Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute. Review: Clean Water Act Goal of CWA is to restore and maintain water quality suitable for the “protection.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Watershed Planning: A Key to Integrated Planning FHWA Environmental Conference Ann Campbell Wetlands Division.
Advertisements

ALLEN BERTHOLD TEXAS WATER RESOURCES INSTITUTE Water Quality and Copano Bay Watershed Efforts.
What are TMDLs? and What Might They Mean to MS4 Permittees?
Watershed Planning for the South and North Llano Rivers Aaron Wendt Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board Public Stakeholder Meeting August 14,
Clean Water Act SAFE 210. History/Amendments Recent major amendments were enacted in 1972, 1977, and – Established the National Pollutant Discharge.
TMDLs and the NACD TMDL Task Force TMDLs NACD TMDL Task Force TMDL Draft Policy Trading and TMDLs.
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA Region 10, Seattle,
The Lake Allegan/Kalamazoo River Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Plan Implementation by Jeff Spoelstra, Coordinator, Kalamazoo River Watershed Council.
Prioritization Workgroup Summary. Workgroup Topics Nutrient results What is a watershed? What is a TMDL? Prioritization methods Basin framework and management.
Bureau of Water Overview Wastewater issues Drinking water issues Wrap up topics.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality TMDLs 101 An Explanation of the Federal Clean Water Act’s TMDL Requirements and How they Impact Carter Lake.
Clean Water Act Integrated Planning Framework Sewer Smart Summit October 23, 2012.
Bureau of Water Program Overview Local Government Interest.
IDEM TMDL 101 Everything you wanted to know about Total Maximum Daily Loads.
Montana’s 2007 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Robert Ray MT Dept Environmental Quality.
Chesapeake Bay Restoration An EPA Perspective Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Administrator U.S. EPA.
EPA Region 6 Dallas, Texas EPA Region 6 Dallas, Texas.
April 22, 2005Chester Creek Watershed TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load Chester Creek University Lake & Westchester Lagoon Alaska Department of Environmental.
Water Policy in the US and the EU K H Reckhow and C Pahl-Wostl Part I: US Total Maximum Daily Load Program.
Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation in EPA Region 10 Programs: An example based on a newly initiated pilot in the Office of Water and Watershed’s Total.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Setting the Course for Improved Water Quality A TMDL Training Program for Local Government Leaders and Other Water Resource.
Approaches to Addressing Bacteria Impairments Kevin Wagner Texas Water Resources Institute.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Assessment 2015 Strategic Monitoring in the Florida Keys DEAR- Water Quality Assessment Program.
Bill Carter Nonpoint Source Program Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Trade Fair and Conference, May 2015.
Impaired and TMDL Waterbody Listings Impacts on DoD Facilities Bill Melville, Regional TMDL Coordinator
Region III Activities to Implement National Vision to Improve Water Quality Monitoring National Water Quality Monitoring Council August 20, 2003.
Region 1 & 2 IR Workshop October 28,  The Water Quality Framework is a new way of thinking about how EPA’s data and information systems can be.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Background and Litigation Jon A. Mueller, Vice President For Litigation Chesapeake Bay Foundation William and Mary,
Total Maximum Daily Loads in MS4 Storm Water Programs.
1 ATTAINS: A Gateway to State-Reported Water Quality Information Webcast Sponsored by EPA’s Watershed Academy June 18, 2008, 11:30am-1:30pm EST Shera Bender,
VIRGINIA’S TMDL PROCESS.
Federal Clean Water Act Monitoring and assessments completed statewide Standards not met? Section 303 (d) requires placing the water body on the “Impaired.
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program (SWQM)
1 Sandra Spence EPA Region 8 TMDL Program EPA Region 8 TMDL Program Integrating Watershed Plans and TMDLs to Help Answer Watershed Planning Questions November.
Phase II WIP Background & Development Process Tri-County Council – Eastern Shore June 2,
1 EPA Regulatory Authority and PPCPs Octavia Conerly Health and Ecological Criteria Division Office of Water Office of Water October 26, 2005 October 26,
Restoring VA Waters the TMDL Way Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 3.
Straight to the Point – Watershed-based Plans Should: be designed to restore water quality from nonpoint source impairments using sufficiently analyzed.
EPA Chesapeake Bay Trading and Offsets Workplan June 1, 2012.
Eric Agnew Environmental Regulations February 15, 2006.
Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution Grants. Mission --- protect the quality of Nebraska’s water resources from nonpoint source pollution and improve.
West Metro Water Alliance A Path to Clean Water – Understanding TMDLs and Watershed Planning September 21, 2011 Diane Spector Wenck Associates, Inc.
Fecal Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) in 4 Austin Watersheds Presented to the City of Austin Environmental Board November 7, 2012.
A quantification of groundwater seepage during drought and its importance for water quality modeling in the St. Vrain watershed Hannah Chapin Thomas Gerber.
Overview of the Total Maximum Daily Load Program.
76. The central U.S. law regulating water quality is the Clean Water Act (CWA), adopted in The Act initially focused on point sources, which it.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Watershed Section Funding Pete Fastner Grants Coordinator Watershed Division February 3, 2015.
Protecting Alabama’s Water Resources “It’s A Data Driven Process” Presented by: Chris Johnson Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) 2006.
REVISIONS TO THE FEDERAL WATER QUALITY STANDARDS RULE JILL CSEKITZ, TECHNICAL SPECIALIST TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
Commonwealth of Virginia TMDL Program Update Citizen for Water Quality Annual Summit September 22, 2001.
Modeling Fecal Bacteria Fate and Transport to Address Pathogen Impairments in the United States Brian Benham Extension Specialist and Associate Professor,
1975 EPA Study  Extensive construction in 1950s -1970s  Poor canal flushing results in “stagnation, putrification, and excessive nutrient enrichment.
Nutrients and the Next Generation of Conservation Presented by: Tom Porta, P.E. Deputy Administrator Nevada Division of Environmental Protection President,
Commonwealth of Virginia Fecal Coliform Bacteria TMDLs Four Mile Run Public Meeting #1 June 14, 2001.
Mary Apostolico Potomac Watershed Manager. Current Authorities for TMDL Process Federal Clean Water Act, § 303(d) - TMDL List & TMDL Development §303(e)
Ashley Wendt Texas State Soil & Water Conservation Board NPS Project Manager.
VIRGINIA’S TMDL PROCESS Four Mile Run Bacteria TMDL March 25, 2002
GREAT BAY and NEW HAMPSHIRE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Watershed Section Funding
Module 45 Water Pollution Laws
Tim Cawthon TCEQ Nonpoint Source Program
North Dakota’s Alternative Plans
The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program in Illinois
Mike Bira EPA Region 6 NPS Program
The Clean Water Acts of 1977, 1981, & 1987
Straight to the Point – Watershed-based Plans Should:
High Rock Lake TMDL Development
Nonpoint Source Program
Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs
Implementation of Water Quality Standards and the WQ Based Approach
Presentation transcript:

Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute

Review: Clean Water Act Goal of CWA is to restore and maintain water quality suitable for the “protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, wildlife and recreation in and on the water” Implemented primarily by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) CWA requires that all waterbodies exceeding a state’s water quality standards be identified Those identified are placed on the (Texas) Integrated Report for Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d) CWA also requires that states develop an approach to address each impairment

Alternatives for Addressing Impairments (TMDL/TMDL I-Plan) Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) TMDL = WLA + LA + MOS WLA = Waste load Allocation = regulated sources LA = Load Allocation = non-regulated sources MOS = margin of safety Implementation Plan Developed by local stakeholders Typically a 3-5 year plan of activities Revised periodically to evaluate the process of improving water quality and adapted as necessary

Alternatives for Addressing Impairments (WPP) Watershed Protection Plans (WPPs) are coordinated frameworks for implementing prioritized and integrated protection and restoration strategies driven by environmental objectives Holistically address all sources of impairments to a water body Developed by the local stakeholders and meets EPA 9 Key Elements Typically a year plan of activities Makes use of adaptive management to modify the plan according to stakeholder input and observed water quality

Similarities of TMDLs/TMDL I-Plans and WPPs Goal: Improve water quality in rivers, lakes and bays Define actions needed to reduce pollution and restore water quality Provides estimated loading limits Can use simplistic or complex analytical tools (e.g., water quality models) Uses existing data and can include additional data collection if necessary Developed in coordination with local and regional stakeholders Implementation of measures eligible for grant funds Implementation of nonpoint source control measures currently voluntary Law suits or changes in CWA could result in compulsory implementation

Differences of TMDLs/TMDL I-Plans TMDL and TMDL I-PlanWPPs Results in automatic removal from 303(d) list Can result in removal from 303(d) list though 4b process TMDL approved by State and EPA TMDL I-Plan only approved by State WPP acceptance by State and EPA (i.e., determination of consistency with nine- element guidance) Focused on singular pollutants in most cases Pollutant focus is determined by stakeholders TMDLs are set at full permitted flow allowing for more generous WLA End points and flow conditions must be consistent with EPA nine element guidelines Implementation of point source control measures currently compulsory Implementation of point source control measures currently voluntary Annual stakeholder meeting required following development to evaluate implementation progress Quarterly stakeholder meetings generally held to assess and maintain implementation efforts

Timeline of Planning though Implementation TMDL and TMDL I-PlanWPPs Begin forming/working with workgroups immediately Grant proposal developed/submitted and planning would begin Sept if funded Development of Plan: 1 – 2 years Funded by State Development of Plan – ≥ 3 years Funded by EPA or other funding source Implementation Period: ~5 year plan outlined in I-Plan Implementation Period: ~10 year plan outlined in WPP Evaluate and revise every 5 years or as needed Evaluate and revise as outlined in the WPP

Questions/Discussion Kevin Wagner, PhD Texas Water Resources Institute Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute