Rule Development Workshop for Chapter 40E63, Part IV, F'A'C' C139 Basin Everglades Regulatory Progra

1
Rule Development Workshop for Chapter 40E-63,
Part IV, F.A.C.C-139 Basin Everglades
Regulatory Program

• Workshop 4
• October 3, 2007
• Clewiston Field Station

2
Welcome and IntroductionCarmela Bedregal,
P.E.Senior Supervisor Engineer, Everglades
Regulation Division
3
Agenda

• Welcome and Introductions Carmela Bedregal
• Compliance Methodologies Update Jonathan Madden
• Water Quality Monitoring Danielle Tharin
• Preliminary BMP and Permit Revisions Jose Gomez
• Public Comment/Discussion

4
Compliance Methodology UpdateJonathan Madden,
P.E.Lead Engineer, Everglades Regulation Division
5
Discussion Topics

• Everglades Forever Act language
• Basis for Technical Evaluation
• Baseline Data Adjustments
• Existing Methodology
• Compliance Methodology Alternative Concepts
• Technical Working Group Update Schedule

6
Everglades Forever Act

• Effective immediately, landowners within the
  C-139 Basin shall not collectively exceed an
  annual average loading of phosphorus based
  proportionately on the historic rainfall for the
  C-139 Basin over the period of October 1, 1978,
  to September 30, 1988. New surface inflows shall
  not increase the annual average loading of
  phosphorus stated above. Provided that the C-139
  Basin does not exceed this annual average
  loading, all landowners within the Basin shall be
  in compliance for that year. Compliance
  determinations for individual landowners shall
  be based on the landowners proportional share of
  the total phosphorus loading.

7
Basis for Technical Evaluation

• Unless the Everglades Forever Act is revised, the
  compliance method needs to
• Identify the landowners annual total phosphorus
  load
• Account for historic and current rainfall
  variation
• Compare to a fixed historic period of October 1,
  1978, to September 30, 1988, despite data
  uncertainties
• Significant effort was made to achieve fair and
  adequate adjustment to original data
• If exceeded, the District can determine remedial
  actions on a landowner based on proportional
  share
• Rule can maintain some flexibility on compliance
  action
• Fair, technically justified, with realistic
  expectations

8
Baseline Data (Walker, 1995)

• Data issues
• Quality of flow records at L3
• The main water quality station (L3) was located
  approximately 11 miles downstream of the C-139
  boundary
• Grab sample record contains gaps in drought
  periods of Jan 1981 Mar 1982 and Oct 1984 Sep
  1985.
• Only 4 positive-flow samples are available at
  G136, all between June and October 1983.
• Rainfall data from 3 station network was used by
  regression model to rescale 2-station or
  1-station estimates for the October 1978 through
  September 1982 period.

9
Baseline Data Revisions (Walker, 2000)

• Data adjustments to compensate issues
  (continues)
• Flow records at L3
• Reported L3 flows were increased by 25 to
  account for Deer Fence Canal inflows prior to
  October 1979, not in data record.
• Revised to reflect all historical field data
  available calibration purposes (Curtis, 1997)
• Modern measurement Ultrasonic Velocity Meter
  (UVM) record 1996-2000 provides basis for
  calibration and adjustment of historical record
  flows (Method 2)
• A method independent of USGS flow record
  correlating between 7-day average flows and
  antecedent rainfall was developed and generally
  supports calibrated flows

10
Baseline Data Revisions (Walker, 2000)

• The main water quality station (L3) is located
  approximately 11 miles downstream of the C-139
  boundary
• L3 phosphorus concentrations measured with
  historical technique and location have been
  calibrated against concentrations measured with
  modern technique closer to the basin outlet
  between January 1996 and April 2000.
• A calibration composite/grab ratio of 1.062 has
  been applied to grab-sample loads in L3 for
  entire period

11
Baseline Data Revisions (Walker, 2000)

• Grab sample record contains gaps in drought
  periods of Jan 1981 Mar 1982 and Oct 1984 Sep
  1985.
• If the number of days from the closest sample is
  less than 20, daily concentration is estimated by
  interpolation
• If the number of days is greater than 20, daily
  concentration is estimated based on a regression
  developed from paired flow and concentration data
  for the 10-year Base Period
• If sufficient data is not available for the
  regression, the flow-weighted-mean concentration
  from all samples is used
• For G136 concentrations missing July 1982 April
  1994, a correlation was made between paired daily
  L3 and G136 grab sample data with positive flow
  from the entire record (1980-2000). To fill
  missing G136 data the ratio of 0.9145 is applied
  monthly to FWM concentration data at the L3

12
Existing Methodology Limitations

• Potential opportunities to make the model more
  robust
• Incorporate rainfall distribution variables (CV,
  S) within the year (not done originally because
  of poor correlation within Base Period)
• More detailed rainfall data throughout the Basin.
  The three gauge rainfall network may not
  adequately represent basin-wide rainfall, and
  Base Period records are limited for expanding
  network.
• Account for system changes (measurements and
  operation) following STA-5 to differentiate
  landowners contribution.

13
Have changes to climate and/or the District
facilities affected the basin annual TP loads?
Relationships have not been developed for these
components, but could be accounted for in the
Rule, if justified.
14
Compliance Methodology Concepts
15
Technical Working Group Update

• Technical Working Groups first meeting was held
  9/27 at SFWMD HQ in West Palm Beach (announced
  through general workshop mailing)
• Participants included District Staff, FDACS,
  UF-IFAS, Seminole Tribe of Florida
• Introduction of preliminary alternatives for
  basin-level compliance methodologies
• District consultant is conducting a preliminary
  assessment of a variety of methodologies for
  applicability to C-139 basin compliance
• Further analysis will be performed on a narrowed
  set of alternatives

16
Technical Working Group Schedule

• October 25 Initial alternative review results
  presentation of alternatives for further analysis
• November 9 Sub-regional farm-level compliance
  methodology
• November 27 Draft alternative analysis report
  for basin compliance methodology presentation
• December 20 Alternative analysis report comment
  responses and discussion
• Web Board address
• http//webboard.sfwmd.gov/?boardIDC-139.Basin.TWG

17
Water Quality MonitoringJohn Moorman, Staff
Environmental Scientist, Water Quality Monitoring
Division
18
Field QA/QC

• South Florida Water Management District

19
Quality System

• Described in the Quality Management Plan
• Overseen by the QA administrator
• Implemented by the Lab and Field QAOs
• Takes the form of Quality Manuals and Standard
  Operating Procedures (SOPs) that direct Quality
  Assurance Activities

20

Quality System Elements

• A formalized training program for all personnel
  involved in the collection of environmental data
• A systematic planning and implementation process
• Standard operating procedures for key processes
  and/or tasks
• Project-specific quality documentation
• Project and data assessments (e.g. audits).

21
What is our Goal?

• Representativeness - the degree to which sample
  data accurately and precisely describe the
  characteristics of a population of samples,
  parameter variations at a sampling point, or
  environmental condition.

22
How do we get there?

• Training and periodic auditing of sample
  collection personnel
• Sampling locations are selected based on body of
  water in question

23
How do we get there? (cont.)

• Samples are collected at the station unless
  sample would not be representative of the water
  body
• Samples collected at 0.5m depth or half depth if
  TDepth is between 1m and 0.1m

24
How do we get there? (cont.)

• Sample rejection criteria are specified in the
  Quality Manual
• These criteria are applied to each sample
  collected

25
SFWMD Laboratory

• Maintains National Certification (NELAC)
• Participates in statewide Round Robin program for
  TP
• Data Validation Section verifies data meet strict
  QA/QC criteria

