Bill Carter Nonpoint Source Program Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Trade Fair and Conference, May 2015.

Watershed-Based Plans:Successful Elements

Bill CarterNonpoint Source Program

Texas Commission on Environmental QualityTrade Fair and Conference, May 2015

Texas Watershed Plans Accepted by EPABuck Creekhttp://buckcreek.tamu.edu/wpp/

Colorado River Below E.V. Spence Reservoirhttps://www.tceq.texas.gov/waterquality/tmdl/nav/32-colorado/32-colorado.html

Geronimo Creek http://www.gbra.org/documents/crp/meetings/2014/GeronimoAlligatorCreeksWPP.pdf

Lake Granburyhttp://www.brazos.org/gbWPP.asp

Lampasas Riverhttp://www.lampasasriver.org/

Plum Creekhttp://plumcreek.tamu.edu/wpp/

Upper Cibolo Creekhttp://www.ci.boerne.tx.us/DocumentCenter/View/3690

Upper San Antonio River (Update)www.bexarfloodfacts.org/watershed_protection_plan/FinalWPP_7242014.pdf

Road map to preserve or restore water quality

Problem: Sources Effect: Impairment of uses Potential Solutions: Management Measures Starting Point: What are stakeholders

already doing and interested in doing to address the problem?

End Point: Water body meeting water quality standards

Begin with the End in Mind

Nine Key Elements

ScheduleForAction

Load Reductions

Measureable Milestones

Criteria forSuccess

Best Management Practices

Engagement & Education

Resources Needed

Monitoring Progress

Pollutant Load & Sources

Nine Key Elements

Can be summarized in a “Nine Key Element Table”

(Upper San Antonio River WPP Update)

Treat the plan as a set of distinct, manageable tasks.

Get a stakeholder work group to work on each task.

Focus on the first 3 elements as the core: pollutant loads and how they will be reduced.

The other elements show how the needed reductions will be achieved and verified.

Break Plan Down Into Parts

Source and Implementation Categories• Urban Stormwater• Agriculture

Key Elements• Public Education and Involvement• Monitoring / Water Quality

Special Concerns• Habitat• Ground/Surface Water Interactions

Stakeholder Work Groups

In-stream Pollutant loads• Measured in the field• Combined pollutant load from all sources

Watershed Source loads• Where is pollution coming from?• Determine:

Type of source Number of sources Location of sources Pollutant loading per source

ABC. Pollutant Loads/Reduction

Animals

Septic Systems

Wastewater

SELECT Analysis and Load Duration Curves• Plum Creek, Upper Cibolo Creek, Buck Creek,

Geronimo and Alligator Creek, and Colorado River Below E.V. Spence Reservoir WBPs

• Estimated POTENTIAL loading and actual water quality data

Watershed Modeling• Upper San Antonio River and Lake Granbury WBPs• Analytical models simulate effects of source loads

on water quality

A. Two Approaches

Load Chart (Watershed Model)

(Upper San Antonio River WPP)

(Upper San Antonio River WPP Update)

Water Quality Maps Identify monitoring

locations in watershed

Use color to represent pollutant concentrations

Helps identify critical areas for implementation

Actions that reduce pollution Chosen from tested

practices with quantifiable results

Can include point and nonpoint source BMPs

C. Best Management Practices

B

M

P

OSSF Strategies

Scope:

Guidance document and training for inspections and database development

Determine hot spots of human bacteria sources through geo-location and bacteria source tracking

Prioritize areas for inspection

Conduct inspections

Report OSSF failures & prioritize repairs

Acquire funding and prioritize projects

Replace failing OSSFs or connect to sewer system

Public awareness of OSSF failures and prevention activities

Location: all subwatersheds

Critical Areas: households within 150’ of creeks and close to central sanitary collection systems.

Goal: Identify and replace or repair failing OSSF annually from 2014 through 2023 to protect and restore water quality. System repair or replacement will be based on individual evaluations and proximity to waterways or sanitary sewer collection system infrastructure.

Description: This strategy seeks to develop criteria to determine the inspection frequency rate necessary to ascertain if OSSFs are failing, conducting reconnaissance to identify areas of chronic OSSF failure, train OSSF inspectors/investigators on how to conduct visual inspections of OSSF, through public outreach notify homeowners in areas of chronic OSSF failure of assistance provided to address failing OSSF, and conduct visual inspections of OSSF. Based on a prioritized list of failing OSSFs, financial assistance should be provided to pump solids from primary septic tanks, replace failing OSSF, or connect a select subset of OSSF to the City of Boerne centralized system.

Implementation

Participation Projects Period Costs Kendall County and COB will help identify problems, facilitate repair, seek financial assistance programs, property owner financed

1) Investigate, locate, document and map failing or noncompliant OSSFs 2) Connect OSSFs to a centralized wastewater collection system where possible or provide cost share for replacement 3) Work to improve the database that tracks system type, installation date, maintenance records, and documentation of seepage or failure

2014 -202 3, 10 Y ears

$1.5 Million

Load Reduction

Reductions are low because OSSFs only contribute a small portion to the total bacteria load. However, as this wastewater is untreated it is important to eliminate the potential for discharges as it is dangerous to human health and any discharge is unauthorized.

Effectiveness: High: Targeting replacement or removal of failing systems near riparian corridors

can significantly reduce bacteria and nutrient loading to receiving waters.

Difficulty: High: Costs may add value to household, but finding households could be difficult

(Upper Cibolo Creek WPP)

BMP Summary Chart Reference for key facts

about each BMP Scope/components Extent and critical areas Goal Implementation facts Load reduction Effectiveness Difficulty

Basic timeline Realistic timeframes Take into account when resources will be

available

F. Schedule for Implementation

(Upper Cibolo Creek WPP)

Implementation Schedule Management

Measures Responsible

Parties Unit Costs Numbers

Implemented (by time increments)

Total Costs

Ambient conditions (concentrations at index sites)

BMP performance can be estimated in plan In some cases, consider BMP effectiveness

monitoring

I. Monitoring Progress

Establish detailed monitoring schedule Set schedule with targets for progress

Monitoring Schedules

(Plum Creek WPP)

Full-time watershed coordinators meeting frequently with stakeholders and based in the watershed (e.g., Plum Creek, Upper Cibolo Creek WPPs)

Creek or lake clean-up events to mobilize public awareness and involvement (e.g., Geronimo Creek WPP)

Websites providing clearinghouse for water quality, planning and implementation info(e.g., Lake Granbury WPP)

Successful Implementation

Short and Simple: technical material in appendices

Center the plan around elements A to C — pollutants, load reductions, and BMPs

Build the plan as a set of manageable parts Highlight stakeholder priorities

to increase buy-in Adapt

Final Thoughts

Bill CarterNonpoint Source Program

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

[email protected]