Api publ 1669 1994 scan (american petroleum institute)

--`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---Results of a Retail Gasoline Outlet And Commercial Parking Lot Storm Water Runoff Study Manufacturing, Distribution and Marketing Department API PUBLICATION 1669

Trang 1

A P I PUBLXLbb9 9 4

m

0732290 0 5 4 3 9 5 2 b 9 T

m

Storm Water Runoff Study

This study was funded by the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) and the

American Petroleum Institute

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Provided by IHS under license with API

Trang 2

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -Results of a Retail Gasoline Outlet And Commercial Parking Lot

Storm Water Runoff Study

Manufacturing, Distribution and Marketing Department

API PUBLICATION 1669

American Petroleum Institute

Trang 3

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L r L b b 9 94

m

0732270 0 5 4 3 9 5 4 462

m

SPECIAL NOTES

1 API PUBLICATIONS NECESSARILY ADDRESS PROBLEMS O F A GENERAL NATURE WITH RESPECT TO PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS SHOULD BE REVIEWED

2 API IS NOT UNDERTAKING TO MEET THE DUTIES OF EMPLOYERS, MANU-

FACTURERS, OR SUPPLIERS TO WARN AND PROPERLY TRAIN AND EQUIP THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND OTHERS EXPOSED, CONCERNING HEALTH AND

S A F E ï Y RISKS AND PRECAUTIONS, NOR UNDERTAKING THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER LOCAL, STATE, OR FEDERAL LAWS

3 INFORMATION CONCERNING SAFETY AND HEALTH RISKS AND PROPER TIONS SHOULD BE OBTAINED FROM THE EMPLOYER, THE MANUFACTURER

OR SUPPLIER OF THAT MATERIAL, OR THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

4 NOTHING CONTAINED IN ANY API PUBLICATION IS TO BE CONSTRUED AS PRECAUTIONS WITH RESPECT TO PARTICULAR MATERIALS AND CONDI-

GRANTING ANY RIGHT, BY IMPLICATION OR OTHERWISE, FOR THE MANU- FACTURE, SALE, OR USE OF ANY METHOD, APPARATUS, OR PRODUCT COV- ERED BY LETTERS PATENT NEITHER SHOULD ANYTHING CONTAINED IN

ITY FOR INFRINGEMENT OF LETTERS PATENT

THE PUBLICATION BE CONSTRUED AS INSURING ANYONE AGAINST LIABIL-

5 GENERALLY, API STANDARDS ARE REVIEWED AND REVISED, REAF-

FIRMED, OR WITHDRAWN AT LEAST EVERY FIVE YEARS SOMETIMES A ONE- TIME EXTENSION OF UP TO TWO YEARS WILL BE ADDED TO THIS REVIEW TER ITS PUBLICATION DATE AS AN OPERATIVE API STANDARD OR, WHERE

AN EXTENSION HAS BEEN GRANTED, UPON REPUBLICATION STATUS O F THE

CYCLE THIS PUBLICATION WILL NO LONGER BE IN EFFECT FIVE YEARS AF-

PUBLICATION CAN BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE API AUTHORING DEPART- MENT [TELEPHONE (202) 682-8000] A CATALOG O F API PUBLICATIONS AND MATERIALS IS PUBLISHED ANNUALLY AND UPDATED QUARTERLY BY API,

Copyright O 1994 American Petroleum institute

i¡

Trang 4

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b 9 9 4 0732290 0 5 4 3 9 5 5 3 T 9 M

FOREWORD

API publications may be used by anyone desiring to do so Every effort has been made

by the Institute to assure the accuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however, the Institute makes no representation, warranty, or guarantee in connection with this pub-

lication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for loss or damage re- sulting from its use or for the violation of any federal, state, or municipal regulation with which this publication may conflict

Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to the director of the Manufac-

turing, Distribution and Marketing Department, American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C 20005

