Chapter Two

Stormwater Regulations (National, State, Regional, Local)

2.1 Introduction
The concept of stormwater management and regulation is most often credited to the
Clean Water Act of 1972. In agricultural contexts however, stormwater has been considered a
resource for millennia; it’s only within urban contexts that stormwater has been considered a
waste product (Echols & Pennypacker, 2015). Prior to modern day understanding of stormwater,
one of the first ways it was managed was through the creation of dams. ​Figure 2.1.1​ shows
images of one of the earliest dams in New Jersey whereas Sadd-el-Kafara, or dam of the Pagans,
brings the history back even further; known as the first dam and estimated to have been built
around 2700-2600 BC, the goal of the dam was to prevent flooding but it was never completed as
during the building process as it was ironically destroyed by a flood (HYDRIA Project, 2009).
Still, the history of dams continued and the path for stormwater management began to be paved.

Figure 2.1.1

Southern New Jersey Dam That Flooded in 1940

​ lood damage occurred from Millville to Clemton (NJDEP).

Note. F

Dams first made their mark on the United States in the 1800s with the Ohio River being
the predominant focus for potential improvement. Spanning 981 miles and through several states,
the Ohio River could be relied on for early transportation methods of both tools and people
(Billington, Jackson, & Melosi, 2005). During this time period, steamboats were an increasingly
popular choice for this transportation but due to a variety of factors, journeys taken on them were
often unsafe and came with high risk. When populations continued to increase and the river
being navigable became a priority, dams were seen as the answer to this risk. This led to one of
the first instances of federal involvement when in the 1820s, when under the guidance of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dams were set to be constructed throughout the Ohio River
(Billington, Jackson, & Melosi, 2005).
While the Ohio River relied on federal funding and assistance early on, other areas were
still requesting federal funding and assistance. In March 1824, a court case known as Gibbons V
Ogden occurred as a result of these frustrations, and it was ruled that interstate river navigation
fell under the authority of congress and not individual states ​Gibbons v. Ogden. (n.d.) ​ This
ruling opened the door for further federal involvement, and a month later the General Survey Act
of 1824 was passed. This act allotted $75,000 to improve navigation on the Ohio and Mississippi
river through the removal of sandbars, snags, and other obstacles (Glass, 2017). By 1826, the
first version of the Rivers and Harbors Act was passed. While the 1826 Rivers and Harbors act
still didn’t acknowledge the environmental effects it would have, the act was one of the first of
it’s kind as it combined both planning and construction and served as a model for the U.S. Army
Corps for future work involving flood control and navigation improvement (Glass, 2017).
By the second half of the 19th century, predominantly due to the gold rush, California
was another state with a rapidly growing population. This growing population led to dam
construction with the goal of diverting water for mining operations and creating irrigation for
personal properties (Winzenread & Okada, 1999). New Jersey wasn’t blind to the uprising of
dam construction either; despite being located outside of the Delaware River’s basin, the need
for a dam was promoted by the state (Billington, Jackson, & Melosi, 2005). This initial form of
management was quickly becoming a widespread plague for the waterways of America as issues
with dam construction and new transportation abilities quickly arose. General problems for
waterways included excessive sediment deposits, poor fishery health, and overall poor water
quality. In California, excess water was often sent to mines to be used for hydraulic mining, a
practice that caused severe erosion, environmental degradation and excess sediment in rivers
(Winzenread & Okada, 1999). In Minnesota, construction of the Lake Winnibigoshish and Leech
Lake Dams required taking a substantial amount of timber from an area that belonged to
approximately 1,300 Chippewa Indians, (Billington, Jackson, & Melosi, 2005). The dam New
Jersey had promoted ended up in the midst of these realizations and was met by an abundance of
environmentalists who didn’t want it’s construction to occur (Janson, 1975).
While the dams themselves were creating controversy and complications, the increasing
populations that led to the “dam trend” brought their own array of environmental issues as well.
These include sewage and industrial pollutants, urban and agricultural runoff, dredging,
canalizing (Winzenread & Okada, 1999). Transporting lumber by water, an increased practice as
a result of government assistance in creating navigable waters, created significant water pollution
along the upper Mississippi. As the detrimental effects of water pollution were becoming
apparent, the need for pollution prevention was becoming apparent as well. In the 1880s and
1890s, congress began instructing the U.S. Army Corps to prevent dumping and filling in
harbors. In 1893 for example, one Ohio community was forced to build an incinerator and burn
refuse rather than dump the garbage into the river where it obstructed navigation (​US Army
Corps of Engineers, n.d.​). However, environmental regulation had yet to officially exist.
To give the corps proper authority to prevent further degradation of waterways, the first
piece of environmental legislation, known as the 1899 Rivers and Harbors act, was passed to
prevent dumping of refuse off of boats (FWS, 2013). The most commonly used aspects at the
time of the 1899 Rivers and Harbors act were sections 9 and 10; section 10 prohibits the
unauthorized obstruction or alteration of any navigable water of the United States, and section 9
prohibits the construction of any bridge, dam, dike or causeway over or in navigable waterways
of the U.S. without congressional approval (FWS, 2013). Introducing environmental regulation
to the United States was a huge step, however, environmental agencies were still mostly absent
when the 1899 Rivers and Harbors act was passed. Agencies are a significant part of the
regulation process, and during this time period the U.S. Army Corps were essentially the only
agency enforcing environmental regulation. The need for further enforcement brought upon by
newfound pollution issues is what led to the current system, which operates on three general
levels of governing: federal, state, and local. While there were many smaller steps throughout the
timeline, it was in 1971 that the EPA was founded and the Clean Water Act of 1972 that is used
today came shortly after. As one of the first documents to acknowledge stormwater, the CWA is
the primary federal law in the United States governing water pollution and is regulated by the
EPA.
To gain a better understanding as to how each level of government is involved, ​Figure
2.1.2​ includes examples of current agencies and their ability to enforce regulation. As mentioned,
there’s a large gap of development that occurred between the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act and
the 1972 Clean Water Act. However, with the context of regulation foundation, the timeline and
effects these regulations have on individual levels of government can be better understood.

Figure 2.1.2
The Levels of Government & Their Place in Stormwater Regulation (New Jersey Case Study)
2.2 National Regulations
With the precedent set by the first form of environmental regulation, the 1899 Rivers and
Harbors Act, the United States began further expanding federal involvement into the quality of
it’s waterways. While the U.S. The Army Corps worked to prevent the negligent dumping of
refuse into waterways, simultaneously the USDA, established in 1862, was working on the state
of agriculture and the U.S. The Department of Interior, established in 1849, was working to
manage natural resources and protect cultural heritage (USDA, 2020). Still, the nation’s
waterways were suffering; though the Rivers and Harbors act prevented dumping of refuse, the
priority was maintaining navigable waters, not healthy ones (FWS, 2013).
As a result, water bodies were still seen as available areas for waste. In 1945, it was
reported that over 3,500 communities pumped 2.5 billion tons of raw sewage into streams, lakes,
and coastal waters everyday (Powers, 2020). The results of this weren’t going unnoticed; at the
time Manhattan was described as “an island in New York surrounded by sewage,” fish were
dying at rapid rates, and water bodies across the nation were unfit for swimming (LA Tech
University, 1999). More progress had been made with environmental regulation, as the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, established in 1940, served to oversee wildlife management and The
National Park Service, established in 1916, conserved national parks and monuments (USDA,
2020). Municipalities and states had begun attempting to address water pollution on their own at
this time, with one example being the Interstate Commission on The Delaware River Basin
(INCODEL) that was formed in 1936. Including input from New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania, the goal was to create policy and pollution control for the Delaware River Basin
(Patrick, Douglass, Palavage, & Stewart, 2016). However, the steps taken by states and
municipalities across the country were overshadowed by production needs and it was becoming
increasingly apparent that federal involvement was also required to best aide water quality
(Powers, 2020). The U.S. Surgeon General of this era, who was in charge of delivering scientific
information regarding the nation’s health and wellbeing, warned that over half of the U.S.
population relied on drinking water supplies of doubtful purity (Powers, 2020).
Stemming from the uprising concern, the 1948 Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(FWPCA) was enacted by congress in an attempt to alleviate these environmental stressors and
heal the quality of the nation's water bodies. The 1948 FWPCA’s ​Declaration of Goals and
Policy​ directly states, “The objective of this Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” This was the first federal act that addressed
water pollution in regards to environmental health and while this factor may have paved the way
for regulation far more productive than the 1899 Rivers and Harbors act, the Rivers and Harbors
Act was at least regulated by the U.S. Army Corps while the FWPCA allotted most
responsibility to individual states. The FWPCA did allow the U.S. Surgeon General to sue states
which polluted a water body that crossed state boundaries, but there were no federally required
goals, objectives, limits, or guidelines (Stets, 2015). The only federal involvement came when
permission to assess water pollution was granted from the state or when assistance was needed
and requested from the state, and congress often failed to provide sufficient funding (LA Tech
University, 1999). Consequently, as seen through the examples in ​Figure 2.2.1​, water pollution
levels remained the same and even rose in some areas despite the FWPCA as states had little
motivation or reason to implement real change (Powers, 2020). There had been future
amendments in attempts to strengthen the program; however, what was required was a complete
overhaul of the FWPCA for its initial policy goals to hold any effect (Digest of Federal Resource
Laws of Interest, n.d.).

