Photo: Layne Knoche Key P Points Overview of Illinois NLRS Gulf - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
photo layne knoche key p points
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Photo: Layne Knoche Key P Points Overview of Illinois NLRS Gulf - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 01, 2024 12 likes •673 views

Photo: Layne Knoche Key P Points Overview of Illinois NLRS Gulf Hypoxia Nutrient Strategy Framework Illinois Process Science Assessment Policy Workgroup Priorities & Approach Photo: C. Eliana Brown

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Photo: Layne Knoche

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Key P Points

  • Overview of Illinois NLRS
  • Gulf Hypoxia
  • Nutrient Strategy Framework
  • Illinois Process
  • Science Assessment
  • Policy Workgroup
  • Priorities & Approach
  • Implementation of NLRS
  • 2019 Biennial Report

Photo: C. Eliana Brown

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Gulf H f Hypoxia ia T Task F For

  • rce

ce S Stu tudy

GOAL:

  • Reduce Hypoxic Zone to 5,000 km2 (1,930 mi2)
  • Reduce Nutrient Loading to Gulf of Mexico
  • Total Phosphorus and Total Nitrogen 45%
slide-4
SLIDE 4
  • 1. Prioritize watersheds for nitrogen and phosphorus loading reductions
  • 2. Set watershed load reduction goals based upon best available information
  • 3. Ensure effectiveness of point source permits in priority sub-watersheds
  • 4. Agricultural Areas
  • 5. Stormwater (non-MS4) and Septic Systems
  • 6. Accountability and verification measures
  • 7. Annual reporting of implementation and biennial reporting of load reductions
  • 8. Develop work plan and schedule for numeric nutrient criteria development

US USEPA N A Nutr trien ient S Strategy E Elem emen ents ts

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Illin inois is Nutrient Los Loss Reduction St Strategy

NLRS REPORT RELEASED JULY 2015

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Trevor Sample Illinois EPA

GOALS Establishes 45% Reduction of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Interim Milestone—2025 25% Reduction in Phosphorus Loads 15% Reduction in Nitrogen Loads Illin inois is N Nutrie ient Los Loss Red educt ctio ion S Str trategy

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Trevor Sample Illinois EPA

Point Sources

(wastewater treatment facilities)

Urban Stormwater Agriculture nonpoint sources

Photo: MWRDGC Photo: C. Eliana Brown Photo: NRCS

Illin inois is N Nutrie ient Los Loss Red educt ctio ion S Str trategy

Addresses nutrient loads from:

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Illin inois is N NLR LRS S Sci cience A Asses essment

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Illin inois is N NLR LRS S Sci cience A Asses essment

slide-10
SLIDE 10

NLRS I Implementati tion R Recom

  • mmendati

tion

  • ns:

Agriculture N Nonpoint S Source

Practice Type Nitrate Total Phosphorus

In Field Practices Nitrogen Management (MRTN, Inhibitors, Split Applications) Cover Crops Reduced Tillage (no-till, strip till) Nutrient Management Cover Crops Edge of Field Practices Woodchip Bioreactors Stream Buffers (non-tile drained land) Constructed Wetlands Stream Buffers Land Use Change Perennial/Energy Crops Perennial/Energy Crops

slide-11
SLIDE 11

NLRS I Implementati tion R Recom

  • mmendati

tion

  • ns:

Ur Urban S Stor

  • rmwater
  • Municipal Separate Storm

Sewer System (MS4) Permits

  • Prioritize Green

Infrastructure

  • Technical and Financial

Assistance for Green Infrastructure

  • Urban Streambank

Stabilization and Restoration

  • Encourage Stormwater

Collaboratives

Photo: C. Eliana Brown

slide-12
SLIDE 12

NLRS I Implementati tion R Recom

  • mmendati

tion

  • ns:

Poi

  • int S

Sources

  • National P

Pollutant D Discharge E Elimination S System ( (NPDES) P Permits

  • Total Phosphorus limits for major (> 1 MGD) wastewater treatment

facilities—New or expanded facility or discharge to an impaired water

  • Require Feasibility and Optimization studies for nutrient removal
  • Develop N

Nutrient A Assessment R Reduction P Plan ans

  • Facility that discharges to an impaired waterbody or waterbody at risk
  • f eutrophication
  • Meet total phosphorus concentration limit of 0.5mg/L or lower
  • Determine activities needed to address eutrophication impairment
  • Schedule of implementation
  • Encourage U

Urban W Watershed P Planning G Groups

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Prioritized by:

  • Total loads (N or P)
  • Local water quality concerns
  • Active watershed plans

NLRS P Priority ty W Water ershed eds

slide-14
SLIDE 14

NLR LRS C Com

  • mmit

ittee S Str truct cture

  • Policy Working Group
  • Communications Subgroup
  • Agriculture Water Quality Partnership Forum
  • Technical Subgroup
  • Urban Stormwater Working Group
  • Education Subgroup
  • Tracking Subgroup
  • Performance Benchmark Working Group
  • Nutrient Monitoring Council
  • Nutrient Science Advisory Committee

(Has completed its objective and no longer meets)

Photo: Kate Gardiner

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Illinois N NLRS P Policy cy W Working Gr Grou

  • up P

Parti tici cipants ts

Environmen ent/ t/Conser ervati tion Agriculture Poi

  • int S

Sou

  • urce

Governmen ent Sto tormwater ter a and Public W Water er S Supply

BNWRD

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Bienni nial al R Reports

Every two years a Biennial Report will be written to document progress of implementing the NLRS.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Tracki king M Meas asur ures

Biennial Reports are structured to report data on these tracking measures by each sector.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

2019 2019 Bi Biennial Report rt

(2017 – 2018 Repor

  • rting Y

g Years)

Overview

slide-19
SLIDE 19
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Statewide Nutrient Export Loading Network

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Statewide loads based on 8 major river systems

Water Q Quali lity ty Goals: B : Baselin eline a and C Current S t Status

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Percent changes in water flow from 1980–96 to 2013–17 for major rivers in Illinois

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Embarras Little Wabash Big Muddy Kaskaskia Illinois Rock Green Vermilion

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Nitrate-N Load Estimates for Major Rivers in Illinois 1980–96 and 2013–17

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Embarras Little Wabash Big Muddy Kaskaskia Illinois Rock Green Vermilion

annual average nitrate-N load (Million lb N/yr)

1980-96 2013-17

Changes in Nitrate-N Loads for Major Rivers in Illinois 1980–96 to 2013–17

Estimated loads from Indiana and Wisconsin are not included in the Illinois, Rock, or Vermilion River loads

slide-24
SLIDE 24

1997–2011 2012–17

Es Estimated A Average A Annual N Nitrate-N Yiel elds ds b by H HUC 8 UC 8 (lb lb N/ac-yr) )

Aaron Hoyle-Katz, NCSA

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Total Phosphorus Load Estimates in Major Rivers Draining Illinois 1980–96 and 2013–17

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Embarras Little Wabash Big Muddy Kaskaskia Illinois Rock Green Vermilion

annual average TP load (Million lb P/yr)

1980-96 2013-17

Estimated loads from Indiana and Wisconsin are not included in the Illinois, Rock, or Vermilion River loads

Changes in Estimated Annual Average Total Phosphorus Loads in Major Rivers Draining Illinois 1980–96 and 2013–17

  • 0.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Embarras Little Wabash Big Muddy Kaskaskia Illinois Rock Green Vermilion

Change in TP load (Mil. lb P/yr)

slide-26
SLIDE 26

1997–2011 2012–17

Es Estimated A Average A Annual T Total P P Yields b by HUC 8 (lb lb P/ P/ac-yr) )

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Summa mary

  • Statewide average riverine waterflow, nitrate-N load and TP

load estimates 2013–2017 were 13%, 7%, and 26% greater than the 1980–96 baseline period.

  • Point source 2017 estimated point TP and TN discharges

were 22% and 14% lower than 2011 estimates.

  • At the HUC 8 scale, nitrate-N and TP yields 2012–17 were

generally similar to 1997-2011 values, with some exceptions:

  • TP load reductions in Chicago and Des Plaines
  • TP increases in the Upper Sangamon and elsewhere
  • Changes in nitrate-N load were correlated with changes in water

flow for HUCs with high N yields

  • Nitrate-N reductions per unit of water yield in the Mackinaw,

Spoon and Kaskaskia Rivers and Henderson Creek

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Photo: Jennifer Woodyard

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Photo: Haley Haverback-Gruber

slide-30
SLIDE 30

NLRS N NAS ASS S Survey y 2019

Based o ed on 2017 17 C Croppi ping ng Y Year

slide-31
SLIDE 31

NLRS N NASS S Survey 2 2019

slide-32
SLIDE 32

NLRS N NASS S Survey 2 2019

slide-33
SLIDE 33

NLRS N NASS S Survey 2 2019

slide-34
SLIDE 34

NLRS N NASS S Survey 2 2019

slide-35
SLIDE 35

NLRS N NASS S Survey 2 2019

slide-36
SLIDE 36

NLRS N NASS S Survey 2 2019

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Agri Agricu culture Se Sect ctor: r:

State a e and Feder eral al Cost st-Sh Share P Programs

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Conser nservation R Res eser erve P e Progr gram Cove ver C Crops

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Envir ironmental Q l Qualit lity Inc ncen entives P s Progr gram Wet etland R nd Reserve Easement P Pro rogra ram Conser nservation Stew ewardshi dship P p Program

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Conser nservation R Res eser erve E e Enh nhancem ement P Program

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Partner ners f for Conser ervation

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Soil T Trans nsec ect Surve vey

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Photo: IDOA

Soil T Trans nsec ect Surve vey

slide-44
SLIDE 44

319 319 N Nonp npoint S Sour urce Gr Grant P Program

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Photo: University of Illinois Extension

36 Woodchip Bioreactors Treating 1,345 acres

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Partn tner er Up Updates

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Photo: MWRDGC

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Photo: MWRDGC

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Major M r Municip icipal P l Poin

  • int Sou

t Source Achievements 2 s 201 011-20 2018 18 24% T % Total P Phosphorus s Reduction 10% T Tot

  • tal N

l Nitr trogen R Reduct ctio ion

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Top 1 10 W Wastew ewater er T Trea eatmen ent F Facilities es f for Total P Phospho phorus us R Removal

Facility Name 2018 Average Flow (MGD) 2018 Average TP Concentration (mg/L) 2011 TP Load (lb/yr) 2018 TP Load (lb/yr) Reduction (lb/yr) Percent Reduction

MWRDGC-Stickney 775 0.31 2,344,030 707,230 1,636,800 70 MWRDGC-Kirie 38.48 0.27 141,985 40,012 101,973 72 MWRDGC-Calumet 247 2.6 2,058,425 1,990,902 67,523 3 Sangamon County Water Reclamation District-Spring Creek 34.98 0.48 113,296 49,419 63,877 56 North Shore Sanitary District-Gurnee 15.4 1.11 116,070 52,700 63,370 55 Village of Fox Lake 9.19 0.63 76,657 17,808 58,849 77 City of Belleville 5.32 0.65 67,701 11,040 56,661 84 DuPage County Public Works 7.59 0.72 73,625 17,683 55,942 76 Village of Plainfield 4.59 0.58 63,469 7,918 55,551 88 Greater Peoria Sanitary and Sewage District 22.4 0.64 96,827 42,477 54,350 56

slide-51
SLIDE 51

2018

Corrected from previous version

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Nutrie ient A Asses essment R Red educt ctio ion P Plan ( (NARP)

  • IAWA and NGO Agreement for Major (>1 MGD) Facilities
  • Special Condition in NPDES permits
  • Required if facility:
  • Is located upstream of a waterbody or stream segment that has been

determined to:

  • have a phosphorus related impairment, or
  • be at risk of eutrophication due to phosphorus levels in the

waterbody

  • Effluent limit of 0.5 mg/L Total Phosphorus 12 month rolling geometric

mean by January 1, 2030 unless not technologically feasible or economically reasonable or meets one of the special circumstances

  • Not an Effluent or Water Quality Standard
slide-53
SLIDE 53

Nutrie ient A Asses essment R Red educt ctio ion P Plan ( (NARP)

  • Developed and submitted to Illinois EPA by December 31, 2023
  • Supported by data and sound scientific rationale
  • Must cooperate and work with other stakeholders in the watershed
  • Target Levels –
  • Recommendations by the Nutrient Science Advisory Committee – Dec 2018
  • Develop its own watershed-specific target levels
  • Identify phosphorus input reductions from point sources and non-

point sources

  • Schedule for implementation
  • Provisions for water quality trading
slide-54
SLIDE 54

Photo: C. Eliana Brown

slide-55
SLIDE 55
slide-56
SLIDE 56
slide-57
SLIDE 57
slide-58
SLIDE 58

Photo: C. Eliana Brown

slide-59
SLIDE 59

Water er Qu Qualit ity Go Goals—Nitrate

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Water er Qu Qualit ity Go Goals—Tot

  • tal P

Phosphor

  • rus
slide-61
SLIDE 61

Imple lementatio tion S Scen cenarios

slide-62
SLIDE 62

Agricu cultu ture I Implem emen entati tion

  • n S

Scenarios

slide-63
SLIDE 63

Agricu cultu ture I Implem emen entati tion

  • n S

Scenarios

slide-64
SLIDE 64

Poi

  • int S

Source I Imple lementatio tion S Scen cenarios

slide-65
SLIDE 65

Moving F g Forwar ard

  • Policy Working Group and other workgroups

and committees will continue to meet.

  • Collaboration among agencies and
  • rganizations is encouraged to continue.
  • Promote Planning and Implementation at the

watershed scale.

Photo: Haley Haverback-Gruber

slide-66
SLIDE 66

Visit the webpage at go.Illinois.edu/NLRS Trevor Sample—Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Trevor.Sample@Illinois.gov

Kristi Jones—Illinois Department of Agriculture

Kristi.Jones@Illinois.gov

Eliana Brown—University of Illinois Extension

brown12@Illinois.edu

Con Contact U ct Us