The City of Sacramento (Calif.) established its Stormwater Quality Improvement Pro-gram (SQIP) before such initiatives were required by federal law.

The Clean Water Act included a stormwater component in 1987, and the city established the SQIP in 1990, about a year before it was required to, with the aim of reducing stormwater pollutant loads.

“In the 1990s, this was new territory,” says Bill Busath, supervising engineer for the city. “My predecessors in the program were pro-active.” But being a pioneer meant there were no models to follow. Instead, the city worked with other fledgling stormwater programs, the regional water quality control board and consultants like Larry Walker Associates to craft a countywide program that has become a model.

A foundation of the Sacramento program is stormwater monitoring, mainly by consistent sampling. Monitoring established baselines and provided data to develop policies for the program. Monitoring continues today as a way to establish trends and evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Informa-tion from sampling guides the program’s approach to working with businesses, contractors and the public, and to help determine which practices work and which do not.

The program operates with a total budget of about $4.5 million countywide. About a third comes from the city, and the rest from Sacramento County and other incorporated entities in the county, working under a memorandum of understanding. “It’s very cost-effective to work with other entities in the county,” says Busath. “If every jurisdiction had its own program, we’d be spending more money and getting fewer results.”

Sampling to set standards

“The main reason we started monitoring was to establish baseline conditions — the pollutant loads that existed before the SQIP got started,” says Busath. “We continue to do monitoring for various purposes, such as to gauge compliance with the NPDES permit. We also perform special studies like before-and-after sampling to measure the effectiveness of a particular best management practice (BMP), like a grassy swale. In time, we hope to be able to see reductions in pollutants. Then we will have an idea that our program is having an effect.”

One big decision made early on, guided by sampling, was to concentrate on a relatively small number of target pollutants. “We found a few classes of pollutants that appeared consistently in all our samples, and we determined they were having the most detrimental impact on our creeks and rivers,” says Busath.

“We developed reduction strategies that included identifying and prioritizing sources, and then source reduction strategies.” Though samples can be analyzed for hundreds of pollutants, SQIP targets three main types: pesticides; metals like copper, lead, mercury and zinc; and bacteria like E. coli and fecal coliform.

“When we came up with the idea to target just a few pollutants, it was a relatively new concept, but now it’s pretty standard,” says Busath. A focus on the reduction of a few target pollutants helps the SQIP concentrate its mitigation efforts, and the focused efforts themselves have an impact on the broad spectrum of pollutants.

Regular sampling

Staff members sample rivers eight times a year at five sites on the Sacramento and American rivers. There are sample sites upstream and downstream from urban discharges, and a middle site on the Sacramento River.

Samples are sent to labs for analysis and are flow-weighted. “We want to develop pollutant load figures, which is basically flow times concentration,” Busath says. Three to four representative creeks are also sampled and tested for the whole suite of pollutants. Samples are routinely taken at several urban discharge sites.

In addition to pollution monitoring, SQIP does bio-assessment monitoring. “So far, our observation shows that wildlife levels are pretty static,” says Busath. “We rate a stream’s riparian habitats and pull up sediment samples to check on the benthic macroinvertebrate community. A good array of bugs indicates a healthy system.

“We have some healthy creeks and some not-so-healthy creeks, and indications are that, overall, they haven’t changed much. But over time, the biological monitoring may prove to be a better indication of health than pollutant monitoring.”

The program is just starting to get enough data to analyze trends. “We’ve had some definite successes, and we see some trends, but it’s difficult to establish statistical significance with the amount of data that we have now,” Busath says. “Still, there are some things we’re sure of.

“For instance, we’ve seen the levels of pesticides like diazinon fall significantly after those products were banned for most urban uses. They seem to have been replaced by pyrethroids, but it does show that banning reduces pollutant levels. We’ve also seen lead levels go down due to the removal of lead from most substances, and levels of some other metals, like copper and zinc, appear to be showing downward trends, though it is not yet conclusive. On the other hand, levels of bacteria and mercury have been relatively unchanged.”

So far, sampling data has driven some program mitigation activities, but the SQIP realizes that the data can and needs to be used more effectively. “To date, we’ve not used the data to the full extent in assessing and guiding program activities, but we’re getting to the point where we’re ready to shift focus,” Busath says.

Working with contractors

SQIP now has two full-time inspectors checking on erosion and sediment control at construction sites. They follow a well-developed protocol for inspection and suggested BMPs for such sites. It took a while to get to that level. “Our first permit focused on rivers, and we didn’t get to inspection until the second round,” says Busath. “Since we didn’t have any models, we had to develop our own training.”

SQIP worked with regional water quality control boards to develop basic principles, and also worked with building industry representatives. Inspectors were involved from the beginning, helping to develop the standards they would enforce. At first, this meant inspectors had an unusual degree of autonomy in their duties.

The contractor program relies on two basic strategies: soil stabilization and filtration. Stabilization techniques like mulching and seeding are common. For filtration, BMPs like fiber rolls and gravel filter bags are used. Standards for concrete washout have also been developed. Instead of washing out concrete trucks in gutters, contractors are required to use special designated areas.

In addition to inspections, SQIP staff members review new development plans and work with developers to build effective post-construction runoff treatment BMPs into new construction. Busath believes the inspection program has been effective in reducing pollutants in runoff from construction sites.

“There was plenty of resistance at first, and contractors really didn’t like installing BMPS,” he says. “It’s hard to blame them — the idea was completely foreign to them. But over the years, the program has become very effective. Random pictures from ten years ago show that there’s really no com-parison to today. The runoff is much cleaner, and sites are better controlled.”

Educating the public

SQIP is serious about public outreach. “We spend about $250,000 a year on public outreach through community grants, the media, and elementary education,” says media and communications specialist Jessica Hess. “Our basic message is to teach the public how everyday activities affect water quality. We publicize common things, like dumping oil, but also more subtle things like sweeping instead of hosing down.”

Staff and consultants present a one-hour program to third-, fourth- and fifth-graders in classrooms and larger assemblies throughout the county. The program is interactive, with demonstrations and pictures. “We get a lot of positive feedback from teachers, and we’re raising an aware and more responsible generation,” Hess says. “When I’m at community events, kids will come up to me and say, ‘I remember you, you told us to wash the car on the lawn!’”

Outreach also includes efforts to curtail illegal stormwater discharges — potentially a major source of pollutants that are difficult to regulate. The approach is to focus on one type of business at a time — like dry cleaners, carpet cleaners and landscaping firms — and enlist their cooperation by “branding” businesses that follow guidelines.

“We’ve had limited success, but the most success we’ve had has been with carpet cleaners and pressure washers. They agree to dispose of waste in sanitary sewers, and we certify them as Clean Water Business Partners. They get stickers and other materials they can use, and we do some advertising on their behalf.”

Building a brand

Ultimately, the intent is to build a Clean Water Business Partner brand that has resonance with the public and gives businesses an incentive to cooperate. “We do have reports from time to time of Clean Water Partners dumping illegally, but it’s rare; after all, what we’re asking them to do is not that difficult,” Busath says.

Speaking in general of illegal discharges to the storm drains, Busath wonders if increased public awareness might be distorting the issue. Reports of illegal dumping are up, but it could be that the amount of dumping is declining while, because of public awareness, reporting is much more common.

“Unfortunately, we didn’t have any good measures of illegal dumping before this program started — there’s no way to know how common it was,” Busath says. “Increased public awareness is good, of course, but it may be obscuring actual successes.”

SQIP also seeks to reduce pollutants from industry, mainly through facility site inspections by staff from the County of Sacramento Environmental Management Depart-ment. Here too, specific types of industries are inspected for pollutant reduction practices.

Busath is cautious, but not pessimistic, in assessing the successes of SQIP. The program is one of the oldest and most comprehensive in the country, but it is just getting to the point where monitoring provides useful guidance and statistically significant evidence of trends. “Ten years of data isn’t really enough,” Busath says.

On the other hand, sampling data has helped to establish priorities, and it confirms that some high-level decisions, such as targeting a limited number of pollutants, have been correct. Now that sufficient data is available, and as the focus shifts to better data analysis, Busath expects feedback from sampling to better focus stormwater management activities.

It’s hard to be first, but Sacra-mento crafted an approach, guided by sampling and other real-world feedback, that was effective from the beginning and promises to become even more effective as time passes.