Figure 2.2.1

Examples of Continued Pollution Following the FWPCA

Note.​ Image left shows Bayonne, New Jersey, where raw and partially digested sewage can be
seen darkening the water. Image right shows the Edison Power Plant in Manhattan, which is
estimated to have dumped 6 million gallons of coal into the New York/ New Jersey Bright. (EPA
Archives)

The environmental movement that began in the 60s drastically increased tension with
federal agencies regarding hazardous substances and public health perception on chemical
dumping. Social pressures began forming a strong opposition towards unregulated chemical
companies. Rachael Carson’s 1962 release, ​Silent Spring,​ became a culturally accepted
environmental science epitome, coincidentally creating a new moral standard from Americans
(Lear, 2015). The state of the environment was becoming more political, and during President
Lyndon B. Johnson’s State of Union address in 1965 he said, “Every major river system is now
polluted,” and called for the federal government to set effective water quality standards,
combined with effective enforcement procedures (​The Association of Centers for the Study of
Congress, n.d.). That same year, the 1965 Water Quality Act, which required states to set
pollution standards and created the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, was
enacted.
Still, the ladder of the 1960s was known less for the environmental movement and more
for the environmental crisis. Despite the 1965 amendment, disaster was striking across the
nation. In January of 1969, an oil spill known as the Santa Barbara Oil Spill covered more than
35 miles of Southern California coastline and had a catastrophic ecological impact (Stets, 2015).
Lake Erie had become polluted to the point that it’s oxygen was nearly depleted as a result of
algae blooms and dead fish had littered the shore; at the time, the lake was declared dead
(Rotman, 2020). One of the most public crises was that of the Cuyahoga River fire. The residents
of Cleveland passed a $100 million bond initiative to clean up the river in 1968, and in 1969 the
Cuyahoga River fire occurred when sparks from a passing train reached oil in the river (Rotman,
2019). This wasn’t the first time the river had caught on fire either, there were several instances
with one being the 1952 fire seen in ​Figure 2.2.2​. While no photographs were captured of the
1969 fire, Time Magazine still covered it, instead opting to use a photograph of the 1952 fire.

Figure 2.2.2

Cuyahoga River Fire of 1952

(The Cleveland Press Collection)

With the coverage in Time Magazine leading to nationwide concern, The Cuyahoga
River fire soon became known as a figurehead for the countries piling environmental issues
(Latson, 2015). Though it wasn’t the first river fire, it was set to be the last when ​the resultant
reform of federal regulations established the 1972 milestone of water stewardship known as the
1972 Clean Water Act (CWA). With the EPA having been established the year prior, the 1972
CWA amended the previously aforementioned FWPCA with one of the largest improvements
being federal regulations that would now be enforced by an agency (Schumm, 2012).
The CWA’s objectives were to neither dissolve nor dilute the prior regulation, but extend
the FWPCA. The 1972 CWA enactment had given the EPA the authority to create and enforce
new water quality standards in a way that a federal agency hadn’t before (Schumm, 2012). As a
result, individual states were no longer relied as heavily upon, especially due to a new permitting
program called the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, or NPDES within Sect.
402. The NPDES permitting program’s purpose was to limit point source pollution by targeting
susceptible industries, e.g. construction, through regulation of required technologies and
treatment efforts in discharge mitigation (Schumm, 2012). This was achieved by making the
discharging of pollutants into American waterways illegal unless permitted through the NPDES
program. While primary emphasis in the Clean Water Act was municipal and industrial point
sources, no mechanisms for control of nonpoint sources were implemented by the Act, and no
incentives for complying with pollution abatement programs were specified for these sources.
Nonetheless, the enactment of a land-use planning process in the development of management
plans stood as the first formal recognition that regulation of only point sources would not be
adequate in combating the rising pollution problem (Stets, Kelly, Broussard, Smith, & Crawford,
2012).
Stormwater regulation was first introduced to the CWA in 1973, when the EPA noted the
early known detrimental effects of runoff (EPA, 2018a). However, the suggestions made weren’t
regulated by the EPA as at the time it was assumed they would be best handled at local levels.
The EPA justified this decision by suggesting that the enormous numbers of individual permits
that the agency would have to issue would be administratively burdensome and divert resources
from addressing industrial process wastewater and municipal sewage discharges, which
presented more identifiable problems (Stets, Kelly, Broussard, Smith, & Crawford, 2012). This
decision was met with reluctance, resulting in 1977 amendments to the CWA that further
addressed nonpoint source pollution through the Rural Clean Water Program (Schumm, 2012).
The program supported implementation of best management practices for controlling pollution
from nonpoint sources and required individual permits for stormwater discharges from industrial
or commercial activity, or where the stormwater discharge was designated by the permitting
authority to be a significant contributor of pollutants (EPA, 2018a).
At this time, attention was also directed towards agricultural contributions which are now
a well known source of polluted stormwater runoff. By 1972, agricultural runoff accounted for
the erosion of 2.25 billion tons of soil as well as large amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen
deposited in waters (Spellman & Drinan, 2003). The Department of Agriculture offered guidance
on developing measures to control agriculturally related pollution. In addition, recognizing that
there may be an impact to farms and wetlands, the federal government established the first
wetland mitigation banks around 1983 in partnership with the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USDA, 2020). The US Soil and Water Conservation Service began specific programs with
farmers to reduce the impact of farming on waters of the US during this period as well.
As urbanization continued, the 1987 CWA amendment 33 U.S.C. § 1342(p) further
expanded upon the NPDES program by including specificities on regulated entities to include
municipal sewer systems. Permits covered industrial activities, general purpose and individual
purpose based on activity levels and population size. Municipal sewer systems now harboring a
population of 100,000-250,000 would require a permit for discharge through the NPDES permit
program (Howard, 1987). Additionally, a combined sewer overflow (CSO) policy had also been
established within the 1987 CWA amendment to further regulate municipal water quality
standards (Howard, 1987). Industrial activities were required to adhere to permittance
requirements as of the 1987 CWA amendment including construction activities. The 1987 CWA
Stormwater amendment had laid a framework of incentive for state and municipal agencies to
control discharges as section C of 3 U.S. Code § 1342 NPDES states federal suspension upon
submission of state programming. This framework increased state side power and consequently,
more municipal control of discharge point source pollution (Howard, 1987).
The federal government recognized the importance of gradual implementation for
continued state/municipal cooperation in continued stormwater management and NPDES permit
compliance. Phase I of a two phased program was enacted in the 1990 amendments of the Clean
Water Act. The most important aspect of the Phase I amendment in relevance to federal
stormwater regulations was it’s establishment of the municipal sewer system MS4 program. An
MS4 had been denoted as a municipal sewer system that supports a population of over 100,000
and less than 250,000 individuals, owned by a municipality, designed for stormwater
conveyance/discharge and is not combined or sectioned into a treatment plant (EPA, 2020b).
Additionally, municipalities must create a separate stormwater management programs, or
SWMP, in order to acquire their MS4 NPDES permit. Municipal cooperation led to 855 different
MS4’s being in compliance under 250 individual permits in accordance with the 1990 CWA
Phase I enactment (EPA, 2020b).
While progress was being made, it was recorded that nearing the end of the 20th century
50% of receiving water bodies were not meeting the water-quality goals established by the CWA
and multiple lawsuits were filed against the EPA as a result (Stets, Kelly, Broussard, Smith, &
Crawford, 2012). The outcome of this was section 303(d) of the CWA, which overall requires
states to identify waters that are impaired by pollution, even after application of pollution
controls. This section added established TMDLs of pollutants to ensure that water quality
standards can be attained.
Unfortunately, smaller municipalities had not been covered under Phase I
implementation. Congruently, a high majority of central locations for large population flux, e.g.
public universities, are also commonly designed with their own sewer discharge systems similar
to municipal sewer systems. The 1999 CWA amendments sought to alleviate sewer discharge
pollution from such systems by also including them into federal regulation. The Phase II
regulations annotated area’s defined as “urbanized areas” under the U.S. Census Bureau to apply
for MS4 NPDES permits for sewer discharges. In addition to smaller municipalities, other
smaller entities such as institutions, public universities, hospitals and prisons are also defined as
MS4’s; therefore, also requiring MS4 NPDES permits (EPA, 2020b). With polluted stormwater
runoff commonly being transported through MS4s, this phase is a large key in stormwater
management. Most of the 6,695 Phase II MS4s are covered by statewide General Permits,
however some states use individual permits. ​Figure 1.4.1 ​displays these areas.
Today, the CWA has been in place for several decades with noticeable effects, one being
about twice as many waters being fishable and swimmable in comparison to the 70s and another
being a 12% increase in waters suitable for fishing (Wiszniewski, 2020). The introduction of
wastewater treatment, specifically Section 106 of the CWA which authorizes EPA to provide
financial assistance to states and eligible interstate agencies for the creation and improvement of
municipal wastewater plants and sewer systems, has had the most documentable effect. Much
like Lake Erie, parts of the Delaware River below Trenton, NJ were considered “dead zones”
after microbes and bacteria thrived on the organic material from pollution and as a result,
consumed all the oxygen, leaving none for the fish (Phillips, 2019). The biggest source of
pollution along the Delaware River at the time was waste water being dumped directly into the
river. As a result of the CWA, these parts of the Delaware River now not only contain fish, but
have also left the reputation of being “dead” behind (Phillips, 2019).
Referencing both ​Figure 1.4.1 ​ and ​Figure 2.2.4​ offers context to the progress made by
the Delaware River. As observed in ​Figure 1.4.1​, states the river flows through are mostly
regulated MS4 areas. As observed in ​Figure 2.2.4, ​the treatment of sewage post Phase I and
Phase II was a major improvement as previously waste water was dumped directly into water
bodies. Since the introduction of industry-specific discharge standards, such as 33 U.S.C. §1251
of the CWA, more than 700 billion pounds of toxic pollutants every year are prevented from
being dumped into the nation’s waters (Devine, 2017).
Figure 2.2.4

