the lake allegan/kalamazoo river total maximum daily load (tmdl) plan implementation by jeff...
TRANSCRIPT
The Lake Allegan/Kalamazoo RiverTotal Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
Plan Implementationby
Jeff Spoelstra, Coordinator, Kalamazoo RiverWatershed Council – www.kalamazooriver.org
12/9/09 – MWEA Phase I&II SW Permitting
The Lake Allegan/Kalamazoo RiverTotal Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
Plan Implementationby
Jeff Spoelstra, Coordinator, Kalamazoo RiverWatershed Council – www.kalamazooriver.org
12/9/09 – MWEA Phase I&II SW Permitting
What is a TMDL?
Total Maximum Daily Load is an estimate of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards and an allocation of that amount to the pollutant’s sources.
In our watershed area this affects point sources and nonpoint sources.
TMDL“ The primary purpose of the TMDL program is to
protect public health and the health of impaired aquatic ecosystems by ensuring attainment of water quality standards, including beneficial uses.”
US EPA, 1998
Background
1,587 acre reservoir1972 EPA classified as hypereutrophic due to
total phosphorusAssessment kicked off in 1998. A unique
“cooperative agreement” kicked off later to organize the sources.
Point sources participate to maintain flexibility.Stormwater is considered a nonpoint source in
this TMDL.
Lake AlleganLake Allegan
Structure – last 10 years
TMDL Implementation Committee (meets quarterly)
Agriculture subcommittee Urban subcommittee
Point Source Committee (meets 2-3 times per year)
Technical Committee (as needed)Strategy/Leadership Committee (as needed)Phase II resulted in more independent
stormwater/municipal groups, processes, and paperwork load
Battle Creek – Clean Water Partners Kalamazoo Area – Stormwater Work Group
TMDL Lake Goals – during the “growing season”
Water Quality
Indicators
1998 Conditions
Goals*By 2012
Total phosphorus
96 ug/L 60 ug/L*
Chlorophyll a 67 ug/L 30 ug/L
Dissolved oxygen
3.1 mg/L 5 mg/L
Water Clarity 30 inches 42 inches
Carp & catfish as % of fish community
87% 30%
65% of the phosphorus from nonpoint sources; remaining 35% from point sources.
Goal 1998 Goal 1998
Waste Load Allocation
8,700 8,700 6,700 8,700
Load Allocation
9,800 17,218 4,088 8,135
Margin of Safety
100 50
Total pounds per month
18,600 25,918 10,838 16,835
April - June July - September
Load Goals
StatusThe PS have met their WLA.PS P loading reported online, year round.PS have provided educational, monetary,
analytical, sampling and staffing resources.PS technical advisor maintains a website,
provides statistical analysis, advises the group on BMPs and TMDL trends.
NPS load tracking and methodology not consistent.
Point Source WLA Status 2001-2009:
data summaries by Kieser & Associates, LLC
Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Distribution
Stormwater!
Nonpoint Source LA 1998-2007:
What have we tried?Subcommittees refined to focus on ag and urban.Monitoring and trackingUniversity research and sustainability efforts – internal
loading, dissolved fractions of phosphorus. Implementation Plan refined to focus on a three year
strategy (handout).Kanoe the Kazoo, Super Soils Test Saturday, Carp Derby,
built “watershed communication center”.Support BMP projects and planning – AWEP, HWRP.Supported regional or state efforts to reduce phosphorus
(e.g., lawn ordinances, Farm Bill funding).More recently, exploring low impact development
ordinances, stormwater ordinances and practices, wellhead protection ordinances.
Local leadership – sharing the phosphorus message.
Future:Sign a new TMDL Cooperative Agreement?State of Michigan nutrient limits?New stormwater permit process – cooperative
TMDL monitoring?Encouraging non-Phase I&II communities to
tackle stormwaterUmbrella organization and Partnership
AgreementNew overall watershed management plan in
development Buildout analysis Loading
Watershed Nutrient Load, Sediment Load and Runoff Volume Comparisons (2001 – 2030)
Change in Total Phosphorus Load per Land Use in the Kalamazoo River Watershed
TP L
oad
(lb
s)
Comparison of Monthly TP Load in 2001 and 2003 with Phosphorus TMDL Load Allocation
14,022 lbs/mo
16,961 lbs/mo
TP L
oad (
lbs)
Stormwater Control Costs* to Treat Increasing TP Loads from 2001 to 2030
Scenario 1: Only required to reduce 50% of 2001 load because SW ordinance was adopted
Scenario 2: No ordinance adopted; required to reduce new 2030 load by 50%Scenario 3: No ordinance adopted; required to reduce 2030 load to 50% of 2001 loading level
*Assumes an average estimated cost of $10,000/lb of TP reduction (which will vary depending on available land, land costs, design and inflation).
Thank YouTMDL information – www.kalamazooriver.netMunicipal outreach programs – stormwater,
groundwater, and educationwww.bcwater.orgwww.protectyourwater.net
[email protected] to e-mail Jeff