111

Trang 5

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b 9 94 0732290 054Lï5b 2 3 5

m

0 E O M ATR IX

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVESUMMARY 11

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Objective 1

1.2 Background 1

1.3 Other Studies 3

1.3.1 Sacramento County's Action Plan Demonstration Project 3

1.3.2 National Urban Runoff Program 4

2.0 WSPNAPI PART I AND PART II STORM WATER RUNOFF STUDIES 5

2.1 Literature Search 5

2.2 Selection of RGOs and Test Sites 6

2.3 Selection of Parking Lots and Test Sites 7

2.4 Testing Methodology 7

2.5 Sampling Procedures 9

2.6 Analytical Testing 9

2.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 9

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 10

3.1 Analytical Results 10

3.2 Data Comparisons 11

Comparison of Results from RGO Pump Islands and Driveways 12

Comparison of Results from RGOs, Parking Lots, and

NURP

12

3.2.1 3.2.2 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 13

5.0 REFERENCES 14

1 Copyright American Petroleum Institute Provided by IHS under license with API

Trang 6

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -API

9 4 0732270 0541757 171

GEOMATRIX

EXECUTTVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of a two-part study of constituents present in simulated storm water

runoff fiom six retail gasoline outlets (RGûs) and four commercial parking lots The objective of the

study is to characterize storm water runoff from RGûs and to compare the results with runoff from

commercial parking lots and published urban "background" values The study was funded by the

Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)

The study demonstrates that for the constituents analyzed, median event mean concentrations

(EMCs)

in storm water runoff fiom normally operated and maintained RGOs are no higher than those in

lead, and zinc in

runoff

urban runoff as established by the National Urban Runoff Program Furthermore, there are no

significant differences in median EMCs in runoff from

RGO

constituents analyzed These results indicate that fiieling activities at normally operated and

maintained RGOs do not contribute additional significant concentrations of measured constituents

in storm water runof

In 1987, Section 402(p) was added to the Clean Water Act to establish a framework for addressing

storm water discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

progrm Storm water discharges from commercial facilities, such as RGOs and parking lots, are not

included under the initial regulations However, regulations are to be promulgated that are expected

to increase the number and types of dischargers required to obtain NPDES permit coverage for storm

water discharges EPA, in a report to Congress @PA, 1993), identified several business categories

that are not currently regulated by NPDES permits Automotive service facilities, including RGOs,

are included on EPA's list of potential Phase II permittees

11

Trang 7

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -m

GEOMATRIX

RESULTS OF A RETAIL GASOLINE OUTLET AND

This report presents the results of a two-part study of simulated storm water runoff fiom six retail

gasoline outlets (RGOs) and four commercial parking lots Part I was conducted by Hart Crowser,

Inc (Hart Crowser) and characterized simulated storm water runoff from five RGOs Part II was

conducted by Geomatrix Consultants, Inc (Geomatrix) and characterized simulated storm water

runoff from four commercial parking lots and one

RGû

Petroleum Association (WSPA) and the American Petroleum Institute ( M I )

1.1 Objective

The objective of this study is to characterize storm water runoff from RGOs and to compare the

results with runoff fiom commercial parking lots and published urban "background" values

1.2 Background

In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act or CWA) was

amended to provide that any discharge of pollutants from a point source to Waters of the United

States is effectively prohibited unless it is in compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System ("DES) permit

As more signiticant sources of water poilution were brought under control, the impact of pollutants

in storm water became more noticeable Water quality studies conducted in the 1970s and 1980s

identified urban runoff as a source of pollution In response to these studies, the 1987 amendments

to the Water Quality Act added Section 402(p) This section established a comprehensive two-

phased approach for the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to follow in addressing storm

Trang 8

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * : L b b 9 9 4 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 4 3 9 5 9 T44 9

GEOMATRIX

water discharges Five types of storm water discharges are covered under the Phase I program

Dischargers within these five categories, listed below, were required to obtain permit coverage before

October 1, 1992:

A discharge for which a pennit has been issued prior to February 4, 1987;

A discharge associated with industrial activities;

A discharge from a municipal separate storm sewer system serving a population of 250,000 or more;

A discharge from a municipal separate storm sewer system serving a population of

100,000 or more, but less than 250,000; or

A storm water discharge determined by the EPA Administrator or the State to contribute to a violation of a water quality standard or to be a significant contributor

of pollutants to the waters of the United States

Discharges from commercial facilities, such as RGOs and parking lots, are not included under the

Phase I regulations However, Phase II regulations to be promulgated are expected to increase the

numbers and types of dischargers that are required to obtain

NPDES

discharges EPA, in a draft Phase II report to Congress @PA, 1999, identified several business

categories that are not currently regulated by NPDES permits Automotive senrice facilities,

including RGûs, are included on EPA's list of potential Phase II permittees It should be noted that,

according to the EPA

draft

reliable data on storm water problems associated with Phase II sources nationwide In order to

provide data regarding storm water runoff from potential Phase II facilities, WSPA and API

commissioned this study

2

Trang 9

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b 9 9 4 W 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 4 1 î b O 7 6 6

G E 0 M ATR IX

This study utilized the results from a recently published RGO runoff study titled Action Plan

Demonstration Project, Demonstration of Gasoline Fueling Station Best Management Practices,

Phase I Report (September, 1993), prepared by Unbe & Associates and Larry Walker Associates

for the County of Sacramento, Water Resources Division Another storm water runoff study used

for the WSPNAPI study described herein is the Final Report of the Nationwide Urban Runoff

Program (December 30, 1983) prepared by the Water Planning Division of EPA These storm water

studies are described in the following sections

1.3.1

Sacramento County's Action Plan Demonstration Project characterized storm water

runoff

pollution EPA provided fùnding of the study by a grant through the San Francisco Estuary Project

and the Sacramento County Water Resources Division The report presents the analytical results of

samples collected from storm water runoff from three RGOs in Sacramento County

Sacramento County's Action Plan Demonstration Project

The Sacramento County project selected high-volume (over 200,000 gallons per month), self-service

selected RGOs are located less than 2 miles apart

Within each RGO, a single representative sampling point was selected where station runoff leaves the

property and includes drainage from the fueling and auxiliary services areas Uribe collected samples

during six storm events during the 1992/93 wet season For five of the storms, the sample collection

procedure consisted of placing a 1 liter sampling bottle into a below-grade concrete sump A portion

of

were collected in this manner for each 0.05 inch increment of measured rainfall The samples were

composited immediately into a 5-liter borosilicate bottle until the 5-liter bottle was filled The one

exception to this sample collection method occurred during the first storm event, when only grab

samples were collected

3

Trang 10

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -m

GEOMATRIX

The initial analytical program for the collected samples included analyses for oil and grease, total suspended solids, metals (13 EPA priority pollutant metals plus aluminum and iron), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and petroleum hydrocarbons However, some of the metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, and PAHs were consistently not detected in samples collected from the first

three storm events

On

three sampling events:

oil and grease total suspended solids heavy metals (cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and zinc)

Pertinent results of Sacramento County's Action Plan Demonstration Project are discussed in Sections

3 and 4 of this report

1.3.2 National Urban Runoff Program

The National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) was conducted from 1978 through 1983 with fhding

and guidance provided by EPA

NURP

separate storm sewers that drain residential, commercial, and light industrial areas NURP included

28 projects across the nation, conducted separately at the local level, but centrally reviewed,

coordinated, and guided The overall objective of the program was to collect information

&om

national perspective that could be used to characterize urban

runoff,

source urban runoff on the quality of the receiving waters, and assist decision makers in developing

control measures to limit its impact The results of NURP provide insight on what can be considered

background levels for urban runoff

The resultant NURP data represent a cross section

of

surface conditions The sites sampled during

NURP

hydraulic devices, such as detention basins, that would modiQ runoff A total of more than 2300

separate

storm

sites were tested for the following standard pollutants:

4

Trang 11

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*3bb7 74 0732290 0543762 539

GEOMATRIX

total suspended solids biochemical oxycen demand chemical oxygen demand total phosphorus

soluble phosphorus total Kjeldahl nitrogen nitrite and nitrate as N heavy metals (copper, lead, and zinc) Pertinent results of NURP are discussed in Sections 3 and 4 of this report

2.0 WSPA/API PART

I A N D

PART

Il

STOW1 WATER RUNOFF STUDIES

This section describes both parts of the WSPNAPI runoff study Part I, conducted by

Hart

characterized simulated storm water runoff from five RGOs Part II, conducted by Geomatrix,

characterized simulated s t o m water runoff from four commercial parking lots and one RGO

2.1 Literature Search

As part of this WSPAíAPI study, Hart Crowser conducted a literature search to assess whether

analytical results from prior RGO runoff studies were available for this study The search was

conducted using the Dialog Information Database and included a search of the following databases:

NTIS (National Technical Information Service)

APILIT (American Petroleum Institute) Pollution AbstractsKambridge Scientific Abstracts Water Resources Abstracts

WATERNET (American Water Works Association)

The database search did not disclose prior RGO storm water runoff studies

5

Trang 12

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*Lbb9 94 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 4 1 9 6 3 475

=

GE O M ATR I X

2.2

In selecting the RGOs to be used for the study, the following characteristics were evaluated for a

number of potential RGO sites:

Selection of RGOs and Test Sites

monthly throughput site location

anticipated level of use by commercial vehicles age and general appearance

types of ancillary services provided including on-site vehicle service, car washes, or convenience stores

on-site drainage patterns and adjacent property usage

On the basis of this evaluation, six RGûs, all located in Southern California, were selected

for

study The

six

Site characteristics for each RGO are summarized in Table 1 Each of the selected RGûs was

considered "normally operated and maintained" For the purposes of this study, "normally operated

and maintained" signifies that the RGûs utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the

buildup of potential storm water contaminants on exposed areas These BMPs include regular

sweeping of exposed areas, regular site inspections, and standardized spill response procedures

a pump island and driveway approach area within each RGO These areas were selected to provide

results that are representative of discharge from the entire RGO A summary of pavement types and

conditions of each test site location is presented in Table 2

A simulated gasoline spill was performed at RGO 5 to provide data regarding the effectiveness of

standardized spill response procedures One quart of regular unleaded gasoline from a pump nozzle

was discharged onto the pump island pavement Absorbent material was applied to the spill after one

Trang 13

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * L b b 9 94

-

0732290 0541964 301

minute The absorbent material was then swept u p

liquid, and the simulated runoff test was conducted

GEOMATRIX

after it appeared to have absorbed the spilled

2.3

Commercial parking lots for the second part of the study were evaluated using the following criteria:

Selection of Parking Lots and Test Sites

site use relative parking duration traffic and parking volume pavement type, condition, and visual appearance

on-site drainage patterns

On the basis of this evaluation, Geomatrix and WSPA selected four commercial parking lots, all

located in Southern California, for the study The selected parking lots were associated with a

grocery store, bank, ofice complex, and restaurant

Simulated rainfall was applied and sampies were collected at two locations at each of the four parking

lots for

a

parking area The high-use area was generally closer to the commercial facility entrance, and was

occupied more frequently than the moderate-use area Each of the parking lots used scheduled

sweeping as a good housekeeping BMP Parking lot test locations, conditions, and BMPs are

summarized in Table 3

2.4 Testing Methodology

To minimize test variability caused by differing rainfail intensities and durations, both parts of the

water-dispensing system and sampling procedures were identical for both the

RGO

Trang 14

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b S 9 4 0732290 0 5 4 3 9 6 5 248

GEOMATRIX

parking lot sites The water-dispensing system was designed to apply water uniformly over the test

area and create sheet flow

During the test, potable water was distributed uniformly over an approximate 400-square-foot area

using a network of perforated 1-inch-diameter, schedule 80 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes elevated

approximately 4 feet above the pavement surface A schematic of the simulated rainfall system is

Figure 1 Schematic of Simulated Rainfall System

The water was applied at a rate of approximately 2.0 gallons per minute (gpm) for the duration

of

45-minute test This rate represents a rainfall rate of approximately 0.008 inch per minute or O 12

inch every 15 minutes over the test application area

The runoff fiorn the simulated rainfall application was channeled by gravity and sand-filled

polyethylene

tubing

steel collection trough and was pumped into a poly-lined 55-gallon steel drum

8

Trang 15

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*lhh9 94

=

L B 4

G EO M ATR IX

2.5 Sampling Procedures

Sampling procedures for both Part I and II studies follow the sampling protocol established by SW-

846, "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" (including surface and groundwater)

The following samples were collected at each test site

A discrete grab sample from the collection trou;h every 15 minutes during the 45

minute test

In addition to these samples, a background sample of the on-site water supply was collected at the

point of discharge from the simulated rainfall application apparatus, and a duplicate oil and grease

sample was collected at each test site Samples were obtained using cleaned sampling equipment and

were placed into laboratory-supplied and certified "clean" samplinc containers Collected samples

were labeled, placed on ice in a cooler, and maintained under proper chain-of-custody procedures