How Sewage is Processed

Note.​ Infographic created based on information from CWA amendments.

2.3 State Regulations

New Jersey Regulation. ​Using New Jersey as the main case study for state level
regulations, the predominant agency within the state set to enforce the CWA is the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). In addition to enforcing CWA standards,
NJDEP oversees seven different program areas, which include

● air quality,
● energy and sustainability,
● water resource management,
● land use management,
● climate and flood resilience,
● compliance and enforcement,
● natural and historic resources,
● site remediation, and
● water management (NJGOV, 2020).

After its creation in 1970, the NJDEP concentrated most of the state's water resource protection
efforts on sewage treatment plants, industrial discharges and other major point sources of
pollution. However, as these sources of pollution have been reduced, it’s become clear that one
of New Jersey's largest pollution problems is now nonpoint source pollution. For instance, 586
NJ water bodies that were assessed as not supporting general aquatic life found nonpoint source
pollution from urban runoff and agriculture land uses was the most predominant potential cause
(NJDEP, 2012). With considerations of New Jersey’s population density and the increase of
impervious surfaces this has caused, runoff being a major contributor to water quality harm is far
from shocking, but requires regulation to prevent excess harm (NJDEP, 2012).

While other states and the Federal government generally refer to their rules as
regulations, New Jersey instead uses the word “code.” The New Jersey Administrative Code
(N.J.A.C.), also known as the Code, is the codification of all rules and regulations made by the
executive branch agencies of New Jersey (NJDOE, 2020). Rules from NJDEP are codified in
Title 7 of the Code. New Jersey’s Stormwater Management rules specifically, codified under
N.J.A.C. 7:8, are implemented by the NJDEP through the review of permits issued by the
Division of Land Use Regulation (DLUR) as well as local authorities through the Municipal
Land Use Law (MLUL) and the Residential Site Improvement Standards (RSIS).

In New Jersey, EPA has delegated authority to issue NPDES permits to the NJDEP. As a
result, the first set of rules are the Phase II New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Stormwater Regulation Program (NJPDES) rules (EPA, 2015). As part of NJDEP’s Water
Pollution Control Act, codified as N.J.A.C 7:14, The NJPDES addresses and reduces pollutants
associated with existing stormwater runoff and establishes a regulatory program for existing
stormwater discharges as required under the CWA (EPA, 2015). ​Figure 2.3.1 ​gives a
generalized idea as to when these permits are utilized. The second set of rules are known as the
Stormwater Management rules, codified as N.J.A.C. 7:8, which set forth the required
components of regional and municipal stormwater management plans and establish the
stormwater management design and performance standards for proposed development. The
design and performance standards for new development include groundwater recharge, runoff
quantity controls, and runoff quality controls (NJDEP, 2020b). The New Jersey Stormwater Best
Management Practices Manual provides guidance to address the standards in the Stormwater
Management Rules.

Figure 2.3.1:

NPDES Construction General Permit (CGP) Requirement Flowchart

(EPA, 2017)

Last amended in June 2016, N.J.A.C 7:8 Stormwater Management Rules discuss the
general provisions of stormwater management which include general requirements, regional and
municipal stormwater management planning within the state, design and performance standards
for stormwater management measures, and safety standards for stormwater management basins
(NJDEP, 2020b). These provisions are regulated by The Bureau of Nonpoint Pollution Control
under the NJDEP’s Division of Water Quality (DWQ), which maintains a mission statement to
“protect New Jersey’s surface and ground waters from pollution caused by improperly treated
wastewater, residuals, and stormwater” (Division of Water Quality, 2019). The stormwater
management planning goals stated in the N.J.A.C 7:8 should be designed to “reduce flood
damage, minimize an increase in stormwater runoff from new developments, reduce soil erosion,
assure the adequacy of existing and proposed culverts and bridges, maintain groundwater
recharge, prevent an increase in non-point pollution, maintain the integrity of stream channels for
their biological functions, minimize pollutants in stormwater runoff, and to protect public safety
through proper design and operations” (NJDEP, 2016). A plan must include structural and
nonstructural stormwater management strategies, safety standards for stormwater basins,
consideration of physical and ecological characteristics of the planning area, and any ordinance
must be coordinated with other management areas in the same river basin.

General Requirements of NJ Stormwater Regulation.​ The Stormwater Management

rules apply to all major developments, which can be defined as all developments that are part of
a common plan of development or sale that collectively or individually meet any one or more of
conditions listed by the NJDEP. These conditions are

● The disturbance of one or more acres of land since February 2, 2004;

● The creation of one-quarter acre or more of “regulated impervious surface” since
February 2, 2004;
● The creation of one-quarter acre or more of “regulated motor vehicle surface” since
March 2,2021; or
● A combination of 2 and 3 above that totals an area of one-quarter acre or more. The same
surface shall not be counted twice when determining if the combination area equals one
quarter acre or more (NJDEP, 2016).

Within the N.J.A.C 7:8-5, design and performance standards discuss measures that should be
taken for major developments, structural and nonstructural stormwater management strategies,
erosion control, groundwater recharge and runoff quantity standards, and stormwater runoff
quality standards. Major developments within the state have the most standards to abide by
having to meet the standards for all components mentioned previously and should be focused on
minimal impact to the surrounding environment including surface water and groundwater
quality, habitat for threatened and endangered species, and land use management. As of October
25, 2019, NJDEP adopted amendments to N.J.A.C. 7:8 “to replace the current requirement that
major developments incorporate nonstructural stormwater management strategies to the
‘maximum extent practicable’ to meet groundwater recharge standards, stormwater runoff
quantity standards, and stormwater runoff quality standards, with a requirement that green
infrastructure be utilized to meet these same standards” (NJDEP, 2019).

NJ Stormwater Runoff Standards. ​The runoff quantity standards at N.J.A.C.

7:8-5.4(a)3 are applicable to major development if 0.25-acre or 1-acre of new impervious surface
is added or exceeded, unless the receiving waterbody is tidal and existing structures will not be
subject to increased flood damages by increases in runoff (NJDEP, 2016). As described in the
Stormwater Management Rules, the NJDEP has specified that one of two general runoff
computation methods be used to compute runoff rates and volumes. The first and most
commonly used method is The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
methodology, which uses a hypothetical design storm and an empirical nonlinear runoff equation
to compute runoff volumes, and a dimensionless unit hydrograph to convert the volumes into
runoff hydrographs method for computing stormwater runoff rates, volumes, and hydrographs
(Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 5-27). The key component of the NRCS runoff
equation is the NRCS Curve Number, which is based on soil permeability, surface cover,
hydrologic condition, and antecedent moisture. This method is particularly useful for comparing
pre- and post-development peak rates, volumes, and hydrographs. The second method is The
Rational Method (QD), which uses an empirical linear equation to compute the peak runoff rate
from a selected period of uniform rainfall intensity. Since it is not based on a total storm
duration, but rather a period of rain that produces the peak runoff rate, the method cannot
compute runoff volumes unless the user assumes a total storm duration but continues to be useful
in estimating runoff from simple, relatively small drainage areas such as parking lots (Division
of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 5-27).

For stormwater runoff quantity standards, one of the three following designs should be
completed using the assumptions of stormwater runoff calculations. In general, all runoff
computation methods are, to some degree, mathematical expressions of the hydrologic cycle.
One, to demonstrate that runoff leaving the site post-construction does not exceed
pre-construction runoff for two, 10, and 100-year storm events. Following, to demonstrate
through hydrologic and hydraulic analysis there is no increase compared to pre-construction, in
peak runoff rates leaving the site for two, 10 and 100-year storm events and if there is an
increase in runoff does not negatively impact property at or downstream of the site. Post
construction stormwater management designs should have runoff rates for two, 10, and 100-year
storm events that are 50%, 75%, and 80%, respectively of pre-construction rates. Stormwater
runoff quality standards (N.J.A.C 7:8-5.5) are based on design measures to reduce
post-construction load of total suspended solids (TSS). ​Table 2.3.1​ below describes the time
interval from time 0 to 2 hours and the amount of cumulative rainfall in inches used to determine
these water quality calculations. As an aspect of New Jersey’s BMP, it contains cumulative and
incremental rainfall values for the stormwater quality design storm in five minute increments that
can be used in computer programs such that contain the NRCS methodology and allow
user-specified rainfalls.

Table 2.3.1

NJDEP 1.25-Inch/2-Hour Stormwater Quality Design Storm

(Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 5-27)

Overall, in accordance with NJDEP stormwater management measures should be

designed to reduce the post-construction nutrient load from the developed site in stormwater
runoff generated from the water quality design storm to the maximum extent feasible. In
achieving reduction of nutrients to the maximum extent feasible, the design of the site shall
include nonstructural strategies and structural measures that optimize nutrient removal while still
achieving the performance standards in N.J.A.C. 7:8-5.4 and 5.5. In addition, if a waterbody or
waterbody segment in the regional stormwater management planning area is on the Department's
list prepared to comply with CWA, Section 303(d) (33 U.S.C. § 1313(d), for one or more
designated uses by stormwater runoff, then drainage area objectives would be included to
address the pollutants which left the waterbody threatened or impaired.
Besides issuing permits, Rain Tax, S-1073 was introduced in New Jersey to help
manage stormwater, stating, “Any county, municipality, or authority that collects a stormwater
utility fee under the bill would be required to remit to the State Treasurer annually an amount
equal to five percent of all such fees collected by the stormwater utility, or $50,000 (Peterson &
Haines III, 2019).” The Bill allows counties and municipalities to create stormwater management
utilities dedicated to reducing flood risk and cutting back on the amount of pollution that washes
into Garden State waterways. The utilities are funded by fees assessed to property owners based
on the number of impervious surfaces, like roads, roofs and parking lots, they have on their
property (Peterson & Haines III, 2019).
Plus the agencies mentioned above, the New Jersey Department of Agriculture (NJDA)
aids in lowering pollutants resulting from stormwater runoff as well. One way is through the
Animal Waste Management rules, adopted by the NJDA in 2009 and codified as N.J.A.C. 2:91.
These rules “set forth the requirements for the development of Animal Waste Management Plans
(AWMPs) or Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs) for farms which generate,
handle or receive animal waste (NJDA, 2016).” The rules contain criteria and standards for
animal waste management on all agricultural animal operations not requiring a New Jersey
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) permit, including animal feeding operations,
all of which can pollute stormwater runoff (NJDA, 2016).
Moreso, along with the NJDEP, the NJDA is a co-sponsor for The Conservation Reserve
Enhancement Program (CREP) which is a joint State-Federal conservation program targeted to
address environmental impacts related to agricultural practices. Under NJ CREP, farmers receive
financial incentives from FSA and NJDA to voluntarily remove marginal pastureland or
cropland from agricultural production and convert the land to native grasses, trees and other
vegetation ​(Land Use Management & Division of Watershed Management, 2008, p. 35-40.)​. The
vegetation can then serve as a buffer to filter or contain agricultural runoff and prevent polluted
stormwater runoff generated by farms from reaching neighboring water bodies. The $100 million
NJ CREP proposal seeks to enroll 30,000 acres of agricultural lands into the program and
provides a 10-year enrollment period and targets the installation of riparian buffers, filter strips,
contour buffer strips and grass waterways ​(Land Use Management & Division of Watershed
Management, 2008, p. 35-40.)​.

NJ Groundwater Recharge Standards.​ Within N.J.A.C 7:8-5:4, minimal design and

performance for groundwater recharge standards are established. These standards abide by those
of the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Act, N.J.A.C. 4:24-39, with the minimum design and
performance standards for erosion control established by the act. Standards for groundwater
recharge in areas of urban development use calculations and factors to either demonstrate
through hydrologic and hydraulic analysis that a site and its stormwater management strategy
maintains 100% of its annual average groundwater recharge prior to construction or that there is
an increase in runoff volume from prior to post construction (Division of Watershed
Management, 2004, p. 6-29). Specifically, groundwater recharge is calculated using “The New
Jersey Geological Survey Report GSR-32 A Method for Evaluating Groundwater-Recharge
Areas in New Jersey.” An important component to groundwater recharge is that the design
assesses the impact on the groundwater table to avoid adverse hydraulic impacts. Potential
adverse hydraulic impacts include a naturally or seasonally high water table so as to cause
surficial ponding, flooding of basements, or interference with the proper operation of subsurface
sewage disposal systems and other subsurface structures in the vicinity or downgradient of the
groundwater recharge area (Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 6-29). The exception
is that of stormwater from a high pollutant area, which should not be recharged.

On March 2, 2020, amendments to the SWMR were adopted. Most significantly, the
amendments require major developments to utilize green infrastructure to meet the groundwater
recharge and stormwater runoff quantity and quality standards, replacing the previous
requirement to incorporate nonstructural stormwater management strategies to the “maximum
extent practicable (Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti LLP & Haus, 2020).” Water
quantity, quality, and groundwater recharge standards must be met in each drainage area on-site
and a groundwater mounding analysis is required for all infiltration BMPs, not just for recharge.
According to the NJDEP, the amendments to the SWMR will more effectively reduce
stormwater volume, reduce erosion, encourage stormwater infiltration and groundwater recharge,
and minimize the discharge of stormwater-related pollutants into the environment (Johnson,
2019). Even with these amendments, FEMA still recommended the state consider adding a
requirement that nutrients, such as fertilizer, be reduced in runoff water as currently there are no
specific regulations regarding these nutrients that prevent excess use of them (Johnson, 2019) .

NJ Stormwater Structure and Infrastructure.​ In N.J.A.C 7:8-6, the safety standards

set forth are to protect the public through proper design and operation (NJDEP, 2016). The
purpose for trash racks, overflow grates and any escape provisions follow as such: design to
catch debris and prevent clogging out outlet structures; to prevent obstruction of overflow
structure; and provisions for stormwater management basins. Some requirements for each
include being designed to not adversely affect outlet pipes and be removable in emergency and
maintenance cases, constructed to be durable and corrosive resistant and withstand a live load of
300 lbs./ft sq (Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p.22).

The New Jersey Statewide Nonpoint Source Program is responsible for administering the
federal Section 319(h) Grant Program, in which sources are the EPA pass-through grants issued
under Section 319(h) of the CWA and other federal and State funds that may be available for
NPS-related water quality restoration activities (Division of Water Monitoring and Standards,
2020a). On top of the Nonpoint Source Program, The New Jersey Water Bank, a partnership
between the NJDEP and the New Jersey Infrastructure Bank (I-Bank), provides low-cost loans
and other funding for a variety of environmental infrastructure projects that provide a water
quality benefit as well (New Jersey Future, 2018). Eligible projects include bioswales,
stormwater pump-outs, porous asphalt or concrete, green roofs, cisterns, and street tree trenches;
Table 2.3.2​ contains examples of already implemented projects as well as their purpose.

Table 2.3.2

Projects With Green Infrastructure Funded by The Water Bank From FY2015 to FY2017
(New Jersey Future, 2018, p. 3)

​2.4 Regional Regulations

Regional stormwater management planning is a water resource management strategy that

identifies and develops solutions to problems that can be managed most effectively on a regional
basis (Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 3-16). The regional stormwater management
plan (RSWMP) under N.JA.C 7:8 covers individual properties, neighborhoods, municipalities,
and even county borders. The goal of the plan is to address any existing water quantity issues
such as water quality issues, like excess pollutant loading, or issues of water quantity and quality
for future development on existing land uses in regional bases, which the planning area should
consider one or more continuous drainage areas. Under N.J.A.C 7:8-3, the regulations require the
formation of a broadly representative regional planning committee, then the committee will lead
a planning agency to plan out technical and administrative resources to develop and implement a
regional plan. Doing so requires sources from
 ● state and FEMA floodplain maps,
● hydraulic analysis and stream cross section data from stream encroachment
permits,
● topographic data from aerial photos with two-foot contours,
● water quality data from New Jersey Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NJPDES) permits or intake waters from local water treatment facilities, and
● monitoring data from the U.S. Geological Survey, the Environmental Protection
Agency’s STORET database, the NJDEP, local health departments,
environmental commissions, or watershed associations (Division of Watershed
Management, 2004, p. 3-16).

While the benefits include improved water resources for years to come, creating a
suitable, well-organized, high-quality Regional Stormwater Management Plan takes a substantial
amount of effort. In addition to requiring great effort, budgets for developing RSWMPs typically
exceed $100,000 as they often require extensive collection and complex analysis of field data
(Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 3-16). Once created, the plan should have the
following components, existing land uses; projected lands; soil mapping units from the U.S
Department of Agriculture; Topography from U.S Geological Survey Topographic Map; Water
bodies map from both the U.S Department of Agriculture and U.S Geological Survey
Topographic Map; Coastal wetlands map from the Wetlands Act of 1970, 13:9A-1 et seq and
freshwater wetlands maps from the Department under the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act,
13:9B-1 et seq; Flood hazard areas listed from the Flood Hazard Area Control Act, 58:16A-50 et
seq; Groundwater recharge areas from NJDEP; Environmentally constrained and critical areas;
River areas from the New Jersey Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 13:8-45 et seq., or the Federal
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, (Division of Watershed Management, 2004, p. 3-16). Nonetheless,
as a state containing both a vast coastline and vast forest, New Jersey has had to create some
regional level management. While as of 2019 no Regional Stormwater Management Plans had
been created in New Jersey, some regions maintain their own management plans that incorporate
individualized stormwater management plans.
In regards to the state's beaches, NJDEP administers the New Jersey Cooperative Coastal
Monitoring Program (CCMP). During the bathing beach season, ocean and bay stations that can
be located in​ Figure 2.4.1 ​are monitored on a weekly basis for bacteria. Once an impaired area is
identified, existing data and information is researched, reviewed, and analyzed to identify gaps
and develop targeted monitoring studies and sanitary surveys (CCMP, 2020). Stormwater runoff
has a significant impact on water quality at public recreational beaches and as a result elevated
bacteria levels and subsequent beach closure often occur following rainfall. Though these are
often only temporary fluctuations, many beaches face consequences from not just stormwater
runoff runoff but stormwater outfalls as well that convey stormwater from our streets to oceans,
bays and rivers. Following the identification of an impaired area, if the DEP then identifies
persistent water quality problems at a recreational bathing beach, the CCMP will implement a
source track down strategy in partnership with the Division’s Bureau of Marine Water
Monitoring, the local health agency. The New Jersey Water Bank can be used as a resource to
repair and replace problematic and antiquated infrastructure and offers 50% principal forgiveness
for capital improvement projects that will eliminate, prevent or reduce occurrences of beach
closings due to the presence of pathogens (New Jersey Future, 2018). Funding has the potential
to be applied to projects that would eliminate potential sources such as leaking or broken sanitary
sewers and illegal cross connections between storm sewers and sanitary sewers (New Jersey
Future, 2018).
Figure 2.4.1:

CCMP Water Monitoring Stations as of July 1, 2020

(CCMP 2020)

Another regional focus of New Jersey is that of the pinelands; in 1978 the US Congress
passed legislation creating the New Jersey Pinelands National Reserve, seen in ​Figure 2.4.2​, to
protect the area's ecology and aquifer, which serves the large metropolitan region (Pinelands
Preservation Alliance, 2020). The aquifer in question, also seen in ​Figure 2.4.2​, is the
Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer and contains some 17 trillion gallons of fresh water. Due to how
shallow it is the aquifer is easily polluted by fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides and chemicals that
are spread or spilled on the ground’s surface (South Jersey Water Savers, 2020). Following the
reservation of the land, the 1979 Pinelands Protection Act was created, establishing a regional
plan (the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan, or CMP) and governance structure (the
Pinelands Commission) that restricted development in environmentally sensitive areas in order to
preserve natural and cultural resources. The Stormwater Management rules do not supersede the
Pinelands CMP, putting relevant municipalities in the unique position of having to implement
stormwater management ordinances that comply with both DEP and Pinelands regulations.
Additionally, in conjunction with NJDEP the Pinelands Commission created a Stormwater
Control Model Ordinance for Pinelands municipalities in 2004 using $15,000 of NJDEP funds
(Rapa, 2004). Some variances between the general rules and those followed in the pinelands
include that in Pinelands, groundwater accounts for more than 90 percent of stream flow
(Pinelands Preservation Alliance, 2020). Consequently, the pinelands require groundwater
recharge levels that are higher than that of other New Jersey areas. Another difference is that in
comparison to other areas, as a result of the porous soils in the Pinelands the amount of runoff is
low.

Figure 2.4.2​:

Map of Pinelands National Reserve

(Pinelands Preservation Alliance, 2020)

2.5 Local Regulations

New Jersey’s Stormwater Management Rules are implemented by local authorities

through the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL) and the Residential Site Improvement Standards
(RSIS). MLUL is how municipalities in NJ obtain their authority to identify, evaluate, designate,
and regulate historic resources, enabling legislation for municipal land use and development
planning, zoning, and historic preservation zoning (NJDEP, 2016). Under MLUL, a utility
service plan element analyzing the need for and showing the future general location of water
supply and distribution facilities, drainage and flood control facilities, sewerage and waste
treatment, solid waste disposal and provision for other related utilities, and including any storm
water management plan is required. Through the RSIS, the Stormwater rules are activated
whenever a municipality requires the control of runoff from a site that is the subject of a site or
subdivision application (NJDEP, 2016). Therefore, with its duly adopted ordinances, a
municipality may require compliance with the Stormwater rules through the RSIS whether or not
a development is a major development. The rule clarification and interpretation are consistent
with the current application of the Stormwater rules by the Department and don’t supersede local
authority under the MLUL. Most recently, a bill known as the “rain tax” by some and “flood
defense” by others let's municipalities and counties create their own local stormwater utility that
could then charge property owners a fee based on "a fair and equitable approximation" of how
much runoff is generated from their property (Peterson & Haines III, 2019). Property owners
could get their fees reduced by installing rain barrels, rain gardens and other naturally based
systems that reduce runoff rates.

The Municipal Stormwater Regulation program from the NJDEP, codified as NJAC
7:14A-25.1, was developed in December 1999 corresponding to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s Phase II rules. As defined by MLUL, established municipalities must meet
requirements set for regulating discharges to surface water and groundwater of stormwater from
large, medium, and small municipal separate storm sewer systems (NJDEP, 2016). NJDEP
delivered the confirmed stormwater rules and four permits on February 2, 2004. The four
renewal permits referred to as MS4 according to 4&41, authorized stormwater discharges from
Tier A and Tier B municipalities, public complexes, and highway agencies that discharge
stormwater from municipal separate storm sewers. These general permits address stormwater
quality issues associated with new development, redevelopment and existing development.

Tier A, assigned under N.J.A.C. 7:14A-25.3(a)1, includes 462 municipalities, that are
more densely populated regions or along or near the coast addressing new and existing
development (NJDEP, 2016). The renewal of NJPDES master general permit NJ0141852 applies
to Tier A municipalities only and also regulates privately owned streets, basins and storm drains,
any stormwater facilities owned by commercial interests or by homeowner associations.
According to N.J.A.C. 7:14A-25, the regulation of stormwater for Tier A MS4 NJDEP permit is
planned to deliver significant water quality benefits and prevent increased flooding and erosion,
regulatory mechanism which addresses stormwater quality and quantity issues related to public
works operations, new development, redevelopment, and existing developed areas by requiring
existing Tier A Municipalities to continue to implement stormwater programs (NJDEP, 2020b).
In 2018, NJDEP added new permit conditions since most permit conditions are from the 2009
Tier A MS4 master general permit, which include:

· Upgraded maintenance language intended to ensure better function of

stormwater facilities; prioritizing maintenance; to ensure proper maintenance of
privately owned and operated stormwater facilities at developments approved by
the municipality; and to specify that any inspection and maintenance logs include
specific information including the location of the facility inspected.

· Greater flexibility in the frequency of storm drain inlet and catch basin
inspection and cleaning to maintain the integrity and functionality of the MS4.
 · Clarified, improved and additional stormwater management conditions to better
reflect activities that generally occur at the municipal maintenance yard such as
vehicle washing, yard trimmings and wood waste management.

· Best practices for the use of herbicides in municipal roadside operations

· Greater flexibility for employee training with new training resources to

expand knowledge and skills.

· A Major Development Stormwater Summary form

· Training requirements for design engineers, municipal engineers, and other

individuals that review stormwater management design for development and
redevelopment projects on behalf of a municipality.

· Training requirements for members of municipal boards and councils that

review and approve applications for development and redevelopment projects on
behalf of a municipality.

· Annual review of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) reports (Division of

Water Quality, 2004).

Further, if a Tier A Municipality meets the requirement, it does not require any new local
ordinances to renew but instead is required to submit an annual report and certification under the
new MSA4 Tier A permit. Galloway Township is an example of a Tier A Municipality and
maintains a Municipal Stormwater Management Plan, as mandated by NJAC 7:14:A-25, that
addresses all requirements in 7:8 Stormwater Management Rules (GTNJ, 2017).​ Figure 2.5.1
displays the general requirements from Galloway’s Tier A permit as well as the codes that
regulate them. The town is a Municipal Blue Star Recipient, meaning it has partaken in The
Municipal Blue Star program that combines the visionary Sustainable Jersey Program with Clean
Ocean Action’s focus on water quality protection. The program works on a point basis and
Galloway Township exceeded the necessary 150 points needed to attain certification by
completing 234 points through things such as their water conservation education program and a
rain garden in the town (GTNJ, 2017). The Office of Sustainability in Galloway is in charge of
the towns stormwater management and overall water quality.

Figure 2.5.1:

Galloway Township Tier A Permit General Conditions

(GTNJ, 2017)

Public complexes can include a “campus of a college or university which Statewide has a
combined total of at least 1,000 employees (usually present at least six hours per day on
weekdays) or full-time students'' located partially in a municipality that is assigned to Tier A or
in a municipality that receives a waiver (NJDEP, 2016). The Public Complex Permit, which
regulates discharge from large public complexes such as universities, hospitals and prison,
requires that each Public Complex develop, implement, and enforce a stormwater program that
shows how the public complex will implement each permit requirement. Under the permit, an
Annual Report and Certification must be submitted each year on or before July 1, which need to
be maintained for at least five years and signed and dated by the university (EPA, 2007). A
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP) form is also required for the permit which can be
created by the public complex, however it is not required to submit the plan as the Department
will review the SPPP during inspections. The steps taken to create a SPPP can be seen in ​Figure
2.5.2. ​Another reason submission isn’t mandated is the plan is meant to serve as a dynamic
document that is never fully completed; each year, with the submission of an Annual Report and
Certification, complexes should analyze and assess BMPs and potential management
improvements (NJDEP, 2016). ​Figure 2.5.3 ​displays an example of how municipal stormwater
programs, SPPP, Statewide Basic Requirements (SBRs) and other permit requirements
(Additional Measures and Optional Measures) all relate to one another, offering context as to
how the different levels of regulation coincide.

Figure 2.5.2

SPPP General Development & Implementation Steps

(EPA, 2007)

Figure 2.5.3
How Municipal Stormwater Programs, SPPP, Statewide Basic Requirements (SBRs) and Other
Permit Requirements (Additional Measures and Optional Measures) Relate to One Another

(Division of Water Quality, 2004, p.5)

An example of a public complex is Stockton University, which implemented one of their

first master plans in 1990 that states that the area is within the NJ pinelands area that’s covered
under NJSA 13:18A-1 and NJAC 7:50-1 through 8 (Stockton University, 2020b). The 2010
master plan addressed miscalculations from the initial plan and introduced stormwater
management. Now with a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Team consisting of 12 team members
who are involved with other important directories within Stockton, the school aims to reach
stormwater prevention goals by sharing the responsibility of keeping common pollutants out of
the water and making small but impactful changes within the community.

Tier B includes 104 municipalities, which are in more rural and non-coastal areas
focusing on new development, redevelopment projects and public education. The renewal of
NJPDES master general permit NJ0141861 applies to Tier B Municipalities only (NJDEP,
2016). Tier B apply on Statewide Basic Requirements (SBR), which includes local public
education and outreach, post-construction stormwater management in new development and
redevelopment. There is no renewal fee for both Tier A Tier B permits, but it does charge Tier A
from $600 to $9000 and Tier B for $500 annually. Both Tier A and Tier B permit is related to
N.J.A.C. 7:8 under the authority of Municipal Land Use Law and the Residential Site
Improvement Standards where both need to meet the standards (NJDEP, 2016).
 The Highway Agency Stormwater Permit regulates the discharge of stormwater from
highways or roads for the NJ Department of Transportation, NJ Turnpike Authority, and the
South Jersey Transportation Authority. There are different regulatory mechanisms which are all
under legation within most New Jersey counties, which are pet waste control, improper waste
disposal control, wildlife feeding control and prohibiting illicit connections. All regulatory
mechanisms need to meet the minimum standard for the permit. In addition to the MS4s, there
are many general permits that are issued by the department to regulate stormwater discharge that
can be seen in​ Table 2.5.1.

Table 2.5.1:

General Permits Issued by The Department

Permit Area of Use

The Sand and Gravel Activity permit (RSG) Involved in sand and gravel mining or
quarrying processes

The Vehicle Recycling General Permit vehicle recycling

(RVR)

Dental Amalgam General Permit (K2) for new or existing dental facilities.

The Concrete Products Manufacturing Permit for facilities that manufacture concrete or
(CPM) concrete products.

Basic Industrial Stormwater Permit (5G2) for facilities being eliminated or eliminated
within 6 months of authorization, any
exposure materials will need to be covered or
moved indoor.
The Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation for regulating animal feeding discharge under
Permit(R8) N.J.A.C. 7:14A-2.13.

The Construction Activities Permit(5G3) where construction parties need to develop a

soil erosion and sediment plan and the permit
is given by the Local Soil Conservation
Districts.

.The Scrap Metal Permit (SM) recycling business, including vehicle parts.

The Hot Mix Asphalt Producers Permit (R4) aims for any manufacture on hot mix asphalt

Mining and Quarrying Activities Permit for mining and quarry activates under the
(R13) Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 1411,
1423, 1429, 1442, 1446, 1459 and the North
American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) 212311, 212313, 212319, 212321,
212322, 212325, 212319, 212399

permit for Newark Airport (R5) regulates any aircraft, vehicles and equipment
activates related to stormwater discharge

The Lined Surface Impoundments Permit for unlined surface impoundments, basins or
(LSI) infiltration or percolation creeks.

The Basin Discharges at Sanitary Landfills for sanitary landfills on stormwater discharge
Permit (l1) toward basins. Sanitary Subsurface Disposal
Permit (T1) which allows discharge of
sanitary sewage with a design volume in
 addition to 2,000 gross domestic product
(GPD)

The Potable Water Treatment Plants discharge of filter backwash and clarifier
Permit(I2) water from potable water treatment plants to
basins, this permit also involved drinking
quality standards on removal of metals.

The Wood Recyclers General Permit (R7) for wood recycling facility operations that are
classified as Solid Waste Class B Wood
Recyclers.

(NJDEP, 2016)

2.6 Conclusion

The United States have come a long way in their efforts to protect the nation’s waterways
in the last 70 years. From the first federal regulation of the FWPCA in 1948 to the CWA of 1972
with constant adoptions and amendments being added throughout the years. Within the United
States, states have their own authority based on the federal regulations to either abide by or make
stricter laws in the battle to protect our waterways. ​Table 2.6.1​ lists applicable Stormwater acts,
rules, regulations and manuals that have played a significant role in protecting the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters.

Table 2.6.1

Applicable Stormwater Acts

Federal Regional

Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 Regional Stormwater Management Plan under
N.J.A.C 7:8-3

Clean Water Act of 1972 NJ Stormwater Best Management Practices

1987 Stormwater Amendment Manual
National Pollution Discharge Chapter 3
Elimination System
1990 Phase I Amendment
1999 Phase II Amendment

State (NJDEP) Local

Stormwater Management Rules N.J.A.C 7:8 N.J.A.C 7:8-4

as of 2016
Adoptions to N.J.A.C 7:8 as of late 2019

NJ Stormwater Best Management Practices Municipal Stormwater Regulation

Manual General permits for Tier A & B
Municipalities, Public
Complex & Highway Agencies
Guidance Document

Rain Tax Bill S-1073 Municipal Land Use Law

Water Pollution Management Element

New Jersey Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System

Table 2.5.1 Stormwater acts, rules, regulations and manuals for federal, state, regional, and
local use
 Bibliography

The Association of Centers for the Study of Congress. (n.d). ​WATER QUALITY ACT​. THE

GREAT SOCIETY CONGRESS. http://acsc.lib.udel.edu/exhibits/show/legislation/water

Billington, D. P., Jackson, D. C., & Melosi, M. V. The history of large federal dams: planning,

design, and construction in the era of big dams, The history of large federal dams:

planning, design, and construction in the era of big dams (2005). Denver, CO: U.S. Dept.

of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation.

CCMP. (2020, Febuary 3). ​CCMP Water Monitoring Station Status​. State of New Jersey

Department of Environmental Protection.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fndYcnRzbuiMdxbQhTr4tIeLYvjSyBxyjgHtBY0

VkMI/edit

Devine, J. (2017, May 5). ​Please Stand Up for Clean Water Now!​ NRDC.

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/jon-devine/please-stand-clean-water-now

Division of Water Monitoring and Standards. (2020, July 1). ​Water Quality Restoration Grants

for Nonpoint Source Pollution.​ State of New Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection. https://www.state.nj.us/dep/wms/bears/npsrestgrants.html

Division of Water Quality. (2019, October 15). ​General Information​. New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection.

https://www.state.nj.us/dep/dwq/dwqinfo.htm#:~:text=NJDEP%2DDivision%20of%20W

ater%20Quality&text=Located%20under%20Water%20Resources%20Management,treat

ed%20wastewater%20and%20its%20residuals​.

Division of Water Quality. (2004). ​Public Complex Stormwater Guidance Document​. NJDEP.

https://www.nj.gov/dep/dwq/public_complex/pdf/PC_Guidance.pdf
Division of Watershed Management. (2004). ​New Jersey Stormwater Best Management

Practices Manual​. NJDEP.

