Lower Big Blue Watershed Draft Escherichia coli (E. coli) TMDL Stakeholder Meeting May 7, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Major Sources of Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution and Best Management Practices (BMPs) By: David Wojnowski, Stream Watch/Project WET Coordinator Stream.
Advertisements

Ann D Hirekatur Project Manager State of Lake Wisconsin Meeting July 13, 2013 Wisconsin River Basin Water Quality Improvement Project.
TMDL Development Mainstem Monongahela River Watershed May 14, 2014.
Leona River Potential Loads and Sources for Bacteria and Nitrates Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research Stephenville, Texas June 4, 2013.
The Lake Allegan/Kalamazoo River Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Plan Implementation by Jeff Spoelstra, Coordinator, Kalamazoo River Watershed Council.
7:00 pmWelcome and introductions 7:05pmHLWD planning overview Plan update process 7:25 pmStakeholder involvement Watershed problems 7:40 pmPublic comment.
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.
Stormwater, Wellhead Protection and Drainage Issues Public Hearing.
Minnesota Watershed Nitrogen Reduction Planning Tool William Lazarus Department of Applied Economics University of Minnesota David Mulla Department of.
NPDES Phase II Storm Water Regulations: WHAT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NEED TO KNOW.
The Wisconsin River TMDL: Linking Monitoring and Modeling Ann Hirekatur, Pat Oldenburg, & Adam Freihoefer March 7, 2013 Wisconsin River TMDL Project Team.
IDEM TMDL 101 Everything you wanted to know about Total Maximum Daily Loads.
Chesapeake Bay and New York State Water Quality and the Potential for Future Regulations Presented by the Upper Susquehanna Coalition.
Introduction to TMDLs for Nutrients Presented by: Dr. Scott Emery January 15, 2009.
April 22, 2005Chester Creek Watershed TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load Chester Creek University Lake & Westchester Lagoon Alaska Department of Environmental.
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.
Getting the Big Picture How to Look at Your Watershed Indiana Watershed Planning Guide,
Rogue Basin Water Quality Implementation Plans Greg Stabach, Natural Resources Project Manager Rogue Valley Council of Governments.
GIS Tools for Watershed Delineation Public Policy Perspectives Teaching Public Policy in the Earth Sciences April 21, 2006 Gary Coutu Department of Geography.
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources Christopher Gale Bill Taft.
 Why are we here?  Without regulations, rivers used to catch fire. Rules and Regulation.
Brent Mason, Mackenzie Consoer, Rebekah Perkins BBE 5543 November 8, 2011.
1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.
Bear River Cathy Lee CE 296 B Spring 1998 Assignment #4.
Taking the Next Step: Implementing the TMDL. What IDEM Provides to Help With Implementation  Compiling all the data in one place  Data-driven recommendations.
A Plan for Clean Water in Smith Creek Nesha Mizel VA Dept. of Conservation and Recreation.
Floyds Fork Bacteria TMDL Andrea M. Fredenburg Kentucky Division of Water TMDL Section November 28, 2012.
Review of Scenario Builder BMP crediting Christopher F. Brosch University of Maryland Extension Chesapeake Bay Program Office
LOWER L’ANGUILLE WATERSHED COST SHARE PATRICIA PERRY ST. FRANCIS COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
Redwood River TMDL Critique David De Paz, Alana Bartolai, Lydia Karlheim.
Big Raccoon Creek Watershed TMDL Stakeholder Meeting June 26, 2013.
Attachment B Water Quality Duration Curves for the Lower Eel River Watershed.
Pine and Mill Creek E. coli Stakeholder Meeting Pine and Mill Creek E. coli Stakeholder Meeting Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Water Bureau.
West Fork Whitewater River E. coli Water Quality Duration Curve (all sites) IDEM Water Quality Data & USGS Gage Stream Flow Data Upstream Drainage.
Staci Goodwin Senior TMDL Project Manager Office of Water Quality
Bacteria and Dissolved Oxygen Total Mass Daily Load Development for the Atascosa River Jessica L. Watts.
Deep River-Portage Burns Watershed TMDL Stakeholder Meeting March 13, 2013.
Protecting our Watershed. What is a watershed? A watershed is an area of land that drains into a body of water: –Stream –River –Lake (Let’s take a look!)Let’s.
KWWOA Annual Conference April 2014 Development of a Kentucky Nutrient Strategy Paulette Akers Kentucky Division of Water Frankfort, KY.
Lake Independence Phosphorus TMDL Critique Stephanie Koerner & Zach Tauer BBE 4535 Fall 2011.
CENTRAL MUSCATATUCK WATERSHED. BMPs Cost-Shared by Central Muscatatuck Watershed Project.
An Overview of our Community’s Stormwater Management Program
Kentucky Growth Readiness for Water Quality Does your water quality matter?
Critique of North Branch of Sunrise River TMDL Nate Topie and Taylor Hoffman.
Adem.alabama.gov Tombigbee Basin Up-date July 29, 2015 Mark Sport.
Skokomish River Fecal Coliform TMDL Attainment Monitoring in Washington State George Onwumere, Ph.D National Monitoring Conference, San Jose, California.
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.
Water Quality Monitoring on Larkin Creek St. Francis County, AR JL Bouldin RA Warby Arkansas State University.
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources By Joan Schumaker Chadde, Western U.P. Center for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education. All photos by Chadde,
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.
Human Impacts Part 2- Watersheds. What’s a Watershed? An area of land that drains into a common body of water.
Yahara River Watershed RCPP
Mulberry River Watershed
VIRGINIA’S TMDL PROCESS Four Mile Run Bacteria TMDL March 25, 2002
Dave Clark and Michael Kasch
Hydrosphere Notes Part 9-Land Use.
Elm Creek Watershed TMDL E. coli TMDL – Review of Preliminary Findings
Public Meeting February 19, 2009
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources
The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program in Illinois
Watershed Management Plan Citizens Advisory Committee April 18, 2011
Human Activity and Ground Water
Human Activity and Ground Water
Human Activity and Ground Water
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources
Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs
Presentation transcript:

Lower Big Blue Watershed Draft Escherichia coli (E. coli) TMDL Stakeholder Meeting May 7, 2014

Agenda Watershed Overview Listing Information Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Allocations Implementation Schedule

Watershed Overview Watershed Size Watershed Location Lower Big Blue Subwatersheds General Watershed Land Use

Watershed Overview County area – 19.14% in Hancock – 5.10% in Henry – 1.81% in Johnson – 29.42% in Rush – 44.35% in Shelby Municipalities – Shelbyville – Shirley – Morristown – Edinburgh Drains approximately 280 square miles

Subwatersheds – Headwaters Little Blue River – Beaver Meadow Creek – Gilson Creek- Little Blue River – Manilla Branch- Little Blue River – Town of Rays Crossing- Little Blue River – Headwaters Six Mile Creek – Anthony Creek- Six Mile Creek – Nameless Creek – Prairie Branch- Big Blue River – Foreman Branch- Big Blue River – DePrez Ditch- Big Blue River – Shaw Ditch- Big Blue River

Land Use Watershed Area Percent Acres Square Miles Open Water Developed Land 13, Forested Land 12, Grasslands and Shrubs 1, Pasture/Hay 6, Agricultural Lands 14, Wetlands TOTAL 17,

Listing Information Lower Big Blue Watershed

Definition of a TMDL Clean Water Act requires that a TMDL be allocated as follows: – TMDL = WLA + LA + MOS – Wasteload allocations (WLA) for “point sources” (regulated under NPDES) – Load allocations (LA) for nonpoint sources and natural background – MOS for margin of safety

Water Quality Standards Escherichia coli (E. coli) April 1 through October 31, E. coli shall not exceed 125 colony forming units (cfu) per 100 milliliters (mL) as a geometric mean based on not less than 5 samples equally spaced over a 30-day period nor exceed 235 cfu per 100 mL in any 1 sample in a 30-day period

Impaired Segments -72 Miles E. coli -15 Miles PCB Fish Tissue -8 Miles Total Mercury TMDL only addresses E. coli

Assessment of Water Quality 2012 listings reassessed – E. coli sampling performed by IDEM in sites for E. coli Sampled 5 consecutive weeks – September 20, 2010 – October 18, 2010 – 2013 East Fork White River sampling 2 sites sampled in Lower Big Blue River watershed – July 16, August 13, 2013

Site # L-Site #Stream NameRoad Name 1 WED Sixmile Creek CR 1050 E 2 WED Dilly Creek CR 200 S 3 WED Nameless Creek CR 400 S 4 WED Sixmile Creek CR 800 E 5 WED Little Blue River CR 150 W 6 WED Little Blue River CR 300 N 7 WED Beaver Meadow Cr CR 100 N 8 WED Little Blue River CR 400 N 9 WED Tributary of Little Blue River Union Rd 10 WED Little Blue River CR 200 N 11 WED Foremans Branch Knighthood Grove Rd 12 WED Big Blue River Morristown Rd 13 WED Little Blue River Franklin St 14 WED Big Blue River Noble St 15 WED Big Blue River CR 575 E 16 WED Big Blue River CR 100 S 17 WED Howell Ditch Manetta Rd 18 WED Big Blue River CR 550 S 20 WED Big Blue River SR WED Little Blue River CR 400 W 22 WED Sixmile Creek CR 900 E

E. coli Data IDEM sampled in 2010, 2013 Geometric mean calculated for each site – 7 sites reported meeting the standard in 2010 – 14 sites reported not meeting the standard in 2010 – 2 sites reported not meeting the standard in 2013 Highest geometric mean = – Site 21 Lowest geometric mean = – Site 1 Highest single sample = – Sites 3, 10 Lowest single sample = 10.8 – Site 1

E. coli Data

Impaired Segments -256 Miles E. coli -15 Miles PCB Fish Tissue -8 Miles Total Mercury TMDL only addresses E. coli

TMDL Allocations

Lower Big Blue River Sources of E. coli Point Sources Municipal NPDES Permits – 5 permitted WWTPs MS4 Permits – 2 permitted MS4s Nonpoint Sources Land use Practices: Agricultural, Forested, Urban Wildlife CFOs – 12 permitted CFOs Septic Systems

Point Sources Municipal NPDES Permits – IN Eastern Hancock Jr/Sr High School – IN Shirley WWTP – IN Morristown WWTP – IN Shelbyville WWTP – IN Edinburgh WWTP MS4 Permit – INR Shelbyville – INR Edinburgh

Nonpoint Sources Land Use Practices –Agricultural –Forested –Urban CFOs – 184- David Vanosdol – 637- Janes Brothers – SSZ Enterprises – Jarrod Law and Michael Pauszek – Ronald Sullivan – Jeff and Bruce Muegge – Bob White Farm – Signature Farms Morristown – Lewis Pork Farm LLC – William E. Smith Farm 3 – J & J Livestock LLC – Pork in Blue River LLC Septic Systems Tile Drains Wildlife

Lower Big Blue River TMDL Allocations Load Allocations – Agricultural Run-off – Failing Septic Systems – Livestock – Tile Drains – Urban Run-off – Wildlife – Forested

Precipitation Many sources of pollution are impacted by precipitation A path for pollutant to enter a waterbody is through rain and snow melt Information on precipitation used with the Load Duration Curve will give a better overall sense of flow conditions in stream

Flow The long history of flow gages provides a valuable tool in evaluating water quality data USGS flow gages provide a consistent high quality source of flow information The large network of flow gages means that finding a representative flow gage is possible

Upstream Downstream

Load Reductions Needed HUC 12Minimum [CFU/100mL] Maximum [CFU/100mL] Geometric Mean [CFU/100mL] % Reduction to meet WQS Headwaters Little Blue River Beaver Meadow Creek Gilson Creek- Little Blue River > Manilla Branch- Little Blue River Town of Rays Crossing- Little Blue River Headwaters Six Mile Creek Anthony Creek- Six Mile Creek Nameless Creek > Praire Branch- Big Blue River Foreman Branch- Big Blue River DePrez Ditch- Big Blue River Shaw Ditch- Big Blue River

Implementation

Implementation of TMDL expected to occur via ongoing and new watershed management activities: – Outreach, education, and training – Agricultural conservation practices – Urban storm water management – Control of failing septic systems – Forestry BMPs

Potential Priority Implementation Areas Subwatershed PPIA Rank Load reduction (Billion MPN/Day % ReductionImplementation Strategies DePrez Ditch-Big Blue River % Outreach, Education, and Training Stream Fencing Storm water planning and management Cover Crops Manure handling, storage, treatment, and disposal Conservation tillage/ residue management Grassed Waterways Prescribed Grazing Septic System Education Conservation Easements Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans Constructed Wetlands Heavy Use Area Pads Pasture and Hay Planting Conservation Crop Rotation Riparian Buffers Filter Strips Precision Agriculture Prairie Branch-Big Blue River % Anthony Creek-Six Mile Creek % Town of Rays Crossing-Little Blue River % Nameless Creek % Manilla Branch-Little Blue River % Beaver Meadow Creek % Headwaters Little Blue River % Gilson Creek-Little Blue River 9 00 Headwaters Six Mile Creek Shaw Ditch-Big Blue River Foreman Branch-Big Blue River 12 00

Schedule

Lower Big Blue River TMDL Schedule Sampling Completed September 2010 and 2013 Draft TMDL Meeting: May 7, Day Comment Period: May 7– June 6 – – Final TMDL Report Submittal to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA): July 2014

TMDL Project Manager Cory Fischer TMDL Project Manager Office of Water Quality Indiana Department of Environmental Management 100 N. Senate Ave. Indianapolis, Indiana PH: (317) FX: (317) E MAIL: