Policy Considerations in the Lower Poplar River Turbidity TMDL Study Greg Johnson, Karen Evens, and Pat Carey, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul and Duluth, MN; Troy Naperala – URS Corporation, Traverse City, Michigan

Abstract

A TMDL study was initiated on the lower Poplar River along the North Shore of Lake Superior in Minnesota given significant interest by some watershed stakeholders by the MPCA. Contracts with an EPA contractor and local unit of government were developed to complete the technical and stakeholder activities for the study, respectively. Several policy and program issues and concerns arose during the EPA contractor portion of the study including the role and participation of stakeholders in the study, especially in the review of draft contractor reports; application of the turbidity standard given likely significant “natural” background contributions; consideration of a process to establish a site-specific standard; and a need to address turbidity issues along all of the North Shore. This presentation will describe the issues and work that were and are continuing to be done to address the issues and concerns.

Background

The Poplar River is an important resource to the property owners and businesses located in the Poplar River watershed. It is also a valuable resource to the general public and various public and private organizations interested in the quality of the North Shore of Lake Superior. As such, Cook County asked that an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) by Lutsen Mountains be developed in part to address potential impacts of proposed development and the impaired status of the lower Poplar River on each other. Interest in addressing sediment pollution issues in the watershed resulted in the formation of the Poplar River Management Board.

Given the stakeholder interest in the river and its impaired listing, the MPCA requested contractor support from EPA to begin work on a TMDL. MPCA also developed a contract with the Cook SWCD for local work on the project.

Policy and program issues were just as important in the project as the project tasks of data collection, data analysis, modeling, stakeholder involvement, and report writing. Several of the issues formed around questions regarding the basis of the turbidity standard, the application of the standard, and TMDL requirements.

Project Scope

• The project was established with an approach that was to encompass the local units of government, stakeholders, USEPA, and an USEPA contractor.

• The USEPA contract originally called for a completed TMDL as a final product from the contractor.

• The contractor was to determine if existing data was adequate to complete the study; and if not, propose additional work to be done; complete the additional work as authorized by EPA; and draft the TMDL.

• A contract between the MPCA and the Cook County SWCD was established to provide local unit of government coordination and contact with EPA, MPCA, and the EPA contractor.

Contact: Greg Johnson – Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155Phone 651-296-6938, Fax 651-297-8676Gregory.Johnson@pca.state.mn.us

Major Policy and Program Issues During the Project

• Four major issues were raised throughout the project in relation to the technical aspects of the TMDL. These included:• the appropriateness of applying an instantaneous turbidity standard to flashy north shore

streams,• the influence of and ability to parse out man-made vs. “natural” erosion, • the fundamental uncertainty present in watershed science when using less than perfect data

sets to identify pollutant sources and pathways, and• the presence of data analysis limits in drawing conclusions.

• Other concerns that were present during the project:• Completing TMDL with existing information• Role and participation of stakeholders in the study, especially in providing early input to

and subsequent review of draft contractor reports• Integrating a federal contract with the state and local emphasis on local stakeholder

participation was a challenge.• Regulatory requirements of a TMDL and implications for local businesses and residents• Impacts of the impairment identification on the area’s tourism industry• Adequacy of the data available for the project, watershed modeling, budget for necessary

tasks• A need to identify reference streams from which to evaluate the Poplar River

Policy Considerations Addressed in the Project

• Communication between the project staff and stakeholders was not always easy, but was critical in working through the process with the stakeholders. It is important to work towards the use of a shared “language” – socially, scientifically, and politically.

• A clear and specific work plan is important for the adequate completion of project tasks.

• Active coordination and cooperation by the project team (EPA, MPCA, EPA contractor, and SWCD staff) resulted in a much better final project than if staff took a “hands off” approach to project management

• Listening to stakeholders’ concerns, discussing the concerns, and committing to continued project work resulted in the decision to not draft a TMDL as the final deliverable for the contractor. Rather, the MPCA committed to provide greater stakeholder review of the project reports, greater participation of the stakeholders in determining the direction to take in identifying and completing additional work on the project.

• Issues not directly related to the TMDL project may be a source of concern for staff and stakeholders. Communication is important in clearly describing the distinctions and interrelatedness of the issues and the TMDL project.

General Timeline for TMDL-related Activities

• Request for and completion of AUAR for the lower Poplar River watershed area• Formation of Poplar River Management Board• Request for Proposal and ensuing contract with EPA contractor (by EPA)• MPCA contract with Cook County SWCD• Completion of EPA contractor tasks

• Data compilation• Data analysis• Computer model evaluation • Additional modeling• Physical channel assessment• Completion of contract final report

• Concurrent completion of Cook SWCD contract tasks• Coordination with MPCA, EPA, and EPA contractor• Review of EPA contractor project documents• Public information• Stakeholder involvement and participation• Macroinvertebrate sampling (subcontract with NRRI)• Collection of additional water quality samples