Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Nonpoint Source Annual Report JULY 1, 2012—JUNE 30, 2013 ADEQ’s Nonpoint Source Program Activities for state fiscal year 2013 Prepared by the Grants & Outreach Unit of the Water Quality Division’s Surface Water Section ADEQ Pub # EQR 13-02 Tonto Creek near Payson, Arizona PROTECTING AND ENHANCING PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN ARIZONA Table of Contents Report Section List of Figures and Tables Acronym List Page iii iii I. Executive Summary II. Arizona’s Nonpoint Source Management Program Background Arizona’s Primary Nonpoint Source Pollutants Funding Allocations Nonpoint Source Program Goals Determining Nonpoint Source Priorities Process Improvement Partnerships and Support Measures of Success III. Nonpoint Source Strategic Plan 1 3 3 3 5 7 7 9 11 11 16 Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix 18 32 42 44 46 A: Strategic Planning Table B: Impaired Waters Table C: Map of WQIG Projects and Targeted Watersheds D: Active WQIG Projects and Budget Reporting E: WQIG Grants and Contracts Awarded During FY12 ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 i List of Tables and Figures Table 1: List of 10-digit HUC Watershed Based Plans Figure 1: ADEQ Cycle of Identifying and Addressing Water Quality Concerns Table 2: 2010 Impairments by Pollutant Stressor Category Table 3: 2010 Status of Impaired Waters Figure 2: ADEQ’s Use of Base and Incremental Funding to Support Nonpoint Source Activities Table 4: Kaizen Participants Figure 3: Flow chart for determining how to best move an impaired water body towards being delisted Table 5: Load Reduction Estimates Reported to EPA for State FY12 • • • • • • • • Page 1 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 8 Page 9 Page 11 Acronym List • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ADEM ADEQ ADOA ADOT ADWR AGWA ASLD AZPDES BLM CGP CWA DO EPA MSGP MTL NRCS PGP TMDL USDA USFS WBP WIP WLA WQIG ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Arizona Division of Emergency Management Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Department of Administration Arizona Department of Transportation Arizona Department of Water Resources Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment Arizona State Land Department Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Bureau of Land Management Construction General Permit Clean Water Act Dissolved Oxygen Environmental Protection Agency Multi Sector General Permit Master Target List Natural Resource Conservation Service Pesticide General Permit Total Maximum Daily Load United States Department of Agriculture United States Forest Service Watershed Based Plan Watershed Implementation Plan Waste Load Allocation Water Quality Improvement Grant ii I. Executive Summary Arizona’s Nonpoint Source (NPS) Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2013 presents a synopsis of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) NPS Program activities for fiscal year 2013 (July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013). The majority of work performed by ADEQ’s NPS Program is funded by Clean Water Act Section 319(h) grant monies, awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Section 319(h)(11) requires states to report annually on progress in meeting the schedule of milestones contained in their Nonpoint Source Management Plans, and, to the extent that appropriate information is available, report reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loadings and improvements in water quality resulting from program implementation. Arizona’s current Five –Year Management Plan (NPS Management Plan) is available for viewing and download on the ADEQ Web site. This report summarizes activities carried out during year three of the current five-year plan. Overall, ADEQ is on track to complete the majority of the goals set forth in the current NPS Management Plan. State programs have made significant progress in the following areas: o Completing four community-led Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) to identify implementation needs and prioritize projects for nonpoint source funding (links provided in Table 1). o Development of broad-based watershed plans for Arizona’s 10 major watersheds o Creation of a “BMP Toolbox”, in conjunction with the University of Arizona, with a focus on best management practices that apply to arid environments. o Development of an Interactive Mapping Service (IMS) that gives the public access to a wide variety of GIS layers and allows ADEQ-Funded Watershed Planning them to create their own maps for Documents grant applications and other watershed Large-scale Watershed Plans [8-digit planning purposes Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)] o Ensuring that ADEQ’s sampling methods and protocols are up to date Colorado River/Grand Canyon and readily available to the public via Little Colorado (and the San Juan watershed) the ADEQ website Colorado River/Lower Gila o Developing AZPDES permit language Bill Williams requiring that surface water quality Verde monitoring meet ADEQ’s credible data Middle Gila (and the Agua Fria sub-watershed) requirements Salt o Adapting and completing EPA’s Santa Cruz Environmental Monitoring and San Pedro Assessment Program (EMAP) for Upper Gila Arizona Impairment-Driven Watershed o Training watershed stakeholders in Implementation Plans (WIPs) ADEQ’s Targeted Watersheds to Granite Creek perform watershed surveys, water Oak Creek quality sampling and data analysis San Francisco/Blue More information about all of these topics San Pedro and how they relate to the Nonpoint Other Watershed Planning Documents Source Plan goals can be found in the Coyote Creek Strategic Plan update section of this document, located in Appendix A . ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Table 1: Watershed plans 1 ADEQ has seen a 25 percent staffing decrease in water programs since the original writing of the existing NPS plan. This has had an effect on progress rates toward achieving certain goals. Strategies that have been impacted include grant-specific effectiveness monitoring, TMDL/TIP development, and outreach and education activities. In addition, the state moratorium on rule making has prevented progress in developing and implementing new water quality standards to support water quality assessments and impairment identification. ADEQ has strived to adapt and find new ways to meet its NPS management goals in recent years. Increased emphasis has been made on finding common priorities both across internal programs and with external partners to maximize the potential of our combined resources. Some examples of this include coordination with: • Coordination with the Arizona Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) to identify priority watersheds for the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI) • Coordination with US Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to identify annual shared monitoring and implementation priorities • Coordination with Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD) to update GIS coverage for Arizona lakes • Coordination with Arizona Department of Emergency Management (ADEM) to address post-fire erosion control needs in the Wallow Fire burn area • Coordination between Grants and Outreach (G&O) and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) staff to identify and support Targeted Watershed projects • Partnership with the University of Arizona to provide technical support to Targeted Watershed projects • Partnership with local groups such as the Upper Gila Watershed Partnership, Prescott Creeks Preservation Association, Oak Creek Watershed Council, Little Colorado River Resource Conservation & Development (RC&D) council, and Coronado RC&D council to develop community-driven watershed based plans While ADEQ’s NPS Program has faced staffing and budget challenges in recent years, there is an ongoing, demonstrable commitment to achieving the goals set out in the current NPS Management Plan. The Program continues to be successful in adapting current strategies and coordinating resources both internally and externally in order to maximize effectiveness. During the remaining two years covered by the current NPS Management Plan, staff will focus on increased coordination with state and local entities to address pollutants in impaired and non-attaining water bodies. Additional efforts will also be made to assess the effectiveness of WQIG projects and report to EPA on CWA Section 319-leveraged watershed improvements in order to better communicate the continued success and relevance of nonpoint source efforts in Arizona. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 2 II. Arizona’s Nonpoint Source Management Program Background ADEQ’s NPS Program uses a combination of tools to protect the state’s water resources from nonpoint source pollution. Identifying and addressing water quality concerns are part of an ongoing cycle that includes water quality standards development, surface and groundwater monitoring, water quality assessment reports, Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies, TMDL implementation plans (TIPs), watershed inventories and characterizations, watershed-based plans, and Water Quality Improvement Grant (WQIG) projects. Figure 1: Identifying and addressing water quality concerns are part of an ongoing cycle. Arizona’s Primary Nonpoint Source Pollutants Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution, unlike pollution from industrial and sewage treatment plants, comes from many diffuse sources. NPS pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural and humanmade pollutants, finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and even groundwater. Today, nonpoint source pollution remains the nation's largest source of water quality problems. It is the main reason that approximately 40 percent of our surveyed streams and lakes are not clean enough to meet basic uses such as fishing or swimming. The primary nonpoint source pollutants causing impairments in Arizona’s most recent assessment (2010) are: • • • • • • • Suspended sediment Nutrients or related parameters (nitrogen, phosphorus, low dissolved oxygen, high pH) E. coli bacteria Metals and low pH Selenium Boron Historic pesticides ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 3 Sources of these pollutants include livestock grazing, recreation, crop production, mining, forestry, and wildlife. A breakdown of pollutant stressor categories