Seacoast Stormwater Coalition – MS4 Collaboration Matrix

NOI Section / Shared
opportunities for collaboration / Individual
community efforts / PotentialCollaboration
but more work needed to identify what, who, how / Already underway
Part I: General Conditions / No comments (NC) / NC / NC / NC
Part II: Summary of Receiving Waters / Comments:
  • Develop scope of work for regional GIS effort to overlay MS4 areas with georeferenced assessment units, impaired waters, and outfalls; then crosscheck with 303(d) list to id. waters(RPCs? DES?)
  • Pay attention to 17 month timeline as this idea moves forward
  • Benefits: All communities use same method
  • Use existing available information – what is available at DES already?
/ NC / Comments:
  • Identify entity for GIS/regional collaboration to assist communities(as in, RPCs, SWA, others)
  • Identify which 303(d) list to use – cut off point Question for EPAWhat about the waters that came off the most recent list?Would want to pick what makes the most sense? What is a reasonable method? UNH method?
  • Assess communities’ GIS capacity – some may be helped by regional collaboration, others may not need help with GIS
  • ID “Waters of the US.” Discuss Urban Areas. Each town may pick what their priorities are.
/ NC
Part II Next Steps Action: Convene subcommittee to develop next steps for regional GIS effort – working with UNH on a methodology. Use NHDES data/website.
Part III:
Stormwater Management Program Summary
MCM 1:
Public Education and Outreach / Comments:
  • Shared opportunities exist; next steps, id. specific activities – subcommittees would be helpful especially to address specific messages (as in nitrogen)
  • Identify regional entitieswho could help – NROC? Others?
/ Comments:
  • Leverage existing products/presentations, etc. (Example: Rye’s catch basin cleaning door hanger – has potential to hit multiple audiences and messages; also, pet waste messaging)
  • Leverage HHW days
/ Comments:
  • Coordinate with other regional groups to leverage messaging – GB 2020, etc.
  • For N impaired waters, for construction, could do a shared approach?
/ NC
  • NRPC and SNHPC

MCM 1Next Steps Action: Revisit shared opportunities at a later date; consider subcommittees – develop scope of work
MCM2:
Public Involvement and Participation / Comments:
Put NOI in a form that could be shared with public, muni boards, etc. (as in town council other boards). Output would be a shared template/fact sheet/exec. summary/bullet points all could use / NC / Comments:
  • Define scope of “public comment”
/ Comments:
  • Cross check existingmunicipal activities to identify ongoing programs that might be able to be used to demonstrate compliance

MCM 2 Next Steps Action: Revisit when towns have NOIs, then develop scope of work and id. who will do it
MCM3:
Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
SSO Inventory / NC / NC / NC / Comments:
  • Municipalities Are likely already this doing under CWA or other regulatory responsibilities so ensure coordination among departments to obtain information needed for MS4 compliance

Storm sewer mapping / Comments:
  • Develop shared SOP to help communities who haven’t done this yet? For example, culverts are not outfalls and there has been confusion around this in the past so shared efforts might help clarify
  • Develop shared definition of compliance (esp. timeline requirements)
/ Comments:
  • Communities likely doing already; confirm?
/ NC
  • NRPC and SNHPC can help centralize and compile data.
/ Comments:
  • UNH has outfall monitoring and investigation methodology – leverage?

MCM3 – Storm Sewer Mapping Next Steps Action: Outfall prioritization and investigation is an opportunity for shared definitions and protocols – to help all make sure we are making same assumptions about which outfalls need to be investigated (UNH willing to do demo. for coalition); get everyone on same page to adopt same standard; then leverage towns’ existing products and approaches (Durham, UNH, etc.) – define together.
Written IDDE
program / Comments:
  • Review and standardize programs so that we are all on the same page – use output to help towns who don’t have programs
/ Comments:
  • Some towns have IDDE programs others don’t
/ Comments:
  • Assess towns’ capacity
/ NC
MCM 3 – IDDE Program Next Steps Action: Subcommittee could be developed to review Central MA and existing NH IDDE SOP to develop shared approach and scope of work; output could include a shared template/approach and structure it so that it is useful to us
Employee training / Comments:
  • Develop shared approach for employee training; example: leverage existing SSC meetings to host trainings for all
  • Identify potential partners to lead trainings: T2 (incorporate into the Roads Scholar program?), UNHSC, others
/ NC
  • Amherst has done some training.
/ NC
  • RPCs can be the convener of training and record presentations and put on-line and have available on-demand.
  • RPCs Can facilitate getting others to municipal trainings.
/ NC
Wet and dry weather screening / Comments:
  • For screening, explore using UNH students and other existing programs for sampling
  • Consider standardizing type of kits and also maybe shared procurement (also for IDDE)
  • Shared definition of what we are sampling for/level of sampling (n of sampling sites defined by prioritization?)
  • Is mixed in with outfall mapping
/ NC / Comments:
  • Identify who will be responsible for sampling – volunteers? Town employees? Consultants? UNH? DES programs?
/ NC
  • Collaborate more with existing cons com (contact cons com chair) and other org monitoring and NHDES training and using interns.? What other institutions have potential for interns?

