Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

North Canadian River Oklahoma River Shell Creek Draft TMDLs For Bacteria 2 nd PUBLIC MEETING September 12, 2006.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "North Canadian River Oklahoma River Shell Creek Draft TMDLs For Bacteria 2 nd PUBLIC MEETING September 12, 2006."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 North Canadian River Oklahoma River Shell Creek Draft TMDLs For Bacteria 2 nd PUBLIC MEETING September 12, 2006

3 AGENDA Welcome / Introductions Recap Current Studies Revisions in Version 2 Issues Raised To Date NPS Watershed Plans (OCC) Questions Comments

4 Review Current Studies North Canadian River: Canton Dam to Yukon, including Shell Creek Prepared by Parsons And DEQ North Canadian River & Oklahoma River: Yukon to Dale Prepared by ACOG Presented by Paul Yue

5

6 NC02 NC05 NC03 NC04 NC08 NC06 NC07 NC01 Shell Crk Yukon Lake Overholser HW 81 Del City Midwest City Dale Upstream of OKC discharge XXX Rd

7 Monitoring Data If more than 10% of data above the standards Problem North Canadian River (NC01) FC – 33% exceed E-Coli – 13% exceed Enterococci – 94% exceed

8 North Canadian River: Canton Dam to Yukon, including Shell Creek Prepared by Parsons and DEQ

9 North Canadian River Enterococci - 89% Reduction

10 Shell Creek Fecal Coliform - 92% Reduction

11 REDUCTION RATES (Parsons Report) StreamsFecal Coliform E ColiEnterococci N Canadian River 68%48%89% Shell Creek92%62%90%

12 North Canadian River & Oklahoma River: Yukon to Dale Prepared by ACOG

13 North Canadian River (ACOG) EL RENO STATION ENTEROCOCCI REDUCTION GOAL: 95.6%

14 REDUCTION RATES (ACOG Report) SitesFecal ColiformE. ColiEnterococci NC0192.4%None95.6% NC0253.1%None95.9% NC0370.7%None81.0% NC0494.0%63.0%99.3% NC0598.2%63.8%99.7% NC06None 87.7% NC07None 4.9% NC0818.3%None83.2%

15 Proposed Revisions In Version 2

16 Demonstrate progress toward meeting the reduction goals Demonstrate progress toward attainment of water quality standards What Is Necessary To Comply With The TMDL ? Clarifications added

17 Permitted MS4 stormwater discharges are considered point sources. Since these sources are associated with wet weather events, they are assigned the same pathogen reduction goals as the nonpoint source load allocations. These reduction goals apply only to the pathogen contribution from within the MS4. Permitted stormwater dischargers are not expected or required to produce the entire pathogen loading reduction specified in this TMDL. Do Stormwater Dischargers Have To Produce The Entire Reduction Required By The TMDL ?

18 The suitability of the current criteria for pathogens and the beneficial uses of the receiving stream should be reviewed. Are Current Water Quality Standards Appropriate ?

19 3 Approaches To WQS Revisions Remove The Use Requires a Use Attainability Analysis Existing Uses Cannot Be Removed Are Current Water Quality Standards Appropriate ?

20 3 Approaches To WQS Revisions Modify Application Of The Criteria Exemption For High Flows Allowance For Natural Conditions Establish A Subcategory Of The Use Special Provision For Urban Areas Are Current Water Quality Standards Appropriate ?

21 3 Approaches To WQS Revisions Revise The Numeric Criteria Remove Indicator(s) Change The Numeric Values Risk-Based Approaches Are Current Water Quality Standards Appropriate ?

22 Unless or until the water quality standards are revised and approved by EPA, Federal rules require that this TMDL must be based on attainment of the current standards. If revisions to the pathogen standards are approved in the future, the reductions specified in this TMDL will be re-evaluated. Are Current Water Quality Standards Appropriate ?