impacting lakes and streams can be seen in Table 2 below. Please refer to the 2010 Integrated 305(b) Assessment and 303(d) Listing Report for additional details. Pollutant Stressor Category # Lakes Nutrients & related (N, P, DO, pH) Metals & related 34 % Lake Impairments per Pollutant Stressor 65% 0 Selenium Acres # Reaches 7783 18 % Stream Impairments per Pollutant Stressor 9% Miles 0% 0 102 53% 608 1 2% 27045 14 7% 270 Arsenic 0 0% 0 4 2% 36 Mercury 13 25% 31693 3 2% 46 Boron 0 0% 0 3 2% 59 Solids (turbidity, sedimentation) E. coli (& biological – lakes) Pesticide (DDT, chlordane, toxaphene) Other (nitrate and chlorine) 0 0% 0 15 8% 196 2 4% 27 19 10% 374 2 4% 286 10 5% 105 0 0% 0 4 2% 23 204 *Cannot total miles or acres because some waters are impaired by multiple stressors Table 2: 2010 Impairments by Pollutant Stressor Category Some lakes and streams are listed as impaired for more than one of these pollutants. The draft 2010 Status of Ambient Surface Water Quality in Arizona (Arizona’s Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Listing Report) indicates that Arizona has 22 lakes listed as impaired for 32 pollutants and 70 stream reaches for 118 pollutants. These numbers may change prior to finalizing the current draft document, as EPA will have the opportunity to list additional water bodies and/or pollutants. Although in a few drainages point sources may be contributing, these impairments are primarily the result of nonpoint source contributions. Use Support Category # Lakes Acres # Reaches Miles Category 1 (Attaining all uses) 0 0 24 288 Category 2 (Attaining some uses) 6 23609 78 976 Category 3 (Inconclusive) Categories 4A, 4B, 4A/5 (Not attaining) 28 4459 152 1430 12 2732 42 309 Category 5 (Impaired) 22 69,663 70 982 Total Assessed 68 100463 366 3985 Total Attaining or Impaired 40 96,004 214 2555 Table 3: \2010 Status of Assessed Waters ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 4 Funding Allocations The total amount of Section 319 funding available nationally in given year is determined by Congressional appropriation. State shares of that total are determined by a state-by-state allocation formula developed by EPA in conjunction with the states. In FY13, the total nonpoint source award of $2,613.129 was split into separate base ($929,000) and incremental ($1,684,129) grants. Figure 2 demonstrates the allowable use of each type of funding, and how that funding was allocated by ADEQ to manage and implement the state nonpoint source program. Half of the overall funding was committed to funding on-the-ground implementation, watershed planning, and stakeholder education and training projects via the Water Quality Improvement Grant (WQIG) program. The remaining was utilized internally to fund NPS Program and supporting staff and TMDL development. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 5 Arizona’s CWA Section 319 Funding for FY13 Arizona received a total of $2,573,000 separated into two types of funding: Base and Incremental. Base (36% Total Award) Incremental (64% Total Award) Can be used to implement all aspects of the state’s NPS program, including protection and restoration of non-impaired waters and effectiveness monitoring. A 20% cap is placed on planning activities, which include: • Development of NPS TMDLs and watershed based plans (WBPs) to implement NPS TMDLs • Development of WBPs in the absence of/prior to completion of TMDLs • Development of WBPs that focus on the protection of threatened waters, source water, or other high priority unimpaired waters • Other NPS monitoring and program assessment/development activities. PPG (69% Total Base) NPS Staff Must be used to develop and implement watershed based plans that address NPS impairments in watersheds that contain 303(d)-listed waters. Region may authorize state to use Incremental funds in watershed w/o impaired waters in special circumstances to protect uniquely high-priority waters from becoming impaired (ex: Fossil Creek) Up to 20% may be used to develop NPS TMDLs, WBPs to implement TMDLs, and WBPs in the absence of/prior to a TMDL in 303(d)-listed waters. Region may authorize state to use >20% for plan development related to 303(d)-listed waters (ex: current Watershed Improvement Plan/WIP grants), but a proper balance must exist between funding plan development and plan implementation. NPS Program Activities (31% Total Base, 21% Total Incremental) TMDL Development NPS Staff Project Money (79% Total Incremental) Sub-awarded via the Water Quality Improvement Grant Program via competitive grants and non-competitive contracts Figure 2: ADEQ’s Use of Base and Incremental Funding to Support Nonpoint Source Activities. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 6 Nonpoint Source Program Goals ADEQ’s NPS Program operates primarily under the direction of the NPS Management Plan. The current State Management Plan identifies nonpoint source goals and strategies for 2010-2014, and identifies four broad goals (identified below). Goals Identified in the 2010-2014 Arizona Nonpoint Source Five-Year Management Plan 1. Prevent and reduce nonpoint source pollution discharges to protect surface or groundwater resources. 2. Coordinate efforts of various programs within ADEQ and with other agencies and partners to reduce nonpoint source pollution impacts to surface and groundwater. 