Goal of the 1972 Clean Water Act

Transcription

1

2 Goal of the 1972 Clean Water Act

3 Clean Water Act provides framework to protect and restore water quality Recreation Aquatic Consumption

4 Beneficial uses

5 TMDLs and the How many pollutants before a water body cannot meet its designated use requirements? LA(s) + WLA(s) + Margin of Safety + Reserve Capacity = Total Maximum Daily Load

6 TMDL Process Evaluate water quality List waters not meeting standards Identify sources & needed reductions Implement restorative activities

7 Developing TMDLs Business Watershed projects Agriculture Government "It takes a village" Non-profits Cities Education & research

8 Advisors provided input on work plan, modeling and practices

9 TMDL projects Minnesota River Mississippi River Blue Earth River

10 South Metro Mississippi River TSS TMDL

11 South Metro Mississippi impaired by total suspended solids from St. Paul to Frontenac

12 : MPCA board approved site specific standard for Total Suspended Solids 32 Mg/L summer average 47 Mg/L current summer average

13 South Metro Mississippi degree of impairment Median Total Suspended Solids average (ppm) Lock & Dam 1 Lock & Dam 2 Lock & Dam 3 Lock & Dam 4

14 TMDL loads by category TSS (metric tons/yr) Load allocation Natural Background WWTP RC WWTP Stormwater very high high moderate low very low Flow condition

15 Sediment loads Tss (MT/year) Load Allocation Natural Background WWTPs (reserve capacity) WWTPs Stormwater (MS4s) Minor tributaries Metroshed Upper Mississippi Tributary Minnesota St. Croix Cannon

16 Percent TSS reduction Internal Sources Local Tribs. Upper Miss Cannon River MN River MS4s

17 Minnesota Turbidity TMDL Sediment sources

18 The Minnesota River has 18 impaired reaches Dakotas Metro area Iowa

19 Goal for main stem of Minnesota River 100 mg/l Western watersheds Redwood & Cottonwood Southern watersheds 50 mg/l 70 mg/l 90 mg/l

20 Capacity versus current load Minnesota River at Jordan TSS Load (Tons/Day) Very High High Mid-Range Low Very Low

21 TSS load varies with flow (Example: Le Sueur River Load Duration Curve) tons/day Target All Data Apr-Oct Total Suspended Solids (tons/day) tons/day Very High High Mid-range Low Very Low Flows Flows Flows Flows Flows 0.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Flow Duration Interval

22 Understanding sediment sources Sediment fingerprinting Ravines, bluffs, streambanks LeSueur River sediment Sediment loading St. Croix Watershed Research Station U of M Study National Center for Earth-surface Dynamics MPCA and MSU-Mankato

23 Sources of sediment Ravines Banks/Bluffs Upland Upland

24 Implementation choices/alternatives Crop residue Stormwater Perennial vegetation at watershed mouths Ravine BMPs In-line ditch treatment Water storage/ infiltration Channel stability/ Rehabilitate bluffs Groundwork Implementation Continued implementation

25 Modeling

26 What is modeling? What does it tell us? Looks at big picture Calculates potential results of change (without making the change) Limits results to technically-achievable practices Helps determine high-leverage practices

27 Modeling example 1 Plant perennial vegetation Control drainage through <1% slope Store runoff on field

28 Modeling example 2 Example 1 practices plus Reduce bed, bank, bluff contributions

29 Blue Earth River TMDL

30 Greater Blue Earth River Basin

31 Capacity versus current load Greater Blue Earth River Tons/day High flows Moist Conditions Mid-range Dry Conditions

32 Public Notice

33 60 days to give written comments Your interest Action you want MPCA to take Supporting reasons

34

35 Implementation Strategy Minnesota River Turbidity Total Maximum Daily Load

36 Implement on different geographic scales Mississippi watershed River basin Major watershed

37 The larger community must settle on critical balances Geographic Upland Near channel Treatment mechanisms Source reduction Interception & treatment Stressors Source reduction Hydrology Timeline Readiness Need Sector Environment Economy

38 Mississippi & Minnesota River Plans Flow Near-channel sources Targeting

39 Aggregate Phosphorus (killograms) Minnesota River: Aggregate Wastewater Phosphorus Reduction Aggregate Load Permit Limit 2015 TMDL Limit (May - September)

40 Clean Water Council Water Conservation & Reuse March 19, 2012 Brian Davis Metropolitan Council Presenters Randy Ellingboe MDH

41 Purpose Benefits of Reduction, Reuse & Recharge Examples across Minnesota Common Hurdles 2

42 Roles Reuse, Recharge, Reduction Roles State Agencies EPA Regional and Local Government Wastewater Stormwater Conservation 3

43 Roles Wastewater & Storm Water State/Federal MPCA Review and Permitting MN Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) MN Plumbing Code Regional/Local Wastewater and Storm Water Utilities Collection, treatment, disposal Local Building Officials MN Plumbing Code SSTS regulation for systems < 10,000 gpd 4

44 How Plumbing Fits Into the Picture 5

45 Roles Reduction of Water Use Regulatory Conservation rates (DNR) Impacts on users and local water utility Voluntary: Agriculture Industry WaterSense 6

46 What Opportunities Exist for Water Conservation & Reuse? 2010 Groundwater Use: Municipal Waterworks Major Crop Irrigation 60% Agricultural Processing Ethanol Processing Golf Course Irrigation 25% Pollution Containment Dewatering 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 4% Rural Water Districts Temporary Construction Livestock Watering 7

47 Minnesota Groundwater Use

48 Billion Gallons per Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Seasonal Patterns Shape Conservation & Reuse Options Major Crop Irrigation Municipal Water Works 9

49 10

50 Water Levels in White Bear Lake Water Level (ft asl)

51 Groundwater Pumping Around White Bear Lake Total Monthly Pumping (Million Gallons)

52 Controls on Groundwater Levels and Related Systems Reduce Conservation Reuse Wastewater & Stormwater Recharge Infiltrating precipitation Remember: Consider long-term consequences to prevent unintended results. 13

53 Conservation - Regulation Examples: Municipal watering restrictions Benefits: Controlled per capita water Lower daily peaks for water utilities, reduced need to expand storage, lowered risk of well interference Communication channels established Implications: Increased enforcement costs Shifting demand, not reducing demand 14

54 Conservation - Rates Examples: Municipal rates, permit rates & fees Benefits: Creates economic incentive to conserve water Implications: Reduced water use may reduce water utility revenue Possible increase in unreported and unpermitted use 15

55 Conservation Technology/Process Examples: Arctic Cat Inc., Home appliances, Ag irrigators Benefits: Reduced per capita water use Reduced energy use & waste Increased municipal capacity Implications: Reduced use can reduce water utility revenue 16

56 More Efficient Irrigation Technology Can Substantially Reduce Groundwater Pumping 17

57 45% of Minnesota s Irrigated Acres Already Use Low Pressure Technology Data Source: 2007 Census of Agriculture Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey (2008) 18

58 Reuse Treated Wastewater Mankato 679 MGY saved Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community 35 MGY saved East Bethel In progress 19

59 Legislature s Interest in Sustainable Economic Growth Led to Study Recycling Treated Wastewater for Industrial Use Study* Reduce aquifer depletion Reduce demand on finite water resources Provide reliable, low-cost water for industry Courtesy of Xcel Energy *Funding for this project was provided by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund as recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR). 20 Explore Minnesota Tourism

60 Wastewater Recycling Applications Types & Locations Agricultural irrigation: throughout Greater MN Golf course irrigation & wetland enhancement: Nisswa, Montgomery, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, etc. Power plant water supply: Mankato Drivers Water quality limitations in receiving water body Water supply concerns Environmental stewardship 21

61 Study Conclusions Wastewater recycling for industrial use: Industry Demand*, million gallons per day Treated WW Supply, million gallons per day Minnesota Twin Cities Metro Area The economics of wastewater recycling are competitive in some situations Implementation issues exist Demonstration project: could take multiple forms 22

62 MCES East Bethel Water Reclamation Plant 0.41 MGD tertiary wastewater reclamation plant with biological nutrient removal Effluent suitable for reuse Initial use: Groundwater recharge Construction:

63 Stormwater Reuse 24

64 Stormwater Reuse Guide Reduce demand on potable infrastructure Diversify water sources to reduce risk Reduce mass loading of pollutants to surface waters 25

65 Stormwater Reuse Guide 26

66 Recharge Precipitation that infiltrates to replenish groundwater Benefits: Increased quantity of groundwater Reduced impact to surface waters Lower stormwater utility fee Implications: Impacts to quality of groundwater, including drinking water sources 27

67 Maplewood Mall Stormwater Infiltration Retrofit: Goals Mitigate impacts: Kohlman Lake Cost effective Improve aesthetics Maintain parking Photo by Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District 28

68 Maplewood Mall Stormwater Infiltration Retrofit: Benefits Estimated reduction in contaminants Phosphorus loading from 33 to 13 pounds per year Sediment loads from 3.2 to 0.3 tons per year Improved aesthetics and traffic control 29 Photo by Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District

69 Maplewood Mall Stormwater Infiltration Retrofit: Challenges Coordinating stakeholders Utilities: plumbing, electrical, communications, water Negotiating changes to leases to accommodate changed parking configurations Maintaining communication channels Compacted soils low infiltration rates Stormwater BMP maintenance 30

70 Minimum Impact Design Standards MIDS Urban runoff to mimic natural hydrology Minimize pollution reaching lakes, rivers, and streams Low impact development + standard practices Recharge groundwater Voluntary urban stormwater package Credits & calculator for protection and restoration (TMDLs) + ordinance goals Flexibility for diverse conditions 2009 Legislation + ENRTF funding Completion: June 2013

71 Final Thoughts Reduction, reuse & recharge projects benefit Minnesota Examples exist across the State Need to address common challenges Economic feasibility Water quality Regulatory oversight 32