Click for next page ( 154


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 153
A-1 APPENDIX A STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SURVEY AND RANKING OF RESEARCH PREFERENCES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WATER Design Criteria QUALITY MANAGEMENT, RESEARCH, AND RESEARCH NEEDS SURVEY (1.10) What are your currently unaddressed needs in this area? This survey, conducted by phone and online, combined (1.11) If your agency has not developed such guidelines, two state-initiated efforts in process at the time and NCHRP who or what agency decides the design criteria to 25-20(02) on water quality research and research needs. be used? Department of Transportation (DOT) Research Directors con- (1.12) Does your agency have any other manuals or tacted separately were asked to send water quality research resources that could be shared with other state performed or funded by their state DOT and to provide elec- DOTs? tronic copies or online links if available. (1.13) Comments Venner Consulting combined the existing data, assisted the Virginia Transportation Research Center (VTRC) in com- Research on Stormwater Impacts pleting their survey effort, and focused on reaching all 50 on Receiving Waters state DOTs for participation in Sections 2 through 8. These sections provide information most directly pertinent to (2.1) Has your agency performed any research on storm- NCHRP 25-20(02). At the same time, information was pre- water impacts on receiving waters? sented on the current state of knowledge about practice in each (2.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- individual state to update and further complete this information. mation for obtaining copies of such studies and A large number of states contributed information in these other reports. sections, facilitating related research efforts at VTRC and pro- (2.3) What are your most important unaddressed research viding a basis for further research and information sharing per- needs in this area that would increase your ability taining to water quality best practices. to improve water quality? Please express the priority your DOT would place on Manuals and Design Guidelines for research in assessing stormwater impacts on receiving Stormwater Management at DOT Facilities waters, and resultant decision-making related to storm- water management from 1 (low interest or priority) to (1.1) Do you have a Highway Runoff Manual? 3 (high priority). (1.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- mation for obtaining copies the Manual. (2.4) Chemical, toxicity (level and causes), and physi- (1.3) Year updated: 19902003 cal (habitat) impacts to aquatic biota of storm- (1.4) Has your DOT developed a set of design guidelines water discharges or protocols for stormwater management at non- (2.5) Role of total suspended solids and dissolved organic highway DOT facilities? carbon in controlling concentrations of dissolved (1.5) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- metals in stormwater runoff mation for obtaining copies of such studies and/or (2.6) Herbicide runoff characterization (concentrations, reports. transport and fate, impacts to aquatic biota) (1.6) Year updated: 19902003 (2.7) Water quality problems due to urbanization and (1.7) Has your DOT developed a set of design guidelines heavy metal concentrations in relation to or pro- or protocols for stormwater management during jected from Total Connected Impervious Area in construction? the watershed (1.8) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- (2.8) Threshold traffic densities below which certain pol- mation for obtaining copies of such studies and lutants in highway runoff can be considered negligi- reports. ble or irreducible and can be dispersed on roadsides (1.9) Year updated: 19902003 (2.9) Methodologies to determine where flow controls on runoff volumes and high flow durations are

OCR for page 153
