extent that a marina can adopt practices that apply to

boats in their facility. Also, the management measures for

siting and design apply to new facilities and to expanding

facilities if there is potential for the expansion to impact

water quality and important habitat.



Siting and design management measures are shown in table 1.



V-2



»

The next speaker, Ms. Nathalie Peter of the National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will be discussing

"Marina Siting and Design to Minimize Pollution" and so I

won’t go into this any further. ,



Table 1. Siting and Design Management Measures

SITING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT MEASURES

‘MARINA FLUSHING



WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT



HABITAT ASSESSMENT

| SHORELINE STABILIZATION

| STORM WATER RUNOFF



FUELING STATION DESIGN



SEWAGE FACILITY



Table 2 lists the Management Measures and each measures’

objective(s) for "Marina and Boat Operation and Maintenance".

To achieve each management measure’s objective, practices can

be implemented at existing and new or expanding facilities.



The management practices that are included in the Guidance are

shown in table 3. While the management measures of a state or

territory’s plan must be specified and consistent with those

of the Guidance document, the actual practices used to achieve

these measures do not. The practices listed can be used

individually, or in combination to reduce or control nonpoint

source pollutants. As I mentioned earlier, these practices

are not limited to those shown; others that may be more

effective or appropriate for unique situations or

circumstances can be used.



The practices listed in table 3 are all relatively simple and

inexpensive to implement. There are many operational or

procedural practices, such as providing special waste

receptacles for certain wastes, or designating specific areas

for maintenance. A number of these management practices are

designed to education and inform user groups about each

Management measure, and so gain compliance with the practices

through increased understanding and awareness of NPS problems

and solutions.



v-3

Table 2.

Boat Operation and Maintenance



MARINA AND BOAT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

MANAGEMENT MEASURES



Management Measures and Objective(s) for Marina and



SOLID WASTE



Properly dispose of soclid wastes from operation, cleaning,

maintenance, and repair of boata to limit entry of solid wastes to

surface waters.



FISH WASTE



Promote sound fish waste management through a combination of fish-

cleaning restrictions, | Public education, and proper disposal of fish

waste.



LIQUID MATERIAL



Provide and maintain appropriate storage, transfer, containment, and

disposal facilities for liquid material, such as oil, harmful

solvents, antifreeze, and paints, and encourage recycling of these

materials.



PETROLEUM CONTROL



Reduce the amount of fuel and oil from boat bilges and fuel tank air

vents entering marina and surface waters.



BOAT CLEANING



For boats that are in the water, perform cleaning operations to

minimize, to the extent practicable, the release to surface waters of

(a) harmful cleaners and solvents, and (b) paint from in-water hull

cleaning.



PUBLIC EDUCATION



Public education/outreach/training programs. should be instituted for

boaters, as well as marina owners and operators,, to prevent improper

disposal of polluting material.



MAINTENANCE OF SEWAGE FACILITIES



Ensure that sewage pumpout facilities are maintained in operational

condition and encourage their use.



‘BOAT OPERATION

| _puyeice: boating activities where necessary to decrease turbidity and

BP.



«



yaical destruction of shallow-water habitat.

Table 3. Management Practices for Marina and Boat Operation



and Maintenance



PETROLEUM CONTROL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:



BOAT CLEANING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES



. the water and clean where debris can be trapped and properly disposed



PUBLIC EDUCATION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES



MAINTENANCE OF SEWAGE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PRACTICES



BOAT OPERATION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (applies to boating

only)



used ‘antifreeze, and. waste. ‘diesel, kerosene, and miteral” ‘spirits

should be available and clearly labelled.

Direct marina patrons as to the proper disposal of liquids.



Use auto shut-off nozzles and promote the use of... fuel/air. ‘separators

on .air-vents or tank stems: to reduce spillage.



Promote the use of oil-absorbing materials in the boats’ bilges;

examine and replace as necessary. Dispose/recycle accordingly.



Wash hulls above waterline by hand. Where feasible, remove boat from



of.



Use phosphate-free and biodegradable detergents. Don’t overuse.

Discourage the use of cleaners containing ammonia, sodium hypo-

chlorite, chlorinated solvents, petroleum distillates, or lye.



Do not allow in-water hull scraping or paint ‘removal underwater.



Signage



Recycling/Trash Reduction Programs



Pamphlets or Flyers, Newsletters, Inserts in Billings, etc.

Meetings and Presentations



Arrange maintenance/service contracts for pumpout facilities.

Develop regular inspection schedules.



Maintain a dedicated fund for pumpout station repair and maintenance

(for Government-owned facilities) .



Mandate pumpout use and specify penalties for failure to comply in

slip lease agreements.



Put dye tablets in holding tanks to discourage illegal disposal.



Exclude motorized vessels from areas that contain important shallow-

water habitat.

Establish and enforce no-wake zones to decrease turbidity.

PUBLIC EDUCATION



It is apparent from the listed practices that public education

is an important -component of the management measures. Not

only is "Public Education" a specific management measure -- a

required part of any program -- there is also an education-

related practice associated with virtually all of the other

measures.



Public participation and involvement in developing,

implementing and continuously improving a nonpoint source

reduction program is imperative for it’s success. A Public

Education/Information campaign must be the very first step in

this process at the territory-level. A program cannot be

effectively put into place without the awareness, cooperation

and assistance of the community.



CONCLUSION



Many diverse sources of pollutants from marina and

recreational boating operation and maintenance can be

eliminated or reduced through the use of some very simple,

economical means. The management measures and practices to

control NPS pollution from recreational boating are direct and

inexpensive. Small improvements in water quality within a

Marina or bay can be achieved through the implementation of

any of these; a comprehensive program incorporating a number

of practices can result in significant improvements in marina

water quality.



The key to a successful NPS Control Program is public

education and involvement in the entire’ program development

and implementation process. With increased public awareness

through participation and education, the management practices

that are put into place can effectively minimize nonpoint

source pollution from recreational boating. :



V-6

MARINA SITING AND DESIGN TO CONTROL

NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION



Nathalie Peter

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

Silver Spring, Maryland



Marinas and recreational boating are increasingly popular uses

of coastal areas and an important means of achieving coastal

access. The Virgin Islands, known as the "Charter Capital of

the World," has a large number of resident and transient

vessels. throughout the year. There are 20 marinas in the

Virgin Islands. In 1991, DPNR registered 4,044 vessels and

issued 719 mooring permits. According to the 1992

Strickland/Quinn report on marine facilities, 70% of the

marine community that were surveyed noted the significant

relationship that exists between the health of the marine

environment and the success of their businesses.



When marinas are poorly sited and designed, they pose a

nonpoint source (NPS) pollution threat that can affect public

health and marine ecosystems. Because marinas are located

right on the water's edge, there is often no buffering of the

release of pollutants to the sea. Adverse environmental

impacts can include:



. poorly flushed waters with low dissolved oxygen and



increased petroleum hydrocarbons, pathogens, and

metals.



* pollutants transported in storm water runoff from

parking lots, roofs, and other impervious surfaces.



. physical alteration or destruction of wetlands and

other bottom communities during construction and

operation.



. pollutants generated from boatyard and marina

operation and maintenance activities that

contaminate bottom sediments. For example, copper

is a major contaminant because of its use in

antifouling paints.



° shoaling and shoreline erosion.



There are numerous territorial and federal regulatory programs

that apply to marinas. Today, however, I will concentrate on

the 6217 Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program that

Congress included in the 1990 CZMA Reauthorization Amendments.

It applies to all states and territories with approved Coastal

zone Management Programs (CZMPs). Most of the material in my



V-7

cee see entettnttatla eM ata nite atte oot eres



presentation comes directly from the marinas chapter of

Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of



Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters (6217 Guidance), released

jointly by EPA and NOAA in January 1993.



Management measures are defined as:



economically achievable measures for the control of the

addition of pollutants from existing and new categories

and classes of nonpoint sources of pollution, which

reflect the greatest degree of pollutant reduction

achievable through the application of the best available

nonpoint pollution control practices, technologies,

processes, siting criteria, operating methods, or other

alternatives.



Fifteen Marina Management Measures, classified as "Siting and

Design" or “Operation and Maintenance" Management Measures,



are included in the Guidance. ——These Marina Management ~



Measures are comprehensive in their coverage of sources of

nonpoint pollution associated with marinas.



The following operations and facilities are covered by the

6217 Marina Management Measures:



piers and marinas with 10 or more slips;



any facility where a boat for hire is docked;



boat maintenance or repair yards;



public or commercial boat ramps;



residential or planned community marinas with 10 or

more slips; and,



. any mooring field where 10 or more boats are moored.



*e © @# @



All of the following siting and design management measures

apply to new and expanding marinas. In addition, the storm

water runoff management measure applies to. éxisting marinas

and boatyards for at least the hull maintenance areas. .



A. Flushing Management Measure



The first management measure is the marina flushing management

measure which is to be applied to new and expanding marinas.

it is to " [slite d_de marinas such that tides and/or

currents will aid in flushing of the site and renew its water

reguiariy."



If a marina does not flush properly, there is a potential for

waters to stagnate and for pollutants to concentrate to

unacceptable levels in the water and/or bottom sediments,

resulting in impacts to the biological resources. Flushing

time can range from several hours to possibly several weeks,

depending upon the location of a marina in a waterbody and its

configuration.



v~8



|

In the Virgin Islands, flushing is primarily due to (1) the

movement of the tidal prism and currents in and out of a

marina waterbody and (2) wind-driven circulation.



The degree of flushing necessary to maintain water quality in

a marina should be balanced with safety, vessel protection,

and sedimentation. Flushing guidelines can be developed for .

different regions and different conditions. For example, in



Florida where tidal range does not exceed 1 meter, a flushing

reduction of 90% over a 24 hour period has been recommended.



Practices



In addition to specifying management measures, the §6217

Guidance also provides management practices that can be

applied successfully to achieve. the management measures.

However, the application of these practices needs to be tied

to the NPS pollution source, the specific site, and the

Climate. This is especially true in the Virgin Islands where

the climate is tropical; the topography is steep slopes; soil

cover is thin; and suitable shoreline is limited and costly.

While most of the siting and design practices in the §6217

Guidance appear to be appropriate for the Virgin Islands, the

territory may find that alternative practices will be more

effective in controlling NPS pollution.



1. There are a number of practices in the Guidance to

achieve adequate flushing. One practice is to site and

desi marinas such that the bottom of the marina and the

entrance channel are not deeper than the adjacent

navigable waters, unless it can be demonstrated that the

bottom will support a natural population of benthic

organisms.



Existing water depths necessarily ‘affect the entire

marina layout and design so bathymetric surveys should be

conducted for a proposed basin and approach channel.

Marina basin and channel depths should be designed to

gradually increase toward open water to promote flushing.

Otherwise, isolated deep holes where water can stagnate

may be created.



2. A second practice is to design marinas with as few

segments as possible to promote circulation within the

basin. Flushing efficiency is inversely proportional to

the number of segments. For example, a one-segment

marina will not flush as well as a marina in open water,

and a two-segment marina will not flush as well as a one~

segment marina. The physical layout of a marina, as

determined by the orientation of the marina toward the

natural water flow, can also have a significant effect on

the flushing capacity. Ideally, the distance between the

exchange boundary and the innermost portion of the basin

is minimized; otherwise, elongation increases circulation

time.



v-9

There will be better dissolved oxygen (D.0.) conditions

in marinas that avoid improper channel entrance designs,

bends, and square corners. These areas tend to trap

sediment and debris. If square corners are unavoidable,

then access points should be provided to allow easy

cleanout of accumulated debris.



oor) filus waterbodies consider _ desi

alternatives to enhance flushing: an open marina basin

over a semi-enclosed design: wave attenuators over a

fixed structure. A marina at the head of an embayment

will normally have poorer flushing than one located near

the opening. Obviously, safety and vessel protection

will weigh heavily in this sort of siting decision.



Another practice is to design and locate entrance

channels to promote flushing. Entrance channel alignment

should follow the natural channel alignment as closely as

possible to promote flushing. Any bends that are

necessary should be gradual. In the Virgin Islands where

the tidal range is small, the marina entrance should be

designed to be as wide as possible to promote flushing

while still affording vessel protection. Entrance

channels aligned parallel to the direction of the

prevailing winds also promote circulation.



If the entrance channel is perpendicular to the waterway,

shoaling can be a problem in areas of significant

sediment transport due to currents. Shoaling can require

increased maintenance dredging of the channel and can

lead to water quality problems by reducing circulation.



