Element C Management Measures and Critical Areas Brian Fontenot, - - PDF document

11/1/2013 1

Element C Management Measures and Critical Areas

Brian Fontenot, EPA Region6 Watershed Planning Short Course Bandera, Texas September 26, 2012

“A description of the nonpoint source management measures that will need to be implemented to achieve load reductions, and a description of the critical areas in which those measures will be needed to implement this plan.”

What do we need to do? Where do we need to do it?

11/1/2013 2

 Structures or practices that will help control the

pollutant loads to receiving waters

 At Source

 Remove Source  Reduce Contribution

 During Transport

 Removing/reducing pollutant  Slowing transport/delivery

 In Waterbody

 Treatment

 Structural

 built facilities

 capture or treat runoff  discharge the treated water

 Nonstructural

 changes in activities or behavior

 reduce impacts on receiving waters  control pollutants at their source

 Regulatory

 nonpoint sources  point sources

11/1/2013 3

 Where are the critical areas?  What’s in place and is

it working?

 What else is available?  Which measures will address

problems in the critical areas?

 What are the preferred measures for my goals?  Identified in early planning stages  Contribute to water quality

impairments or concerns.

 CWA 303(d) list  State or local priorities

 Affect other priority areas or features such as

 Outstanding Natural Resource Water (ONRW)  High quality waters or aquatic habitat  Endangered or threatened species

• r habitat

 Other areas sensitive to

environmental impacts

11/1/2013 4

Erosion Priority Areas

based on SWAT modeling

11/1/2013 5

 Where are the critical areas?  What’s in place and is

it working?

 What else is available?  Which measures will address

problems in the critical areas?

 What are the preferred measures for my goals?

 Agriculture/Silviculture

 Local Conservation Districts  Agricultural Research Service (ARS)

 Urban Runoff

 State Permitting Authority for NPDES MS4 requirements  Permittee for location of existing management measures

 Wastewater

 State Permitting Authority

11/1/2013 6

 Identify failing or insufficient

management measures

 What was the original goal of the existing measure?  Where are these measures in relation to the water

quality concerns?

 Why are they insufficient to stop/address water quality

problems?

STAKEHOLDER EXISTING PROGRAM / POLICY POLLUTANT ADDRESED County Road Commission

Leave Buffers for grading roads Sediment Assess/manage erosion at stream crossings Follow erosion control practices

Village of Chelsea

Soil erosion controls and stormwater retention requirements- New Development Sediment Detention Ponds Sediment Wastewater Treatment Plant Nutrients Stormwater collectors Nutrients Oil and grease separators Oil grease

Private Sector: Chrysler

Leave Buffers along creek Sediment Switch product use to no or low phosphorus alternatives Nutrients Monitor Bettis Cr. Per NPDES Permit Nutrients Oil-Grease Separators Oils and grease

11/1/2013 7

 Where are the critical areas?  What’s in place and is

it working?

 What else is available?  Which measures will address

problems in the critical areas?

 What are the preferred measures for my goals?  Are the management measures appropriate for the

identified source(s)?

 Are individual site features suitable for incorporating the

practice?

 How effective is the practice at achieving the goals and

loading targets?

 How much does it cost? (compare too)

11/1/2013 8

 Structural:

 Buffer strips,  mulching,  exclusion fencing,  riprap,  sediment  basins,  waste treatment lagoons,  grassed waterways

 Non‐Structural:

 Brush control,  conservation tillage,  nutrient management plans,  rotation grazing,  pesticide management,  residue management

 Structural:

 culverts  cover crops  windrows  road dips

 Non‐Structural:

 education  erosion control plans  fire management  road designs  preharvest planning

11/1/2013 9

 Structural:

 bioretention cells,  green roofs,  stormwater ponds,  sand filters,  vegetated gabions,

 Non‐Structural:

 LID planning,  pollution prevention plans,  public education,  ordinances,  pet waste programs,  erosion control plans.

EPA Management Measures Documents

www.epa.gov/owow/nps/pubs.html

NRCS Field Office Technical Guide

www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/efotg/

State Forestry Guides

http://texasforestservice.tamu.edu http://www.ldaf.state.la.us/

Others

Urban Sources : www.bmpdatabase.org Center for Watershed Protection: www.cwp.org

11/1/2013 10

 State & Local Stormwater Ordinances  State and Local Land Use Ordinances  Regulate NPS, ex. CA requires NOI before irrigation

return flow can be discharged

 NPDES Programs: CAFOs, POTWs  Are the management measures appropriate for the

identified source(s)?

 Are individual site features suitable for incorporating

the practice?

 How effective is the practice at achieving the goals and

loading targets?

