Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Integrated Report 2008 Report and List Update Process and Schedule Bruce Gwynne Environmental Scientist.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Water Quality Standards at Caddo Lake Environmental Flows Workshop Planning Meeting May 2007.
Advertisements

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection Patrick Campbell - March 17, 2009.
Integrated State-Federal Partnership for Aquatic Resource Monitoring in the United States Anthony (Tony) R. Olsen USEPA NHEERL Western Ecology Division.
Defining Water Quality The Standard-Setting Process Chapter 15 © 2007 Thomson Learning/South-WesternThomas and Callan, Environmental Economics.
Prioritization Workgroup Summary. Workgroup Topics Nutrient results What is a watershed? What is a TMDL? Prioritization methods Basin framework and management.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality TMDLs 101 An Explanation of the Federal Clean Water Act’s TMDL Requirements and How they Impact Carter Lake.
Stream Monitoring in Loudoun County David Ward, Water Resources Engineer Department of Building and Development, Department of Building and Development,
IDEM TMDL 101 Everything you wanted to know about Total Maximum Daily Loads.
Issues and Recommendations Workgroup January 14, 2014.
Montana’s 2007 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Robert Ray MT Dept Environmental Quality.
2009 Performance Assessment Member Representatives Committee Meeting October 28, 2008.
1 State Water Quality Assessments Under the Clean Water Act Charles Spooner Assessment and Watershed Protection Division Monitoring Branch National Water.
April 22, 2005Chester Creek Watershed TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load Chester Creek University Lake & Westchester Lagoon Alaska Department of Environmental.
Naples Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan
Alabama’s Water Quality Assessment and Listing Methodology ADEM QA Workshop February 13, 2006.
2010 Water Quality Assessment MARINE WATER Presented by Mike Herold.
Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute. Review: Clean Water Act Goal of CWA is to restore and maintain water quality suitable for the “protection.
1/6/2003ESA Ecological Vision Committee Building the scientific foundation for sound environmental decisions U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office.
Item No. 13 Recommendation to the State Water Resources Control Board Regarding the Section 303(d) List Lahontan Water Board June 19, 2014 Carly Nilson.
Department of the Environment Overview of Water Quality Data Used by MDE and Water Quality Parameters Timothy Fox MDE, Science Service Administration Wednesday.
GIS Tools for Watershed Delineation Public Policy Perspectives Teaching Public Policy in the Earth Sciences April 21, 2006 Gary Coutu Department of Geography.
Georeferencing Water Quality Assessments to NHDPlus Catchments A New Approach to Evaluating and Measuring Progress in Surface Water Quality DWANE YOUNG,
Pacific Fishery Management Council Jurisdiction –3 miles to 200 miles –4 states (includes Idaho) Members -- appointed –State governments –Federal Agencies.
Total Maximum Daily Loads in MS4 Storm Water Programs.
Overview of WQ Standards Rule & WQ Assessment 303(d) LIst 1 Susan Braley Water Quality Program
1 ATTAINS: A Gateway to State-Reported Water Quality Information Webcast Sponsored by EPA’s Watershed Academy June 18, 2008, 11:30am-1:30pm EST Shera Bender,
Federal Clean Water Act Monitoring and assessments completed statewide Standards not met? Section 303 (d) requires placing the water body on the “Impaired.
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program (SWQM)
Clean Beaches Initiative Proposition 50 Draft Guidelines.
Water Quality Standards, TMDLs and Bioassessment Tom Porta, P.E. Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Bureau of Water Quality Planning.
Update on Wyoming Draft 303(d) List and Changes to Watershed Planning.
Restoring VA Waters the TMDL Way Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 3.
Upper Ocklawaha River DRAFT Basin Management Action Plan For the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) Adopted by the Florida Department.
Eric Agnew Environmental Regulations February 15, 2006.
2011 Upper Basin Stakeholder Forum Nueces River Authority Feb 16, 2011 – Uvalde Feb 23, 2011 – Corpus Christi.
- DCWAC - Where we’ve come from, Where we are, Where we’re headed.
1 Management of Non-Point Source Pollution CE 296B Department of Civil Engineering California State University, Sacramento Lecture #4, February 10, 1998.
Staci Goodwin Senior TMDL Project Manager Office of Water Quality
Region 2000 Local Government Council 828 Main Street, 12th Floor Lynchburg, VA March 4, :30 – 8:30 p.m.
Regional Water Availability Rulemaking Chip Merriam Water Resources Advisory Commission February 8, 2007 Chip Merriam Water Resources Advisory Commission.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
Maryland Association of Counties Conference August 12, 2009 Bob Koroncai USEPA Region III The Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
Fecal Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) in 4 Austin Watersheds Presented to the City of Austin Environmental Board November 7, 2012.
Overview of the Total Maximum Daily Load Program.
Protecting Alabama’s Water Resources “It’s A Data Driven Process” Presented by: Chris Johnson Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) 2006.
California Sediment Quality Advisory Committee Meeting SWRCB Program to Develop Sediment Quality Objectives for Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California.
TMDL for Diazinon in Chollas Creek Watershed TMDL for Diazinon in Chollas Creek Watershed Linda Pardy (858) Jimmy.
Watershed Monitoring *Background Watershed Stewardship Plan-2004 Gap Projects IRWMP-Dec Policies SFEI study-2007 Joint TC/WC meeting-June 2010 *Proposed.
IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE Rice County Local Water Management Plan BOARD PRESENTATION JUNE 16, 2015.
1 Staff Public Workshops Fall 2011 Policy for Siting, Design, Operation and Management of Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems San Luis Obispo: October.
Update for the Citizens Advisory Committee February 22, 2017
Arkansas Dept. of Environmental Quality Regulation No
GREAT BAY and NEW HAMPSHIRE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
303(d) List Methodology Jeff Manning
Shirley Birosik Environmental Specialist
Water Quality Trading – Utah Perspective
Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards Proposed Rulemaking
The Basin–Wide Approach New 303(D) Vision
North Dakota’s Alternative Plans
The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program in Illinois
Watershed Literacy & Engagement
ADEQ Approaches to the Assessment Methodology
Review of 20 Years of UOWN Data Trouble-Spots and Trends Todd Rasmussen UGA Hydrology & Water Resources.
Salt/Nutrient Management Plans
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Implementation of Water Quality Standards and the WQ Based Approach
Information Item- Monterey Coastkeeper v. SWRCB
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Agricultural Order 4.0 Discussion
Presentation transcript:

Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Integrated Report 2008 Report and List Update Process and Schedule Bruce Gwynne Environmental Scientist North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board February 7, 2007

Table of Contents 305(b) Assessment Report Integrated Report 303(d) list What happens when a waterbody is placed on the 303(d) list 303(d) List Changes (d)/305(b) update process

What is the 305(b) Assessment Report? Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires states to assess and report on the condition of waters and their beneficial uses Required every two years, in April of even numbered years, as a submission to USEPA for biennial report to Congress Identifies what is known about state waters, and where information gaps exist Includes 303(d) list of impaired waters

What is the Integrated Report? Assessment of State waters into five categories Category 1: All designated uses are supported, no use is threatened; Category 2: Available data and/or information indicate that some, but not all of the designated uses are supported; Category 3: There is insufficient available data and/or information to make a use support determination;

What is the Integrated Report? (continued) Category 4: Available data and/or information indicate that at least one designated use is not being supported or is threatened, but a TMDL is not needed; Category 5: Available data and/or information indicate that at least one designated use is not being supported or is threatened, and a TMDL is needed. rt/2006irg-report.pdf

What is the 303(d) list? Waters identified as category 4 or category 5 under 305(b) assessment are candidates for 303(d) listing Section 303(d) of Clean Water Act requires States to identify impaired waterbodies

What is the 303(d) list? (continued) “Impaired” means water quality objectives are not being met, or beneficial uses are not being supported The pollutant or stressor causing impairment must be identified

What is included on the 303(d) list? Name of impaired waterbody Pollutant or stressor causing impairment Source of pollutant/stressor Priority and schedule for developing pollution control plan

What happens when a waterbody is placed on the 303(d) list? Trigger development of a pollution control plan, called a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) TMDL serves as means to attain and maintain water quality standards

How often is the list updated? The 303(d) list is typically updated every two years in conjunction with 305(b) Report on Water Quality The list was last updated in 2006

303(d) List Changes- De-listings WaterbodyPollutant Salmon RiverNutrients Lost River HATemperature Upper Lost River HSANutrients Guerneville HAS (Russian River)Turbidity

WaterbodyPollutant Noyo RiverTemperature Albion RiverTemperature Pudding CreekTemperature Laguna de Santa RosaMercury Claire Engle (Trinity) LakeMercury Trinity River, East ForkMercury Klamath Glen HSASediment/siltation Humboldt BayDioxin Bodega HarborExotic Species/crabs Pocket Canyon Creek (Russian River)pH Big Sulphur Creek (Russian River)Conductivity 303(d) List Changes- New listings

(d)/305(b) Update

Regional Board lead Integrated report Standardized guidance from SWRCB (d)/305(b) update process

Public Notice of statewide 90-day public solicitation of water quality information distributed by SWRCB – December 2006 Staff reviews, compiles and summarizes public solicitation and in-house information – Spring (d)/305(b) update process (continued)

Staff presents draft recommended list to Board and receives Board input – Summer 2007 Staff presents recommended list as resolution of the Board – Fall 2007 Staff forwards Board recommendation to SWRCB – Fall (d)/305(b) update process (continued)

QUESTIONS?