Review of Alternatives for Addressing Water Quality

Impairments in the Copano Bay Watershed

Allen BertholdTexas Water Resources Institute

Review: Clean Water ActGoal of CWA is to restore and maintain water quality

suitable for the “protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, wildlife and recreation in and on the water” Implemented primarily by the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA) CWA requires that all waterbodies exceeding a

state’s water quality standards be identifiedThose identified are placed on the (Texas) Integrated

Report for Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)

CWA also requires that states develop an approach to address each impairment

Alternatives for Addressing Impairments (TMDL/TMDL I-Plan)

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)TMDL = WLA + LA + MOS

WLA = Waste load Allocation = regulated sources LA = Load Allocation = non-regulated sources MOS = margin of safety

Implementation Plan Developed by local stakeholdersTypically a 3-5 year plan of activities Revised periodically to evaluate the process of

improving water quality and adapted as necessary

Alternatives for Addressing Impairments (WPP)Watershed Protection Plans (WPPs) are coordinated

frameworks for implementing prioritized and integrated protection and restoration strategies driven by environmental objectives Holistically address all sources of impairments to a

water bodyDeveloped by the local stakeholders and meets EPA 9

Key ElementsTypically a 10-15 year plan of activitiesMakes use of adaptive management to modify the

plan according to stakeholder input and observed water quality

Similarities of TMDLs/TMDL I-Plans and WPPs

Goal: Improve water quality in rivers, lakes and bays

Define actions needed to reduce pollution and restore water quality

Provides estimated loading limits

Can use simplistic or complex analytical tools (e.g., water quality models)

Uses existing data and can include additional data collection if necessary

Developed in coordination with local and regional stakeholders

Implementation of measures eligible for grant funds

Implementation of nonpoint source control measures currently voluntary• Law suits or changes in

CWA could result in compulsory implementation

Differences of TMDLs/TMDL I-PlansTMDL and TMDL I-Plan WPPs

Results in automatic removal from 303(d) list

Can result in removal from 303(d) list though 4b process

TMDL approved by State and EPATMDL I-Plan only approved by State

WPP acceptance by State and EPA (i.e., determination of consistency with nine-element guidance)

Focused on singular pollutants in most cases

Pollutant focus is determined by stakeholders

TMDLs are set at full permitted flow allowing for more generous WLA

End points and flow conditions must be consistent with EPA nine element guidelines

Implementation of point source control measures currently compulsory

Implementation of point source control measures currently voluntary

Annual stakeholder meeting required following development to evaluate implementation progress

Quarterly stakeholder meetings generally held to assess and maintain implementation efforts

Timeline of Planning though Implementation TMDL and TMDL I-Plan WPPs

Begin forming/working with workgroups immediately

Grant proposal developed/submitted and planning would begin Sept. 2013 if funded

Development of Plan: 1 – 2 years• Funded by State

Development of Plan – ≥ 3 years• Funded by EPA or other

funding source

Implementation Period: ~5 year plan outlined in I-Plan

Implementation Period: ~10 year plan outlined in WPP

Evaluate and revise every 5 years or as needed

Evaluate and revise as outlined in the WPP

Questions/Discussion

Kevin Wagner, PhDTexas Water Resources Instituteklwagner@ag.tamu.edu979-845-2649

Allen BertholdTexas Water Resources Institutetaberthold@ag.tamu.edu361-318-8780