26
Questions?
27
Preliminary BMP and Permit Revisions Jose
Gomez,Engineering Specialist 3, Everglades
Regulation Division
28
Proposed Rule Changes

• The proposed changes to the Rule have been
  developed based on previous public workshop input
  
• These preliminary changes are conceptual
• There is example draft language that will be
  presented, but this draft language is preliminary
• Based on the input given at this workshop, the
  District will proceed with writing a Draft of
  sections of the Rule

29
Proposed Changes Procedural

• Definitions and Miscellaneous Language
• Recognition of Adaptive Management
• 40E-63.400(4) This Program requires landowners
  to reduce phosphorus discharges from the C-139
  Basin, and in conjunction with the Stormwater
  Treatment Areas (STAs), especially STA-5,
  provides a sound basis for the State of Floridas
  long-term cleanup and restoration objectives for
  the Everglades. It is recognized that achieving
  phosphorus water quality standards will involve
  an adaptive management approach, whereby best
  available information is used to identify and
  implement incremental optimization measures for
  further phosphorus reduction.

Draft text is meant to show concepts that are
being proposed as rule amendments. The text is
preliminary and subject to change.
30
Proposed Changes Procedural

• Definitions and Miscellaneous Language
• 40E-63.402(1) Definitions
• C-139 Basin means those lands described in the
  EFA, Section 373.4592(16), F.S. or any other
  lands that discharge to water bodies that make
  connection to Works of the District as described
  in Rule 40E-63.401(1).

Draft text is meant to show concepts that are
being proposed as rule amendments. The text is
preliminary and subject to change.
31
Proposed Changes Procedural

• Definitions and Miscellaneous Language
• Definition of Comprehensive BMP Plan
• 40E-63.402(12) Definitions
• Comprehensive BMP Plan means BMP plans that
  incorporate a balanced approach to reducing
  phosphorus using practices that address
  concentration and flow. This can be accomplished
  by choosing BMPs from applicable BMP categories.
  Examples of BMP categories applicable to the
  C-139 Basin are Nutrient Control Practices, Water
  Management Practices, Particulate Matter and
  Sediment Controls, and Pasture Management found
  in Appendix B1.

Draft text is meant to show concepts that are
being proposed as rule amendments. The text is
preliminary and subject to change.
32
Proposed Changes Procedural

• Definitions and Miscellaneous Language
• Definition of BMP Optimization
• 40E-63.402(13) Definitions
• BMP Optimization means improving or maximizing
  the effectiveness of BMPs to reduce phosphorus in
  discharges to achieve compliance with the levels
  required in the Rule.

Draft text is meant to show concepts that are
being proposed as rule amendments. The text is
preliminary and subject to change.
33
Procedural

• Permit Types
• Permit Types under Current Rule
• No Notice General Permits
• Areas exempt from Agricultural Privilege Tax and
  served by an approved and operational surface
  water reservoir (Currently two covering 11,840
  acres)
• General Permits
• All issued permits in C-139 Basin (32)
• Applicable for single entity, selected BMPs
  described in the Rule (Appendix B-1), and elected
  not to monitor at the farm level.
• Individual permits
• None currently issued
• More than one permittee. Alternative BMPs.
• Optional farm-level monitoring

34
Proposed Changes Procedural

• Permit Types
• Eliminate No Notice General Permits and
  Individual Permits
• One Permit Type General Permit
• All areas currently under No Notice General
  Permits will be required to apply for a General
  Permit

35
Proposed Changes Procedural

• Permit Types
• General Permits will allow the following
• Co-permittees
• Demonstration Project or BMPs not in Appendix B-1
• Other BMP technical sources as long as they meet
  Rule Basis of Review
• Optional Discharge Monitoring Plan
• Application fees will remain the same
• Addition of Letter Modification option with a
  0 fee for changes to permit that will improve
  the BMP Plan or to participate in BMP
  Demonstration Projects.

36
Proposed Changes Source Controls

• Elimination of Increasing Levels of
  Implementation
• Require Comprehensive BMP Plans
• Require BMP Optimization if Basin is
  out-of-compliance (not every year)
• Development of paths that can be used towards BMP
  Optimization
• Regulatory incentives for BMP Demonstration
  Projects and Monitoring of BMP Effectiveness
  (e.g., meets requirements of optimization)

37
Proposed Changes Source Controls

• Comprehensive BMP Plans

38
Proposed Changes Source Controls

• Comprehensive BMP Plans

Or Customized BMP plan with adequate technical
documentation
39
Proposed Changes Source Controls

• BMP Optimization

Targeted on types of phosphorus, Optimal
practices are refined upon documentation and
based on technical data, site effectiveness is
verified
Targeted on TP, Documentation is developed to
improve practices, Optimal implementation methods
based on technical Data, Site specific
effectiveness assumed
General water quality benefits Basic
documentation Some technical data supporting
implementation methods, Site specific
effectiveness assumed
Not a BMP
Practices unrelated to water quality No
documentation Not based on technical Data
Site-specific Effectiveness Unknown
OPTIMIZATION
40
BMP Optimization
Soil test taken with P levels carefully
considered soil lab results with recommendation
based on site specific data P app based on site
specific crop-yield response curves and field
specific Not applying any excess P eliminates
movement

• Example Soil Testing
• Avoid excess nutrient application by determining
  P requirements of soil and follow standard
  recommendations for application rates (crop
  specific).

Soil test taken and P is specifically considered
soil lab results with recommendation P app based
on crop-yield response curves and field specific
Movement of excess P is reduced by not applying
excess
Soil test taken and P is considered soil lab
results available with recommendations P app
based on some sound science and data Movement of
excess P is a consideration
Not a BMP
OPTIMIZATION
Soil test taken but P is not targeted soil lab
results available with no recommendations P app
based not based on science Movement of excess P
not considered
41
BMP Optimization

• Example Detention Reservoirs

Inflow/outflow arranged to maximize flow path,
maintenance provided to keep reservoir operating
ideally residence time is maximized
Inflow/outflow arranged to improve flow path
regular maintenance good residence time
Not a BMP
Some consideration to inflow/outflow locations to
maximize flow path Provides some maintenance
adequate residence time
Inflow/Outflow ineffective and excessive inflows
Minimal maintenance limited residence time
OPTIMIZATION
42
Proposed Changes Source Controls
Performed on a defined schedule using only
mechanical harvesting Excellent documentation
kept removal only occurs during no flow
conditions and plant material is placed adequate
distance from canal

• Example Aquatic Weed Control

Performed on a regular basis using herbicides/
mechanical harvesting as required good
documentation kept care is taken so that
removal occurs during no flow conditions and
plant material is removed from canal
Not a BMP
Performed on seasonal basis using herbicides
Required documentation kept Timing of spraying
is considered
Performed as needed to improve canal flow using
herbicides only Minimal documentation, Timing of
spraying not considered, Generate P floc
OPTIMIZATION
43
BMP Demonstration and Optimization

• BMP Demonstration and BMP Effectiveness
• Provide BMP credit for participation
• Grant funds would be available
• Monitoring of BMPs
• Technical data acquired from demonstration
  projects would be used to optimize BMPs

44
BMP Workgroup

• Workgroup to evaluate current list of BMPs
• Evaluate new BMPs to add to list
• Determine optimization paths for BMPs
• Evaluate additional BMP optimization
  opportunities
• To be scheduled, first external meeting in mid to
  late October

45
Considering Land Practice Changes

• Options
• Can use process similar to one used in the Lake
  Okeechobee Watershed
• Changes in land use must be evaluated to
  determine if project will result in a net
  phosphorus input increase
• Other Options
• Develop a new methodology to evaluate

46
Public Comment/Discussion