Cape Fear River Estuary TMDL Development Stakeholder’s Perspective

1. Cape Fear River Estuary TMDL DevelopmentStakeholder’s Perspective Cape Fear Council of Governments TMDL Forum May 26, 2004 Kenneth L. Vogt, Jr. PE, DEE Wastewater Treatment Superintendent / City of Wilmington Lower Cape Fear River Program Cape Fear Estuary TMDL Advisory Subcommittee

2. Waterbody A Shared Resource BENEFITS A Shared Responsibility STAKEHOLDERS

3. Explicit Commitment and EfforttoAttain/Maintain DesignatedUses and Underlying StandardsandStakeholder’s Acknowledgementand Buy-In

4. Waterbody ClassificationWater Quality Standards● Designated Uses/Attainability● Numerical Criteria● Narrative Criteria● Antidegradation Requirements

5. Waterbody Use Designations ● Public Water Supplies ● Protection and Propagation of Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife ● Recreation In and On the Water ● Agricultural ● Industrial ● Navigation

6. A Regulator’s Perspective ●Non-Attainment ●Impaired Status ●303 (d) Listing ●TMDL Establishment

7. TMDL and Pollution • TMDL is “Total Maximum Daily Load” of pollutants and water body can assimilate (assimilative capacity) • Occupancy and disturbance result in a pollutional impact that may lead to a condition of non-attainment • TMDL allocates loading to sources and “caps” quantity • Combination of regulatory basis and scientific process

8. Cape Fear TMDL Timeline • Current hydrodynamic and water quality modeling developed by City of Wilmington & New Hanover County now being used by DENR • Current DENR policy requires new and expanding point sources to meet BOD5- 5 mg/l Ammonia- 1 mg/l • 1 to 2 year TMDL development period is now underway • How is the TMDL “pie” shared? • Point Source • Non-Point Source • Natural • Margin of Safety (MOS) • Growth • Upstream Sources above Lock and Dam #1

9. The TMDL Process ● Name and Geographic Location ● Problem Identification ● Target Analysis ● Source Identification and Assessment ● Linkage of Source and Target (Model) ● Allocating Pollutant Loads ● Implementation and Monitoring Plan Development

10. A Layman’s/Stakeholder’sPerspective • Any regulatory process relies upon a strong foundation. • Thorough, comprehensive, and, when applicable, founded upon sound scientific principles. • Procedures, good and bad, come and go. • While institutional considerations are important, good science transcends all procedure. • Scientific product, if properly designed and conducted, should hold lasting value.

11. Stakeholder Questions • As a resource, what do we want to do with our waterbody? • Who is “we”? Who plays a role in the decision-making process? • How are participants/stakeholders identified and encouraged to become involved in the decision- making process, including attempts to reach a broad, diverse cross-section of the stakeholder community?

12. Stakeholder Questions • Who sets the rules? • How are the rules set? Is there a well conceived /established institutional/regulatory/procedural basis and/or a sound scientific technical framework to work within?

13. Key Stakeholder Concerns • Designated Use and Attainability (Previous Determination) • Criteria Establishment (Previous Determination) • Determination of Non-Attainment (Previous Determination)

14. Key Stakeholder Concerns • Stakeholder Identification ●If you cause pollution to enter the Cape Fear River, you are/should be a stakeholder because you may be directed to better manage/reduce your pollutant contribution. LCFRP CFRE TMDL Advisory Subcommittee ● Communicate/ disseminate between the LCFRP and DWQ ● Sufficiently knowledgeable to serve in peer review/ quality control capacity ● Not sufficiently knowledgeable to act as primary product developer

15. Key Stakeholder Concerns • Contribution/Source Identification and Quantification ● Natural Sources/Background (LA) ● Point Sources & Permitted Stormwater (WLA) ● Non-Point Sources (LA)

16. Key Stakeholder Concerns • Allowable Pollutant Load (APL) APL = WLA + LA + MOS + FG MOS can be large or small based upon uncertainties. Use as much data and analysis as possible to minimize the MOS and keep it reasonable. Apply different MOSs to different categories based upon different data/analysis uncertainties.

17. Assimilative Capacity “Pie” • Assimilative Capacity = Acceptable Pollutant Loading to the Water Body • How big is the pie? • We don’t presently know • Will be determined by the TMDL process 1000 #/day OR 100,000 #/day

18. Pieces of the “Pie” Who gets “slices”? Upstream Sources Above Lock and Dam #1 Point Source (PS) Loads (Ex: Wastewater Plants & Stormwater?) Non-Point Source (NPS) Loads (Ex: Agriculture & Stormwater?) Natural Sources Growth Regulatory “Margin of Safety”

19. Key Stakeholder Concerns • Load Allocation ● Procedural ● Equitable/Fair/Reasonable ● Credits for Past Reductions

20. TMDL “Pie” Equity? • “Pieces” of the “Pie” may not be equal • How are the “slices” determined? Yet to be determined • TMDL process will determine “allocations” • Recognition/credit previous historical pollution addition and reduction activities Natural Non-Point MOS Growth Point Sources Upstream

21. How Big are the Slices? • Total loading needs to be determined • Then allocation is to be made by source. How? • Pieces are not necessarily equal • How many pieces will there be? 1,000 #/day 100,000 #/ day

22. How Each Source of Pollution is Estimated? Inputs: • Agricultural • Acres X lbs. of pollution per acre X number of acres = Total Loading • Non-point • Developed acres of each use X estimated loading by development type = Total Loading • Natural • Undeveloped acres of each use (marsh, highland, swamp) X estimated loading for each use = Total Loading

23. How Each Source of Pollution is Estimated? Inputs: • Point Source • Total of the maximum loading of all NPDES permit limits • Growth • Adds to point and non-point loads Boundaries: • Upstream • Calculated Critical Condition Maximum Loadings passing Lock and Dam #1 All sources added together with MOS to set TMDL. Total Maximum Daily Load for each category is then permanently established.

24. Simplified Load Allocation Example (No MOS or FG)

25. Potential Requirements to Meet Allocations? • Point Sources: • Lowering of discharge limits or no discharge • Non-Point Sources: • Require construction of Innovative and proven BMPs • Innovative land planning regulations • Control of construction and post-construction activities • Homeowner ordinances: • Controls of lawn care (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides) • Pet waste controls • Elimination of illicit discharges • Minimization of car washing in streets and driveways • Innovative home and commercial site design • Public education programs

26. Potential Requirements to Meet Allocations? • Agriculture: • Require manure controls and processing • Require buffers along waterways and drainage systems • Controls on head of livestock per acre • Upstream Sources: • Set and monitor maximum loads passing Lock & Dam #1 • Natural Sources: • Require thinning of deer and raccoon populations • Re-establishment of impacted wetland system • Restrictions on drainage systems constructed through natural areas • Mitigate • Offset by others • Modify use(s) / relax standard(s)

27. Establishment of a “New Way of Thinking” • Implement Pollutant Credit Trading program for removals or reductions of difficult–to-control pollution • Direct- Local individual efforts (public education) • Indirect • Coordinated regional planning • Common ordinances • Managed by a central agency

28. Questions / Discussion