 How much does it cost? (compare too)

11/1/2013 11

AFO Ag Industry Urban Disturbed Areas Stream Erosion Management Practice Load Reduction (H,M,L)

☻ ☻

Construction Site Mgt

L

☻

Grazing M

☻ ☻ ☻ ☻

Filter Strip H

☻ ☻ ☻

Detention basin M

☻

Cover Crop H

☻

Gabions H

☻

Street Sweeping L

From Handbook TABLE 11-2 Summary of Selected Models for Simulation of Practices

MODEL Management Practice Evaluation Technique Water Quality Constituents Ann AGNPS Sediment- RUSLE factors Runoff Curve Number Changes Storage Routing Particle Settling Sediment Nutrients Organic Carbon STEPL Sediment – RUSLE factors Runoff Curve Number Changes Simple percent reduction Sediment Nutrients HSPF HSPF infiltration and accumulation factors HSPF erosion factors First order decay Particle Settling Sediments Nutrients SWAT Sediment – MUSLE parameters Infiltration – Curve number parameters Storage routing Particle settling Flow routing Sediment Nutrients Pesticides

11/1/2013 12

From Handbook TABLE 11-1 Selected Models Representation Capabilities

MODEL Types of Practices Considered Strengths Limitations STEPL

Contour farming Filter strips Reduced tillage systems Streambank Stabilization Terracing Forest Road Practices Animal Feedlot Practices Urban / low impact development Easy to use; good for giving quick estimates. Includes most major types of practices. Simplified representation

• f practices using long-

term average %. Developed based on literature information that may not rep all conditions.

Ann AGNPS

Feedlot Management Tillage Management Fertilizer Management Pesticide Management Irrigation Management Strong capabilities for simulating ag. area management. Long-term continuous simulation. Limited urban and structural practice simulation.

HSPF

Agriculture practices Impoundment Buffer Can simulate both area and point management practices. Long-term simulation Land and practice simulation are linked. Weak representation of structural point practices. Requires moderate to high effort to set up.

SWAT

Street Cleaning Tillage Management Pesticide/ Fertilizer Management Grazing & Irrigation Management Filter Strips & Impoundment Strong capabilities for simulating ag area practices. Ability to consider crop rotation. Long-term simulation. Limited urban and structural practice simulation. Texas County: ANGELINA

• 1. Input watershed land use area (ac) and precipitation

(in) 0.908 Water- shed Urban Cropland Pasture land Forest Feedlots Total Annual Rainfall Avg. Rain/Eve nt W1 2400 1000 3000 10000 5 16405 45.56 0.832 W2 1500 2500 3000 12000 3 19003 45.56 0.832

11/1/2013 13

• 2. Input agricultural animals

Water- shed Beef Cattle Dairy Cattle Swine (Hog) Sheep Horse Chicken Turkey Duck # of months manure applied W1 500 2000 3000 100 30000 10000 8 W2 300 1500 2500 20 35000 12000 300 8 Total 800 3500 5500 100 20 65000 22000 300

• 3. Input septic system and illegal direct wastewater discharge data

Watershed

• No. of

Septic Systems Population per Septic System Septic Failure Rate, % Wastewater Direct Discharge, # of People Direct Discharge Reduction, % W1 500 2.43 2 15 W2 350 2.43 2

• 1. BMPs and efficiencies for different pollutants on CROPLAND,

Watershed Cropland N P BOD Sediment BMPs % Area BMP Applied W1 0.0825 0.0675 ND 0.1125 Grass Swales 15 W2 0.1 0.35 34 0.425 Terrace 50

• 2. BMPs and efficiencies for different pollutants on PASTURELAND,

Watershed Pastureland N P BOD Sediment BMPs % Area BMP Applied W1 100 W2 Combined BMPs- 100

• 3. BMPs and efficiencies for different pollutants on FOREST,

Watershed Forest N P BOD Sediment BMPs % Area BMP Applied W1 ND ND ND 0.1775 Grass seeding roads 25 W2 ND ND ND 0.258 Steamside buffer 30

11/1/2013 14

LOADS: NO BMPS

WITH BMPs

Water shed N LOAD (no BMP)

P Load (no BMP) BOD Load (no BMP) Sed. Load (no BMP) N Reduct P Reduct BOD Reduced Sed. Reduct. lb/year lb/year lb/year t/year lb/year lb/year lb/year t/year W1 108603 20351.2 247397 2351.0 3326.0 2251.4 963.0 150.5 W2 98424.3 20873.0 224130 3702.1 15679 6096.7 2051748 1154.8 Total 207,027.4 41224.2 471527 6053.2 19,005 8348.0 2052711. 9 1305.3

Agricultural Management Measures

11/1/2013 15

 Are the management measures appropriate for the

identified source(s)?

 Are individual site features suitable for incorporating

the practice?

 How effective is the practice at achieving the goals and

loading targets?

 How much does it cost?

11/1/2013 16

 Where are the critical areas?  What’s in place and is

it working?

 What else is available?  Which measures will address

problems in the critical areas?

 What are the preferred measures for my goals?

11/1/2013 17

 Develop Screening Criteria  Summarize Results

11/1/2013 18

 Present to Stakeholders  Stakeholder Feedback  Rank Preferences and Make Final Selections

Questions?