A-2 appropriate to prevent streambank erosion in ultra- (5.3) What are your most important unaddressed research urban areas needs in this area that would increase your ability (2.10) Ability of watershed or regionally based enhance- to improve water quality? ments of wet weather storage capacity to improve baseline (high and low flow) hydrology and ecolog- ical productivity downstream Research on Stormwater Efficiency (2.11) Characterization on a watershed basis: availabil- during Construction ity or prioritization, or both, of sites for constructed wetlands (6.1) Has your DOT conducted any studies or prepared (2.12) Contribution of highway runoff to watershed load- reports on the design or efficiency of stormwater ings management measures during construction? (2.13) Receiving water temperature change reduction (6.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- (2.14) Other mation for obtaining copies of such studies and (2.15) Suggested research needs related to impacts on reports. receiving waters (6.3) What are your most important unaddressed research needs in this area that would increase your ability to improve water quality? Research on Stormwater Management Effectiveness (3.1) Has your DOT conducted any studies or prepared Research on Stormwater Maintenance reports that evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency, during Construction or performance of source control or treatment con- trol stormwater management measures at DOT (7.1) Has your DOT conducted any studies or prepared facilities? reports on the maintenance aspects of stormwater (3.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- management measures during construction? mation for obtaining copies of such studies and/or (7.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- reports. mation for obtaining copies of such studies and (3.3) What are your most important unaddressed research reports. needs in this area that would increase your ability (7.3) What are your most important unaddressed research to improve water quality? needs in this area, which would increase your abil- ity to improve water quality? Research on Stormwater Please express the priority your DOT would place on Management Maintenance research in the following areas from 1 (low interest or priority) to 3 (high priority). (4.1) Has your DOT conducted any studies or prepared reports on the maintenance aspects of stormwater (8.1) Technical feasibility of BMPs management measures at DOT facilities? (8.2) Construction costs of BMPs (4.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- (8.3) Construction BMP efficiencies mation for obtaining copies of such studies and (8.4) Operations and maintenance costs of BMPs reports. (8.5) Valid monitoring methods (4.3) What are your most important unaddressed research (8.6) Compliance with numeric water quality standards needs in this area that would increase your ability (8.7) Methodology to quantify BMP benefits and costs to improve water quality? (8.8) Development of small footprint BMPs (8.9) Performance of BMP retrofits/effectiveness (remov- Research on Stormwater ing constituents of concern, hydraulic performance, Management Retrofitting export of elements to receiving waters) (8.10) Effectiveness of combinations of sedimentation, (5.1) Has your DOT conducted any studies or prepared filtration, and chemical addition for stormwater reports on the retrofitting of existing stormwater BMP construction and retrofit projects management measures at DOT facilities? (8.11) Selection of treatment BMPs and documentation of (5.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- process mation for obtaining copies of such studies and (8.12) Design and maintenance of BMPs to reduce mos- reports. quito and other vermin populations

OCR for page 153
A-3 (8.13) Design and maintenance of BMPs to reduce con- (9.7) Dry Vaults/Tanks flicts with endangered and threatened species. (9.8) Porous/Permeable Pavement Designs (8.14) Viral pathogen indicators and treatment (9.9) Oil and Water Separators (8.15) Detention basin design optimization (9.10) Silt Fences (8.16) Bypass detention basin design and effectiveness (9.11) Infiltration Basin/Trench (8.17) Gross solid removal device design and performance (9.12) Sand Filter (8.18) Physics and chemistry of BMP design (9.13) Low Impact Design (LID) (8.19) Practical and effective ways to improve dissolved (9.14) Hydrodynamic Ultra-Urban BMPs metal removal in current treatment systems (9.15) Filtration Ultra-Urban BMPs (e.g., StormFilter (8.20) Infiltration guidance to prevent groundwater con- Compost/Peat Filter; Storm Treat System; Austin, tamination Texas, System) (8.21) Toxicity controls (9.16) Natural Stream Channel Design and Stabilization (8.22) BMP benefits and constraints in highly urbanized (Including Bioengineering) corridors (9.17) Herbicide Alternatives for Roadside Vegetation (8.23) Best methods for improving stream ecology through Maintenance water quality BMPs, alternatives to regulating run- (9.18) Trash off in urban areas (9.19) Dry Weather Diversion (8.24) Demonstrating the costs and benefits of alternative/ (9.20) Flocculating Agents offsite/watershed-based stormwater mitigation (9.21) Other (8.25) Applicability and effectiveness of particular Low Impact Design (LID) methods in linear corridors/ for transportation Stormwater Management (8.26) LID modeling and design so that end-of-pipe con- Regulatory Compliance trol systems can be accurately sized (8.27) New erosion control technology evaluation (10.1) Is there a state stormwater management regu- (8.28) Temporary non-vegetative soil stabilization eval- lation in effect in your state which affects DOT uation projects? (8.29) Performance of non-vegetative permanent soil sta- (10.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- bilizers for reducing erosion and potential impacts mation for obtaining copies of the regulation. of products on stormwater quality (8.30) Vegetation establishment What stormwater permitting requirements apply? (8.31) Guidance for seed mixes and effective establish- ment and maintenance of erosion control vege- (10.3) NPDES: What stormwater permitting requirements tation for short-term first growth and long-term apply? establishment. (10.4) Construction: What stormwater permitting require- (8.32) Arid region erosion control ments apply? (8.33) Soil evaluation process for slope vegetation (10.5) UIC: What stormwater permitting requirements (8.34) Deicing agent selection criteria apply? (8.35) Traction sand removal BMPs for snow areas (10.6) What other stormwater permitting requirements (8.36) Other apply? (10.7) Does your DOT assist municipalities in develop- ing permits and complying with Phase II storm- Innovative Stormwater Management Practices water permits? (10.8) If so, in what way? Does your DOT employ innovative stormwater man- agement techniques and technologies at DOT facilities? Please check all that apply: Has your state completed an outfall inventory? (9.1) Water Quality Inlets (11.1) In Phase I MS4 regulated areas? (9.2) Constructed Wetlands (11.2) In Phase II MS4 regulated areas? (9.3) Grassed/Vegetated Swales and Buffer Strips (11.3) MS4 areas plus other priority areas (e.g. near (9.4) Wet Ponds impaired/TMDL waters)? (9.5) Dry Ponds (11.4) Statewide (9.6) Wet Vaults/Tanks (11.5) Comment

OCR for page 153
A-4 Stormwater quality practices that you use: (14.5) Stormwater banking (14.6) Cross-category trading (12.1) Temporary Erosion Soil Control (TESC) (12.2) Describe (12.3) Permanent stormwater facility Water Control Requirements (12.4) Describe (15.1) Is your agency subject to water quality control (12.5) Stormwater retrofit requirements such as inches retained, detention (12.6) Stormwater monitoring times, buffer zones, etc? (12.7) Water quality BMPs in operations and main- (15.2) If yes, please describe these requirements. tenance (15.3) Is your agency subject to water quality requirements on additional flow beyond those in the previous Alternative Mitigation question (such as additional requirements for treat- ment after detaining the first inch of runoff)? (13.1) Have you developed research or resources in the (15.4) If yes, please provide details. area of programmatic or other alternatives to project- (15.5) What agency or permit dictates this requirement? specific mitigation, including means for establishing (15.6) Other comments or issues related to control require- critical needs and priority mitigation projects on a ments. watershed scale? (13.2) If so, please provide the web link or contact infor- Rapid Aquatic Toxicity or Ecologic Impact mation for obtaining copies of such studies and Assessment reports. (13.3) What are your most important unaddressed research (16.1) Have you developed or are you using rapid aquatic needs in this area that would increase your ability toxicity or ecologic impact assessment of untreated to improve water quality? highway runoff (hot spots) by using highway/ receiving water/land use characteristics rather than through direct testing? Alternative Mitigation/Stormwater Management Flexibility (16.2) If yes, please describe. (14.1) Onsite mitigation Are there any other issues or comments that you would (14.2) Offsite (within sub-basin) like to include? If so, please include them below. (14.3) Offsite (within larger watershed) (14.4) Alternative mitigation (17.1) Notes.

