Source Water Initiative Work Group Webinar Thursday, July 13, 2017

Transcription

1 Source Water Initiative Work Group Webinar Thursday, July 13, 2017

2 Welcome & Introductions Nicole Zacharda, Program Manager Great Lakes Commission

3 Review of Goals, Objectives, and Timing Social Values and Quality of Life Awareness of water value Stewardship of, and investment in, water resources Sustainable Human Uses Safe and sustainable domestic water supply Flourishing and sustainable natural resource based economies Flourishing and sustainable water withdrawing economies Flourishing and sustainable non consuming, water based economies Healthy Aquatic Ecosystems Functional nearshore and coastal processes Healthy, diverse and connected habitats Healthy and abundant wildlife Our Desired Outcome

4 Pilot Work Group Summer & Fall 2017 Goals Metrics Data Main Work Group May & June, July, & August 2017 Information Delivery (Website)

5 Recap of the May 2017 Kick off Meeting Successful Establishment of the Work Group: 36 members representing 8 out of 10 of the Great Lakes jurisdictions participated Risk ranking exercise used to determine the Top 10 Shared Regional Risksfor Great Lakes source water protection These 10 risks were translated into a preliminary list of 5 Key Goals for source water protection in the Great Lakes region Began preliminary discussions regarding the appropriate Metrics to track progress towards achieving 5 Key Goals

6 Risk Ranking (from May 25) #1. Nutrients (phosphorus?)/cyanobacteria/algal blooms (18) #2. Plans with no teeth (9) #3. Communications (9) #4. Spills (8) #5. Emerging contaminants, including pathogens ( unknown unknowns ) (8) #6. Binational consistency (7) #7. Lack of comprehensive water quality assessment (7) #8. Lack of public trust in ability of municipality to maintain water quality. (7) #9. Lack of monitoring (6) #10. Lack of funding/uncertainty (4)

7 Risk Ranking (from May 25) #1. Nutrients (phosphorus?)/cyanobacteria/algal blooms (18) #2 Plans with no teeth (9) #3. Communications (9) #4. Spills (8) #5. Emerging contaminants, including pathogens ( unknown unknowns ) (8) #6. Binational consistency (7) #7. Lack of comprehensive water quality assessment (7) #8. Lack of public trust in ability of municipality to maintain water quality. (7) #9. Lack of monitoring (6) #10.Lack of funding/uncertainty

8 Risk Ranking (from May 25) #1. Nutrients (phosphorus?)/cyanobacteria/algal blooms (18) #2 Plans with no teeth (9) #3. Communications (9) #4. Spills (8) #5. Emerging contaminants, including pathogens ( unknown unknowns ) (8) #6. Binational consistency (7) #7. Lack of comprehensive water quality assessment (7) #8. Lack of public trust in ability of municipality to maintain water quality. (7) #9. Lack of monitoring (6) #10. Lack of funding/uncertainty

9 Top 5 Risks from Post Meeting Summary 1. Nutrients 2. Effective Planning 3. Spill Prevention & Response 4. Emerging Contaminants 5. Binational Consistency

10 Proposed Goals for Great Lakes Source Water within the Blue Accounting Framework A Survey was distributed to the Work Group to further evaluate and expand upon the outcomes of kick off meeting including 24 Responses Received

11 What s a Goal? Observable Measurable Understandable to Great Lakes decision makers

12 Goal 1: Nutrients Protect sources of drinking water from nutrient impacts.

13 Survey Results for Potential Metrics Goal 1: Nutrients Number and/or spatial extent of cyanobacteria or hypoxia events (19 votes, 82%) Trends in nutrient concentrations in raw water (21 votes, 91%) Number of relevant conservation practices installed on working agricultural lands (data available at a HUC 12 scale) (20 votes, 87%) Linear extent of protected riparian corridors (i.e. permanent buffers or riparian corridors under easement) (14 votes, 61%)

14 Other Potential Metrics from Survey Goal 1: Nutrients Nutrient concentrations throughout the watershed (including shallow groundwater) Nutrient reduction associated with implemented ag BMP's Water plant shut downs due to excessive nutrients or HABs

15 Goal 2: Effective Planning All public water supply systems are guided by up to date plans designed to protect source water, and are implemented through a combination of voluntary and regulatory mechanisms.

16 Survey Results for Potential Metrics Goal 2: Effective Planning Number of public water supplies covered by plans designed to protect source water (17 votes, 77%) Geographic extent of planning efforts (16 votes, 73%) Plan implementation characteristics (voluntary, required by ordinance, not implemented) (16 votes, 73%) Age of plan (14 Votes, 64%)

17 Other Potential Metrics from Survey Goal 2: Effective Planning Number of watershed stakeholders involved in planning (i.e. not all about water utilities) Resources (money and/or time) spent on plan implementation Percentage of plans with annual progress reporting, and update/review cycles

18 Goal 3: Spill Prevention and Response Effective systems for spill prevention and response are accessible and in use by diverse stakeholders.

19 Survey Results for Potential Metrics Goal 3: Spill Prevention and Response Number of public water supplies participating in local spill preparedness activities (21 Votes, 91%) Number and extent of early detection systems for vulnerable intakes (18 Votes, 78%) Number of spill incidents reported or otherwise identified (19 Votes, 83%) Number of service interruptions due to spills to source water (16 Votes, 70%) Cost of corrective measures (including fines) arising from enforcement of spill incidents (12 Votes, 52%)

20 Other Potential Metrics from Survey Goal 3: Spill Prevention and Response Date of last map/database update of spill threats Defining what a spill event of concern should be Incorporation of vulnerable areas into response plans Responder training

21 Goal 4: Emerging Contaminants Support actions to decrease the number and volume of "emerging contaminants" entering source waters from municipal, industrial, & commercial point sources.

22 Goal 4: Emerging Contaminants Support actions to decrease the number and volume of "emerging contaminants" entering source waters from municipal, industrial, & commercial point sources. Or, as another option Actions are undertaken to improve our ability to detect and to decrease the number and volume of emerging contaminants entering source waters from municipal, industrial, & commercial point sources.

23 Survey Results for Potential Metrics Goal 4: Emerging Contaminants Number of Pharmaceutical takeback programs (County, State, or watershed wide level) (16 Votes, 80%) Number of public water supplies that monitor for ECs (17 Votes, 85%)

24 Other Potential Metrics from Survey Goal 4: Emerging Contaminants Lab results from Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (EPA data) (suggested 2x) Number/quality of hospital disposal practices Number of relevant conservation practices installed at working livestock facilities Development of a readily accessible database for all emerging contaminant sampling being done How many emergent contaminants are communities addressing? (what are they?) Industrial Monitoring What technologies have been implemented to remove emerging contaminants? Specifically, what technologies are being implemented to remove what contaminants? b f bl l h h d l d d d h

25 Goal 5: Binational Consistency Work to increase points of agreement in source water protection requirements across Great Lakes states and provinces.

26 Goal 5: Binational Consistency Work to increase points of agreement in source water protection requirements across Great Lakes states and provinces. Or, as another option Great Lakes states and provinces actively engage to build consensus on source water protection requirements across the binational Great Lakes basin.

27 Survey Results for Potential Metrics Goal 5: Binational Consistency Number of Great Lakes states and provinces with required source water protection planning activities (20 Votes, 95%) Number of Great Lakes states and provinces with required implementation of source water protection plans (19 Votes, 91%) Dollars (both US & Canadian) allocated to source water protection, by jurisdiction (with additional refinement to reflect state/provincial vs. local contributions) (16 Votes, 76%)

28 Other Potential Metrics from Survey Goal 5: Binational Consistency Source Water Protection Plan implementation is typically placed upon the water system and yet most PWSs have little control in regulating the discharges. There needs to be a better connect for water systems and the waste/industrial dischargers. Annual Progress Reporting/Information Management

29 Suggested Pilot Communities Suggested Communities Avon Lake, OH Bay City, MI Escanaba, MI Grand Haven, MI Holland, MI Lake Winnebago, WI Monroe, MI North East, PA Saint Joseph, MI Toledo, OH

30 First Look at the (under construction) Blue Accounting Website

31 Goals Information Delivery Metrics Data

32 But does that structure connect with non scientists? Strategies Investments Results

33 But does that structure connect with non scientists? Strategies Investments Results

34 Overview Goals Strategies Goals with Metrics Library Contributing Resources Information Delivery (The Website) Investments Data Results Metrics + Data

35 How might the Blue Accounting website support the Source Water Initiative? Discussion topics: 1. The ErieStat example 2. Overview 3. Strategies 4. Investments 5. Results 6. Library

36 How s the water? LAKE ERIE, VERMILION LIGHTHOUSE, VERMILION, OHIO

37 Overview Menu Why Source Water Protection matters GOALS Where we are working (map, potentially dynamic) Who we are (with we being organizations represented by Work Group members)

38 Strategies Menu GOALS again, but now introducing strategies for measurement, aka METRICS Highlight current law and policy intended to move the needle on identified metrics (pulling from the Compendium) Opportunity to share unique approaches Selected pilot communities TNC work on Water Funds (i.e. local funds, administered by local stakeholders, for local source water protection)

39 Investments Menu Visualization of DATA as money invested in strategies or activities pushing progress toward goals (as measured by the selected metrics) Highlight pilot community activities & serve as a template for additional communities to share information and collaborate Dynamic mapping functionality, possible to select by goal/metric or location or other as needed.

40 Results Menu METRICS + DATA = Results! Also powered by the dynamic map introduced in the Investments menu, this page will total efforts and track progress against the GOALS Here again, pilot communities will be profiled, creating a template for other communities to join us.

41 Library Menu Opportunity to gather and profile materials relevant to source water protection efforts in the Great Lakes Searchable by key word, we can filter by various resource types (i.e. projects or partnerships, data, maps, & tools, etc.) Ideas for content may be submitted for inclusion in the Library through a form shared with postwebinar materials.

42 Next Steps and Action Items Final Comments on Compendium Please submit final comments to GLC staff by Friday 7/14 Extended Survey Deadline Survey to remain open until the end of the week (Friday 7/14) Scheduling our next webinar More discussion on metrics and pilot communities Tentatively scheduled for mid August A Doodle poll will be distributed with post webinar materials Initial Pilot Community Suggestions Included through the last survey question, or please contact us with your suggestions by Tuesday 8/1 Contributions to the Website s Library Resources A form for standardized submittal of library resources will be distributed to the group with post webinar materials

43 Adjourn!