The AWWA G300 Standard The operational guidebook Evaluation towards exemplary source water protection Case-study

Transcription

1 Robert Morgan Beaver Water District Chi Ho Sham The Cadmus Group, Inc. Quick review The AWWA G300 Standard The operational guidebook Evaluation towards exemplary source water protection Case-study Focus on characterization, implementation, and evaluation elements 1

2 Fall of 2000 AWWA Source Water Protection Committee (under TEC) was requested to develop accreditation criteria and supporting guidance June 2002 Draft SWP accreditation document (the program did not come to fruition but evolved into utility management standards G series) A formal committee was formed under the auspices of the AWWA Standards Council 2006 the standards committee approved the AWWA G300 Standard 2007 AWWA approved and published the G300 Standard effective on July 1,

3 Purpose: To recognize organizations in North America who have developed and are implementing exemplary source water protection programs. Frequency : Yearly, up to three awards, with the intent to distribute to organizations representing different water system size classifications based on the population served. Eligibility: Any organization or drinking water system that performs source water protection for drinking water supplies in North America is eligible to apply for the award. Selection Criteria: based on the criteria set forth in the AWWA Standard G300. Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 3

4 A formalized vision that guides the development and implementation of a SWP program. The vision may be articulated in a mission statement or policy of the governing body of the utility, and is a statement of the utility s commitment to SWP. This written vision helps to align priorities and resources for the SWP program. Characterization and assessment of the source water and the land or subsurface area from which the source water is derived obtain the understanding and knowledge needed to develop the goals and plans to implement the actions that will realize the source water protection vision provide information for conducting a risk assessment/susceptibility analysis inform prioritization of water quality and SWP issues and contamination sources 4

5 Goals and objectives need to be formulated to guidethe SWP program and its specific elements goals should be targetsdeveloped in response to specific problem areas identified through the characterization and risk assessment processes goals should address each of the driversmotivating the SWP program including the SWP vision goals may address both current and potential future issues goals should be prioritizedto reflect the concerns of greatest importance, and ideally should specify temporal and qualitative and/or quantitative dimensions (e.g., specific timelines and measurable goals). both internal and external stakeholdersshould be involved in the development of the goals The action plan identifies required actions (management practices, statutory or regulatory changes, agreements, etc.) needed to mitigate existing and future threats to source water quality establishes priorities establishes a timetable for the plan s implementation 5

6 Implementation of the Action Plan is the core of any SWP program: Planning without implementation does not provide results, and without this step, no actual protection takes place develop a comprehensive and implementable plan use an adaptive management approach to respond to unexpected challenges and barriers adhere to an established timeline SWP Plan should be a living document, continuously undergoing improvement in an iterative process include provisions for review and revision in SWP plan periodic, scheduled review in response to changes in sources or implementation performance modify the utility s vision, characterization, goals, action plan, and implementation elements measure the accomplishment or completion of projects, programs, and activities identified in the action plan identify obstacles to success and means to overcome those obstacles 6

7 Remsen, Iowa Source Water Protection Program Acknowledgements: Rebecca Ohrtman, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources Dan Cook, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources Steve Pick, Remsen Municipal Utility Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 7

8 To develop a SWP process that would eventually lead to an implementable plan that would reduce nitrate in the drinking water supply. Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 8

9 Remsen, Iowa MCL 9

10 Identify potential source area(s) for the high nitrate levels found in Municipal Well No.8. Identify groundwater flow paths for the Deep Creek alluvium system. Determine why Wells No. 3, 5 and 6 do not have the same nitrate levels. 10

11 3D Groundwater Flow Model 11

12 The close proximity of two feed lots may also be contributing to the nitrate levels. Potential source area for the nitrates found in Municipal Well No.8 appears to be from application of commercial fertilizer and manure in a sensitive area. Potential migration pathway without well No.8 8 Because of Municipal Well No.8s unique position and pumping rate most of the nitrate contamination is captured. Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 12

13 Goals and objectives need to be formulated The community leadership determined reasonable and meaningful objectives for their future water supply and articulated these to their community. 1) Take action on the detailed IDNR s environmental assessment and obtain permanent control of the cropland areas identified as contributing to the nitrate issues. 2) Inform and educate the residents of the community to understand the actions taken and how they positively impact ground water supplies with quarterly newsletters and articles published in the local newspaper for the next 3 years. 3) Promote further water quality protection measures with City residents and others on the public water supply in quarterly newsletters and articles in the local newspaper for the next 3 years. 4) Develop and make available the information to show an effective Source Water Protection model. Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 13

14 Proposed engineering solution Capital cost = $1.8M (400 gpm) Other costs & contingencies = $0.45M Annual O&M = $35K (0.2 MGD) USE THE SWP PARTNERSHIP Remsen SWP Community Planning Team Remsen Utilities Board and City Council Plymouth County USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Sioux Rivers Resource Conservation & Development (RC&D) Council IDNR SWP Targeted CWS Program & Contaminated Sites Section IDNR Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) State Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship/Division of Soil Conservation USDA-Agriculture Research Service (ARS) Plymouth County Pheasants Forever Chapter 14

15 Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation (Land Acquisition) WIRB -Watershed Improvement Review Board: Action: $178,400 grant to purchase 22.3 acres east of well field (i.e., $8,000 per acre for the land) SRF -Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program: Action: $548,550 loan to purchase acres west of well field (i.e., $15,000 per acre, including buildings, utilities, and other improvements) (Land Restoration) Pheasants Forever: Action: prepared seedbed and planted most of the new source water protection area ($15,000 and labor). 15

16 Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 16

17 Third year of prairie grasses 30 Remsen Municipal Water Supply Nitrate Levels Wells No. 3, 5, 6, and Nitrate Levels mg/l Well 3 Well 5 Well 6 Well 8 Rainfall (In Inches) Linear (Well 8) 17

18 Beaver Water District Source Water Protection Partnership Acknowledgments: Sarah Wrede, City of Fayetteville Sandi Formica, Watershed Conservation Res. Center Mark Willobee, GeoSyntec Consultants Matt Van Epps, Watershed Conservation Res. Center Beaver Water District 18

19 Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation BWD Hwy

20 Two-Ton Carroll-Boone BWD Madison County Noland WWTP HuntsvilleW WTP West fork WWTP From Beaver Lake Watershed Protection Strategy Prepared by TetraTech,

21 Cost Kg P removed / year Effluent Concentration, mg/l Adapted from F. Jiang, M.B. Beck, R.G. Cummings, K. Rowles, and D. Russell, 2005 Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 21

22 OVERARCHING GOALS Maintain water quality Restore impaired uses Minimize costs and Minimize new regulations. OBJECTIVES Minimize risk to health Minimize T&O problems Minimize impact on treatment Meet water supply needs Maintain recreational enjoyment Restore impaired uses Provide economical water Vision Source Water Characterization (e.g., Source Water Assessment) Program Goals Action Plan Implementation (e.g., monitoring, best management practices, education) Program Evaluation 22

23 2007, West Side Wastewater Treatment Plant 6 MGD East Side Wastewater Treatment Plant 12 MGD Split Discharge 2007, Removed Split Discharge TP < 1 mg/l Fayetteville agreed to: Maintain average 0.5 mg/l discharge Meet 0.5 mg/l during summer season Develop NPS Phosphorus reduction plan Spend $200,000/year implementing plan Provide discharge records Meet quarterly Report yearly BWD agreed to: Drop request to lower NPDES to 0.5 mg/l Maintain source water protection effort Support the city s efforts Meet quarterly Report yearly 23

24 Scope: Identify sources of phosphorus Recommend non-structural and structural controls Estimate potential TP load reduction Develop a monitoring program Coordinate with a stakeholder review group Sediment Bound Streambank Erosion Construction Sites Pasture Other Sources Agriculture Poultry Cow and Calf Commercial Fertilizer Urban Urban runoff Lawns Pet Waste Septic Systems 24

25 Project Heritage East Detention Wal-Mart Detention Sale Barn West Fork Restoration U of A Mullins Creek Pasture Renovation Cost estimate $ TP removed, lb/yr Cost/lb removed Recommended funding level $65, Not selected by stakeholders Status $100, $50,000 Not initiated yet - Ceased Operations $576, ,000 Proceeding Phase 1 $300,000?? 100,000 Initiated $152, $152,000 On-hold Project Education and Outreach Cost estimate Recommended funding level Status 25 40K/yr 105,000 Proceeding Mass Media 10 18K/yr 15,000 Commercial Fertilizer 10-20K/yr 60,000 Storm Water Utility 50 70K 60,000 In-house study Regulatory Framework Septic System - Identified systems Buffers - Ordinance adopted Erosion and Sediment Control Low Impact Development 10 20K 15,000 Proceeding - Ordinance adopted 25

26 Conditions of the agreement: City will achieve annual average 0.5 mg/l TP Annual load of TP < 9.49 tons Zone 1 first 25 Open space, passive uses No mechanized cultivation Fertilizer/herbicide/pesticide restrictions Zone 2 next 25 or the floodway Only accessory structures < 150 sf No foundations Prohibition of certain uses 26

27 It s a watershed thing! We are in this together! It takes time! It takes leadership! Administration must be on board! Meetings are a must! 27

28 Robert Morgan, Ph.D. Manager of Environmental Quality Beaver Water District, AR phone Chi Ho Sham, Ph.D. Senior Vice President The Cadmus Group, Inc. phone