The orientation and location of a solitary entrance can

impact marina flushing rates. When a marina is square or

rectangular, a single entrance at the center of the

Marina produces better flushing. If .a marina is

circular, an off-center entrance channel will promote

better circulation.



Establish two openings, where appropriate, at opposite

ends of marina to omote flow-throu currents. In

situations where both openings cannot be used for boat

traffic, a smaller outlet can be opened solely to enhance

flushing. In other situations, a buried pipeline has

been used to promote flushing.



The last practice has to do with land use: designate

areas that are suitable and areas that are unsuitable for

marina development: Provide advance identification of

waterbodies that do or do not experience adequate

flushing. Several years ago, Puerto Rico completed a

marina siting study for the northeast coast. It is now

uses as a basis for marina permit decisions in the

commonwealth.

B. Water Quality Assessment Management Measure



The second management measure is to "[A]ssess water quality as

part of marina siting and design."" This management measure

does not require a study per se but rather an assessment of

water quality.



Assessment of water quality may be used to determine whether

a proposed marina design will result in poor water quality.

This may entail:



(1) pre-development and/or post-development monitoring

of a marina or ambient waters;



(2) numerical or physical modeling of flushing and

water quality characteristics; or



(3) both.



Cost impacts may preclude a detailed water quality assessment

for marinas with 10-49 slips. A pre-construction inspection

and assessment can still be expected, however.



Historically, water quality assessments have focused on two

parameters: DO and pathogen indicators. DO levels may be

used as a surrogate variable for the general health of the

aquatic ecosystem. . Pathogen indicators are used as a

surrogate variable for assessing risk to public health through

ingestion of contaminated water and shellfish and through

bathing. Water quality assessments can be used to ensure that

water quality standards supporting a designated use are not

exceeded.



North Carolina conducted a post-development marina study to

characterize the water quality conditions of several marinas

and to provide data that can be used to evaluate future

marinas.



Providing water quality information is already required

nationwide when dredging is involved. Dredging a marina site

or entrance channel requires a River and Harbors Act section

10 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. If there is

discharge into U.S. waters after dredging, then a Clean Water

Act section 404 permit is required. DPNR would issue a

section 401 water quality certification before the Corps would

issue a section 404 permit. Section 10 and section 404 both

require a permit applicant to present to the Corps information

necessary for a water quality assessment. An expert

knowledgeable in water quality and hydrodynamics may assess

potential impacts using available information and site

inspection.



v-1}

As part of the section 401 water quality certification

process, DPNR requires information about water quality. The

Department needs to look at this certification process to see

if it adequately addresses nonpoint source impacts.



Cc. Habitat Assessment Management Measure



The third management measure. is to "f{sjite and design marinas

to protect against adverse effects o e ces

wetlands, sub ed aquatic vegetatio or othe t



riparian and aquatic habitat areas as desiqnated by local,

state, or federal governments."



Coastal marinas are often located in estuaries, one of the

most diverse of all habitats. The Mangrove Lagoon on St.

Thomas is a good example of this. Estuaries contain many

plant and animal communities that are of economic,

recreational, ecological, and aesthetic value. These

communities are frequently senéitivé to habitat alteration

that can result from marina siting and design. Biological

siting and design. provisions for marinas are based on the

premise that marinas should not destroy important aquatic

habitat, should not diminish the harvestability of organisms

in adjacent habitats, and should accommodate the same

biological uses have been classified. Important types of

habitat for an area, such as wetlands and coral reefs, are

usually designated by local and federal agencies. In some

situations, however, the locations of all important habitats

are not known. Geographic information systems show promise as

a method of conveying important habitat and other siting

information to marina developers and environmental protection

agencies.



Currently, DPNR requires a habitat assessment in the

Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) that is submitted as

part of a coastal zone management major permit application for

a marina. ‘



Some of the practices in the §6217 Guidance associated with

habitat assessment are already followed in the Virgin Islands.

The practices are as follows:



1. Conduct surveys to characterize the project site.



Characterization of a proposed marina project site

is the first step to determine compatibility. This

would include evaluation of physical properties,

water quality characteristics, and available

habitat and seasonal use of the site by benthic

species, macroinvertebrates, resident and transient

fish, birds, endangered species, etc.

2. Redevelop coastal waterfront sites that have

previously been disturbed; expand existing marinas



or consider alternative sites to minimize potential

environmental impacts.



The Virgin Islands should use caution with this

practice since many marinas here may have been.

designed at the maximum sustainable size in the

first place. This is especially important in areas

identified as Areas for Preservation and

Restoration and Significant Natural Areas.



3. Employ rapid bioassessment techniques to assess

impacts to biological resources.



Rapid bioassessment uses biological criteria and is

based on comparing the community assemblages of the

potential development site to an undisturbed

reference condition.



4. Assess historic habitat function (e.g., spawning



area, nursing area, migration pathway) to minimize

indirect impacts.



5. Minimize disturbance to indigenous vegetation in

the riparian area.



Riparian areas are the vegetated ecosystems along a

waterbody. They are generally more productive

habitat, in both diversity and biomass, than

adjacent uplands. They serve an important nonpoint

source pollution control function in the Virgin

Islands: mangroves reduce sedimentation; salt

ponds filter storm runoff prior to its entry into

coastal waters. Disturbance should be minimized or

disallowed altogether.



6. Finally, the territory could develop a marina

siting policy to discourage development in areas

containing important habitat as designated by

territorial and federal agencies.



This type of land use policy would: be useful in

such places as Salt River. It could be

incorporated into the proposed comprehensive Land

and Water Use Plan or APC/APR management plans.



D. Shoreline Stabilitization Management Measure



“Where shoreline erosion is a nonpoint pollution problem,

shorelines should be stabilized. Vegetative methods are

stronql referred unless structural methods are more cost

effective, considering the severity of wave and wind erosion,

offshore bathymetry, and the potential adverse impact on other



shorelines and offshore areas."

Shoreline erosion is not always a NPS pollution problem, but

where it is, the shoreline should be stabilized. (It is

usually in the best interest of the marina operator to

minimize erosion anyway to reduce sedimentation and the

frequency of dredging). The Virgin Islands is fortunate to

have red mangroves which are relatively easy to plant under

the right circumstances and offer excellent shoreline

protection. Another advantage of this vegetative protection

is its affordability. But mangrove effectiveness varies with

the amount of wave reduction provided by the physiography and

offshore bathymetry of the site. ~



In some cases, structural techniques such as gabions, riprap,

and sloping revetments can dissipate wave energy that can

cause erosion. Bulkheads, jetties, and breakwaters are other

structural methods to stabilize shorelines and navigation

channels, but they may also cause scouring in front of the

structure and increase erosion of the adjacent shoreline.



E. Storm Water Runoff Management Measure



"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

and territories 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.



The principal pollutants in runoff from marina parking areas

and hull maintenance areas are suspended solids and organics

(predominantly oil and grease). Toxic metals from boat hull

scraping and sanding are part of, or tend to become associated

with, the suspended solids. The proper design and operation

of the marina hull maintenance areas 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 areas 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



V-14

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.



Suspended solids are solid materials that remain suspended in

the water column. 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 2-year/24-hour storm. The 80

percent standard can be achieved, by reducing over the course

of 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 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.



These are a number of techniques for controlling maintenance

area runoff. They include (1) filtration/infiltration, (2)

retention, detention, and (3) physical separation of

pollutants. Because these were covered in the storm water

runoff session, I will not get into them here. Please refer

to the §6217 Guidance for additional details.



Because of the steady breezes, heavy downpours, soil types,

and limited land areas suitable for haulout facilities in the

Virgin Islands, source controls at marinas such as sanders

with vacuum attachments may be more appropriate for both

health and NPS pollution control purposes than filters,

strips, wet ponds, infiltration basins and trenches, or

grassed swales.



F. Fueling Station Design Management Measure



Another sound objective in designing a marina is to "{Dlesign

fueling stations to allow for ease in cleanup of spills."

This is required under the §6217 program for new and expanding

marinas where a fueling station is being added or moved, but,

for the most part, it is already required in the Virgin

Islands under other territorial and federal authorities.



The possibility of spills during fueling operations always

exists. Since most petroleum-based fuels float on the water's

surface, this allows for their capture if containment



v-15

equipment is uses in a timely fashion. The following

practices can be applied successfully to achieve this

management measure.



1. Locate and design fueling stations so that spills

can be contained in a limited area.



Fuel station location and design should be such

that booms can be deployed to surround a spill.



2. Design a Spill Contingency Plan.



A plan that meets local and federal requirements is

probably already required in the Virgin Islands for

fuel storage and dispensation areas. Marina

personnel should be properly trained in spill

containment and control procedures.



3. esi ueling stations with spill containment

equipment. ,



Appropriate equipment should be stored in a clearly

marked, easily accessible cabinet or locker.



G. Sewage Facility Management Measure



"Install pumpout, dump station, and restroom facilities where

needed at new and expanding marinas to reduce the release of

sewage to surface waters. Design these facilities to allow

ease of access and post signage to promote use by the boating

public."



This management measure applies to new and expanding marinas

in areas where adequate marine sewage collection facilities do

not exist. Pumpout stations are for vessels equipped with

marine sanitation devices (MSDs) and dump stations are.for

vessels with portable toilets. A marina should choose a

pumpout facility and/or dump station based on the types of

vessels it services. In the Virgin Islands, there currently

are not any pumpout stations in operation.



There are (1) fixed point systems, (2) portable/mobile

systems, and (3) dedicated slipside systems available. Fixed

point collection systems are generally located on the end of

pier, often near the fueling station so that pumpout and

fueling operations can be combined. Pumps or vacuum systems

remove sewage from the vessels to an approved disposal

facility.



A portable unit includes a pump and a small storage tank. In

many cases, these units are considered the most logistically

feasible, convenient, accessible, and therefore, economically

affordable method for a marina. In some locations in the



V-16

U.S., a radio dispatched pumpout vessel will service vessels

in a marina or mooring field.



Dedicated slipside systems provide continuous wastewater

collection at a marina slip for vessels equipped with MSDs.

These are appropriate for liveaboard vessels in a marina.



Adequate signage should be provided to advertise pumpout

service availability and public restroom facilities.



H. Other Design Considerations



During the design phase of a marina, attention to the

environmental concerns of marina operation will significantly

reduce the potential for NPS pollution from day-to-day

activities. Siting and design of trash facilities, waste oil

and other liquid disposal sites, and fish cleaning and

disposal sites should be key considerations in marina layouts.

Adequate and well-marked facilities in appropriate, protected

locations within the marina can minimize the entry of

pollutants into marina waters.



In addition to proper marina siting and design considerations,

public education for boaters and marina operators can go a

long way toward preventing NPS pollution.



Conclusion



In conclusion, many factors influence the long-term impact

that a marina or boatyard will have on water quality and

habitat in the immediate vicinity of the marina and the

adjacent waterway. Initial marina site selection is the most

important factor. ‘A site with favorable hydrographic

characteristics that requires the least amount of modification

can reduce potential NPS impacts. Whether a marina is open or

semi-enclosed and its configuration will affect its

circulation and flushing characteristics. The final design is

usually a compromise that should produce a é favorable

combination of marina capacity, services, and access while

minimizing environmental impacts, dredging requirements,

protective structures, and other site development costs.

MARINA OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE/OUR FRAGILE ENVIRONMENT

Kim E. Lindlau



~



American Yacht Harbor, Red Hook, St. Thomas, USVI 00802



We must protect our natural resources through awareness,

education and communication.



The marine industry plays a very large part of the overall

economy of our islands. Vessels travel great distances to

enjoy and share our beautiful pristine waters. The United

State Virgin Islands have much to offer the boating industry,

we have location, climate, and almost constant trade winds. By

the same token the boats are the life sustaining force for

Many marine related businesses. Over the past few years we

have lost numerous vessels to other islands due to incentives

and lower operational costs. Hurricane Hugo also lowered the

overall size of the fleet. Both losses have affected the

marine industry which directly affects the Islands economy.

Not only should we be aware of the positive impact these

vessels have on our islands, we should also be aware of the

environmental mishaps that can occur if proper education and

communication is not available.



My office operates with an open door policy. Should a problem

occur on land side or water side, chances are I've had

dealings with it in the past. Response time is very important

as part of the final result. Therefore as soon as a manager

is made aware, the sooner actions can be taken to correct it.

Again Communicate. I believe this policy works for any

business.



The ownership, management and staff of American Yacht Harbor

are environmentally aware of their surroundings. The

redevelopment which is in progress has taken into account not

only the federal and local rules and regulations which govern

us but future rules and regulations. The fuel system was

designed to meet all EPA requirements. We have fiberglass

double walled tanks and lines. We also use three different

types of leak detection.