MCM 4:
Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control / NC / NC / Comments:
  • Develop deed restrictions to enable stormwater maintenance
/ NC
Site inspection and enforcement of ESC measures / Comments:
  • Opportunity to leverage shared approaches and references for inspection (SWA, DES, etc.)
  • Challenges: Following up when issues are identified during post construction inspection
/ NC / Comments:
  • Survey towns to determine capacity; some may need assistance esp. with inspection
  • Also, evaluate consistency of approaches to ensure all towns on same page
  • Might need more definition/formalization around inspection
  • Look at more collaboration with the AoTRegs.
  • Standards exist – CGP etc. need to formalize incorporate into SW permit process.
/ Comments:
  • Many towns currently have developer’s PE provide inspection reports to town, but are existing inspection methods acceptable or is something different needed (for example, town staff follow-up on developer’s PE inspection to validate)?

Site plan review / Comments:
  • Develop shared terms for site plan review
/ NC / NC / NC
Erosion and sediment control / NC / NC / NC / NC
Waste control / NC / NC / NC / NC
MCM 4 Next Steps Action: Develop shared inspection protocol and understanding of what inspection is and who does it; create shared training for inspections – develop collective definition of compliance and terms for site plan review
MCM 5:
Post-construction Stormwater Management in New and Re-development / NC / NC / NC / Comments:
  • Rochester passed a stormwater ordinance

As-built plans for on-site control / Comments:
  • Develop shared, regional understanding of what “ensure” means
/ NC / Comments:
  • RE ensuring long term operation and maintenance: What is Env-Wq 1507.08 – what does it say for maintenance?May need to review for group?
/ NC
Target properties for IC reduction / Comments:
  • Develop shared opportunity to standardize and use UNHSC’s hot spot mapping approach and update it to fit new permit requirements (use new EPA pollutant loading CEs/rates); easy to complete
/ NC / NC / NC
Allow GI / NC / NC / NC / NC
Street and parking lot design guidelines / Comments:
  • Have RPCs audit municipal street designs to id conflicts and opportunities for improvement that will enable compliance
  • Connect municipalities to existing resources for roads/parking lots (for example, Center for Watershed Protection criteria and audit documents); also look to SWA regs. for parking lot designs
/ Comments:
  • Review road and parking lot criteria – potential to align with CWP criteria
  • Review ordinances to determine if there are conflicts
/ NC / NC
Ensure stormwater controls for new and re-development will prevent/minimize water quality impacts / NC / NC / Comments:
  • Identify which municipalities need help/connection to existing regional resources
  • Develop shared interpretation of new/re-dev re municipal projects (as in: a school)
  • Might be a need to align regs to require same for public/private development
/ Comments:
  • SWA model standards should suffice for compliance
  • PREP has funding to help communities update their regs
  • Resources and models exist

MCM 5 Next Steps Action:
MCM 6:
Muni. Good Housekeeping and PP / Comments:
  • In general, standardized methods, definitions, approaches are needed
/ NC / NC
Written O & M for parks, open spaces, buildings, vehicles, equipment / Comments:
  • Develop shared approach and standards – templates; leverage central MA, UNH, others; develop shared scope of work
/ NC / NC / Comments:
  • Leverage Central MA resources
  • Likely individual municipal efforts exist already; need to inventory and review

Inventory municipal parks, open spaces, buildings (incl. stormdrains), etc. / NC / NC / NC / NC
Establish program for repair of MS4 infrastructure / NC / NC / NC / NC
SWPPP for parks, open spaces, garages, transfer stations, other waste facilities / Comments:
  • Develop shared approach and standards – templates; leverage EPA’s industrial SWPPP – UNH is currently working on one and we could also leverage the Central MA product; develop shared scope of work to create
/ NC / NC
  • Look at existing templates and put on-line. Work with partners and RPCs on consolidating and customizing.
/ NC
  • Work with RPC on bibliography software for searchable website content.

Catch basin cleaning / Comments:
  • Towns could explore collective bidding – would this lower/standardize costs?
  • Identify opportunities for shared bids, practices, etc.
/ NC / NC / Comments:
  • Most municipalities are already doing collective bidding.
  • Note: A range of prices exists for services = ~$28/basin to ~60/basin; more frequent cleaning lowers costs; bidding by hour may be cheaper than by the basin
  • Helpful tip: While sweeper truck goes around, have municipal staff map and mark CBs and assess condition

Street sweeping program / Comments:
  • Evaluate use of vac-n-sweeper type trucks (regenerative air vac)
  • Evaluate sharing services for smaller towns
  • Document leaf reduction programs to get credit for P load reduction (to get credit for education in phosphorus impaired waters)
/ NC / NC / Comments:
  • Many towns have volume estimation methods – could be shared?

Road salt optimization / Comments:
  • Participate in Green SnoPro program through T2
  • DES has salt reduction plans to help create templates
/ Comments:
  • Some towns likely participate in SnoPro – identify those who don’t?
/ NC / NC
MCM 6 Next Steps Action:
Actions for Meeting TMDLS / NC / NC / NC / NC
Actions for meeting requirements for WQ limited waters / Comments:
  • Develop list of what pollutants we would be controlling
/ NC / NC / NC
Part IV:
Notes and Additional Information / NC / NC / NC / NC
Documentation for parts of 2.2.2 deemed not applicable / NC / NC / NC / NC
Part V: Certification / NC / NC / NC / NC

Next Steps:

  • At MaySSC meeting, tackle MCM 1
  • Jamie will tackle impaired waters id. and present at next meeting – an outline of how to address Part II
  • Urgency and concerns around training requirements – need help (MCM1 requirements for the minimum 8 messages)
  • Does SSC want a logo to use on materials?

April 2017

1