OCR for page 153
A-5 TABLE A-1 Research areas ranked according to priority by state DOTs Research Areas Ranked in Priority by State DOTs Research Area High Mid-level Low SCORE RANK Priority (3) Priority (2) Priority (1) WEIGHT 4 2 -1 1 Operations and maintenance costs of BMPs 36 10 4 160 2 Construction BMP efficiencies 37 8 5 159 3 Technical feasibility of BMPs 30 14 6 142 Methodology to quantify BMP benefits and 27 17 6 136 4 costs 5 Construction costs of BMPs 29 12 9 131 6 New erosion control technology evaluation 28 13 9 129 Threshold traffic densities below which certain 26 15 8 126 pollutants in highway runoff can be considered negligible or irreducible and can be dispersed 7 on roadsides Contribution of highway runoff to watershed 26 12 11 117 8 loadings 9 Development of small footprint BMPs 22 18 10 114 Performance of nonvegetative permanent soil 23 15 11 111 stabilizers for reducing erosion and potential 10 impacts of products on stormwater quality Applicability and effectiveness of particular 19 19 9 105 low impact development (LID) design 11 methods in linear corridors/for transportation Temporary nonvegetation soil stabilization 23 13 14 104 12 evaluation 13 Valid monitoring methods 23 12 14 102 Demonstrating the costs and benefits of 17 21 9 101 alternative/offsite/watershed-based stormwater 14 mitigation Performance of BMP retrofits/effectiveness 21 14 15 97 (removing constituents of concerns, hydraulic performance, export of elements to receiving 15 waters) Best methods for improving stream ecology 18 18 12 96 through water quality BMPs---alternatives to 16 regulating runoff in urban areas 17 Vegetation establishment 20 15 15 95 BMP benefits and constraints in highly 17 19 12 94 18 urbanized corridors Selection of treatment BMPs and 18 18 14 94 19 documentation of process 20 Detention basin design optimization 16 20 14 90 Effectiveness of combination of sedimentation, 17 18 15 89 filtration, and chemical addition for stormwater 21 BMP construction and retrofit projects Guidance for seed mixes and effective 20 13 17 89 establishment and maintenance of erosion control vegetation for short-term first growth 22 and long-term establishment Infiltration guidance to prevent groundwater 18 15 16 86 23 contamination (continued on next page)

OCR for page 153
A-6 TABLE A-1 (Continued) Research Areas Ranked in Priority by State DOTs Research Area High Mid-level Low SCORE RANK Priority (3) Priority (2) Priority (1) WEIGHT 4 2 -1 Methodologies to determine where flow 14 21 12 86 control of runoff volumes and high flow durations are appropriate to prevent stream 24 bank erosion in ultra-urban areas Design and maintenance of BMPs to reduce 17 15 18 80 conflicts with endangered and threatened 25 species Characterization on a watershed basis and the 14 19 14 80 availability/prioritization of sites for constructed 26 wetlands Chemical, toxicity and physical impacts to 16 16 17 79 27 aquatic biota of stormwater discharges Role of total suspended solids and dissolved 14 15 11 75 organic carbon in controlling dissolved metal 28 concentration 29 Soil evaluation process for slope vegetation 13 20 17 75 Bypass detention basin design and 13 19 17 73 30 effectiveness LID modeling and design so that end-of-pipe 13 18 16 72 31 control systems can be accurately sized The ability of watershed or regionally based 13 18 18 70 enhancements of wet weather storage capacity to improve baseline (high and low flow) 32 hydrology and ecological productivity Compliance with numerical water quality 14 15 21 65 33 standards Design and maintenance of BMPs to reduce 15 12 23 61 34 mosquito and other vermin populations Deicing agent selection criteria 14 13 23 59 35 Gross solid removal device design and 12 15 23 55 36 performance Water quality problems due to urbanization 8 21 20 54 and heavy metal concentration in relation to or projected from total connected impervious 37 area in the watershed Practical and effective ways to improve 9 19 22 52 dissolved metal removal in current treatment 38 systems 39 Traction and removal BMPs for snow areas 12 12 26 46 40 Toxicity controls 7 20 22 46 41 Receiving water temperature change reduction 5 19 25 33 42 Herbicide runoff characterization 5 17 27 27 43 Physics and chemistry of BMP design 5 15 29 21 44 Arid region erosion control 10 5 34 16 45 Viral pathogen indicators and treatment 4 10 34 2

OCR for page 153
A-7 TABLE A-2 Potential pooled-fund research opportunities--states ranking each research area as a high or moderate-level priority POTENTIAL POOLED-FUND RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES RESEARCH AREA STATE DOTs with STATE DOTs with HIGH INTEREST MODERATE INTEREST Chemical, toxicity (level and causes), AK, AZ, CO, CT, DE, AL, AR, CA, GA, IA, KY, and physical (habitat) impacts to FL, HI, IN, MI, MO, NY, MD, NC, NH, NV, OK, RI, aquatic biota of stormwater OH, OR, SD, TN, UT SC, VA, VT, WA, WY discharges Role of total suspended solids and AK, CO, CT, DE, FL, HI, AL, CA, ID, KS, MA, MO, dissolved organic carbon in IN, ME, NY, OH, RI, SC, MI, NM, MT, NH, NV, OK, controlling concentrations of UT, VT, WI TX, VA, WA, WV dissolved metals in stormwater runoff Water quality problems due to FL, ID, KY, SC, UT, VA, AK, AL, AR, CA, CO, CT, urbanization and heavy metal WA GA, HI, IL, LA, MI, MN, concentrations in relation to/projected MO, MT, NC, NV, NY, OH, from total connected impervious area OK, OR, TN, WI in the watershed Threshold traffic densities below DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, AL, CA, IA, KS, LA, MA, which certain pollutants in highway KY, ME, MI, MN, MO, MD, NE, NH, OK, PA, RI, runoff can be considered negligible or MS, MT, NC, NJ, NV, WI, WV irreducible and can be dispersed on NY, OH, OR, SC, SD, roadsides TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WY Methodologies to determine where AR, AZ, FL, KS, ME, AK, AL, CA, CO, DE, HI, flow controls on runoff volumes and MO, MS, NC, NY, OH, ID, IL, IN, KY, MI, MT, NJ, high flow durations are appropriate to SC, TN, VA, VT NM, NV, OK, OR, RI, TX, prevent streambank erosion in ultra- UT, WI urban areas Ability of watershed or regionally FL, ID, IN, KY, MD, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, based enhancements of wet weather ME, MO, MS, NV, NY, IA, LA, MT, ND, NJ, OH, storage capacity to improve baseline SC, VT, WI OK, OR, TN, TX, VA, WV (high and low flow) hydrology and ecological productivity downstream Characterization on a CO, FL, IA, ID, LA, MO, AK, CA, GA, IN, KS, KY, watershed basis: MS, MT, NV, NY, SC, VA, MD, ME, MI, NC, NE, NH, availability/prioritization of WV NJ, NM, OH, OK, TX, UT, sites for constructed wetlands WA, WI Contribution of highway runoff CA, CO, DE, FL, HI, ID, IN, AK, AL, IA, IL, MA, MD, to watershed loadings KY, LA, ME, MI, MO, MT, ND, OK, OR, RI, WA, WI NC, NH, NJ, OH, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT Reduction in receiving water ID, MD, ME, SC, VA CA, FL, IN, KY, LA, MI, temperature change MN, MO, MT, NC, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, TN, VT, WV Technical feasibility of BMPs AK, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, AL, AR, GA, IL, KS, KY, HI, ID, IN, LA, ME, MI, MS, MA, MN, MO, NC, NM, SD, MT, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NV, UT, WI NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA, WY Construction costs of BMPs AL, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, IN, AK, AZ, IA, ID, IL, KY, NH, KS, LA, MI, MN, MO, MS, SD, TN, UT, VT, WI MT, NC, ND, NE, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, RI, SC, TX, VA, WA, WY Construction BMPs efficiencies AK, AL, AZ, CA, CO, DE, IA, IL, MA, MI, ND, RI, TX, FL, GA, HI, ID, IN, KS, KY, WA, WI LA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, SC, SD, TN, UT, VA, VT, WY (continued on next page)

OCR for page 153
A-8 TABLE A-2 (Continued) POTENTIAL POOLED-FUND RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES RESEARCH AREA STATE DOTs with STATE DOTs with HIGH INTEREST MODERATE INTEREST Operations and maintenance AL, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, AK, IA, ID, IL, MA, ME, OR, costs of BMPs GA, HI, IN, KS, KY, LA, SD, TN, WI, WY MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, RI, SC, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA Valid monitoring methods AL, CA, CT, DE, FL, HI, ID, AL, CA, CT, FL, GA, HI, ID, KY, LA, ME, MN, MO, MS, LA, MN, MO, NV, NY, TN, ND, NE, NV, NY, OR, RI, UT, CO, DE, IN, KS, MD, TN, VA, WA ME, MI, MT, NC, ND, OH, OR, SD Compliance with numeric AL, CA, CT, FL, GA, HI, ID, CO, DE, IN, KS, MD, ME, water quality standards LA, MN, MO, NV, NY, TN, MI, MT, NC, ND, OH, OR, UT SD Methodology to quantify BMPs AL, CA, DE, FL, ID, IL, IN, AK, AR, AZ, CO, GA, HI, benefits and costs KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, KS, LA, MO, NE, NH, NJ, MS, MT, NC, ND, NV, NY, OK, OR, TX, UT, WA OH, SC, SD, TN, VA, VT, WI Development of small footprint AL, CA, CO, FL, IL, IN, LA, AR, GA, HI, ID, KS, KY, BMPs MD, ME, MI, MN, NC, NJ, MA, MO, MS, MT, ND, NE, NY, OH, OR, SC, TN, TX, NH, NY, OK, SD, UT, VT VA, WA Performance of BMPs AL, CA, DE, FL, ID, IN, LA, AK, CO, HI, KS, KY, MA, retrofits/effectiveness (removing MD, MN, MO, NC, NH, NY, MI, MS, MT, ND, NE, NJ, constituents of concern, OH, RI, SD, TN, UT, VA, OK, SC hydraulic performance, export WA of elements to receiving waters) Effectiveness of combinations AL, CA, FL, HI, ID, IN, LA, AK, AR, CA, CO, DE, GA, of sedimentation, filtration, and MN, MO, ND, NE, NH, NY, KS, KY, ME, MT, NC, NJ, chemical addition for OK, TN, VA OH, SC, SD, UT, VT, WA, stormwater BMPs construction WI and retrofit projects Selection of treatment BMPs AK, CA, CO, FL, ID, IN, LA, AL, DE, GA, HI, IL, KY, and documentation of process ME, MI, MN, MS, NC, NJ, MA, MO, ND, NE, NH, NV, NY, OH, RI, TN, VA OK, SC, SD, UT, VT, WI Design and maintenance of AL, FL, LA, MN, MO, NE, AR, CA, CO, DE, IN, MA, BMPs to reduce mosquito and NJ, NV, NY, OR, RI, SD, MD, MI, NC, ND, OH, WA other vermin populations TN, VA Design and maintenance of FL, GA, ID, LA, MN, MO, AK, AL, CA, CO, IN, KS, BMPs to reduce conflicts with MS, NE, NJ, NY, RI, SC, SD, KY, MD, MI, ND, NV, OK, endangered and threatened TN, VA, WA OR, UT, WI, WY species Viral pathogen indicators and CA, LA, SC, VA AL, KS, MI, NC, NJ, TN, UT, treatment WY Detention basin design AZ, CA, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, AK, AL, CO, IA, KS, LA, optimization MN, MO, NE, NY, OK, SC, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NV, TN, TX, VA OH, RI, SD, UT, WA, WI, WV Bypass detention basin design CA, FL, ID, IN, KY, MN, AK, AL, AR, CO, GA, KS, and effectiveness NE, NY, OK, SC, TN, TX, LA, MO, NC, ND, NJ, NM, VA NV, OH, SD, UT, WA, WV Gross solid removal device CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, MI, AK, AL, HI, KS, KY, MA, design and performance MO, ND, NV, NY, UT, VA MN, NE, NA, NJ, OH, SC, WA, WI

OCR for page 153