1. Leak detection at the tanks..

2. Accounting fuel inventory.

3. DPNR Petroleum Inventory Control Form.



Petroleum products are very damaging to our environment. The

waste oil problem has been affecting these islands for many

years. However, there has been a waste oil committee formed

to find a long term solution to this problem. The membership



includes very dedicated people from the government and private

sector.

—_—e



~



em ee ee ee eS



For years waste oil has been disposed of in dumpsters, poured

in guts or just poured along the side of the road. Probably

sooner than later this oil will reach our coastal waters,

pollute our wells and contaminate our water table. Storm run

off and saturation will speed this process along. When an

agreeable solution is found, a massive educational program

will follow to stop this type of pollution. At this time ~

double containment and very strict maintenance programs are

recommended, not only for the marine environment but for all

of us.



American Yacht Harbor has had double containment for a number

of years and the location is visited on a regular basis by a

Staff member. It is very important to keep the surrounding

area clean and clear of small, full containers of oil. We

have seen everything from open coffee cans to 5 gallon

containers with the lids full of oil, rainfall then

complicates the matter by spreading it into the containment

area on the ground. We have a oil boom and until recently

only absorbent pads (which unfortunately absorb more water

than contaminate) . We have now added to our inventory a

product called Spil CAT.



Spil CaT:

1. Encapsulates oily liquids on contact and

prevents them from causing further damage to the

environment.



2. Floats and will remain floating after

application on spills.



3. Is lightweight



4. Absorbs sixty times its weight.

5. Will not absorb water.



6. Is non-toxic.



7. Non-flammable.



8. Non-hazardous.

9. Non-corrosive.

10. Has a long shelf life.



It appears this product is environmentally friendly and can

reduce costs in oil cleanup plus help protect our ecosystem.



In closing, it's our environment, let's take care of it to the

best of our ability. Remember the agencies here today are

here to help us. They don't expect anyone to know all the

answers but they do hope we know the proper questions to ask.



v-19

"CONSEQUENCES OF DREDGING COASTAL HABITATS

IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC OCEAN AND IN WATERS: AROUND

ST THOMAS / ST JOHN, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS



N.J. Quinn? and B.L. Kojis*



lgastern Caribbean Center, University of the Virgin Islands,

No. 2 John Brewers Bay, St. Thomas, United States Virgin

Islands 00802. “Department of Planning and Natural

Resources, Government of the Virgin Islands of the United

States, St. Thomas, United States Virgin Islands 00802.



INTRODUCTION



Many dredging projects are related to people’s desire to

travel, engage in trade, fill or enhance shorelines, or,

particularly in the Pacific, establish military bases. On

small islands airports are usually located in the coastal

zone and often substantial lands have to be filled and

causeways constructed to provide land for runways and termi-

nals. Docks and ports must be located at the shoreline and

frequently require shoreline alteration and sea bed modifi-

cation to accommodate vessels. Dredge spoil has been used to

fill submerged lands, to provide cover for garbage dumps,

and to enhance beaches. U.S. expansionist interests during

the Cold War resulted in dozens of remote military bases

being constructed on uninhabited islands in the Pacific

Ocean. Many of these islands required major dredge and fill

operations to accommodate military activity.



PHYSICAL CONSEQUENCES



The following lists the probable effects of mechanical exca-

vation and dredging:



1) the bottom is physically disturbed and habitat for

bottom dwelling organisms removed,

2) sediment is deposited on the sea botton,

3) sediment is suspended in the water column,

4) toxic substances are reintroduced into water

column,

S) light penetration is reduced,

6) the oxygen content of the water is reduced,

7) turbidity increases,

8) circulation patterns change,

9) dissolved oxygen levels are reduced,

10) nutrient levels increase, and

mE le



Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



11) indirect damage is caused by anchors, m moorings and

slurry pipes.



The most widespread and visible consequence of dredging and

excavation is the generation of suspended sediments and tur-

bidity. This paper will focus on the ecological aspects that

are the result of the physical consequences of dredging.



ECOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES



An unavoidable impact of any dredging operation is the

direct elimination of the bottom habitat in the dredged area

and loss of associated species. The accumulation of sediment

on the bottom in adjacent areas can also have a significant

adverse effect on the animals and plants on the bottom.



Depending upon the extent of the alteration caused by dredg-

ing, recolonization may eventually be possible on many

dredged surfaces. However, it generally takes a long time,

perhaps several decades, for the fauna and flora to return

to its original state. Harbor bottom environments tend to

accumulate fine sediments and are most often colonized by



'soft-bottom or sand-dwelling communities. If the orginal



harbor bottom was a seagrass community, it may be many years

before this type of community return. Dredged hard surfaces

that are not deep (greater than 30 ft depth) and exposed to

waves and currents (such as quarry holes on outer reef flats

in the Pacific) can be extensively recolonized by reef life

within a decade following dredging (Maragos, 1987).



The recolonization of hard substrate in the Caribbean is

poorly known and needs additional study. Currently we are

investigating colonization of reefs in three sites around

St. Thomas, but results are not expected for some time.



Corals and many other reef organisms are adapted to clear

waters and are particularly susceptible to turbidity caused

by dredge and fill operations. Knowledge of currents in the

construction area allows prediction of direction and persis-

tence of turbidity plumes, thereby facilitating assessment

of potential impacts of dredging surrounding marine communi-~

ties.



Studies by Kojis and Quinn (1984) found that the ability of

corals to reproduce was affected by the levels of sedimen-

tation at various sites. Corals living in regions of high

turbidity released fewer larvae and only grew in shallow

water. A smaller zone of living reef reduces the area which

associated reef fish may live and in effect reduces the pro-

ductivity of an area. Over a prolonged period of time high

sediment loads result in lower diversity, percent cover, and

growth rates of coral species, smaller colony sizes, an



V-21

Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



upward shift in depth zonation, and a predominance of resis-

tant growth forms or species (Rogers, 1990).



There have been few studies that address the effects of sus-

pended sediments on growth and mortality of individual coral

species. Field studies have demonstrated that growth rates

of the Caribbean mountainous star coral (Montastrea

annularis) diminish as sediment loads increase (Dodge, et

al., 1974; Hubbard, et _al., 1987). However, workers in the

Pacific have found that there was little or no evidence of

decreased growth rate for surviving colonies of Porites

lutea (a species often found in turbid waters) even in areas

where high mortality of other coral species has been

attributed to the effects of sedimentation (Hudson, et_al.,

1992). Laboratory experiments evaluated the. resistance of

seven coral ‘species found in the subtropical waters off

Tampa Bay to 49 to 199 mg per liter of suspended natural

marine sediments for 10 days. Although growth rates

decreased, all corals survived (Rice and Hunter, 1992).



Local currents and exposure to wave action also play a role

in recruitment and survival rates of marine organisms.

Variation in these rates determine the distribution and

zonation of corals and other marine life. Consequently,

dredging and the resultant physical modification of topo-

graphic features that may alter current regimes and exposure

to wave action also can have profound effects on reef commu-

nity structure in a surrounding area.



Indirect impacts of dredging include anchoring operations

for barges, ships, and pipelines. Placement and dragging of

anchors and pipes over sensitive ecosystems can damage

. coral, and to a lesser extent, plant communities.



ECOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES: DOCUMENTED EXAMPLES



A. Pacific Ocean



1. Federated States of Micronesia



At Okat Reef, Kosrae, Federated States of Micronesia

(Fig. 1), the rate of slurry discharged into a reten-

tion basin exceeded the basin’s capacity, causing

slurry to overflow the walls, spill] out over 25 acres

of seagrass and coral habitat, and completely bury it

under 0.8 to 1.5 feet of fine slurry muds. The impact

could have been prevented by a reduced rate of slurry

discharge, but the construction contractor had a sched-

ule to meet and was unwilling to slow operations

(Maragos, 1984). Dredging further destroyed reef and

sea grass meadows and greatly altered circulation in

Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



the harbor. The stronger water currents were implicated

in shoreline erosion near the airfield and Tafunsak

Village. The impacted reef was once Kosrae’s most

important fishing ground. Fish yields at Okat reef have

declined to half of preconstruction levels (Maragos,

1984).



2. Kaneohe Bay,.Hawaii



Military dredge and fill operations between 1938 and

1950 increased circulation in the north part of Kaneohe

Bay, Oahu, Hawaii, but reduced circulation in the south

part (Fig. 2). Additonally, the southern part of the

bay was impacted from sewage outfalls constructed in

1950. By 1970, only northern bay reefs were recovering

while cehtral-and southern bay reefs” declined because

of sewage pollution.



The sewer outfalls were removed from the bay during the

years 1977-1978, allowing for coral recovery in the

central and southern bay. The recolonization of corals

on dredged surfaces was accelerated after removal of

sewage outfalls in the nearby lagoon and relocated to

outside the lagoon. The discharge of primary treated

sewage does not appear to have adversely affected the

reefs because of it'us discharged at a depth of 35 m

and there is excellent mixing and flushing at the new

site (Maragos, et al., 1985).



3. Taongi Atoll



Many enclosed Pacific atolls have elevated lagoon water

levels because of wave action pumping water over wind-

ward reefs and the lack of large, deep channels‘ to

drain the excess water. The reefs grow above normal

ocean sea level because of constant water flow and the

resultant elevated water level. Dredging a deep channel

through such an atoll reef causes waters to drain more

quickly, lowering the lagoon water level and killing

emergent reefs. This occurred at Taongi Atoll (Fig. 3)

(Maragos, 1989). .



4. Palmrya Atoll, U.S. Line Islands



Construction of road causeways around the East Lagoon

at Palmyra Atoll, U.S. Line Islands by the U.S. Navy

completely blocked circulation, causing collapse of

coral reef communities (Fig. 4). Dredging of a channel

through the western reef and between the central and

east lagoons destroyed reefs and altered water

circulation. Sediments drifting west from the dredge

and fill areas damaged reef communities off the western

end of the atoll. By 1979, some of the northern



V-23

Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



causeways had breached restoring some exchange between

the east lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. Observations in

1987 found only partial recovery of the reefs from

military construction (Maragos, 1979; 1987).



B. Virgin Islands



Numerous dredging activities have occurred in the Virgin

Islands. These activities range from smail localized

activities to maintain channel depth to the larger dredging

projects to maintain harbors and fill wetlands. Among the

major dredging projects in the U.S. Virgin Islands are two

that exemplify some of the changes and problems created by

dredging: Great Cruz Bay, St. John and at Water Bay, St.

Thomas.



1. Great Cruz Bay



The dominant biotic feature of Great Cruz Bay is an

algal sea grass meadow characterized by Manatee and

Turtle grass interspersed with worm hummocks and green

algae such as Penicillus, Udotea and Halimeda. Queen

conch and the long-spined black sea urchin were once

common, and healthy fringing coral reefs were present

along the northwestern and southwestern shore

(vanEepoel & Grigg, 1970).



In 1968, dredging of 186,000 cu. yd. was permitted in

the bay to a depth of 15 ft within 300 ft of the shore

(Fig. 5). The area dredged was a rich seagrass and

algal meadow. The bulk of the dredge spoil was used to

fill in wetlands while the rest was used for con-

struction in the Hyatt Regency Hotel. Dredaqing

occurred at the same site in 1985.



Although the Corps of Engineers 1968 permit required

compliance with federal and local regulations regarding

water pollution, no attempt was made to minimize the

quantity of fine material in suspension in the water.

However, despite this, the predicted destruction of the

benthic biota outside the dredged area (vanEepoel and

Grigg, 1970) did not occur. In 1985, the area was

dredged again. Elght years later in August 1993, we

found the dredge site characterized by soft sediments

inhabited by burrowing organisms, little algae, and no

sea grass.



The water Clarity, measured using a Secchi disc, in the

dredged area was 1.6 ft in 1970 (vanEepoel and Grigg,

1970). When we sampled water clarity on a calm day in

August 1993, the Secchi disc reading was 4.5 ft. This

is still poor and unattractive compared to the clearer



V-24

Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



water over the sea grass meadows near the entrance of

the bay. In both 1970 and in August 1993, the sea grass

meadows near the entrance of the bay could be clearly

seen (>20 ft deep).



2. Water Bay



Between 1961 and 1970, a ten year period, approximately

750,000 cubic yards of sand were dredged from Water Bay

(Fig. 6) for various land fill, construction, and beach

nourishment projects. This dredging operation removed

the bottom cover of sea grasses and algae. The result

was that fine sand and silt particles were no longer

trapped and turbidity remained "undesirable" (Grigg and

vanEepoel, 1970).



During the ten year period that dredging occurred, the

living animals on the fringing reef on the east side of

the bay gradually died. These changes were called "...

a major ecological disaster for the sub-littoral flora

and sessile fauna" (vanEepoel, 1969). While not on the

order of a Gulf of Valdez oil spill, the gradual

destruction of habitat diminished the productivity and

natural beauty of the territory’s coastal waters.



Dredging of Water Bay not only destroyed habitats, it

also was responsible for loss of sand from Sugar Bay

Beach. Originally it was believed that the presence of

the dredge holes in Water Bay promoted “slumping" of

the Sugar Bay beach sand into the holes (Brody cited in

VIMA, 1992). However, various reports describe the

stockpiling of sand on the eastern end of Sugar Beach

which would have required the slurry pipes to traverse

the live reef and this would have damaged the reef. A

recent theory is that as a result of the damage to the

reef, Sugar Beach was provided less wave protection and

severe erosion occurred (VIMA, 1992). Specifically, as

a result of physical damage to coral (primarily elkhorn

corals) caused by the pipes, the height of the reef

surface was lowered, increasing wave energy which

rapidly eroded the beach (VIMA, 1992). The cléan, car-

bonate sandy beach became dominated by 10-20 cm cob-

bles. The beach in its present condition does not pro-

vide easy access to the sea for bathers and diminishes

the appeal of the new Sugar Bay Plantation Hotel.



In 1992, permission was sought to replenish the sand on

the beach using 4,000 cu yd of sand purchased from off

island and to place boulders on top of the reef to

simulate the protection previously naturally provided

by the reef. The irony is that one of the original uses

of the dredge spoil was to enhance beaches in the bay.



V-25

Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



.Monday morning quarterbacking is fun unless you are the

one who must pay for someone else’s mistakes.



PATHOLOGICAL EFFECTS ON HUMANS



Dredging, filling, and other physical changes to habitats in

the tropics have been implicated in the increased incidence

and outbreaks of ciguatera fish poisoning. The poisoning is

caused by a toxic dinoflagellate, Gambierdiscus_toxicus

(single celled plant), growing on macroscopic algae, which

are consumed by herbivorous fish. The herbivores are eaten

by carnivorous fish and the toxin passed up the food chain.

Although mildly toxic to fish, ciguatera is much more toxic

to mammals, including humans. There is considerable circun-

stantial. evidence for a relationship between ciguatera and

construction activities. Ciguatera was absent on some

Pacific atolls before construction, but outbreaks occurred

on atolis such as Palmyra, Johnston and Bikini during and

after construction.



RECOMMENDATIONS



~



Recommendations for alleviating impacts of dredging:



1) Choose an appropriate site. Locate a site with natural

conditions that would minimize impacts. Avoid par-

ticularly valuable or sensitive areas.



2) Test dredge material to determine its composition and if

it is toxic.



3) Select best available appropriate technology (BAAT).‘ The

selection of BAAT will help minimize turbidity and

sedimentation during both the dredge operation and spoil

dumping. Dredge spoils can often be collected in cascaded

settling ponds and, if not toxic, used for alternative

purposes such as fill or other construction related pur-

pose.



If the dredge spoil is toxic, contact the Department of

Planning and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental

Protection for information on suitable disposal methods.



Physical barriers such as silt screens surrounding the

dredging operation and a combination of silt screens and

earthen berms on the spoil site can be effective in

reducing turbidity. Silt screens are curtains of plastic,

fiberglass, or other fabric that in the water are hung

from the surface using a system of floats and anchors;

normally, silt screens are effective where wave action is

low and water currents are 2 ft/sec or less.



u 7

Quinn and Kojis

Dredging Consequences



3) Consider the restoration potential of the site after

dredging and restore the site if possible.



4) Beware of indirect impacts of dredging such as anchoring

operations for barges, ships, and pipelines. Avoid plac-

ing anchors in and dragging them over sensitive ecosys-

tems such as coral reefs and algal / sea grass meadows.



REFERENCES CITED



Dodge, R.E., R.C. Aller and J. Thomson. 1974. Coral growth

related to resuspension of bottom sediments. Nature

247:2574-577.



Grigg, D.I. and R.P. vanEepoel. 1970. The status of the

marine environment at Water Bay, St. Thomas. Govt. of

the V.I., Dept. of Health, Division of Environmental

Health. Water Pollution Report. pp. 11.



Kojis, BL & NJ Quinn. 1984. Seasonal and depth variation in



fecundity of Acropora palifera at two reefs in Papua

New Guinea. Coral Reefs 3:165-172.



Maragos, J.E. 1979. Palmyra Atoll: Preliminary Environmental

Survey and Assessment. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

Pacific Ocean Division, Honolulu, Hawaii.



Maragos, J.E. 1984. Kosrae airfield and dock project at Okat

(TTPI) and follow-up meeting with Navy OICC, Guam. U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, Pacific Ocean Division, Hon-

olulu, Hawaii.



Maragos, J.E. 1987. Environmental Impact Assessment Made

Easy. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme.

South Pacific Commission, Noumea, New Caledonia. pp 34.



Maragos, J.E. 1989. Impacts of construction: on coastal

ecosystems in Oceania: A review. Pac. Sci. 33:45-67.



Maragos, J.E., C. Evans, and P. Holthus. 1985. Reef corals

in Kaneohe Bay six years before and after termination

of sewage discharges. Proc. Sth Inter. Coral Reef

Cong., Tahiti. 4:189-194.



Hubbard, D.K., J.D. Stumb and B. Carter. 1987. Sedimentation

and reef development in Hawknest Fish and Reef Bays,

St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands. Biosphere Reserve

Research Report No. 21:199.



Hudson, J.H., E.A. Shinn and D.M. Robbin. 1982. Effects of

offshore oil drilling on Philippine reef corals. Bull.

Mar. Sci. 32:890-908.



V-27

Quinn and Kojis



Dredging Consequences



Rice, S.A. and C.L. Hunter. 1992. Effects of suspended



sediment and burial on scleractinian corals from west



central Florida patch reefs. Bull. Mar. Sci. 51(3):429-



442.



Rogers, C.S. 1990. Responses of coral reefs and reef organ-



isms to sedimentation.



Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.



62:185-



202.



.



vanEepoel, R.P. 1969. Effects of dredging in Water Bay, St.



Thomas. Govt. of the V.I., Dept. of Health, Division of



Environmental Health.



Water Pollution Report.



No.



2,



10.



Pp.



vanEepoel, R.P. and D.I. Grigg. 1970. Effects of dredging at



Great Cruz Bay, St. John. Départméent of Health, Divi-



sion of ‘Environmental Health, Water Pollution Report.



tT



4.



é



.



PPp-



Virgin Islands Marine Advisors.



1992.



Environmental Assess-



ment Report. Beach Restoration at Sugar Bay Plantation



Resort.



Pp-



70.



7 9

I



tL



Corat reef fiat



4 OKAT REEF 1978



x



Wave driven



currents



Reef fet



ihe



Seagrace beds *



eee



ate



ahs



\ .



3



site Cu,



win Sig PAS



ye >



RPMS



ny



aay,



eh aoa



aie gt



at



2B



MAG



<o



bs



: Shoreline |



.-



,



ee



«Ope



ae



te.



oe



+



.*



i}



ra



Ot wv ey



a



rae Island



Fad



Bes



i &e"



by



tl,



ae,



ey



“St.



23



oe



fs



ew



“vy OKAT REEF 1988



B _—z-—)



Stronger water currents



Reef smothered



by sediments



Gaerne



during dredging



*e,



Ws



Shoreline



erosion



ok



g3



Sie}



wo



Ma



iat



ones



ROPE



bs Fe



bs"



aN



ney



thy



aes



en



ae



Sean



i



eT,



ee



ge



“ie



<"*



ny 5



ed



RP}



1s]



wy



ey *



Sats



we



a



red



Ay



NR de



ve



at



at



tire



Aca



i



tT t.



4".



af



Figure 1.



Adverse effects of dredge and fill for reef flat



runway and dock construction at Okat, Harbor,



Kosrae Island, Federated States of Micronesia



(adapted from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1989).



V-29

eliminated:



How impacts are bei



KANEOHE BAY 1950



KANEOHE BAY 19%



KANEOHE BAY 1983



KANEOHE BAY BEFORE 1938



.



.



et



+



|



Dredge-and-fill impact roe



EEE) Lingering dredgeand-it impact



x



-



| fd Sewage impact tone



al



B



DI



OAHU



OA HU



~



~



OAHU



| ) OAHU



a,



et,



As



a)



a4



e's



Mye



°



2.0



iw



30



oO? 0



*6



aN



ee



‘



ra



x



for navigation and



20



om ¢



Qa



ce



@ © Fill material | |



eo



© 65



a)



Oo a6



0.09 &



*0 40 o



%



ata,



2°



Oe



iN



Pa



at



oF



aa?



v2



a aoe



Recovered



20



ee



myer



"+



Ss)



tone®,



e*



*,%



+



760



«a



vite



ete Dd



4 4a



ee8o



oe



a My,



@eQe



oQ



2'? gece



e& We



oe



% Ones?



Fitting of reef flats



oe



«ae



Pov



és



to create Land



|



a‘



oy



Poe.



th



‘—



4



of



Faia



gp



(Pr



ee



1



as



06



t eae



outfall



vn



(Ta



a



focation



dent



ove Attive “eo le



o,@



OF o.* woe



al



CA



omy



so



aawa hoa



LOM.



* oe recovery 6



eee



the



otee



| ct



as



Stns



OV ag 7 Q



\



aA gh ea



* see



eee



SA Sree



a7



o,f Sewage



eet



ee 6



pas



se fulall 2



oo ess



ee



iz)



e®



oe,



oh



ee ie



AY



rh Ae TI



Kaneohe



Kaneohe



Ny



Kaneohe



Kaneohe



TP ao



NS



Figure 2. Adverse effects of dredging,



filling and sewage



discharge in Kaneohe Bay, Oah



u, Hawaii (after



Maragos et al.,



1985).



mm Hmmm Hm HH HF HH He HE Ee ee Ee ee a —

oar



ngi Atoll



aongi Atoll



N



\



mC



teoom



PACIFIC



Merch &.



ys



A



OCEAN



\



OCEAN



£



af



o*V



bid



if



=f



ta



a



\



Cut caanel



7



Ades Pow



Stronger



A



x



oe



‘Pubsh 4.



ttieoe



eer ree ee



—_—_—_— =—



eee



Weve action pumps



Water drains more qu



ieht



from the lagoon, lewering



‘Water trickles



Elevated water level



water up and ever



water level and



Dyfi



ing exposed reefs



down ever



windward reet



lee evet



So lea



& T]



as



Ree



er®.



ae



™- ---



6



rong



“at



ces



ard reef



Windwend



ee ee



ath



of aRe



de,



+ ce



2U



owed My



>, Deep channel



<&



Ce



ars



t52%



Gs



4



ad ke



ete



Est)



b+



zy



Peas



Ah,



a



vr Pinnacle



oem



ie



Say ey



ay



aed



ne



ost



ads



ag



‘



ao



=~



t.



bas



pas 2



a Py



tte



ir



ie)



St



sae



SA



ve



eae



&,



¥



»,



:



wz,



he



a3



tex’



€ de



4S



ot



Zh



eg



Wesel



a was



ae



ee



on



.



ak



Tax



'



et



A



Crose section of atoll



Wated cicculatio



Oy muy be cut off an 80



re portrons of the goon



Atoll with virtually no deep passes through the reef



Isame atoll with deep, wide channel cut through the leeward reef



Figure 3. Adverse effects of dredging channels through



semi-enclosed lagoons (after Maragos, 1989).



V-31

PALMYRA 1939



eof



Y 6



Pacific Ocean !



a ep ie)



gO



Ly



VO



Wa



rie en



ow



— ee ae



—— eee eee



—



—



A



PALMYRA 1946



Pacific Ocean



POS,



~



oo



wks



Ling



Zone of evel



rst



ons FY,



damaged from



id water



gaits



at



deck



ments



ang and



: de: fadatten.



ase frre



4 ines



NaSEE



Sr ee,



[eos



eh fa



anes



+ be



3,



I testt cage



gf



AEE



of



eae |



ee



eS



oe



Nautical mniie



Figure 4. Adverse effects of dredge and fill operations at



Palmyra Atoll, U.S. Line Islands (after Maragos



1987)



-



V- 32

_— aa



a a a ee ee oe oe mmm meee ee he



Dredge Hole



Contant Pt.



a0?



7?O



oe?



GREAT CRUZ BAY



Blasbalg Pt.



Figure 5. Location of 1960’s dredge site in Cruz Bay, St.



John, U.S. Virgin Islands

De



4



ES



ha



Soe



ae



”



‘ef



by



ai



Wa



ca



ee



es



EY



ae



eae



aE



oF



ts



=



He



pede



Le



RS



te’



“I



Fe



ie



a



5



ule



Bs



fi,



a,



&



dete



wee



WATER BAY



Wy)



St. Thomas, USVI



40—



eeetes



-



oA



REE:



0"



er



fs



077



190



02



7



15



20



epee



72



£1§



2



ens



ev



Oredge hole



Song



D



10



20



Yards



$00



elers



Oepths In Fee



aN



SSS



SS



Figure 6.



Location of dredge site in Water Bay, St. Thomas,



U.S. Virgin Islands (after VIMA,



1992).



ls



Vv

HOW TO PREVENT OR MINIMIZE BEACH EROSION



Dennis K. Hubbard

V.I. Marine Advisors, 5046 Cotton Valley, St. Croix, USVI 00820



Introduction



Beach erosion has become an increasingly prevalent problem in the territory, primarily

for two reasons. First, sea level continues to rise, as it has for the past 18,000 years.

Global warming tied to the increased introduction of carbon dioxide and other

“greenhouse gasses" into the atmosphere may result in dramatic acceleration of sea-level

rise over the coming decades. However, this remains largely a natural phenomenon over

which we have little direct control. Our best response to this is awareness and the careful

siting of development in areas that will be least affected. The other, and more

controllable, factor in increased beach erosion is the accelerating pattern of development

and the mistakes that are too often associated with it. These are the most-easily remedied

and are the focus of the discussion below.



What Causes Beach Erosion



Most-simply stated, erosion occurs when more material leaves an area than is being

delivered to it. While seemingly a simple concept, ignoring this immutable law of nature

lies at the heart of most beach-erosion problems that we face today. The key is, therefore,

to recognize the factors that result in this imbalance and to suggest ways to avoid or

remedy them.



Natural beach erosion is generally occurring to some degree throughout the territory.

This is related in part to the gradual rise in sea level mentioned above and in part to the

natural tendency for waves to break down the materials that comprise our shores and to

move them offshore. Beyond this, most of the problems that we have seen are related to

somehow interrupting a natural pattern that has in the past resulted in a near balance

between sediment coming in and sediment going out. This usually takes one of two

forms. First, some sort of physical barrier can be placed in the nearshore system that

prevents sand from moving along the beach. The simplest example is a groin (Fig. 1), a

linear structure erected perpendicular to the shoreline. Because waves approach at an

angle, sediment is moved dominantly in one direction along the shore. In‘the Virgin

Islands, this is generally toward the west as a result of the prevailing Trade Winds. A

groin placed across a beach will trap sand along its eastern side because the sediment is



Erosion



Figure 1. Alongshore sediment transport without (A) and with (B) a beach groin prescnt. Once the rock

structure is in place, sediment moving from left to right is trapped by the groin. As a result. the beach on

the left accretes and the one to the right erodes. This is in contrast to the uninterrupted transport without

any structure.



/

B 15%

h A A



incoming Wave Tete



: h Oe A

» ih 7



% On A

Dm ee of



Suspension ytet



Backwash



Offshore Transport



Figure 2. Wave-induced sediment transport on a natural beach (A) and against a seawall ne). : On the

sloping beach, the uprush and backwash have roughly equal transport potential. As a result, the beach

remains stable until a storm passes. In contrast, waves reflecting off the seawall stir up sediment on the

way in, leaving it in suspension for the reflected wave to move it offshore. This process continues until the

nearshore zone fronting the wall is scoured to a depth where the waves can no longer effectively suspend

the resident sediment.



coming in naturally from the east, but cannot get past the groin and move out to the west.

On the other side of the structure, sand is being n moved away to the west, but is not being

replaced. The result is erosion.



The second common cause of beach erosion involves modifying natural processes in a

manner that favors net sediment export. One of the most commonly used coastal-

protection structures is the seawall. This structure armors a stretch of eroding shoreline,

creating security for the properties immediately behind it. The problems with these

ubiquitous features are many, however. The most problematic is scour. When waves

encounter a vertical or steeply sloping surface, they reflect seaward. The reflected wave

carries with it large quantities of sediment, resulting in erosion along the base and ends of

the wall, sometimes undercutting the structure to the point of collapse.



To understand the nature of this complex interaction,. let us consider what happens to a

wave as it runs up a natural beach, and contrast that to the sarne waves breaking against a

vertical seawall. On a beach, the wave gradually breaks as it moves into shallower water.

In the process, sediment is picked up from the bottom and moved onto the beach face. As

the uprush of the wave slows, sand is deposited on the beach. As the wave swash stops

on the beach face and runs back to the sea, some of the water is absorbed into the beach.

As a result, not as much water moves seaward, and the return swash is less effective in

picking up and removing the sediment that was just deposited - thus, the beach accretes.

Through time, the slope of the beach adjusts to the point that landward and seaward

transport balance one another and the beach stabilizes.



On a shoreline "protected" by a seawall, the sequence of a strong wave uprush. deposition

of sand on the beach and a gentler backwash is modified. Consider, as an analogy. a ball

striking the cushion of a billiard table. It will come off the cushion with nearly ‘the same

speed it entered. The same thing happens along a seawall. We must add to this scenario

the facts that 1) the incoming wave has already done all the work of suspending the

nearshore sediment and 2) the quick reflection of the wave off the wall does not provide

an opportunity for the sediment to settle out. Therefore, the reflected wave is free to use

all of its energy to move that sand away from the shore. In combination with the



V-3b6

turbulence that is generated around the base of the wall, the net result is severe erosion

that will lower the substrate to a depth below which the incoming waves are no longer

efficient in suspending sediment.



These are offered only as simple examples for the sake of illustration. Accretion to the

east of a groin and erosion to the west should not be taken as a hard and fast rule. Our

coastline is very jagged, and waves can be bent and redirected such that a very complex

transport pattern results, Likewise, a seawall should not always be ruled out as a

defensive structure. Sometimes, the need for shoreline stabilization is so eminent that a

wall is the only realistic option. Also, there are strategies that can mitigate the effects

discussed above (for example, placing the seawall on a solid, rocky substrate). In both

instances, the answer lies in careful consideration of the existing natural forces and the

changes that are likely to result from the use of a particular structure. A careful analysis

of the nearshore wave field under both day-to-day and storm conditions should be

completed before considering any coastal modification.



What Can We Do About Erosion?



Providing examples of every type of erosion problem and solutions to each are far

beyond the scope of this short paper. In the Workshop, case histories have been provided

that illustrate the kinds of problems that most commonly occur and the solutions that

worked under that particular set of circumstances. As a general point of reference, we

have assembled Table 1 which briefly outlines the types of erosion problems that are

most common in the U.S. Virgin Islands, the processes that are involved and possible

remedies for them. Beyond that, the best advice that we can offer is to consult with a

trained professional before attempting even what may appear to you as a benign

modification. I was recently asked to comment on possible causes of and remedies for a

new and sudden episode of beach erosion on St. Croix. After examining the beach, I

suggested a program of aggressive beach revegetation. I was summarily informed that

the owner had just spent considerable effort and money to pull up the existing vegetation

as the owners of the property wanted an open, sandy beach and not a lawn - my solution

was Clearly not acceptable to them. This kind of ignorant practice, more than any other.

has traditionally lead to the problems that we now face. The laws of physics are the only

ones that we cannot break without sure punishment.



Beach Nourishment as an Option . ‘



From the introductory discussion of erosion as an imbalance between sediment Coming in

and going out, we can deduce that erosion on a particular beach is necessarily being offset

by accretion somewhere else. Corollary to this idea, any engineering measure that causes

sand to be deposited on your beach necessarily robs another site. As a result, the only

way that you can circumvent this relationship (but still only on a local basis) is to bring in

sand from an outside source - beach nourishment. :



While preferable to most complex engineering solutions, there is a downside to this

approach. First, it is expensive. Sand from off-island costs in the vicinity of $35 a yard.

Therefore, even a modest nourishment project of 500 cubic yards will cost $17,500 for

the sand along. To this, you must add handling costs, permitting fees and the studies that

are necessary to obtain those permits. From a philosophic point of view, you are still

robbing sand from somewhere else to solve your problem. And finally, you are probably



- committing to a long-term program of successive renourishment.

Table 1. Common beach-erosion problems and their remedies.



Cause of Erosion __ Factors Involved Remedy

Sea-Level Rise Natural forcing functions; Stay out of its way; build with

Global Warming common sense

Seawall Scour at the base of the wall; Foot seawall in rock

Preferential seaward transport Foot seawall deep enough to prevent

of sediment undercutting

Desi 1 ae ,

Breakwater Reduces transport along the shore that Use only in areas where downdrift

is protected by the structure; can shoreline is rocky (i.e.,

i wndri Not subject to erosion)

Groin Block alongshore transport Use only in areas where downdrift



beach is not sensitive (¢.g., rocky

or no development)

Vegetation Removal Destabilization of the substrate, Don't do it; in areas where erosion is

making it more susceptible to already a problem, undertake an

erosion ive rev i

Creation of a hole that Mother Nature Avoid nearshore dredging

wants to fill. If it is close enough,

your beach will provide the fill

Modification of offshore wave patterns

that become focused on your beach

Destruction of offshore reefs Removal of protection from waves Ensure that your project does not

cause damage. If the problem

already exists, then protection

must be re-established.



Offshore Dredging



Aside from the more altruistic aspects of the decision-making process (e.g., finding a

supply that has not caused environmental damage at that locale), there are several

important considerations in designing a working nourishment program. First, the sand

must be of a proper size that it will remain on the beach. As a rough rule of thumb, do

not put anything on the beach that is finer than what Mother Nature left there. The reason

that the existing sand is there is that ambient waves could not pick the material up and

move it away. Anything finer will disappear quickly. There are simple engineering tests

that can be performed to approximate the fate of your chosen sand. Ambient wave and

current conditions also need to be understood. This is important from a standpoint of

understanding where your sand might go under extreme conditions and: what adverse

environmental impacts it might have. Consider, for example, that seagrass tends to

stabilize the sand in the immediate offshore zone of many island beaches. Extreme levels

of sedimentation can bury those grasses, thereby removing their stabilizing effect and

opening your beach to increased erosion. Offshore reefs that now provide protection for

your beach, if killed, will quickly be “eaten away" by the countless organisms that live on

the reef and grind away at dead substrate to make their living in the reef economy. As a

result, your beach will be exposed to increasing wave attack and will erode at an even

greater rate.



This discussion closes with two points. First, beach erosion is not necessarily a bad

thing. It is part of the natural waxing and waning of any shoreline comprised of loose

material. The problem arises only when a man-made structure is put in the way of this

process. A beach may come and go as part of the natural cycle. The end result is a stable

beach over a long period of time. However, a building or other structure that is built on

the beach and destroyed during the erosive cycle will not repair itself when the beach

comes back. Erosion is not the problem: man-made structures put in its path are what we



y-38



B : *

. : e

are trying to avoid. Second, it cannot be stressed enough that a “qualified marine

professional" is not just someone with an advanced degree whose business brings them in

contact with the sea on a regular basis. Biologists have special talents that qualify them

to address ecosystem-level effects. Coastal engineers have. been trained to design

structures that will withstand the physical impact of wave attack. And marine geologists

generally focus on physical-oceanographic phenomena and their effects on coastlines and

the sediments that make them up. Expertise in one of these areas does not necessarily

qualify them to make informed judgments about everything that goes on in the marine

environment. Choose your “experts” wisely.



V-39

AGRICULTURE AND WETLANDS



Overview of Agricultral Nonpoint Source Pollution



OLASECE DAVIS Livers sacs navnn nae eens anes ssresenneeatnssenrene VI-1

How to Manage Wastewater and Runoff from Confined Animal

Facilities



TefF SCHMIdt Leese ccc ccc aca ccce nent reer essere neesereeeene «.. VI-9

The Benefits of Using Sustainable Agriculture



Louis Petersen ........ sete ewe eeene sae eeee senna eeeneeas . VI-12

The Environmental and Economic Benefits of Wetlands



Algem Petersen 2... cece sere ccc acc sevsresee cee eee e ee eee VI-15

Using Artificial Wetlands for Pollutant Removal



CarloS PAGin wiccecccr ent an tae enna r see e casas acervereaseetaes *



7



t

1



* Paper not available at time of printing.

OVERVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION

IN THE U. S. VIRGIN ISLANDS



Olasee K. Davis



Cooperative Extension Service/Natural Resources, University

ofthe Virgin Islands, Kingshill, St. Croix Vv. I. 00850



HISTORICAL REVIEW OF AGRICULTURE IN THE U. S. VIRGIN ISLANDS



At one time, the Virgin Islands had an extensive and

luxuriant forest. During the virgin stage of these islands,

the native Indians gathered wild fruits from forest and

cultivated small plots of land. Land plots, however, did very

little to alter the forest ecosystem.



By the arrival of Columbus in 1492, forest was still the

dominant vegetation throughout the islands, with the possible

exception of a few small wetlands and rivers. Between the

15th and 16th century, a drastic change took place by the

European settlers that inhabited the Virgin Islands.



Large acreage of forest lands were burned for colonial

agriculture development on St. Croix, thus changing the

ecology of the island. Also, clearing of land on St. Thomas

and St. John went through a similar phase for agriculture

development.



Land clearing was made possible when African slaves were

brought to the shores of these islands in the late 1600's.

Slaves cleared the land by cutting the trees and setting them

on fire. At this period, sugarcane plantations were

established for agriculture production. By the mid-1800's,

the island of St. Croix had 114 windmills and 144 animal or ox

mills.



In the early 17th century, agriculture revolutionized the

islands' economy. With this, soil erosion became a major

factor in agriculture production. Plantation crops were

planted on slopes and hillsides, causing considerable erosion

of the already thin tropical soil. Furthermore, the repeated

burning of crop residue degraded the soil further by

destroying its structure and reducing its fertility.



At this time, the European settlers realized that in

order to continue to make a profit from the land, they would

have to implement conservation practices. As a result, St.

Croix's rolling hills were plowed along the natural lines of

the land to keep the soil from washing away, while on St.

Thomas and St. John, terraces were built along the hillsides

to reduce further soil erosion.



VI-1

Techniques in land use, combined with engineering and

management practices, were thoroughly developed and well known

in ancient times before the first Europeans set foot in these

islands. )



Today, it is proven through both scientific tests and the

experiences of millions of farmers in many parts of the world,

that contour practices, designed to fit the topography of the

land and combined with soil-saving rotation planting and

proper fertilization, provide protection to the soil, conserve

water for plant growth, and raise yields of cultivated crops

in many parts of the world.



Between the 1780's and 1800's, St. Croix became the

richest sugarcane island in the Caribbean in addition to

indigo, tobacco, and cotton. The 375 plantations on St. Croix

flourished as produce was

exported to Europe. It was at this time that the island was

called the “Garden of Eden or Bread Basket of the Caribbean."

However, the prosperity of agriculture production in the

Danish Virgin Islands lasted only for a short time.



After more than 200 years in which the ownership of the

Virgin Islands changed several times, Denmark encountered

serious problems. Problems occurred when St. Croix was

controlled by the British for a brief period of time. In

1803, the slave trade was abolished. Other problems arose

when natural disasters such as earthquakes, tidal waves,

hurricanes, droughts, and political upheavals and war: in

Europe worsened the Virgin Islands economy. By 1848, he

Slaves received their physical emancipation.



A few years later, in 1917, the United States purchased

the Virgin Islands from Denmark. Since then, the agriculture

industry in the Virgin Islands changed drastically. Prior to

the emancipation of the slaves in 1848, the island of St.

Croix was cultivated from the beaches to the hilltops. There

were some 30,000 acres of farmland devoted to sugar cane and

other important crops.



Back then, sugar commanded up to $2.00 per pound in the

world's markets, and under these circumstances the one crop

economy was profitable. In 1966, sugarcane production phased

out in the Virgin Islands and agriculture shifted from

cropping to livestock production. Today, dairy and beef

cattle are the Virgin Islands' two largest agricultural

industries, primarily located on St. Croix.



THE EFFECT OF NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION ON AGRICULTURAL LAND

In agricultural areas of the U. S. Virgin Islands, the

major nonpoint source pollution are land clearing,



sedimentation, overgrazing, and to some extent the misuse of

pesticides and fertilizers.



VI-2



4

LAND CLEARING



Of the earth's land surface, 43 percent is occupied by

rangeland, 11 percent by farming, 31 percent by commercial

forest, and 15 percent by ice. . In the Virgin Islands,

approximately 75 percent of the agricultural land is devoted



to animal husbandry with St. Croix having 92 percent of the

grazing land.



The majority of this land, however, is covered with

shrubs and bushes which reduce the productivity of animal

production. Poor pasture management leads to undesirable

species such as Casha (Acacia spp.), which dominates most of

the Virgin Islands pastureland.



Thus, farmers find it necessary to clear the land in

order to :increase forage production for animal consumption.

Oftentimes, however, lands are indiscriminately cleared by

removing desirable plants with topsoil leaving the land bare,

which is probably the worst thing that can be done.



It is important to leave vegetative cover on the land in

order to protect the topsoil. The energy of falling raindrops

is expended directly on the soil surface when land is cleared

of every vegetation. During rain, the soil surface seal forms

quickly and soon water run off at a maximum rate.



SOLUTIONS FOR CLEARING LAND



1. Avoid clearing land during the rainy season.



2. Leave trash on the land to reduce soil erosion.



3. Maintain as much permanent-type grazing grass as

possible.



4. Plan and follow a weed control program.



5. Follow recommendations closely in establishing

pasture (Experiment Station scientists and



Cooperative Extension Service Specialists will

provide recommendations when needed).



SEDIMENTATION



Sediment is made up of tiny soil particles that are

washed or blown into guts, streams, eventually end up in the

sea. Sediment is also one of the most damaging pollutants on

agricultural land in the Virgin Islands, and nonpoint source

pollution. Loss of soil by washing and blowing usually

follows deterioration of vegetation. As soil becomes less

abundant and increasingly.compacted with misuse of the land,

decreased water infiltration and increased runoff are

inevitable.



VI-3

On many pasturelands — in the Virgin Islands, especially

slopes and grazing land near the coast, gully erosion is

visible. It occurs, either where runoff from a slope increase

sufficiently in volume or velocity to cut deep incisions, or

where the concentrated water flows long enough in the same

channel to develop deep incisions in the soil.



Often gullies develop in natural depressions of the land

surface where run-off water accumulates over a period of time.

Gullies are often started by ruts or tracks up and down hills

by the movement of machinery or livestock. With gullies,

sediment is carried or transported picking up soil particles

and disposing it in farm ponds or along the coastlines.



Although these problems are visible and easy to

understand, other nonpoint source pollution problems

associated with sediment are less obvious. For example,

nutrients and pesticides can become strongly bound to

sediment, especially fine soil particles, and can be carried

with it to surface and ground water. These pollution sources

will be discussed later.



SOLUTION FOR SEDIMENTATION



Control erosion with vegetation cover.

Livestock distribution on pasture land.

Ponds or dams construction on pastureland.

Practice conservation measures.



Bm WA



OVERGRAZED PASTURELAND



The primary purpose of pasture management is to prevent

excessive grazing. This is especially important during the

growing season for livestock farming in the Virgin Islands in

order to increase the vigor and productivity of existing

forage plants and eventually, to improve species composition.

Animals have a major impact on the physical environment and

the plant communities in which they are associated with

(Davis, 1993).



This impact is also influenced by climate changes, land

topography, and soil type which determine species of plants

adaptation to different areas of the islands. Since most

pastureland are made up of complex plant species, grazing must

consider availability and palatability of the vegetation to

maintain healthy animals.



Animals will not graze all individual plant species

uniformly unless the pasture is overgrazed or grazing is

carefully controlled to maintain plant vigor throughout the

growing season. Also, with a given site, different plant

species will maximize their growth at different times of the

year.



VI-4

As plant community develops, there is a continual change

in the relative proportions of different plant and, therefore,

a continually changing availability of forages (Mott 1960).

If grazing is unmanaged or managed without consideration of

the dynamic nature of the plant ecosystem, some forages will

be grazed heavily by animals while others are lightly grazed

or not grazed at all during the growing season.



This has been the case for years in most pastureland in

the Virgin Islands. Desirable forages such as guinea grass

(Panicum maximum) are at a disadvantage because of

differential grazing will lose to the more undesirable plants.

This will change, and usually reduce, the productivity of

pastureland.



Thus, many pastures in the islands are overgrazed and

invaded by plants that affect the performance of animals

nutritionally to produce beef or milk. Such undesirable

pasture plants as (Crotalaria retusa L.), Maran (Croton

riaidus), and Wild physicnut (Jatropha gossypifolia L.) are

indicators of overgrazed pasture land.



Overgrazing of pastureland in the Virgin islands has a

major impact on land thus contributing to some level of

nonpoint source pollution to surface or ground water supplies.

Livestock affect watershed properties by removal of vegetation

cover and through the physical action of their hooves.

Reduction in vegetation cover of pasture can increase the

impact of raindrops, decrease soil organic matter, soil

aggregates, and increase soil crusts.



The primary effect of hoof action is the compaction of



the soil surface. As a result, it decreases water

infiltration rates, increases runoff, and soil erosion.

Livestock also affect water quality. Fecal wastes from



livestock grazing can be a sizable pollution problem in range

watershed management (Holecheck, Pieper, and Herbel 1989).



To avoid such problem is to control the number of

livestock, distribution in pastures, and attract livestock

away from guts or stream areas. Grazing systems can help

improve livestock distribution, and pasture forage conditions

by protecting plant during critical growth periods, and can

improve livestock performance by ensuring that plants are

utilized at the best times of the growing season. The chart

below shows one of many grazing systems that can be used

locally for livestock production.



VI-5

Four-Pasture Merrill System :



April - July August ~ Nov, Dec. - Masch

A a A 5 A a

FIRST YEAR Rea | Gaze Gaze} Res Guaze | Graze

D c 5 ¢c o ¢

Graze | Graze Graze | Graze Graze | Ren

April - July Augual - Nov. Dec. - March

A 8 A B A 8B

SECOND YEAR [Graze | Graze Res | Graze] Greased Ren

dic > c Dic

Rest-7 Graze Graze | Graze Graze | Graze



Livestock concentrate on most nutritional plants when Jirst placed in a fresh pasture. When

these Plants are grazed, they then graze less nutritional Plants; thus, the nutritional level of

their diet goes down. Ta overcome, speed up moves.



GRAZING SOLUTIONS



1. Implement grazing systems that will create and/or

maintain good pastureland.



2. Control of space or how much area is to be grazed.

This is done with fences, either permanent or

temporary.



3. Control of time. How long the area is to be grazed

or rested.



4. Control of numbers, or how many animals are to be

placed in the area to be grazed.



5. Control of the animal. The farmer must be able to



Place the animal where and when he wants, for as

long as he wants.



PESTICIDES



"Pesticide" is an umbrella term that covers a wide range of

chemicals such as insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides.

The use of these agrichemicals help the Virgin Islands farmers

to produce high yields of crop, but pesticides could also

provide a pathway for toxic pollutants to our ground water if

they are used incorrectly.



Proper application of pesticide and operation of equipment are

important to protect the applicator as well as_ the

-environment. The prevention of nonpoint source pollution by

pesticide concentrates, spray mixtures, or wastes is also

essential in protecting the environment.



VI-6

At this moment, pesticide is not a major environmental problem

as a nonpoint source pollution. Most Virgin Island farmers

practice sustainable agriculture. However, the potential for

pesticides to become a serious environmental problem is there.

Those who use pesticides need to understand the chemical

properties and how they should be applied in order to protect

our natural resources. ,



The University of the Virgin Islands Cooperative Extension

Service conducts classes both in the private and commercial

category for pesticide applicators who want to become

certified. By using pesticides wisely and applying them

correctly, the responsible pesticide applicator can use these

chemical for the benefit of the environment.



PERTILIZER



AS crops .grow, soil nutrients are utilized to produce food.

On the other hand, significant amounts of nutrients are

removed from the soil when crops are harvested and not

recycled back to the soil. Thus, nutrients such as nitrogen,

phosphorus, and potassium are essential parts of the

agriculture industry in the Islands. These nutrients may be

added to the soil in the form of fertilizer, decaying

vegetation, or manure.



Fertilizer is not a major nonpoint source pollution in the

Virgin Islands agriculture industry. But every step should be

taken by farmers not. to misuse fertilizer on farmland. All

form of nutrients such as manure, legumes, and fertilizer

should be managed properly to meet the needs of crop nutrients

and reduce the chance of nutrient loss to surface or ground

water.



CONCLUSIONS



The risk of agricultural nonpoint source pollution can be

Significantly reduced by more prudent application of land

clearing, overgrazing, nutrient, pesticide and by good overall

land management. I personally believe that conservation

practices of agriculture provide environmentally and

economically sound farming techniques for the Virgin islands

farmers. Finding solutions to environmental pollution can

only be solved when we recognize the importance of managing

our natural resources properly.



VI-7

REFERENCES



Jerry, L., Holecheck, Rex., D. Pieper and Carlton., H. Herbel.



1989.



Range Management Principles and Practices.



Mott,



G.



oO.



1960.



Grazing Pressure and Measurement of



Pasture Production.



Proceedings of the 8th International



Grassland Congress, pp. 606-611.



Davis,



K.



Oo.



1993.



Range Ecology.



Virgin Islands



Agriculture and Fair 1993.



VI Dept. of Economic Development



and University of the Virgin Islands.



Bulletin Number 7 pp.



23-24.



wh



VI-8”

HOW TO MANAGE WASTEWATER AND RUNOFF FROM

CONFINED ANIMAL FACILITIES



JEFFREY J. SCHMIDT



United States Department of Agriculture

Soil Conservation Service

United States Virgin Islands Field Office

St. Croix, USVI 00851



The United States Virgin Islands confined animal facilities are

very unique. Two categories are the most common and at the same time

very different. In one category, there are less than a few dozen farms

that have large enough systems (usually more than 75 head of stock) that

would support controls or measures that are engineered, designed, and

constructed, but may require large sums of monetary support. Most

commonly these herds are either dairy, beef, swine, sheep, goats, or

poultry. This is not to say that all large facilities have water

quality problems, but rather the potential is greater.



On the other hand is the category where there are virtually

hundreds of small operations of confined animals. The animals common in

this group are more of a mix than the preceding category. Again, each

situation is different. Five goats can be more hazardous than twenty

cows if the confinement location is not appropriate.



Of course there are the herds that just roam, graze, or browse.

Common to this group are horses and goats. It should be noted that any

animal can be a roamer, should gates be left open or fences be in dire

need of repair. Certain animal types are common to an area in the

Virgin Islands, rather than the rule. In other words, these

domesticated animals do not roam from coast to coast in search of food

or forage. But rather stay in an area big enough to support the herd,

and from there they do not venture. Commonly referred to as the lands

“carrying capacity". This refers more directly to the plants ability to

survive grazing pressure. These roamers can also be detrimental to

humans, other livestock herds, and to themselves as well. It just

depends on where the feces fall.



Wastewater management problems often arise when livestock are

added to a farm without increasing the land base. When land and animals

are out of balance - that is the waste produced greatly exceeds the

Capacity of the land to utilize the nutrients in the waste product - we

find that water quality problems begin to show. Unfortunately, these

problems can go unnoticed for a long period of time. Some examples

could be fish kills, odor, drinking water contamination, or even

bacteria related diseases spreading to humans. A common bacteria in

these cases is E-Coli.



Careful observation and common sense can often determine whether a

given farm practice is likely to cause the quality of water to

deteriorate or affect the environment. The quality of water can be

adversely affected if manure runs into streams or guts as a result of

land application, spillage, storage overflow, or deliberate dumping.



vVI-9

Increased bacterial counts can indicate this has happened. Several

illnesses can be attributed to high bacteria counts in water systems.

Common are typhoid, hepatitis, bronchitis, and even urinary infections.

All of which can be fatal if not treated. More often than not, rainfall

transports the waste products into the groundwater and/or across the

soil surface. Nutrients in manure applied to the soil at rates that

exceed the soils and plants ability to breakdown or uptake the

nutrients, can leach into groundwater or be carried away off site with

runoff water: and eroded soil to the sea. This off site transport: is

often referred to as non point source pollution. Increased’ nutrients

like nitrogen in the groundwater can cause drinking water problems for

water well users. Nitrate poisoning is possible which can he serious,

but more so to infants.



The reasons for developing and maintaining a sound wastewater

Management plan include: 1) environmental benefits to everyone, 2)

economic benefits to the farmer, and 3) compliance with laws and

regulations concerning environmental quality.



Let us explore managing waste from a large animal facility first

so that we can be introduced to the general principles of waste

management or runoff control. The two are rather synonymous. A

component of waste management is controlling runoff to and from the

confined facility.



A system to manage waste and runoff from a confined animal

facility must be developed using a total systems approach. A total

system accounts for all the waste associated with an agricultural

enterprise throughout the year from production to utilization. From



extra feed to overflowing watering tanks. From parlor flushing to

excess bedding. From manure storage to application. Everything. In

short, it is the management of all the waste, all the time, all the way

through.



With this in mind we begin the process of inventorying all of the

resources associated with the agricultural enterprise. This list is not

all inclusive. The accuracy of identifying the resources allows more

functional alternatives to be developed. Some of the data you collect

can be easily measured, such as the number of acres available to spread

waste. While other data may be less tangible, not easily measured, but

rather rely on personal discussions, observations, or just plain common

sense judgement.



A brief list of the inventory needed includes: type of livestock,

type of operation, breed, size (number of stock, ages, weights,

replacements), feeding components, site location, bedding, present

facility, land availability, soils, topography, rainfall, geology,

crops, labor availability, equipment availability, level of producer

management, adjacent land use, livestock travel routes, confinement

days, laws and regulations, utilities, landscape resources, flexibility,

expansion opportunities, producer financial situation, etc, etc.



Once a thorough investigation of the resources is complete,

arrange the information into six categories for interpretation,

analyzation, and evaluation. They are: 1) Production, 2) Collection, 3)

Storage, 4) Treatment, 5) Transfer, and 6) Utilization. Once broken

down into one or more of these categories, alternatives can be selected

that best fit the site conditions, livestock operation, and the

producers objectives. When selecting and considering alternatives,



VI-10

always keep in mind that the purpose of managing animal wastewater is

not to detrimentally affect water quality or the environment.



Components of the previously mentioned categories are more

commonly known as “alternatives available to manage wastewater and

runoff". They include, but again are not limited to: roof gutters,

clean water diversions, dirty water diversions, alley scrapers, flush

alleys, ponds, tanks, dry stack, lagoons, composters, solid separators,

settling basins, pipelines, hauling equipment, pumps, push off ramps,

irrigation systems, spreaders, commercial sale, refeeding, bedding,

energy generation, artificial wetland wastewater treatment, etc, etc.

This last alternative is excitingly new for the Virgin Islands and may

hold great promise because of our shrinking agricultural land base.



Moving to a smaller operation, all the principles of planning and

data collection are the same, you just do not have the land base

available and more common, the financial capital to build the same

controls as: a larger operation. Some items are suggested for larger

operations ‘as well. These happen to be virtually free from monetary

input. The first thing that can be done is to reduce the stock size.

Prevent stock from entering watering facilities, streams, ponds, and

diversions, rotate pastures, rearrange feeding areas away from steep

slopes, create buffer strips, repair fencing, feed in bunks not on

ground, and keep thinking. Common sense approaches can be found every

day. Your only limitation sometimes can be your imagination. Animal

waste management is not a one day event. Conditions are constantly

changing, as you must, in any farming or animal management enterprise.



Managing wastewater and runoff from confined animal facilities is

dynamic with many alternatives being available as well as many problems

that can be created. Because of the variety of alternatives, solutions,

conditions, and situations, that the management system must be

incorporated, no one procedure can be followed to arrive at a one system

design. One recommendation may be ideal for one farm and completely

inappropriate for another. Alternatives are always available. Whether

they are the ones that fit your operation, or are feasible for you, may

be a completely different matter. ;



In conclusion, the most important item is to recognize a problem,

even a potential problem, and to take positive steps to protect,

restore, and improve the environment - specifically the quality of water

in this case. Out of sight is not out of mind. Remember, to look in

your own backyard before you criticize across the fence.



VI-11

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE IN THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

Louis Petersen, Ph.D



Cooperative Extension Service, University of the Virgin

Islands, St. Thomas, VI 00802



According to the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act

of 1990, Sustainable Agriculture is an integrated system of

plant and animal production practices having a site-specific

application that will, over the long-term, satisfy human food

and fiber needs; enhance environmental quality and the natural

resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends;

make the most efficient use of non-renewable resources and on-

farm/ranch resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural

biological cycles and controls; sustain the economic viability

of farm/ranch Operations; and enhance the quality of life for

farmers/ranchers and society as a whole.



Simply stated, sustainable agriculture refers to agricultural

systems that are designed to be productive while being

ecologically sound, economically viable, socially just and

humane. These systems are comprised of practices such as

composting, inter-cropping, multiple cropping, crop rotation,

terracing, diligent record keeping, appropriate varietal

selection, and the use of drip irrigation. While some of these

methods and technologies. are new to some farmers and home

gardeners in the Virgin Islands, some have long been in use as

a consequence of tradition or necessity.



Terracing refers to the construction of earth embankments,

channels, or combinations of both across the slope of the

land. This has been practiced for hundreds of years in the

Virgin Islands, especially on St. Thomas and St. John where

the terrain is hilly and often very steep. The most common

type of terrace constructed by local farmers employs the use

of rocks to contain and stabilize the soil. This makes good

use of the many, available rocks which characterize our soils.

Terracing serves to reduce soil erosion and runoff as well as

create a more manageable working area for the farmer since the

area is made to be level.



Another practice which helps to conserve our natural resources

is mulching. This involves the use of synthetic or organic

materials such as straw, grasSs cuttings, leaves, manure, wood

chips, plastic or woven fabric to cover the ground surface

around plants to conserve soil moisture and control the growth

of weeds. Mulched plants need water less frequently than non -

mulched plants. Mulching also reduces runoff and soil erosion

Since the materials used provide a protective covering for the

soil. Organic materials such as manure and grass cuttings are

more commonly used in the Virgin Islands compared to synthetic

ones. Organic mulch materials gradually decompose and enhance



VI-12



{

soil structure and fertility. on the other hand, synthetic

options such as plastic are more durable and can last from one

Planting season to the next. Biodegradable plastics have been

developed and have great potential usage for Virgin Island

farmers who avoid the use of conventional grades of plastic.



The importance of proper varietal selection of crop types is



‘often underestimated by farmers and home gardeners in the



Virgin Islands. By choosing the appropriate varieties of

fruits or vegetables in production systems, lower inputs of

pesticides, fertilizers, and even water may be necessary.

Modern varieties which are tolerant to diseases, insects,

existing soil conditions, and drought should be used whenever

available.



Crop rotation refers to a system of planting crops in a

compatible and complementary manner in order to prevent the

potential build up pest populations on a given farm site. It

is well known that the potential for disease and insect

problems (especially soil - borne problems) increases when the

same or similar crops are grown successively on the same

field. Crop rotation relies on the diversity between plant

types to interfere with the natural life cycle of insects

and disease causing organisms. Consequently, the quantities of

pesticides used for crop production can potentially be

reduced, and therefore, their environmental impact. In

addition, when the same or similar crops are repeatedly grown

on the same plot of land, soil fertility levels decline due to

the constant demand for the same quality and quantity of

nutrients. This usually leads to unnecessary applications of

fertilizer to restore soil fertility. Crop rotation uses

plants which are appreciably different so that soil nutrient

reserves are not exhausted, resulting in "tired soils".



Similarly, the practice of inter - cropping is based on the

principle that similar plant types attract similar pest

problems while a diversified population of plants guards

against this. Hence, inter - cropping involves the growing of

two or more totally different species together in the same

field. As with crop rotation, to reduce the potential of a

pest outbreak is to reduce the potential environmental impact

of pesticides. Practically all farmers and home gardeners in

the Virgin Islands traditionally practice inter - cropping due

to the unavailability of another very limited and expensive

resource -- land. Farmers and gardeners must use their land

prudently in order to get as much production as possible from

small acreages.



Another important practice which needs more attention on the

part of Virgin Island farmers is record keeping. Good record

keeping (in conjunction with soil testing) can help farmers

decide if, for example, a fertilizer application is necessary.

Fertilizer applications are often made at random without

without considering the date of the last application or



VI-13

the current fertility status of the plot in question. This can

result in unnecessary applications of fertilizers which, in

turn, can eventually contaminate our aquifers. A good record

keeping system also documents a crop history (i.e. the

sequence in which crops have been planted on a farm site).

Such information can facilitate an effective crop rotation

system which, as was mentioned previously, is a pest control

measure and which prevents the exhaustion of soil. reserves.



 'Presh water is quantitatively a very limited natural. resource



in the Virgin Islands. Therefore, measures must be taken to

make the most efficient use of this precious commodity. Many

producers in the Virgin Islands still supply water to their

crops by means of the "conventional" hose or a bucket. Besides

causing mechanical damage to plants, this system makes

wasteful and inefficient. usage of water. Most of the applied

water never reaches the plants for which it was intended, and

instead contributes to runoff, erosion and sedimentation of

soil particles. On the other hand, drip irrigation technology

is strongly advocated for use in crop production since water

use efficiency is maximized. This is accomplished by gradually

supplying plants with small amounts of water in a dripping

manner through tubes for periods of time. This ensures maximum

uptake and utilization of the water by plants, and there is no

resultant runoff, soil erosion, or sedimentation. The use of

drip irrigation systems as a production practice is gradually

becoming more commonplace among Virgin Island farmers.



Composting is the practice of managing the decomposition of

organic matter such as plant or animal residue or waste which

results in a rich, humus material which can be used as a

fertilizer, mulch or to improve soil structure; Composting,

therefore, represents a means of recycling the otherwise

refuse by-products of agricultural activity and_= re-

incorporating these organic materials . into continued

agricultural production systems. The concept of a properly

managed, scientific system of organic matter decomposition is

relatively new to crop producers in the Virgin Islands, but

should be strongly encouraged.



Although the examples given herein are from the perspective of

crop production, sustainable agriculture is also practiced in

livestock production. For example, poor record keeping in

pasture management can result in overgrazing, and thus, poor

Management of animal manure, and soil erosion.



Sustainable agriculture represents one of many initiatives to

address the issue of environmental preservation. With the

assistance of the agricultural agencies of the Virgin Islands,

our farmers can also make significant contributions toward the

conservation of our natural resources in order to ensure

tomorrow's food production.



VI-14

THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMICAL BENEFITS OF WETLANDS

Algem Petersen



Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Coastal Zone

Management Program, St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.



In the ecologist's language, wetlands are known as ecotones,

or transitional areas - sandwiched between permanently flooded

deepwater environments and well-drained uplands - at one edge



they are predominately aquatic (very wet) and at the other

mostly dry (1).



Section 404 of the Clear Water Act defines wetlands as

“areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground

water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and

that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of



vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil

conditions" (2).



Normal circumstances are considered to be:



1. The soil and hydrological conditions that would

exist if the vegetation were not altered or

removed.



2. Cropping or cropping history is not the normal

circumstances.



In the recent press release from The White House Office on

Environmental Policy, on 'New Federal Wetland Policy', Carol

Browner, Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, states that "American wetlands are currently being

lost at a rate of nearly 300,000 acres per year". Another

section of that release entiled "Protecting America's

Wetlands: A Fair, Flexible and Effective Approach" further

States "The Nation has lost nearly half of the wetland acreage

that existed in the lower 48 States prior to European

settlement. The Nation's wetlands continue to be lost at a

rate of hundreds of thousands of acres per year due to both

human activity and natural processes. This continued loss

occurs at great cost to society" (3).



During the last thirty years researchers have discovered the

significant, irreplaceable ecological values and roles that

wetlands provide to communities. The term heritage value has

been used to describe the importance of wetlands as

educational resources, as repositories of biodiversity, as

sources of aesthetic experience, and as, simply existing

Natural phenomenon. The importance of the goods that wetlands

produce has been extensively documented.



VI-15












Se ee ee Ue ho...



SS ee ee eee



ST



NON



ye &



.



ie



a)



,s rw



\



a



caret. |



(



=



Fe



py 4



Sone |



axe \



hy Sf,



Se



we



v ah ba



» \



it



os



1 &



Vey



Ms



SS



~~



\4



4



Ma)



Sy



want.



\



ays



Sy



Pe ae



nae



~~



oy



om,



ab



\ mee



ated



A\



a



bi



ee



\.



aww,



\ro



eed,



i.



aa, CC”



[ego



aes



ee



a



ON



UUr



DYLLU



STUDENT:



Tishuana Hodge



SCHOOL:



John H. Woodson Junior High



NOTE:



Poster has been reduced.



The actual. poster is in color and can be’



seen at the Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Nisky Center, St. Thomas, VI

acc



CLOSING REMARKS

Joan Harrigan-Farrelly, CZM Program Manager

Department of Planning and Natural Resources, St. Thomas, VI

00802



Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.. Over the course of the



". past: two" ‘days;: ‘we-have: ‘tried:-t0pull- together. ‘regulators;. 0":

"users ‘and developers to discuss the problems and’ possible -



solutions ‘concerning NPSP.



We heard from the novices who wondered aloud what NPSP was and

we heard from the experts such as Mr. Kimball, Mr. Mc.Comb and

our own Dr. Kojis and Mr. Giruad. We heard from the regulators

both federal and local who told us what the laws , rules and

regulations governing NPSP were and we heard from Dr. Ragstar

who challenged each of us to deal with the problem from a

personal level, from a behavioral level. For as Dr. Ragstar

said only when we modify our day to day living habits, will we

be able to reduce some of the problems and minimize some of

the waste we have been accumulating.



We saw and heard from our youth their perspective on the

problem and possible solutions through their posters and essay

contest, and we heard from the Governor his commitment to

protect and preserve our beautiful islands.



Some of the solutions presented include:



1) looking at our own personal behavior and looking at

ourselves as of contributors to the problem, and

therefore as the ones capable of solving the problem.



2) Revising our laws and statutes in terms of sewage

disposal, earth change practices, septic systems, and

agricultural practices.



3) Utilizing Best Management Practices as far as



construction, agriculture, marinas, and golf courses are

concerned.

4) Reviewing our earth change criteria moré carefully and



taking a closer look at erosion and sedimentation control

plans that are presented, and then monitoring the

progress of construction.



5) We heard that the soils of the Virgin Islands are not

conducive to septic systems and a recommendation that all

new housing development must use alternate sewage

disposal systems by the year 1995. This means that our

Public Works Department must have on line adequate, and

State of the art sewage treatment plants, and that



VII-5

private home owners and DPNR must also begin to investigate

individual treatment systems, some of which were discussed

today.



There were numerous other recommendations that came out in the

various sessions, too numerous for me to summarize. However,

we will try to compile all the recommendations and present

them to you with | a “Summary | of the ‘Proceedings -



son" whieré “Go we: ge From: here?» what” will, we,” OF How ‘nach’ wilt +



-we commit ‘ourselves,’ our departments, our agencies and.our

companies to solving this problem? Did we during the course of

the last two days-decide the problem was large enough to

warrant our full combined commitment? From the presentations

and open discussions, I believe that the consensus was that we

will all strive to commit ourselves and our resources to

remedying the problem. ©



I must add however, that such a problem cannot be solved by

one agency alone, or by the government alone or by one

company. Clearly from the discussions, we are all contributors

to the problem and therefore it will take our collective

efforts to solve the problem. In the same way that it took our

collective efforts to bring about this conference.



Conferences like this are not easy to organize and so I would

like to thank all those who worked diligently in organizing

the conference, contacting the speakers, and getting the word

out. But before I acknowledge all the conference committee

organizers, I would like to single out one person Ms. Janice

Hodge who worked tirelessly to ensure the conference ran

smoothly. Mrs. Hodge you did a wonderful job and I'd like us

to please give her a hand. Other members of the planning

committee included Ms. Julie Wright-UVI Cooperative Extension

Service, Ms. Marcia Taylor, UVI, Eastern Caribbean Center, Mr.

Olasee Davis, UVI Cooperative Extension Service, Mr. Mario

Morales, USDA Soil Conservation Service, Mr. Bruce Green ,

Caribbean Hydro-Tech, Inc., Ms. Algem Petersen DPNR, Division

of Permits, Ms. Lynne MacDonald UVI Eastern Caribbean Center,

and again last but not least, Ms. Janice Hodge Chair of the

committee, DPNR, CZM program.



Allow me also to thank the Governor for opening our

conference, Mr. Richardson for filling in for the

Commissioner, all the presenters, those that came from far and

near, the schools and students that participated in the

poster and essay contest, Limetree Beach Resort. and in

Particular Lex and his staff, and you the participants. For



Without you there could have been no conference.



Lets leave this conference today with renewed energy and



commitment to working together to solve our problems, and to

making these beautiful islands the paradise they can be.



VII-~6

Only with government departments joining hands with each other

and the private sector and nongovernment agencies will we be

able to come up with solutions that will benefit all.



I look forward to seeing you at next year's conference.



Once again thank you for your participation.



VII-7

AUTHOR INDEX



Adams, ROY creer cece cree eee e eee e eee teen ee ene ee eee teen eens eee teens I-3

Bough, Alfredo oc ec eee ee eee eee eee tees eee nets te renne VII-1

Boulon, Ralf wc ccc cece ccc cc ence cece een we teen weet erence een ete teseenes II-1

Cunningham, Timothy 2... ee cece cece cee ce tee cece teen eeece ence eee eeeee III-6

Davis, (OLaSS@ lice eee vec ee eee tee ee ee bee deeeeemeneues ee eesee cee es VIFI1

Farrelly, Alexander .. ic cece ccc cee cece eee eee eee ee eee eee eee enes vaeee Il

Giraud, VIClOr wi ccccccrccccnccaveenentveucereseccrenesces ener ene teas eeaee II-6

Harrigan-Farrelly, Joan .. ccc cece ee eee n wesw ence teres cone ween ete cen eane VII-5

Henning, Malcolm 2... ccc cece ccc cee ete eee etc ew eee ewe e tenet cere nenees I-9

Hodge, Tishuana .... cc sec ccc een ccc ve sce sneuceacen seme e cece cere nneeen «.» VII-3

Hubbard, DenniS 2... cece cc ccc rcs w ese w ere e neste s tees ere acesanaseeenes eeeeee V-35

TKizarry, Warmer weve ccc s cc arene cree ace name e ence awa e rere ene econ eseene III-23

Kimball, Barry cece s ccc ccc r eres e ree e rere eater test eeseetanens seco neers Iv-11

Kojis, Barbara ... ccc ence new ccneee vce ones a a ir cece eee e ee ee v-20

Lindlau, Kim wc. ccc ccc cece eect ec cee ree ene eee ene eee tener ee eee testers reaes vV-18

Linn1LO, TOM cece ence ccc nsec cece ncn teen e ane ene meee rene t esterase rensees Iv-5

MacDonald, Lynne 2... cece ccc ce cece ee ee cette ee eee ete tee eee eee ees V-1

McComb, William 1... ccc cw ee eee eee ee eee ene twee te eee e easter cces II-25

Morales, Mario cree crc cee ccc c ec ene etc ee nner nee ueeeee eee ewe ewer eeee III-13

Morton, Dale ... cc cc ccc cc eee eee tc eee tee tee tne ee eee nee newt w tate ec enes II-12

Nazario, Benjamin ........ Cee ere eee eee ee te eee eee eee eee nae I-5

Padin, Carlos ..cccreccerecs een eens See ene wee ne en eee mame e eee eee teat anees *

Peter, Nathalie wie c cree cece ene c reece ener sce eee tenet cnet ee eee neon enees V-7

Petersen, ALGEM wc. erence cree nc ence renner nme etree ese twee a eee e sere neee VI-15

Petersen, LOULS wees ae ccc ence n cc cccerncesveresteesceesteneece eee eee eone VI-12

Quinn, Norman ........ ee eee meee eee eee ete ete eee tet cnet ete e ween res v-15

Ragster, Laverne ..ecsccscasecses seem e nee n eee e erences eee e nec c eee eecee . I-15

Reed, Leonard wise secvecccureacees eae ee neces eee e ene e eee e ses neseee eeees ITI-11

Richards, Keith ...... cc ew ccc cnn asses cesnesveesacrese a ra seeeee *

Schmidt, JeffL wc. ccc ccc ccc ecw cee eee c cena ewer ee eens eee re net essee ee eeee VI-93

Selengut, Stanley 2... ccs ccc ec nc ccc cece enna n eet e ete e eee sense ee aaeeeene I-23

Taylor, Marcia coerce cece cece cre rece n cetera scenes eee eee en asereer wav eees III-1

Wernicke, Werner ...c cece cece ce ees eee cme ee tee ee eee ee eee e ener anee II-15

White, Douglas ... cece cee sce c cece reece ene vanees eevee ceee eee eee vce neeeen *

Wright, Julie ............. eee ccc eet e enter eenan crc cc ener eeseeecesees LVL



* Paper not available at time of printing.