23 Appendix F Stormwater Permit Provisions Yukon Mustang Bethany Warr Acres Moore Del City Midwest City Oklahoma City Spencer Nicoma Park Choctaw ODOT OTA Tinker AFB

24 Appendix F Stormwater Permit Provisions OKR04 Requirements Ensure that discharges that would cause or contribute to any water quality standards exceedance will not occur Discharge of a pollutant into any water for which a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for that pollutant has been either established or approved by the DEQ or EPA is prohibited, unless your discharge is consistent with that TMDL

25 Appendix F Stormwater Permit Provisions 1. Develop A Bacteria Reduction Plan 2. Develop Or Participate In A Bacteria Monitoring Program 3. Annual Reporting Compliance with the following provisions will constitute compliance with the requirements of this TMDL.

26 Appendix F Stormwater Permit Provisions 1. Develop A Bacteria Reduction Plan Consider ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms Evaluate the existing SWMP Educational programs Implement BMPs Modifications to the dry weather field screening and illicit discharge detection and elimination program Periodic evaluation of effectiveness Ensure progress toward attainment of water quality standards. Implementation schedule (2 years)

27 Appendix F Stormwater Permit Provisions 2. Develop Or Participate In A Bacteria Monitoring Program Establish the effectiveness of the selected BMPs Demonstrate progress toward the reduction goals TMDL monitoring schedule or commitment to participate in regional program (18 months) Implemented within 2 years

28 Appendix F Stormwater Permit Provisions 3. Annual Reporting Include a TMDL implementation report in the annual report. Status and actions taken to implement the TMDL

29 Appendix F CAFO Permit Provisions These NPDES permits are issued by EPA CAFO permits in the watershed and their management plans must be reviewed Further actions necessary to reduce bacteria loads and achieve progress toward meeting the reduction goals must be implemented Forward to EPA for follow up

30 Issues Raised To Date

31 Monitoring Data

32

33

34 Applicability Of The Load Duration Curve Model Load Duration Curve (LDC) Method is approved by EPA LDC – a proven method for TMDL development

35

36 Applicability Of The Load Duration Curve Model LDC – used by many states (AR, LA, TX, KS, MO, CA, OH, TN, NC, ND, WI, VA, OR, NJ, IN, …) And EPA

37 Geometric Mean vs Maximum Values Fecal Coliform Impaired = Violate EITHER Test Not Impaired = Pass BOTH Tests E. Coli. And Enterococci Impaired = Violate BOTH Tests Not Impaired = Pass EITHER Test For Impairment determination, use 2-year geometric mean Not 30-day geometric mean (OAC 785:46-15)

38 Bacterial Source Tracking (BST) BST is considered by the experts to still have great uncertainty. In all, fewer than 30%percent of challenge isolates were classified to the correct source-animal species by any method – USGS Report

39 BST Examples Turkey Creek Watershed, OK (2003) by USGS (43% isolates unidentified) Four Mile Run – Northern Virginia (49% isolates unidentified)

40 North Canadian River (ACOG) EL RENO STATION ENTEROCOCCI REDUCTION GOAL: 95.6%

41 REDUCTION RATES ** (ACOG Report) SitesFecal ColiformE. ColiEnterococci NC %31.0 %98.5 % NC %44.0 %98.4 % NC %96.8 %98.7 % NC %None98.7 % NC %None99.1 % NC %None98.8 % NC %None99.9 % NC %None86.5 % ** Re-calculated reduction rates

42 REDUCTION RATES (ACOG Report) SitesFecal ColiformE. ColiEnterococci NC0192.4%None95.6% NC0253.1%None95.9% NC0370.7%None81.0% NC0494.0%63.0%99.3% NC0598.2%63.8%99.7% NC06None 87.7% NC07None 4.9% NC0818.3%None83.2%

43 Nonpoint Sources What Programs Are Available? What Are The Plans For The North Canadian River? Greg Kloxin Oklahoma Conservation Commission

44 What Happens Next ? Comments Accepted Through October 12 Comment Responsiveness Summary Final Draft Submitted For EPA Approval Incorporate In Water Quality Management Plan

45 How To Provide Comments Oral Comments Accepted This Evening By Mail: Dr. Karen Miles Water Quality Division Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 1677 Oklahoma City, OK By Comments Must Be Received By October 12 !

46 QUESTIONS

47 COMMENTS

48 Thank You


Download ppt "North Canadian River Oklahoma River Shell Creek Draft TMDLs For Bacteria 2 nd PUBLIC MEETING September 12, 2006."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google