Bacon Creek Watershed Plan Implementation Chapter 3: Learning More - Monitoring to Secure New Data Draft

Transcription

1 Bacon Creek Watershed Plan Implementation Chapter 3: Learning More - Monitoring to Secure New Data Draft There are two main goals of watershed planning: protect good water quality and improve poor water quality. The Bacon Creek Watershed Plan Implementation project is working toward both of these goals. The work presented in Chapter 2 is an inventory of available information about the project area and its subwatersheds. Now additional data and in-depth analysis are needed to identify current pollutant sources and guide implementation projects to places where they will have the most benefit. This chapter outlines the various sources of data that are analyzed in Chapter 4. It also provides a historical perspective on data collection in the watershed. It is important to remember that this project is focused on nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint source pollution originates from diffuse areas (land surface or atmosphere) with no welldefined point of origin. Pollutants are generally carried off the land and into waterways by rain or melting snow. Common nonpoint pollution sources are parking lots and roads, construction sites, agriculture, forestry, recreation, residential activities, and urban land uses. Section 319 of the Clean Water Act addresses nonpoint source pollution, and so grants from the KY Division of Water that deal with nonpoint source pollution are called 319 grants. Water Quality Sampling Water quality sampling is often conducted as part of a watershed planning project. Even if there are existing data, collecting new data allows for an up-to-date look at the condition of the water. Furthermore, conducting project-specific can provide information about target areas or measure the effectiveness of implemented best management practices (BMPs). General information about water quality parameters what each parameter means and how it is collected can be found in the Watershed Planning Guidebook for Kentucky Communities. The Watershed Basics section reviews watershed planning, regulatory issues, and the science behind water quality testing. It can be viewed online: Table 3.1 illustrates the parameters typically sampled for watershed planning projects, including this project. The state of Kentucky has legal standards for some water quality parameters (see Table 3.2). Standards are either numeric or narrative. There are other parameters for which there are no Kentucky standards such as phosphorus, nitrogen, and conductivity. For this watershed planning project, KDOW created a set of benchmarks. These benchmarks are water quality values this project can use to provide perspective on those parameters for which there are no legal standards. The benchmarks are not legal standards. 1

2 Table 3.1: Watershed Plan Monitoring. Group Parameter Monthly 5X/30days May or June 1X/year May or June Every Time Standard Operating Pro. Bacteria E. coli (Escherichia coli) x x DOWSOP03017 NO3/ NO2 (Nitrate/Nitrite) x DOWSOP03015 NH3-N (Ammonia Nitrogen) x DOWSOP03015 TKN (Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen) x DOWSOP03015 TP (Total Phosphorous) x DOWSOP03015 OP (Orthophosphate) x DOWSOP03015 BOD5* (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) x DOWSOP03015 Sediment TSS (Total Suspended Solids) x DOWSOP03015 Flow Stream Discharge x DOWSOP03019 Field Data Turbidity (actual or estimated) x DOWSOP03014/ DOWSOP0315 ph x DOWSOP03014 DO (Dissolved Oxygen) x DOWSOP03014 Conductivity x DOWSOP03014 % Saturation (Percentage of DO) x DOWSOP03014 Temperature x DOWSOP03014 Habitat Habitat Assessment x EPA 841-B Biology Biological Assessment x WWSOP04000 *BOD5: the amount of dissolved oxygen consumed in five days by biological processes breaking down organic matter. The Watershed Planning Guidebook for Kentucky Communities, first edition (2010), page 83. 2

3 Table 3.2: Kentucky State Water Quality Standards (401 KAR 10:031). Parameter Values Dissolved Oxygen ph Temperature Total Dissolved Solids Total Suspended Solids Settleable Solids Ammonia (Un-ionized) Fecal Coliform (Primary Contact Recreation) Escherichia coli (Primary Contact Recreation) Fecal Coliform (Secondary Contact Recreation) 5.0 mg/l Daily Average; 4.0 mg/l Instantaneous Standard Units 89 F(31.7 C) Instantaneous; 84 F (28.9 C) 30-Day Summer Average (July-September) No adverse effects on indigenous aquatic community No adverse effects on indigenous aquatic community No adverse effects on indigenous aquatic community < 0.05 mg/l after mixing 200 CFU / 100 ml geometric mean based on a min. of 5 samples over 30 days, 5/1 10/31. 20% of samples shall not exceed 400 CFUs over 30 days. 130 CFU / 100 ml geometric mean based on a min. of 5 samples over 30 days, 5/1 10/31. 20% of samples shall not exceed 240 CFU / 100 ml over 30 days CFU / 100 ml geometric mean based on a min. of 5 samples over 30 days, year-round. 20% of samples shall not exceed 2000 CFU / 100 ml over 30 days. The benchmarks were created specifically for this project and take the watershed s environment into account. Table 3.3 displays the nutrient and non-nutrient benchmarks. For a full explanation of the benchmarks, see Appendix C. It s important to note that benchmarks for data screening and prioritization do not necessarily represent targets for water quality. Table 3.3: Nutrient and non-nutrient benchmarks for Upper Bacon Creek. Parameter Benchmark Value Nutrient: Total Phosphorus 0.05 mg/l Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.50 mg/l Nitrate-Nitrite 1.10 mg/l Total Nitrogen 1.60 mg/l Non-Nutrient: Ammonia-N 0.05 mg/l Sulfate 21.0 mg/l Specific Conductance 443 (µs/cm) Alkalinity 199 (mg/l as CaCO₃) Total Suspended Solids* 7.0 mg/l Turbidity* 6 NTU 3

4 Existing Data The existing data for the Bacon Creek Watershed are extensive. These data have been collected by three separate entities over a period of several years: the Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW), Upper Green Watershed Watch (UGRWW), and Western Kentucky University s Center for Water Resource Studies (WKU). Within KDOW, there have been several different programs to collect data. Data collection stretches back to 1984, but data have not been collected regularly on a continuous basis by any entity for more than one year. WKU has collected data once a month for one year. UGRWW has collected data at some sites for many years, three times per year, beginning in Much of these data were collected in the lower sections of the watershed, closer to Nolin Lake. Because there has been a lot of activity by different entities in the watershed through the years, it is helpful to refer to a timeline. Table 3.4 summarizes activity in the watershed, including data collection and community activities, beginning with early KDOW habitat monitoring and ending with this current watershed planning project. Not all of these activities are related to this project or to each other. Most of the data in the table can be found in Appendix C. Figure 3.1 illustrates river mile (RM) points on the mainstem of Bacon Creek and some of its tributaries. The timeline refers to river miles for some KDOW data collection sites. The first Bacon Creek Watershed-Based Plan collected bacterial source tracking (BST) data to isolate sources of bacteria (see Appendix C). Those data indicate that BMPs for reducing agricultural sources of bacteria would be most effective in the Upper Bacon Creek Subwatershed, and BMPs for reducing residential sources of bacteria would be most effective in the Honey Run Subwatershed. 4

5 Table 3.2: Bacon Creek Data and Watershed Study Activity Timeline 1. KDOW conducts Basin Management program monitoring in lower watershed (RM 7.2) in Other habitat and biology data are collected in the watershed Bacon Creek Watershed Council is formed with the help of KWA 319 grant and Bonnieville City Council in Upper Green River Watershed Watch collects data from sites in the Bacon Creek Watershed beginning in 2000 for at least one site (site G25). UGRWW subsequently recruits additional volunteers and adds several more sites in the watershed. 4. WKU conducts study on Fecal Coliform and E. coli in on 7 sites in watershed. 5. Bacon Creek at RM 0.2 to 17.2 is assessed by KDOW Aquatic Biology program 2003 to UGRWW conducts Special Study at 9 sites in watershed for E. coli and Fecal Coliform in Watershed Action Plan is completed in 2005 by Dale Reynolds of KDOW. It is a precursor for first watershed-based plan. 8. KWA and Bacon Creek Watershed Council win a 319 grant in 2005 to write a watershedbased plan including data collection and BMP implementation. KWA contracts with WKU to collect data for the watershed plan for one year from AMEC Consulting conducts Watershed Assessment including sediment modeling using the AVGWLF Model, but no new data collection. This report is used to write the first iteration of the Bacon Creek Watershed-Based Plan. It is completed in Sewer lines are installed in Bonnieville in 2007 with help of Bacon Creek Watershed council. 11. KDOW TMDL study begins with data collection at 13 sites. Several sites yield no data due to low flow. The Bacon Creek Health Report presents data from 9 sites. 12. Watershed plan BMP implementation is cancelled due to lack of participation. It is decided instead to conduct Bacteria Source Tracking data collection to isolate sources of bacteria. 13. First version of Bacon Creek Watershed-Based Plan is completed in 2010 including BST data. 14. The Watershed Planning Guidebook for Kentucky Communities is complete in KWA and Bacon Creek Watershed Council win a grant to update the watershed plan, conduct more water sampling, and implement BMPs based on findings of BST data. KWA contracts WKU to collect data at 8 sites in upper watershed for one year from June 2011-May Delays in QAPP approval push back data collection to May 2012 April

6 Figure 3.1: Bacon Creek Watershed River Miles (KWA 2013 from KYGeonet data). 6

7 New Data Kentucky Waterways Alliance and the Bacon Creek Watershed Council won a 319 grant in 2010 to update the Bacon Creek Watershed Plan. The updated watershed plan was written using the Watershed Planning Guidebook for Kentucky Communities. The grant specifies that data collection be conducted for one year in the Upper Bacon Creek Watershed. Data for 319 grants are collected under the guidelines of a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) approved by KDOW (see Appendix C). The QAPP lays out, in detail, how each parameter should be sampled. Because there are existing data and a watershed-based plan for the Bacon Creek Watershed, it was possible for this watershed project to begin with Phase 2 Monitoring and Phase 2 Analysis (see Chapter 3 of the Watershed Planning Guidebook for Kentucky Communities for more information). This is why the plan and data collection are focused on a relatively small area of the overall Bacon Creek Watershed. Data were collected once a month at eight sites in the watershed from May 2012 to April 2013 (see Figure 3.2). Sites were also sampled 5 times in 30 days in May for bacteria. There were also two wet weather and two dry weather sampling events. KWA contracted with Western Kentucky University s Center for Water Resource Studies to collect the data. Due to a delay in QAPP approval, sampling did not begin in 2011 as originally scheduled. Sites were selected based on several factors including historical site location (some sites have been used in the past by other studies), access to the creek, and location of tributaries. If a tributary is sampled close to where it begins (its headwaters), then it doesn t provide information about the entire tributary. The sampling site must be located further downstream, closer to the point where the tributary meets the mainstem (the mouth of the tributary). Note in Figure 3.2 the placement of Site 1Ba. It s located below the point where two tributaries join in order to obtain information about both tributaries. Sites 1Ba, 1Bb, and 1A are all on different branches of the Upper Bacon Creek tributary. The data collected at each site provides information about what is happening on the land above the site (the subwatershed). Because collecting and analyzing water quality data can be expensive, watershed planning projects generally try to limit the number of sites while still obtaining the necessary data to draw conclusions about water quality and sources of pollution. If time, money, and access were unlimited, there could be dozens of sampling sites on Bacon Creek! 7

8 Figure 3.2: Water quality sampling site locations for Upper Bacon Creek Watershed (2012). 8

9 Data Issues There were some reporting limits issues with the Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) data collected for the project. The QAPP specified the reporting limit to be 0.3 mg/l, but WKU could not collect data at that minute level. A KDOW-approved modification was made to the QAPP to allow for a 0.4 mg/l reporting limit instead. This means the TKN data reported are >0.4 mg/l instead of the more rigorous >0.3 mg/l. The request to change the reporting limit from WKU can be found in Appendix C. Data Analysis and Pollutant Loads The data values themselves are available in Appendix C. Chapter 4 analyzes the data. One tool for interpreting water quality data is a pollutant load. A pollutant load is the amount of a specific pollutant moving through a stream. The pollutant load is based upon both the concentration of the pollutant and then stream flow. Loads are generally expressed in terms of a weight (of a pollutant) and a period of time, resulting in pound per day, for example. Appendix C to come. Funding for this project was provided in part by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Kentucky Division of Water, Nonpoint Source Section and the Kentucky Division of Conservation Kentucky Waterways Alliance as authorized by the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987, Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Grant #C

10 Appendix C 10

11 WATER ANALYSIS, TRAINING, EDUCATION, & RESEARCH SERVICES September 20, 2012 Tessa Edelen Watershed Program Director Kentucky Waterways Alliance Cc: Angie Wingfield Ms. Edelen, After submission of the Bacon Creek QAPP and SOPs for the project, I realized that I had attached a TKN SOP and referenced this method in the Bacon Creek QAPP which is different from what the lab is currently using. EPA PAI-DK01 is the TKN method being utilized by WATERS Lab for this project. I would like to request a revision of the SOP and QAPP to reflect this. Please see the correct TKN SOP and the revised WATERS QAPP attached. The chart on pg. 11 of the Bacon Creek Pollutant Assessment QAPP will be revised to reflect this correction. The changes will be made to the Method Type, Method Number and Method Reporting Limit (MRL) as follows: Parameter Units Method Type Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/l Block Digestion/ Titration Method Number EPA PAI- DK01 MDL MRL Precision of Lab duplicates Accuracy of matrix spikes Calibration standard The concentration range for EPA PAI-DK01 is mg/l. Therefore, we request that the MRL 0.3 mg/l as referenced in the original QAPP submission be revised to 0.4 mg/l as reflected by the requested method. Thank you, Gretchen Grover WATERS Laboratory Director Laboratory Western Kentucky University 1906 College Heights Blvd. #61066 Bowling Green, KY Phone: Fax: Equal Education and Employment Opportunities Hearing Impaired Only: