Total Maximum Daily Load Program for North Carolina - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 34
About This Presentation
Title:

Total Maximum Daily Load Program for North Carolina

Description:

North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2002 ... North Buffalo Creek*- fecal coliform. East Fork Deep River*- fecal coliform ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:49
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 35
Provided by: michelle112
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Total Maximum Daily Load Program for North Carolina


1
Total Maximum Daily Load Program for North
Carolina
  • Michelle Woolfolk
  • NC Division of Water Quality
  • 2002 NC Environmental Health Safety School,
    August 19-20, 2002

Crowders Creek, Catawba River Basin
2
What does TMDL stand for?
Total Maximum Daily Load
TMDLs are written plans for attaining and
maintaining water quality standards, in all
seasons, for a specific waterbody and pollutant.
3
TMDL Program has 2 parts...
  • Part 1. Generation of the impaired waters list
    (303(d) List)

Part 2. Development of TMDLs for waters on the
impaired waters list
4
Clean Water Act Requirements
  • Identify Impaired Waters
  • Prioritize Impaired Waters for Management
  • EPA must approve/disapprove within 30 days

Meherrin River (Chowan River Basin)
5
Listing Requirements
  • List due April 1st of every even numbered year
  • Consider all existing and readily available data
  • Comprehensive lists
  • Methodology
  • Public participation

6
EPA actions in the last year...
  • Published 2002 Integrated Reporting Guidance on
    November 19, 2001
  • 2002 303(d) List due date delayed until October
    1, 2002 (Fed Reg)

Cashie River (Roanoke River Basin)
7
The Integrated Report
  • North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and
    Impaired Waters List (2002 Integrated 305(b) and
    303(d) Report)

8
New guidance combines old reports
Historic 305(b) Water Quality Progress Reports
Historic 303(d) Lists of Impaired Waters
and
Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report
9
Summary of new reporting guidance
  • State assessment methodology is the basis for
    listing all waters
  • EPA list approval based on acceptable methodology
  • New listing categories based on attainment of all
    uses
  • Integrated list identifies waters with
    insufficient data and information
  • Provides for probabilistic assessment for waters
    with insufficient data and information
  • New data requested on monitoring schedules and
    assessment methodologies for each water
  • State public notice and review of methodologies
    and integrated list

10
Assessment Process for Integrated Report
1. Develop assessment and listing methodology
2. Assess uses and assign use support ratings
3. Separate waters into 7 categories
4. Assign priority to impaired waters
5. Develop TMDL schedule
6. Public participation
11
Assessment and Listing Methodology
  • Existing and readily available data
  • Methodology for each basin noticed in basinwide
    management plan
  • Overall and multiple category uses assessed

12
Where it all starts.Basinwide Management
  • Solicitation of outside data
  • Occurs year prior to biological data collection
  • 2002 Solicitation Cape Fear and New
  • Biological data collections
  • Use support ratings
  • Incorporates data, information, and best
    professional judgement

13
Use support categories
  • Beginning with 2000 Roanoke Basinwide Management
    Plan
  • Multiple Category Use Support
  • Aquatic life/ Secondary recreation
  • Fish consumption
  • Primary recreation
  • Water supply
  • Shellfish harvesting
  • Other
  • Prior to 2000
  • Overall use support was assessed.

14
Multiple Category Use Support
  • Roanoke
  • White Oak
  • Savannah
  • Watauga
  • Little Tennessee
  • Hiwassee
  • Chowan
  • Pasquotank

15
NC Integrated Report includes
  • Descriptions of monitoring programs and
    assessment methodologies
  • Description of integrated list (categories 1
    through 7)
  • TMDL development schedule for next two years
  • Status of waters targeted for TMDL development in
    2000

16
2000 303(d) List and 2002 Integrated List
Translator
NC Categories
17
Distribution of impaired waters
Based on segments
18
Minimum priorities
  • Water Supply - high
  • Federal endangered or threatened species - high
  • State endangered or threatened species - medium
  • ORW/HQW - medium

Cape Fear River (Cape Fear River Basin)
19
Watershed Assessment and Restoration Project
  • Draft reports used to move streams from Category
    6 (biologically impaired) to either Category 4c
    (impaired by pollution) or 5 (impaired by
    pollutant, TMDL needed).
  • Internal drafts completed for the following six
    streams
  • Clark Creek (Catawba)
  • Morgan Mill Creek (French Broad)
  • Peter Weaver Creek (French Broad)
  • Cullasaja River (L Tennessee)
  • Mill Creek, (L Tennessee)
  • Toms Creek (Neuse).

20
WARP Identified Causes of Impairment
  • Hydromodification (flow alteration)
  • Unspecified toxicants/ toxicity
  • Organic enrichment
  • Chlorine
  • Unstable substrate/ sedimentation

Swift Creek Tributary (Neuse River Basin)
21
TMDL development schedule
  • Focus is on
  • fecal coliform impaired waters
  • piedmont streams (Yadkin, Catawba and Cape Fear
    Basins)
  • NC is allowing Third Party TMDL development

22
NCs 2002 Integrated Report
  • Currently on the internet at
  • http//h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/general_303(d).ht
    m
  • Listed in two parts
  • The Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report and
    impaired waters list
  • Database of Categories 1, 2 and 3 (printout not
    available)

23
Elements of a TMDL
1. Problem identification
2. Target analysis
3. Source assessment
4. Linkage of source and target
5. Determine maximum allowable load
6. Allocation of load/wasteload
7. Public participation
24
TMDL Target
  • What is the water quality standard?
  • Addressing duration and frequency
  • Multiple part standards (e.g., fecal coliform)
  • Data collected consistently with standard
  • At what location was the cause of impairment
    determined?
  • DWQ ambient monitoring location(s)
  • Coalition/Basin Association monitoring

25
Supporting Information
  • Data availability
  • Ambient monitoring (DWQ or coalition)
  • NPDES instream monitoring
  • USGS flow stations
  • Special studies (DWQ, discharger, coalition,
    USGS, university, other?)
  • Rarely have all of the data listed above.

26
ModelingLinking causes and sources
  • Model selection
  • Data availability
  • Watershed characteristics
  • EPA guidance (e.g., Pathogen TMDL Protocol)
  • Experience (personally and as a unit)
  • Schedule
  • Model calibration
  • Critical conditions

27
Allocation of Load/Wasteload
  • Must allocate the allowable load between point
    sources (wasteload) and nonpoint sources (load)
  • Who gets the biggest piece of the pie?
  • Equity versus efficiency

Where the rubber hits the road...
28
Flowchart for Freshwater TMDL Development
Review existing data, including NPDES,
stormwater, DWQ ambient, other.
Contact local government officials/industryregard
ing TMDL development
Create conceptual model for TMDL
Evaluate potential modeling frameworks for TMDL
29
Flowchart for TMDL development, cont
Public notice draft TMDL using web site,
mail-out, and email
Prepare comment responses and finalize TMDL
document
Meet with local stakeholders to discuss results
of TMDL
Submit final TMDL to EPA Region IV
Prepare draft TMDL
30
River Basins with TMDL/303(d) Projects
  • Cape Fear
  • Catawba
  • French Broad
  • Little Tennessee
  • Neuse
  • Tar
  • Yadkin

31
Cape Fear TMDL/303(d) Projects
  • Little Troublesome Creek- fecal coliform,
    biological impairment
  • Horsepen Creek- biological impairment
  • North Buffalo Creek- fecal coliform
  • East Fork Deep River- fecal coliform
  • Booker Creek - biological impairment
  • Little Creek - biological impairment
  • Roberson Creek- nutrients
  • Burnt Mill Creek - biological impairment

The Cities of Greensboro and High Point are
cooperating on these TMDLs and/or TMDL related
field studies.
As of December 2001
32
Catawba TMDL/303(d) Projects
  • Youngs Fork/Coperning Creek - biological
    impairment
  • Sugar, Little Sugar, Irwin, McAlpine Creeks -
    fecal coliform bacteria
  • Clark Creek - fecal coliform bacteria,
    biological impairment
  • Crowders Creek - fecal coliform bacteria

The City of Charlotte developed this Third
Party TMDL. The Town of Maiden, City of Newton
and City of Gastonia assisted with field studies.
As of December 2001
33
To summarize
  • North Carolina has developed a hybrid 2002
    Integrated Report for EPA
  • As additional studies of biologically impaired
    waters are completed, additional TMDLs will be
    needed
  • Modeling staff have committed to developing TMDLs
    for fecal coliform bacteria in freshwaters

34
Questions?
Thank you for your attention.
Michelle Woolfolk Modeling/TMDL Unit 919-733-5083
ext. 505 michelle.woolfolk_at_ncmail.net
Falls Lake (Neuse River Basin)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com