Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute. Review: Clean Water Act Goal of CWA is to restore...
-
Upload
alexandrina-lindsey -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute. Review: Clean Water Act Goal of CWA is to restore...
Review of Alternatives for Addressing Water Quality
Impairments in the Copano Bay Watershed
Allen BertholdTexas Water Resources Institute
Review: Clean Water ActGoal 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 identifiedThose 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 stakeholdersTypically 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 bodyDeveloped by the local stakeholders and meets EPA 9
Key ElementsTypically a 10-15 year plan of activitiesMakes 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-PlansTMDL and TMDL I-Plan WPPs
Results in automatic removal from 303(d) list
Can result in removal from 303(d) list though 4b process
TMDL approved by State and EPATMDL 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-Plan WPPs
Begin forming/working with workgroups immediately
Grant proposal developed/submitted and planning would begin Sept. 2013 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, PhDTexas Water Resources [email protected]
Allen BertholdTexas Water Resources [email protected]