A-9 TABLE A-2 (Continued) POTENTIAL POOLED-FUND RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES RESEARCH AREA STATE DOTs with STATE DOTs with HIGH INTEREST MODERATE INTEREST Physics and chemistry of BMPs CA, FL, KY, MO, VA AK, AL, ID, IN, MI, NC, NE, design NH, NJ, NV, NY, OR, SD, TN Practical and effective ways to CA, DE, MN, MO, NH, NV, AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, FL, improve dissolved metal NY, VA, WA ID, IN, KS, LA, NC, ND, OH, removal in current treatment OK, RI, SC, TN, UT, WV systems Infiltration guidance to prevent AK, AR, AZ, CA, FL, HI, AL, CO, IN, KS, MA, MO, groundwater contamination ME, MI, MN, NJ, NV, NY, ND, NH, OK, SC, SD, UT, OH, OR, RI, TN, VA, WA WI, WV Toxicity controls CA, MO, NY, TN, UT, VA AK, AR, CO, DE, HI, IN, KS, LA, MI, MN, ND, NH, NV, OH, OR, SC, TX, WA, WI, WV BMPs benefits and constraints CO, FL, HI, MD, MI, MN, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CT, DE, in highly urbanized corridors NJ, NY, OH, OK, RI, SC, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, TX, UT, VA, WA KY, LA, ME, MO, NC, VT, WI Best methods for improving AK, DE, FL, GA, KY, LA, AZ, CO, HI, IL, IN, KS, MD, stream ecology through water ME, MI, MO, NY, RI, SC, MN, MS, NC, ND, NH, NJ, quality BMPs--alternatives to SD, TX, VA, WA, WV NV, OH, OK, VT, WI regulating runoff in urban areas Demonstrating the costs and AK, AR, AZ, CO, GA, KY, AL, FL, HI, ID, IN, KS, LA, benefits of alternative/off- MD, MN, MS, NH, NJ, NY, ME, MO, NC, ND, NE, NV, site/watershed-based OH, SC, SD, VA, VT, WA OK, RI, TN, TX, UT, WI, WV stormwater mitigation Applicability and effectiveness AK, AR, AZ, CO, CT, FL, AL, DE, GA, ID, KS, KY, of particular low impact HI, IN, MD, ME, MO, NJ, LA, MN, NC, ND, NE, NH, development design (LID) NY, OH, SC, TN, TX, VA, OK, SD, UT, VT, WV, WY methods in linear corridors/for WA transportation LID modeling and design so AK, CO, CT, HI, IN, MD, AL, DE, FL, GA, ID, KS, that end-of-pipe control NE, NJ, NY, OH, SC, VA, KY, LA, ME, MN, MO, NC, systems can be sized accurately WA ND, OR, TN, TX, VT New erosion control AK, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, AL, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, technology evaluation HI, IA, ID, LA, MI, MN, MO, ME, NM, OR, RI, UT, WA MS, MT, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WY Temporary nonvegetative soil AK, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, AZ, FL, IA, KY, ME, MI, stabilization evaluation HI, ID, IN, LA, MN, MT, MO, NE, NJ, NM, OR, RI, NC, ND, NH, NV, NY, OK, SD, UT, WY SC, TN, TX, VA Performance of nonvegetative AK, AZ, CA, CO, FL, HI, ID, AL, AR, DE, FL, GA, IA, IN, permanent soil stabilizers for LA, MN, MO, MT, NC, ND, KY, ME, MI, NE, NH, RI, reducing erosion and potential NJ, NV, OK, OR, SC, SD, UT, WV, WY impacts of products on TN, TX, VA stormwater quality Vegetation establishment AK, CA, CO, FL, HI, ID, IN, AL, AZ, DE, GA, IA, IL, KS, KY, LA, ND, NE, NV, NY, MT, NM, OH, OR, TN, TX, OK, RI, SC, SD, UT, VA VT, WI Guidance for seed mixes and AK, CA, FL, GA, IA, ID, IN, AZ, CA, CO, DE, HI, IL, KS, effective establishment and KY, LA, ND, NV, NY, OK, MO, NE, NM, OH, TX, UT, maintenance of erosion control OR, RI, SC, SD, TN, VA VT vegetation for short-term first growth and long-term establishment. (continued on next page)

OCR for page 153
A-10 TABLE A-2 (Continued) POTENTIAL POOLED-FUND RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES RESEARCH AREA STATE DOTs with STATE DOTs with HIGH INTEREST MODERATE INTEREST Arid region erosion control AK, AZ, CA, ID, MT, NV, CO, HI, NE, NM, WA OK, OR, SD, UT, WY Soil evaluation process for AK, AZ, CA, FL, GA, IK, CO, HI, IA, IN, KS, LA, MI, slope vegetation KY, MN, MT, NY, SC, SD, MO, ND, NH, NM, NV, OH, VA, WY OK, OR, TN, UT, WI, WV Deicing agent selection criteria AK, CA, CO, CT, ID, IN, AZ, DE, HI, IA, IL, KY, MI, ME, MO, NH, NY, OH, SD, NV, OR, RI, TN, WI UT, VA, WY Traction sand removal BMPs AK, CA, CO, CT, ID, IN, AZ, DE, IA, IL, MA, MI, MT, for snow areas NV, NY, SD, UT, VA, WY NH, OR, RI, TN WI