A trip blank sample was included in each of the sample coolers used for this study

2.6 Analytical Testing

GTEL Environmental Laboratories, a state-certified analytical laboratory located in Torrance,

California analyzed samples from RGOs 1 through 5 Del Mar Analytical, a state-certified

laboratory located in Imine, California analyzed samples from RGO 6 and all four parking lots

Laboratory analyses were conducted in accordance with appropriate EPA methods The constituents,

analytical test methods, and detection limits used for the WSPNAPI study are listed in Table 4

2.7

Both parts of the WSPA/API study described herein developed and implemented field and laboratory

quality assurancekpality control (QMQC) procedures Field Q N Q C includes following strict

sampling protocols as specified in the project work plans and standard operating procedures These

Quality Assurance and Quality Control

Trang 16

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL+lbb9 9 4 O732290 0 5 4 l 9 b 7 010 9

m

GEOMATRIX

procedures include an evaluation of cross-contamination through the analysis of trip blanks

Laboratory QNQC addressed the following:

b Accuracy (analysis of matrix spike recoveries on each batch of samples and regular

analysis of certified samples)

b Precision (analysis of matrix spike duplicates)

Contamination (analysis of method and filter blanks) Holding Time (specified holding times associated with each chemical method)

b Certified Methods of Analysis (EPA or State certified methods of analysis)

The following sections present the results of the WSPNAPI simulated runoff study and provide

sumaries

of

NURP

Also

driveway RGO results and between

RGOs,

NURP

The analytical results

of

RGOs as

of

this

are

summarized in Tables 5a and 5b These tables present the results of both the Part

I

Tables 6a and 6b summarize the results

of

commercial parking lots Tables 7 and 8, respectively, summarize the results from Sacramento

County's Action Plan Demonstration Project and median concentrations reported in

NURP

10

Trang 17

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -API

P U B L * l b b 9 9 4

0543768 T57 W

This report compares analytical data from the

Plan Demonstration Project, and

NURP

series

of

box plots, Figures 3 through 24 Box

plots are a simple and useful method of data

comparison because they effectively describe the

characteristics of single groups of data and

components of a typical box plot are presented

on Figure 2 Shown on this figure are the 25th

25lh Percantile

'-JA inimum

Figure 2 Components of a Typical Box Plot

and 75th percentiles of the data, which form the

top and bottom of the box Therefore, by definition, 25 percent

of

less than the bottom line of the box, and 75 percent have a value equal to or less than the top of the

box

The

values are equal to or less than the median, and one-half are equal to or greater) Lines (called

whiskers) extend vertically from the top and bottom of each box to the maximum and minimum data

values

In many cases, the boxes shown on Figures 3 through 24 are collapsed into a single horizontai line

without a whisker extending to the minimum value The principal reason for the shape of these plots

is the presence of a large number of non-detect values in the data set When this occurs, a single

horizontal line is drawn at the detection limit, and the whisker and box segments below the reporting

limit are masked

Although

Hart

results are normally considered more meaningfúl than individual discrete results when evaluating

pollutant loading

in

Trang 18

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b S 74 0732290 0 5 4 L î b 9 993

m

GE O M ATR I X

methodology used for the WSPNAPI study is equivalent to the event mean concentration (EMC)

reported in NLJRP @PA, 1983), which is defined as the total constituent mass discharged divided by

the total runoff volume In addition, the flow weighted sampling method used for the Action Plan

Demonstration Project (Uribe, 1993) provides an estimate of EMC To provide consistency in

comparisons between these studies, the EMC will be used when describing composite discharge

concentrations for the remainder of this report

The following sections discuss comparisons between the pump island and driveway results from the

3.2.1

Figures 3 through 9 present box plots that compare EMC results between the pump islands and

driveways from the WSPNAPI

RGOs

hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) and benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and total xylenes (BTEX)

On

pump islands and driveways for these constituents In each case, the median EMCs from pump

islands and driveways are either at or very near the detection limit Toluene, ethyl benzene, and total

xylenes were detected more fiequently in samples from pump islands, primarily the result of the

simulated spill on the

RGû 5

below the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for drinking water established by EPA and

California Department of Health Services ( Marshack, 1993)

Comparison of Results from RGO Pump Islands and Driveways

3.2.2 Comparison of Results from

RGOs,

Parking Lots, and NURP

Figures 10 through 24 present box plots that compare the EMC results for RGûs and parking lots

The median EMC resuits fiom W are also presented on the data plots for total suspended solids,

copper, lead, and zinc (Figures 10, 20, 22, and 24, respectively) On the basis of these box plots,

there is no significant difference in median EMCs between RGOs and parking lots for these

constituents In addition, the box plots for total suspended solids, copper, and zinc indicate that for

these constituents, there is

no

12

Trang 19

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*i<lhhï 94

m

0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 4 1 9 7 0 605

GEOMATRIX

and background runoff levels established by

NURP

The box plots for lead, Figure 22 indicate that

the median and range of EMCs from RGOs and parking lots are significantly less than the background

values reported in N7JR.P

The results of this study demonstrate that for the constituents analyzed

in

EMCs

in storm water runoff from normally operated and maintained RGOs are no higher than those in

runoff fiom commercial parking lots Additionally, median EMCs of total suspended solids, copper,

lead,

and

urban runoff as established by

NURP

the fueling related constituents (TPHg and BTEX) from pump islands were either not detected

or

below appiicable Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) These results indicate that fueling activities

at normally operated and maintained

RGOs

of measured constituents in storm water runoff

13

Trang 20

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -APL PUBL*:lbbî 9 4 0732290 054L97L 5 4 1

m

GEOMATRIX

U

S

Storm

Phase II of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System S t o m Water Program, Report to Congress, dated October, 1993

Uribe & Associates and Larry Walker Associates, 1993 Action Plan Demonstration Project

Demonstration of Gasoline Fueling Station Best Management Practices, Phase 1 Report, dated September 1993

U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Water Planning Division, 1983, Final Report of the

Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, dated December 30, 1983

Marshack, 1993 A Compilation of Water Quality Goals, Staff Report of the California Regional

Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, dated May, 1993

Trang 21

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*3bb9 9 4 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 4 3 9 7 2 488 W

GE O M ATR I X

TABLES

Trang 22

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*1bb9 94

y

314

c n o n

Trang 23

Test Site Location Pavement Type Pavement Condioon Surface Condition

Driveway

ApQrOaCh

Pump Island

Driveway Approach Pump Island

Driveway Approach

Portland Cement Concrete

Podand Cement Concrete

Portland Cernent Concrete Asphaitic Concrete

Portland Cement Concrete

Degraáed Degraded

Degraded Good

Trang 24

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -API

94 W 0732290 0543975 397 W

UEOMATRIX

TABLE 3

SUMMARY OF P.ARXIBG LOT TEST LOCâTIONS CONDíTIONS, X i D BEST WVAGEAME;YT PRACTICES

WSPNAPI STORkl WATER RLWOFF STUDY

TraniJPrirlung TrafficiPariung Pavement Type and Management

TS- 1 Grocery Store Near Store Entrance I-hgh Volume of Asphaltic Concrete, Daily

Parkmg Lot TraBc/Parkmg Good Condition Sweeping

Spaces Nonnaily

Occupied During

Business Hours TS-2

Grocery Store Located in Perimeter Moderate Tratfc Asphaltic Concrete, Duly

P a r h g Lot Parking Are3 VolumdArea Good Condition Sweeping

Used For

overflow Parking,

Spaces Oniy Used

During Peak Periods

Bank P a r h g Lot Near Bank High Volume of Asphaltic Concrete, Daily

EnrrancefParking TraffiJPdcing Good Condition Sweeping

Spaces Normaily

Occupied

Bank Parking Lot Located in Perimeter Moderate Trriffic Asphaitic Concrete, Daiiy

Parking Area VoiumeiSpaces Good Condition Sweeping

Oniy Used During

Peak Periods

Otfice Complex Near Office Entrance High Volume of Aqhaitic Concrete, Daily

P a r h g Lot TrdiïJPYking Good Condition Sweeping

Spaces Normally Occupied Ofice Complex

Spaces Normally Degraded Day,

Occupied During Condition Occasional

TS-8 Restaurant Located in Perimeter Moderate to Hi@ Asphaltic Concrete, Sweeping

Parking Lot Parking Area Traffic Volume boderatel y Every Other

Degraded Day, Condruon Occasionai

Washdown

Trang 25

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I PUBL*KLbbS 9 4 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0541776 0 2 3

m

GEDMATRIX

TABLE 4

.-GìALYTICAL CONS7'I?ZTENTS, TEST &METHODS, hYD DETECTION LIMITS

Detection Limit'

RGO 6 and

Volatile Organic Compounds

Benzene

Toluene

Ethyl Benzene

Tomi Xylenes

Tomi Petroleum Hydrocarbons

Total Suspended Solids

Total Recoverable Oil and G r w e

EPA Method 6010

EPA Method 120.1 EPA LMechod 150 I

EPA Method 6010

EPA Method 60 1 O

EPA Method 7421 EPA Method 7470 EPA Method 6010

EP.4 Method 6010

EP.4 ,Method 7740 EP.4 Method 6010

EPA Method 279.2

EPA Method 6010

0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0006

o

0.05

0.001

0.05 0.001

'

some cases higher detection limits were required due u) matrix effects caused by foaming

N A - 'lot X n a l y t e d

Trang 26

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -API PUELWlb69 9 4

=

0541977 ThT

TABLE 5a GEOMATRIX

Summary of Analytical Results for Non-metai Consmuents of Simulated Runoff from Retail Gasoline Outlets

source eacitgrouna agmar92

Pump island 15 minute 09/04~92

P ~ m p isma 30 Minute 09104~92

Pump itlzina 45 Minule agium2

Pump Iscana Comoosite 09/04t32

i5minure 09/04/92

onveway %Minute a g m a 2

O m w a y Composite 09104J92

Source 0ac)cgmuna 09110~32

Pump island 15 minute 09/10/92

?ump isma 30 Minute ag/ian2

Pump Istana 45 Minute 09/10142

Pumpisland Composde 09tl0192

Driveway 15 minute 09/10/92

O m w a y 30Minute OW10192 Omway 45 Minute 09110192

Orweway Canpaste WlO192

Pump island 15 minute 091O9/92

Pump isiana 30 ~imm 09/09/92

Pump ismd 45 Minute 09109/92

PumpIsiand Composte 09~U9192 Dnvevay 15 minute 09/09/92

O 3aMinutc 09i09/92

0 Composte 09/09/92

Pump dana 15 minute 09/17/92

Pump isiand 30 Minure 09117/92

Pump Island 4S Minute 09/17/92

Pump island Compostte 09/17/92

Pump island 15 minute 050rM4

Pump Island 30 Minute 05/04/94 Pump I a n a 45 Minute OsX14í94

Purno Isiana Composite 05W4t34

Pump Mana Oupime C410a/94

NA

NA 8.0

NO(?O) NO( 1 O)

NC( 1 O)

NO(1O) NO(l0) NC(1û) NO(1û) NO(10) ND(1O) NO(1O) NO(10) m(1o)

W ( 1 0)

11

13 NO(10) NC(l0) ND(10) ND(10) NO(1O) NO(10)

74 NO(10)

13

11

10

12 No(? 0)

No(ioa)

~ ~ ( i a o ) NO(I oa)

NO(100) NO(l00)

NO(lO0) NO(100) ND(100) NO(lO0) NO(IO0) NO(fû0) NO(VJ0) NO( 100)

NO(lO0) ND(100) NO( 1000)

NO(100)

NO(lO0) Nq1000) NO(1000) NO( 100) NO(100) NO(100) NO(lO0) NO(100) NC(100) ND(1000) ND(l00) NC(100)

NA ND(5O) NC(50)

W W

NO(S0)

NA NC(5O)

~ o ( 5 a )

NO(O.3) NO(0.3) NO(0 3) NC(0.3)

NO@ 3) NO(0.3)

NO(0 3)

NC(0.3) NO(O.3) NO(0.3) NC(0.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3) 1.5 NC(0.3) NO(0.3) 0.4 NC(0.3) NO01 NQ0.3) ND(0.3) NO(0.3) NO01 NO@) 0.5 ND(0.3)

~ ~ ( 0 3 ) NO(0.3) ND(O.3) Nû(0.3) NO(0.3)

W 3 ) NO(0.3) NO(0.3)

~ ~ ( 0 3 )

NO(0.3)

W 3 ) NO131

1

NC(3) NW.5) NO(3)

NO(7.5)

NO(7.5) ruC(0.3)

W 3 )

No(0.3)

ND(0.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3) ND(0.3) 7.9 NO(0.3)

O 4 0.3 NOPI 4.5

a 8

O 3 NO(0.3)

14

13

9 5 NG(7 5)

No131

ND(7.5) NO(7.5) NO(0.3)

Ml(0.3)

NQ0.3) NOf0.3)

NA

NO(0.3)

No(0.3)

NO(0.3) NC(0.3) NO(0.3) ND(0.3) NO(0 3)

NO(0.3) NO(O.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3) NW.3) NQO 3) NO(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NO(0.3)

NO(0.3) NW.3) ND(0.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3) N0(3) NO0) 1.1 NO(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NC(0.3)

ND01 ND(0.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3)

5 6.3 3.4 NO(7.5) NO01

NA

NO(O.3) ND(0 3)

NC(0.3) NO(0.3) NO(0.3)

NO(0.6)

NO(0.6) NO(0.6) ND(0.6)

NO(0.6) NO(0.6)

12 3.4 7.1 ND(0.6) Nq0.6) 1.5 1.4

n0(6)

ND(0.6) NO(0.6) NOW)

W.6) ND(0.6)

19

37

41

22 NO(15)

W 6 ) NO(15) ND(1S) NO(0.5)

NA NC(0.5)

~o(a.5)

Trang 27

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b 9 9 4 W 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0543978 9 T b

Trang 28

`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,` -A P I P U B L * l b b ï 9 4

=

07322ïO

GEOMATRIX

TABLE 6a Summary of Analytkal Results for Non-metal Constituents of Simulated Runoff from Parking Lots

15

30

45

Composite Duplicate (20)

01112l94 01112/94

01112194 o1112194

01112194 O1112194 o1112194 011121%

o1112194 01112/94 o1112194

0111394 o111394

O l l 1 3 9 4

Oll1394 Oll1394 Oll1394

7.7

NA

7.7 7.4

NA

NA 7.8 7.7 7.8

7.8 7.7

NA

NA 7.9 7.8 7.8 7.9 7.8

NA

7.7

7.7 7.8 7.8

NA

NA 7.7 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9

NA 7.9 7.9

2.2

7.1

NA

NO(f) 3.8

12

5.1 0.8

ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) NC(0.3)

NA ND(0.3)

NA

NA ND(O.3)

NA ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) NDO.3)

NA ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA

ND(0.3)

ND(0.3) ND(O.3) ND(0.3)

NA

i V I U W I I W

,

-,,

benzene Xyienes

ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(O.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.3)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA

ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.3) NC(0.3)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

0.31

NA

ND(0.3)

N D(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(O.3) ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.5)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.S) NO(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.S) ND(0.3)

ND(O.3)

NA ND(O.5)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA NO(0.5) ND(0.3)

NA

NA ND(0.3)

NA ND(0.3) ND(0.3) ND(0.3) NO(0.3)

NA

ND(0.6) ND(0.6) ND(0.6) ND(0.6) ND(0.6)

NA ND(0.5)

NA

NA NO(0.Q

NA ND(0.5)

0.74

ND(0.6) ND(O.6) ND(0.Q

NA ND(0.5)

ND(O.ô)

NA

NA ND(0.6)

NA ND(0.5) NO(0.ô) 0.63 ND(O.6)

ND(0.Q

ND(O.6)

NA ND(0.5)

NA

NA ND(0.6)

NA ND(O.5) NO(0.6)

NA

NA ND(0.6)

NA ND(0.6) ND(0.6) ND(0.6) ND(0.6)

NA

NO(.OOll

NA Nat analyzed

Nat áete6ed at soecfied a e t m n limit

Tiêu đề	Results of a Retail Gasoline Outlet And Commercial Parking Lot Storm Water Runoff Study
Trường học	American Petroleum Institute
Chuyên ngành	Manufacturing, Distribution and Marketing
Thể loại	publication
Năm xuất bản	1994
Thành phố	Washington, D.C.

Định dạng
Số trang	56
Dung lượng	1,26 MB