Echols S., Pennypacker E. (2015) The History of Stormwater Management and Background for

Artful Rainwater Design. In: Artful Rainwater Design. Island Press, Washington, DC

EPA. (2007, May). Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. ​A Guide for

Construction Sites,​ 1. https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw_swppp_guide.pdf

EPA. (2017, July). ​CGP Flow Chart.​ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

(NPDES).

https://www.epa.gov/npdes/construction-general-permit-flow-chart-do-i-need-permit

EPA. (2015). ​New Jersey’s Clean Water Act §404 Permit Program​. United States Environmental

Protection Agency.

https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/new-jerseys-clean-water-act-ss404-permit-program#:~:tex

t=The%20Clean%20Water%20Act%20provides,effected%20by%20interstate%20and%2

0foreign

EPA. (2020). Stormwater Discharges from Municipal Sources. Retrieved April 4, 2020, from

https://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater-discharges-municipal-sources

FWS. (2013). ​Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899.​ Digest of Federal Resource Laws

of Interest to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

https://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/riv1899.html

Gibbons v. Ogden. (n.d.). ​Oyez​. Retrieved October 16, 2020, from

​https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/22us1
Glass, A. (2017, July 2). ​Eisenhower signs flood control legislation, July 3, 1958​. Politico.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/02/eisenhower-signs-food-control-legislation-jul

y-3-1958-240061

GTNJ. (2017, December 7). ​Stormwater Documents.​ Galloway Township New Jersey.

http://www.gtnj.org/index.php/departments/public-works/stormwater/stormwater-docume

nts?own=0

Howard, and James J. “H.R.1 - 100th Congress (1987-1988): Water Quality Act of 1987.”

Congress.gov, 4 Feb. 1987, www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/house-bill/1.

HYDRIA Project. (2009). ​Sadd Al-Kafara ... the oldest dam in the world.​ Collection, Storage &

Distribution of Water in Antiquity Linking Ancient Wisdom to Modern Needs.

http://www.hydriaproject.info/en/egypt-sadd-al-kafara-dam/relevance9

Janson, D. (1975, August 4). Tocks Dam: Story Of 13-Year Failure. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/1975/08/04/archives/tocks-dam-story-of-13year-failure.html

Johnson, T. (2019, March 13). FEMA Knocks State Plan to Lessen Stormwater Runoff

Problems. ​NJ Spotlight News.​

https://www.njspotlight.com/2019/03/19-03-12-fema-knocks-dep-plan-to-lessen-stormwa

ter-runoff-problems-in-nj/

LA Tech University. (1999, July 22). CWA History. Retrieved from

http://www2.latech.edu/~wakeman/biomon/page1-1-2.htm#:~:text=Water Pollution

Control Act, 1948&text=Many streams, rivers, and lakes,Pollution Control Act of 1948.

Land Use Management & Division of Watershed Management. (2008, April). State of New

Jersey Nonpoint Source Report. ​New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,​

35-40.
Latson, J. (2015, June 22). Environmentalism History: The Importance of Cleveland's Cuyahoga

River. Retrieved from https://time.com/3921976/cuyahoga-fire/

Lear, L. (2015). ​Rachel Carson's Biography.​ The Life and Legacy of Rachel Carson.

http://www.rachelcarson.org/Bio.aspx

New Jersey Future. (2018). ​A Review of New Jersey Water Bank Financing for Green

Infrastructure Projects.​ NJFuture.

https://www.njfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/New-Jersey-Future-Water-Bank-G

reen-Infrastructure-Financing-July-2018.pdf

NJDA. (2016). ​Animal Waste Management​. State of New Jersey Department of Agriculture.

https://www.nj.gov/agriculture/divisions/anr/agriassist/animalwaste.html

NJDEP. (2012). ​The Clean Water Book: Choices for Watershed Protection​. Watershed

Restoration. https://www.nj.gov/dep/watershedrestoration/waterbook_chp1.html

NJDEP. (1981, October). New Jersey Shore Protection Master Plan. COMMENTS AND

RESPONSES ON THE DRAFT SHORE PROTECTION MASTER PLAN, 3, 16-17.

NJDEP. (2019, March 26). ​Public Notice​. NJ DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION. https://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/notices/20181203a.html

NJDEP. (2020b, April 16). ​Stormwater Management Rule: Frequently Asked Questions​. State of

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

https://www.nj.gov/dep/stormwater/sw_rule_faqs.htm

NJDOE. (2020). ​Administrative Code and Statute.​ Official Site of the State of New Jersey.

https://www.nj.gov/education/code/process/

NJGOV. (2020). ​About the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.​ Official Site of

the State of New Jersey. https://www.nj.gov/dep/about.html

Patrick, R., Douglass, F., Palavage, D. M., & Stewart, P. M. (2016). Surface water quality: have

the laws been successful? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Peterson, M., & Haines III, F. W. (2019, Febuary 5). SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE

FOR SENATE, No. 1073. ​LEGISLATIVE FISCAL ESTIMATE,​ (2).

https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bills/S1500/1073_E3.HTM

Phillips, S. (2019, January 15). ​REVIVING THE RIVER: How the Clean Water Act fixed the

Delaware River's pollution problem​. WHYY.

https://whyy.org/articles/how-the-clean-water-act-fixed-the-delaware-rivers-pollution-pro

blem/

Pinelands Preservation Alliance. (2020). ​New Jersey Pinelands Overview​. Learn About the

Pinelands. https://pinelandsalliance.org/learn-about-the-pinelands/pinelands-overview/

Powers, A. (2020, October 25). ​Federal Water Pollution Control Act (1948).​ Encyclopedias

almanacs transcripts and maps.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/fed

eral-water-pollution-control-act-1948

Rapa, F. (2004, September 10). Commission to Receive DEP Funds to Develop Model

Stormwater Ordinance. ​New Jersey Pinelands Comission​.

https://www.nj.gov/pinelands/infor/news/091004funds_rel.pdf

Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti LLP & Haus, J. M. (2020, May 19). Attention NJ

Developers: NJDEP Adopts Amendments to Stormwater Management Rules Requiring

the Use of Green Infrastructure. ​Lexology.​

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6eab9fdc-e943-4a6b-af00-0c604b00e08

c
Rotman, M. (2019, October 5). Cuyahoga River Fire. Retrieved from

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/63

Rotman, M. (2020, June 18). Lake Erie. Retrieved from

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/58

Schumm, N. (2012). History, Ironies and Observations on Clean Water in America. Schumm

Consulting LLC, 1-23. Retrieved from

http://www.isecoeco.org/conferences/isee2012-versao3/pdf/325.pdf

South Jersey Water Savers. (2020). ​Kirkwood-Cohansey Aquifer: South Jersey’s Water Supply.​

Get to Know Your Aquifer.

https://www.sjwatersavers.org/understanding-your-water-source/kirkwood-cohansey-aqui

fer-south-jerseys-water-supply/

Spellman, F. R., & Drinan, J. (2003). Stormwater discharge management: A practical guide to

compliance. Rockville, MD: Government Institute.

Stets, E. (2015, November 24). Water Quality Evolution . Retrieved from

https://acwi.gov/monitoring/webinars/industrial_internet_11242015.pdf

Stets, E. G., Kelly, V. J., Broussard, W. P., Smith, T. E., & Crawford, C. G. (2012).

Century-scale perspective on water quality in selected river basins of the conterminous

United States (pp. 1-120) (U.S., U.S. Department of the Interior). Reston, Virginia: U.S

Geological Survey.

Stockton University. (2020). ​History.​ Stockton University.

https://www2.stockton.edu/about-stockton/history.html

US Army Corps of Engineers. (n.d.). ​Environmental Activities.​ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Headquarters Website.
 https://www.usace.army.mil/About/History/Brief-History-of-the-Corps/Environmental-A

ctivities/

USDA. (2020). ​About the U.S. Department of Agriculture.​ United States Department of

Agriculture. ​https://www.usda.gov/our-agency/about-usda

Warner, R. (1969, December). Jersey Resort Battles Erosion. ​New York Times​.

Winzenread, S. M., & Okada, K. (1999). The History of Dams. Retrieved from

https://watershed.ucdavis.edu/shed/lund/dams/Dam_History_Page/History.htm#:~:text=C

Ahistory&text=The first constructed dams were,first known dam to exist.

Wiszniewski, G. (2020, March 12). ​Impact of the Clean Water Act.​ Busy Bee.

https://www.bbcleaningservice.com/clean-water-act-impact.html