1 Questions Addressed What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunities.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
creating a sustainable world The Chesapeake Bay TMDL A Policy Model for Nutrient Pollution Reductions James Noonan October.
Advertisements

Lawyer Creek Steelhead Trout Habitat Improvement Project presented by: Lewis Soil Conservation District.
The Committee and Research – Where are we and where might we be going?
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS for ANTIDEGRADATION
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Reduction Presenter: Keith Noble, Saginaw Bay District Office.
NPDES Phase II in Wake County: Forging A Collaborative Approach to Stormwater Management APWA Conference September 19, 2005.
Stream Corridors Christine Hall Natural Resources Conservation Service North Jersey RC&D Slides 1-12.
When people care problems can be solved. LAKE TAHOE: A CASE STUDY FOR ADDRESSING THE DECLINE OF CLARITY IN A SUB-ALPINE LAKE JOHN REUTER and GEOFF SCHLADOW.
Management Plan: An Overview
Agricultural and Biological Engineering SWFREC, UF/IFAS Immokalee.
Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions Third Generation Watershed Management Plan.
Upper Providence Township Stormwater Management MS4 Program.
Developing Modeling Tools in Support of Nutrient Reduction Policies Randy Mentz Adam Freihoefer, Trip Hook, & Theresa Nelson Water Quality Modeling Technical.
CITY OF SAN MARCOS/TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY 2015 WORK PLAN BUDGETED CONSERVATION MEASURES.
Minnesota Watershed Nitrogen Reduction Planning Tool William Lazarus Department of Applied Economics University of Minnesota David Mulla Department of.
Stormwater Management For Developing Municipalities What Residents Can Do What Towns Can Do.
Introduction To The Highway Runoff Manual This introduction focus on: An overview of the Highway Runoff Manual. The definition of Minimum Requirements.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
Montana’s 2007 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Robert Ray MT Dept Environmental Quality.
Expedited Projects + Innovative Teamwork = Measurable Improvements to the Health of Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Estuaries.
Incorporating the 9-Elements into a WMP Lindsey PhillipsMike Archer Source Water CoordinatorState Lakes Coordinator (402) (402)
Northeast Corridor Greenway Acquisition – Mitigation Feasibility Study Results City Council Workshop June 24, 2014.
Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions Third Generation Watershed Management Plan CAC Meeting 2 - Implementation.
L-THIA Long-Term Hydrologic Impact Assessment Model ….provides relative estimates of change of runoff and non point source pollutants caused due to land.
Introducing Web-Based Decision Tools for Environmental Watershed Management Bernie Engel and Roxanne Mitchell Agricultural & Biological Engineering Purdue.
EEP Watershed Planning Overview August 12, Ecosystem Enhancement Program Nationally recognized, innovative, non-regulatory program formed in July.
The Work of Streams. Erosion Usually happen by streams flowing through their channels and lifting loose particles by abrasion, grinding, and by dissolving.
Determining the effectiveness of best management practices to reduce nutrient loading from cattle grazed pastures in Utah Nicki Devanny Utah State University,
Nonpoint Source Pollution Reductions – Estimating a Tradable Commodity Allen R. Dedrick Associate Deputy Administrator Natural Resources & Sustainable.
1 Lake Tahoe TMDL Forested Upland Source Category Group Load Reduction Analysis Dr. Mark Grismer, UC Davis Michael Hogan & Kevin Drake, Integrated Environmental.
City of New Braunfels Edwards Aquifer and the Habitat Conservation Plan HCP Implementing Committee May 29,
Chesapeake Bay Program Incorporation of Lag Times into the Decision Process Gary Shenk 10/16/12 1.
Northwest hydraulic consultants 2NDNATURE Geosyntec Consultants September 11, 2007 Urban Upland / Groundwater Source Category Group (UGSCG) Overview Presentation.
Water Quality Associated with Urban Runoff: Sources, Emerging Issues and Management Approaches Martha Sutula and Eric Stein Biogeochemistry and Biology.
Morgan and Little Creeks Local Watershed Plan Totten Center, NC Botanical Garden 3 November 2004 Chapel Hill, NC
Nutrient Management in the Urban Landscape Rebecca Kluckhohn, P.E. Watershed Engineer West Metro Water Alliance Forum, May 18 th 2011 W W e n c k Engineers.
Best Management Practices and the Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program Office
Chumstick Creek Salmon Habitat Conditions* Land development, road construction, and other human activities have affected channel migration and sediment.
The Importance of Watershed Modeling for Conservation Policy Or What is an Economist Doing at a SWAT Workshop?
Icicle Creek Salmon Habitat Conditions* Land Development has affected stream channel movement, off channel habitat, and LWD recruitment. Barriers to migration.
Watershed Management Assessment Through Modeling: SALT and CEAP Dr. Claire Baffaut Water Quality Short Course Boone County Extension Office April 12, 2007.
Bassett Creek Water Management Commission Joint Advisory Group Meeting January 23, 2001.
Stormwater Retrofitting: The Art of Opportunity Prepared by the Center for Watershed Protection.
La Moine River Ecosystem Partnership: Organizing for Success Dan Moorehouse & Jeff Boeckler.
Overview of Load Reduction Estimates for Atmospheric Sources of Pollutants Richard Countess Atmospheric Deposition SCG Lead September 10, 2007.
Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,
Critical Loads and Target Loads: Tools for Assessing, Evaluating and Protecting Natural Resources Ellen Porter Deborah Potter, Ph.D. National Park Service.
Timeline Impaired for turbidity on Minnesota’s list of impaired waters (2004) MPCA must complete a study to determine the total maximum daily load (TMDL)
2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.
Clifton Bell, P.E., P.G. Chesapeake Bay Modeling Perspectives for the Regulated Community.
Opportunities for Collaboration on Water- Quality Issues in the Mississippi River Basin Herb Buxton, Office of Water Quality.
Need for Advanced Stormwater Treatment at Lake Tahoe John E. Reuter & Dave Roberts Tahoe TMDL Research Program.
Watershed Stewardship Program Status of Marin County Public Works Watershed Program 11/7/08 11/7/08.
Introduction to Water Quality Trading National Forum On Water Quality Trading July 22-23, 2003 Chicago, Illinois.
Nason Creek Salmon Habitat Conditions* Development, and road building have affected riparian (streamside) habitat, large woody debris and gravel recruitment.
Lake Tahoe Stream Channel Load Reduction and Costs Virginia Mahacek Valley & Mountain Consulting September 2007 Focus Team Workshop 1.
Water Sources & Pollutants FS Unit 5 FCS-FS-5: Students will discuss why water and pH are important factors in food preparation and preservation. C. List.
Gar Creek in Huntersville LID Requirements in Mecklenburg County What Is The Goal? Why Is It Necessary? Where Is It Required? How Does It Work?
Quantifying Reductions of Mass- Failure Frequency and Sediment Loadings from Streambanks using Toe Protection and Other Means Andrew Simon, Natasha Pollen-Bankhead,
Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Management Planning Update Fall 2013.
Sept. 10 and 11, 2007Lake Tahoe TMDL - Phase Two1 Lake Tahoe TMDL Phase Two Fall 2007 Public Participation Series Source Category Group Focus Team Meetings.
What is Stormwater? Direct result of rainfall Recharges groundwater by infiltration Produces “runoff” (excess rainfall after infiltration) May be concentrated.
STORM WATER SOLUTIONS FOR EXISTING URBAN AREAS: IDENTIFYING SITES TO MAXIMIZE RESULTS Jared Bartley, Cuyahoga SWCD September 8, 2011.
Area Plan Overview Public Comments and Area Plan Changes Environmental Analysis Schedule Presentation Overview.
Slide 1 Achieving Effective Conservation in the Upper Mississippi River Basin CEAP —Conservation Effects Assessment Project.
GIS M ETHODOLOGY Swearing Creek Watershed Restoration Plan 8/26/2015 Piedmont Triad Regional Council.
CBP Update: Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL
Test Drive Results and Revisions of the New Stream Restoration Crediting Protocols Bill Stack & Lisa Fraley-McNeal December 2, 2013.
Integrated Reports Classified Use Support Evaluation
The Work of Streams.
Presentation transcript:

1 Questions Addressed What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunities

2 Review Pollutant Reduction Opportunity analysis approach Highlight PRO project findings Discuss planning level implementation recommendations and overall recommended strategy What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

3 Pollution Reduction Opportunity Project Primary Objective: Quantify potential pollutant load reduction opportunities

4 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Analysis Opportunities Quantify potential basin wide solutions Assess cumulative benefits and relative costs Establish basin wide assessment methods Provide foundation for implementation planning

5 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Analysis Limitations Analysis not applicable to project scale Limited to quantifiable actions Emphasis on water quality Limited time, resources, and effectiveness data

6 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Project Team Source Category Groups Atmospheric Deposition Urban Runoff and Groundwater Forest Runoff Stream Channel Erosion Source Category Integration Committee Technical Reviewers Focus Team

7 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunity Development Process Step 1: Pollutant control option selection and screening Step 2: Site scale analysis Treatment Tiers Step 3: Basin-wide extrapolation Pollutant reduction estimates Cost

8 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Atmospheric Deposition Primary Pollutant Sources Mobile Emissions (Nitrogen) Dust (Fine Sediment)

9 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Atmospheric Deposition Pollutant Control Opportunities Emissions – control Nitrogen Reduce VMT: incentives and transit Dust control – reduce Fine Sediment Efficient roadway sweeping Switch to deicers Pave or gravel unpaved surfaces

10 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Forest Upland Primary Pollutant Sources Unpaved roads Disturbed areas Forest management

11 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Forest Upland Pollutant Control Opportunities Unpaved roadway BMPs Mulch/till recreation areas Restore legacy roads and trails Advance BMPs for forest management work

12 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Urban & Groundwater Primary Pollutant Sources Impervious surface runoff Erosion Traction abrasives Fertilizers

13 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Urban & Groundwater Pollutant Control Opportunities Source control methods Remove impervious cover Runoff infiltration Storm water treatment Fertilizer management

14 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Stream Channel Erosion Primary Sources Emphasis on bank erosion only Upper Truckee River Ward Creek Blackwood Creek

15 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Stream Channel Erosion Pollutant Control Opportunities Full unconstrained restoration Targeted bank and bed protection A mix to restoration and bank protection

16 What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunity Project Summary Analysis represents average load reductions and costs Basin wide estimates offer relative benefit comparisons Urban Uplands and Atmospheric controls appear to be largest opportunity Forest practices and stream restoration efforts remain important treatments

17 Implementation Scenarios Source Category Group load and cost estimates are the foundation of basin-wide implementation options Three different implementation “scenarios” were developed and presented to Focus Teams and the Pathway Forum Focus Team and Forum feedback helped narrow the options to a single basin- wide recommended strategy

18 Forest Upland Implementation Load reduction opportunities are relatively limited Additional reduction efforts do not appear cost effective Current practices effectively reduce loads What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

19 Forest Upland Implementation Recommendation Restore/maintain roads as planned Revegetate/treat disturbed lands Treat forest soils Achieve ~1% reduction in total fine particle budget Estimated Cost: $120M Capital, $4.5M Annual O&M What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

20 Stream Channel Restoration In-channel sources are small Restoration is cost effective Restoration offers multiple benefits Restoration likely provides additional water quality benefits What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

21 Stream Channel Restoration Recommendation Continue current restoration activities Support monitoring and research Achieve ~2% reduction in total fine particle budget Estimated Cost: $40M Capital What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

22 Atmospheric Deposition Implementation What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Addressing mobile sources does not significantly reduce particle loads Mobile source controls are expensive Good opportunity to reduce particle loads by targeting dust sources

23 Atmospheric Deposition Recommendation Focus on dust control measures Continue VMT reduction efforts Achieve ~5% reduction in total fine particle budget Estimated Cost: $45M Capital, $0.4M Annual O&M What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

24 Urban Runoff and Groundwater Implementation Significant particle reductions can be achieved through innovative practices Pump and treat technologies hold promise Finer scale planning is needed to refine implementation approach What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

25 Urban Runoff and Groundwater Recommendation Continue to implement known technologies Move toward more innovative practices and intensive operations and maintenance Achieve ~25% reduction in total fine particle budget Estimated Cost: $1.3B Capital, $6M Annual O&M What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

26 Recommended Strategy Summary Options to meet clarity challenge are few Implementation approach emphasizes cost effective measures to reduce atmospheric dust sources Innovative measures will be needed to achieve necessary particle load reductions from urban areas Finer scale jurisdiction and/or subwatershed planning is needed to refine actual implementation options and expected load reductions

27 Charting a course to Clarity

28 Time Sequence - Move Forward & Innovate 28 What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

29 The Clarity Challenge: Reverse clarity decline and measurably improve clarity XX METERSFEET standard Existing Condition 1st Clarity Challenge Year

30 Treatment Tiers What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Represent different levels of effort and cost 3 tiers for each source category Each tier is unique Several exceptions

31 Tiers : Atmospheric Deposition What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Tier 1: baseline – no reduction calculated Tier 2: reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by 10% Tier 3: reduce VMT by 25% and increase stationary source controls Cost offsets

32 Tiers : Urban runoff and groundwater What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Tier 1: enhanced version of the EIP Tier 2: advanced practices, applied more aggressively in a project area Tier 3: Pump and treat system complemented by advanced practices

33 Tiers : Forest runoff What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Tier 1: surface treatments and (currently) required management practices Tier 2: mulch treatments and full management practices Tier 3: tilling and full restoration to “native” conditions

34 Tiers : Stream channel erosion What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Tier 1: full restoration unconstrained Tier 2: mix of restoration and stabilization, constraints considered Tier 3: bank stabilization, no floodplain reconnection

35 What about impervious coverage? Approx. 2% increase in particle loading at full build out under current rules Development under current regulations helps control pollutants

36 What about impervious coverage? An increase or decrease in allowable coverage Changing impervious cover significantly affects fine particle loading Reducing coverage presents load reduction opportunity 36 What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?

37 Estimated Potential Load Reductions 37

38 Estimated Potential Costs 38

39 Combined Load Reductions and Costs 39

40 PCO Concepts Screening Process Screened PCOs PCO Grouping Process Treatment Tiers A A B C A B C Settings Extrapolation Process GIS Models Step 1: PCO Evaluation Step 2: Site-Scale Analysis Step 3: Basin-Wide Analysis Nitrogen Reduction Table Sediment Reduction Table Phosphorus Reduction Table Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Load Tables Cost Tables Combined Results Tables Total 20 Year Cost Table Capital Cost Table O & M Cost Table Cost- Effectiveness Table PCO Concepts Screening Process

41 PCO Concepts Screening Process PCO Grouping Process Treatment Tiers A A B C A B C Settings Extrapolation Process GIS Models Step 1: PCO Evaluation Step 2: Site-Scale Analysis Step 3: Basin-Wide Analysis Nitrogen Reduction Table Sediment Reduction Table Phosphorus Reduction Table Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Load Tables Cost Tables Combined Results Tables Total 20 Year Cost Table Capital Cost Table O & M Cost Table Cost- Effectiveness Table PCO Concepts Screening Process Screened PCOs

42 PCO Concepts Screening Process PCO Grouping Process Treatment Tiers A A B C A B C Settings Extrapolation Process GIS Models Step 1: PCO Evaluation Step 2: Site-Scale Analysis Step 3: Basin-Wide Analysis Nitrogen Reduction Table Sediment Reduction Table Phosphorus Reduction Table Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Load Tables Cost Tables Combined Results Tables Total 20 Year Cost Table Capital Cost Table O & M Cost Table Cost- Effectiveness Table PCO Concepts Screening Process Screened PCOs

43 Implementation Scenario Summary What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?