3. Identify and mitigate impairments to surface water or groundwater quality. 4. Evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the nonpoint source pollution program and communicate success. The state’s progress in meeting these goals and the specific objectives, strategies, and milestones defined therein is detailed in Section III: Nonpoint Source Strategic Plan and in Appendix A: Strategic Planning Table Update. Determining Nonpoint Source Priorities The Impaired Waters Strategy Arizona’s NPS Program has promoted and facilitated statewide efforts to manage the impact that nonpoint source pollution has on our surface and groundwater. ADEQ continues to focus efforts on restoring waters that have been listed as impaired on the Arizona Integrated 305(b) Assessment and 303(d) Listing Report, as well as protecting waters that are attaining their designated uses. In order to identify the highest priority NPS activities for a given year, ADEQ considers each water quality impairment that is influenced by nonpoint source pollution and the different factors that influence the ability to mitigate the impairment (pollutant of concern, land ownership, potential local watershed partners/local interest in the impairment). One tool for assessing this information is the Impaired Waters Table. An abridged version of this table is included in Appendix B of this document, titled “The Impaired Waters Table Update.” Detailed information Arizona’s impaired water bodies can be found on the ADEQ website. Measure W Watersheds EPA’s “Measure W” is another tool utilized by the state when determining nonpoint source priorities. “Measure W” (also known as the Watershed Improvement Measure (WIM) and SP-12) is a key performance measure in EPA’s Strategic Plan. The measure tracks watersheds where water quality conditions have improved by utilizing a watershed approach. One of the primary purposes of this measure is to model and demonstrate the effectiveness of the watershed approach. EPA Region 9 and our state water quality agency partners agreed to track the following watersheds for a five year period (FY08-FY12) for purposes of reporting on this measure and documenting environmental results, and to better focus our water quality restoration activities by identifying needs, sharing information, providing assistance and learning more about the related challenges. • Alum Gulch • Turkey Creek • Tonto Creek • Pinto Creek • Boulder Creek During FY13, ADEQ drafted success stories documenting water quality improvements in Alum Gulch, Turkey Creek (submitted to EPA for comment), and Pinto Creek Measure W Watersheds. A success story for an additional watershed, the Verde River, was also drafted. These drafts will be revised based on EPA comment and finalized in FY14. ADEQ is currently coordinating ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 7 with EPA and other partners to initiate project implementation in the fifth water, Boulder Creek, during FY14. Targeted Watersheds Beginning in FY09 and continuing through FY13 and future fiscal years, the NPS Program has focused Water Quality Improvement Grant (WQIG) funding and technical support resources into formally identified Targeted Watersheds (Appendix B). Targeted watersheds are identified using the Impaired Waters Strategy, and influenced by their potential to satisfy EPA’s “Measure W”. Key criteria for Targeted Watersheds include the presence of a NPS-related impairment as well as local stakeholder interest and ability to effectively address that impairment. As of the close of FY12, ADEQ has seven Target Watersheds, listed below. For ease of reference, watersheds have been grouped into three sets based on the grant cycle/fiscal year in which they were initially identified as “Targets”. All Target Watersheds were given priority for funding during grant cycle 13. The progress that has been achieved to date in each of the Targeted Watersheds will be detailed throughout this report. Cycle 11 Competitive Targeted Watersheds (State FY 09-10) Granite Creek (WQIG #11-T01) Oak Creek (WQIG #11-T02) San Francisco/Blue Rivers (WQIG #11-T03) Cycle 12 Competitive Targeted Watersheds (State FY 10-11) Little Colorado River Headwaters (WQIG #12-002) San Pedro River (WQIG #12-003) Tonto/Christopher Creeks (WQIG #12-007) Non-Competitive Targeted Watersheds (State FY11) Boulder Creek/Hillside Mine Completed Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) for the following watersheds can be found on the ADEQ website: ⇒ Granite Creek ⇒ Oak Creek ⇒ San Francisco/Blue Rivers ⇒ San Pedro River A fourth WIP addressing a portion of the San Pedro River watershed is in final review and approval stages, and will be available online in the fall of 2013. These WIPs focus on subwatersheds that directly impact impairments. They were created by local watershed groups and stakeholders with assistance from ADEQ and the University of Arizona to identify implementation projects and education and outreach activities necessary to improve water quality and attain standards. These plans will help ADEQ prioritize grant-funded activities in these watersheds in the years to come. In addition, a BMP evaluation and recommendation document for the Coyote Creek subwatershed of the Little Colorado River Headwaters has also been completed and can be found on the ADEQ website. The WQIG will utilize these plans to determine future funding priorities in these watersheds. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 8 Process Improvement: TMDL and Grant Unit Kaizen/ Future State Mapping In March of 2013, TMDL and Grants Unit staff hosted a two-part process improvement event called a “kaizen” to review and streamline the steps for identifying and mitigating water quality impairments. External stakeholders participated with staff in mapping out the steps involved in the current state of TMDL and WIP development, and identifying ways in which the processes could be combined and adapted in a proposed future state. Participants are listed in Table 4. Name Linda Taunt Mary Jo Caldwell Debra Daniel Jason Sutter Krista Osterberg Samuel “Jake” Breedlove Jade Dickens Susan Fitch Doug McCarty Kyle Palmer Jan Holder Ned Hall Affiliation Deputy Director, ADEQ Water Quality Division Facilitator, AZ Government Transformation Office Manager, ADEQ Surface Water Section Supervisor, ADEQ TMDL & Assessment Unit Supervisor, ADEQ Grants & Outreach Unit ADEQ Grants & Outreach Unit ADEQ TMDL & Assessment Unit ADEQ TMDL & Assessment Unit ADEQ TMDL & Assessment Unit ADEQ TMDL & Assessment Unit External stakeholder, Upper Gila Watershed Partnership External stakeholder, Freeport McMoRan Inc. Table 4: Kaizen Participants In the current state, TMDL development typically precedes WIP development and implementation activities. This results in significant lag time between identification of an impairment and creation of a watershed improvement plan. In addition, stakeholders have limited involvement in the TMDL process, and often are unfamiliar with the data leading to the impairment listing and the recommendations made within the TMDL report. This has resulted in WIPs taking longer than anticipated to develop, due to the need for extensive outreach and education to the public. Outcomes of the kaizen included identifying four potential alternatives that could be pursued to achieve water quality standards in an impaired water. 1. Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) - A combined TMDL/watershed planning approach to improving water quality in an impaired watershed where non-point sources exist 2. TMDL Lite- A focused TMDL will be developed where sources are known but not well characterized from a water quality standpoint. Implementation planning will be in process or already completed by an external entity. The TMDL will be used to support management and implementation activities. 319 project funding will not be used for developing or carrying out the implementation plan 3. Straight to Implementation (STI)- This approach will be used when the only sources of pollution can be addressed via permit conditions or when no regulated sources are identified and implementation needs are known. In areas where the sources are more diffuse this approach can be used if an implementation plan exists 4. Delist- Develop data set and report to support removing the water from the impaired water list. This approach would be used in instances where impairment decisions were made in error or conditions in the watershed have changed. A flow chart depicting when each of these alternatives would be pursued can be seen in Figure 3. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 9 Figure 3: Flow chart for determining how to best move an impaired water body toward being delisted. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 10 Partnerships and Support Since Arizona has a large amount of publicly owned lands, partnerships with federal, state and tribal land and resource management agencies are key elements in the program’s success. Arizona achieves these partnerships through a variety of formal and informal agreements, cooperative projects, sharing and combining of funds, and meetings to share information and ideas. Through these partnerships, Arizona works with a variety of entities to incorporate other appropriate water quality controls and further the goals of the Nonpoint Source Program. NPS Program staff work closely with stakeholders in Targeted Watersheds to develop community-led, watershed-based planning efforts. These local planning efforts assist the department in developing WIPs and other programs and outreach activities appropriate to the specific area and current issues. A list of Arizona Watershed Partnerships can be found on ADEQ’s website. Within these watershed partnership structures, ADEQ and its partners are able to more easily identify, assess, and help implement voluntary efforts to control nonpoint source pollution. In FY13, ADEQ finalized updates to an existing partnership agreement with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to maximize the potential for collaboration in future years. In addition, the ADEQ/US Forest Service Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was extended for a period of one year. This MOU will be revisited after ADEQ drafts updates to the current NPS 5 year plan. NPS staff also continued to work closely with the Arizona Department of Emergency Management (ADEM) to oversee efforts to mitigate the devastating effects of the Wallow Fire, and provided recommendations for priority watersheds to the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) for the National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI). In addition, ADEQ remained active in the NRCS State Technical Committee and Arizona’s Coordinated Resource Management efforts, ensuring that nonpoint source concerns remain a focus for both groups. ADEQ has continued to work extensively throughout FY13 to coordinate with partners and develop a scope of work and funding plan for an implementation project in the Boulder Creek Targeted Watershed. Boulder Creek from Wilder Creek to the confluence of Butte Creek was identified as a non-competitive Targeted Watershed during FY10. This reach of Boulder Creek is currently impaired due to elevated levels of arsenic, copper, and zinc. The TMDL for this reach identifies three mine tailings piles (referred to as the upper, middle and lower piles) as the primary sources contributing to these impairments, as well as an adit discharge located at the middle pile site. As of the writing of this report, ADEQ is working with EPA Region 9, Arizona State Lands Department (ASLD), the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA), and Freeport McMoRan Inc. (FMI) to finalize agreements for a jointly funded road and lower pile cap construction project. All construction at the lower pile is anticipated to be completed by 6/30/15. BLM (based on EPA’s commitment to activities at the lower pile) is in the planning phase of remediating the uppermost pile. Stabilization of both the lower pile and the upper pile are key steps toward the restoration of Boulder Creek for zinc and copper. In order to address arsenic levels, the adit at the middle pile must be treated as well. ADEQ is currently working with the middle pile land owner to address this issue. Measures of Success State Nonpoint Source programs are required to measure and document successes in improving water quality. ADEQ determines the success of NPS projects using a combination of load reduction modeling and post-implementation monitoring. Each project funded by the WQIG program to implement on-the-ground water quality improvements must describe a process for evaluating the effectiveness of the implementation efforts over time. Monitoring can include photographic tracking of project progress, vegetative transect data, and/or actual water quality monitoring data. Collecting water quality data to quantify the actual load reductions associated with a specific project can be challenging. It can take many years before decreased pollutant loading can ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 11 translate into measurable improvements in the impacted water body. ADEQ worked throughout FY13 to identify ways in which effectiveness monitoring activities could be enhanced, and will commit more resources toward effectiveness monitoring in FY14 and beyond. In addition, ADEQ continues to utilize the Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA) Tool to estimate pollutant load reductions from projects that did not conduct pre- and post-implementation water quality monitoring. AGWA uses widely available standardized spatial datasets to develop input parameter files for two watershed runoff and erosion models: KINEROS2 and SWAT. ADEQ chose to utilize AGWA beginning in FY11 primarily because it can be calibrated to reflect characteristics unique to arid areas. This is a capability that is not well supported by common GRTS load reduction tools such as the EPA Region 5 and STEP-L models. ADEQ anticipates that the use of AGWA will result in realistic, scientifically defensible load reduction estimates when “real-world” data is not readily available for completed projects. Load reduction results for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment, whether directly measured or modeled, are reported to EPA via the Grant Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) database. GRTS enables EPA and states to demonstrate the accomplishments achieved with the use of 319(h) funding. The data entered into GRTS is used by the EPA to respond to inquiries received from Congressional committees, the White House, and various constituent groups. Arizona’s FY13 load reductions were determined based on a combination of AGWA estimates and grantee-provided data. Please note that load reduction estimates are expressed in GRTS in terms of the new load reductions that were achieved in a given year. A BMP or project can then be anticipated to, maintained correctly, yield those same load reductions each year for the life of the BMP. All new load reductions taking place between October 1, 2011 – September 30, 2012 were reported to EPA during state FY13, and are listed in Table 5 below. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 12 FY 12 Load Reductions N P SedimentationSiltation LBS/YR LBS/YR TONS/YR EPA Grant Number Appropriation Year Project Number 96973406 2006 17 Tonto Rim Christian Camp Water Quality Improvement Project VIEW 296 50 0 18 Sustainable Design for the Southwest Family Services Center Pervious Concrete Demonstration to Mitigate Stormwater Pollution VIEW 28 5 1 324 54 1 404 196 98 96973406 2006 Project Title GRTS Link 96973406 Total 96998407 2007 17 Sediment Reduction from Runoff Using Best Management Practices VIEW 96998407 2007 18 Wenima Wildlife Area Stream Restoration VIEW 96998407 Total 97959609 2009 05 E. Coli Reduction on the San Francisco River through Alternative Livestock Watering on Kaler Ranch, Phase II 97959609 2009 21 DEMA Wallow Fire Mitigation Funding 98961308 2008 97959609 Total Middle Fossil Creek 07 Water Quality Improvement Project 98961308 Total Total Load Reductions Reported for 10/1/11 - 9/30/12 97 404 VIEW VIEW VIEW 196 195 78 2,106 1,215 527 2,106 1,215 605 157 3 0 157 3 0 2,991 1,468 800 Table 5: Load Reduction Estimates Reported to EPA in State FY13 for N (Nitrogen), P (Phosphorus) and Sediment ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 13 NPS staff worked throughout FY13 to develop a plan for effectiveness monitoring that will allow improved ability to track and report the success of the NPS program and the agency’s activities to improve water quality. Staff has created a Master Target List (MTL) of waters that will be monitored for improvements through FY18. Water quality improvements will be documented as success stories for both EPA and to agency management to demonstrate achievements toward meeting the Water Quality Division’s performance measure to show improved water quality in 50% of monitored waters over 5 years. More information about the performance measure can be found in the ADEQ FY2014-2018 Strategic Plan. Increased effectiveness monitoring will improve ADEQ’s ability to quantify actual load reductions from projects, versus relying on modeled estimates. Information compiled from effectiveness monitoring efforts will also be incorporated into an updated BMP manual. The updated BMP manual will help future grantees and ADEQ choose the most effective BMPs to improve water quality. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 14 III. Nonpoint Source Strategic Plan The foundation of the 5-year Nonpoint Source Management Plan and subsequently this Annual Report is the strategic plan described in this section and detailed in Appendix A. It contains specific goals, objectives, and strategies that ADEQ will implement to strengthen its Nonpoint Source Program. The strategic plan describes how resources will be allocated to achieve the mission of Arizona’s Nonpoint Source Program, which is to: Achieve and maintain water quality standards through the reduction of nonpoint source pollutant contributions to Arizona’s surface and groundwater. The components of ADEQ’s strategic plan: • • • • • • Goals – Goals are like Generals. They look at the big picture. Goals show us what the world will look like after we achieve our objectives – the desired outcomes. Goals are broad and inclusive, yet attainable and realistic. Objectives – Objectives are like Sergeants, taking directions from the Generals (goals). They describe the broad changes needed to achieve a goal. Strategies – Strategies are the foot soldiers. Strategies are specific actions needed to accomplish an objective. Milestones – Milestones are steps, stages, or phases of implementing the strategy. They allow us to determine progress in accomplishing the strategies. They may include tactics – the tools that must be developed. Responsible Parties – These are the major players who are committed to implementing the strategy. Measures of Success – Indicators of success must be chosen for each strategy. These need to be quantifiable and directed at achieving the objective or goal. Strategic planning starts with the end in mind by establishing broad goals and objectives. Four broad goals were established for this nonpoint source strategic plan: Goal #1: Prevent and reduce nonpoint source pollution discharges to protect surface or groundwater resources. Goal #2: Coordinate efforts of various programs within ADEQ and with other agencies and partners to reduce nonpoint source pollution impacts to surface and groundwater. Goal #3: Identify and mitigate impairments to surface water or groundwater quality. Goal #4: Evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the nonpoint source pollution program and communicate success. Objectives and strategies are then selected to achieve each goal. Definable milestones, responsible parties, and measures of success are then developed for each strategy to direct implementation of the plan and to evaluate success. Measures of success will be monitored and results analyzed to document whether and how well desired outcomes were achieved. Analyses provide the information needed to direct strategic plan changes. Milestone percent completion estimates are based on the completion of the Milestones over the course of the five-year NPS period. Milestones for which work is consistent and ongoing over the five-year period are generally ascribed a completion percentage of 20% per year. Annual reports to EPA will use these milestones and measures of success to report on progress. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 15 ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 16 Appendix A: Arizona Nonpoint Source Strategic Plan (FY 2010 - FY 2014) Note: "n/a" in the "Percent Completion" field indicates that the milestone is 100% complete and updates are not applicable. Goal 1: Prevent and reduce nonpoint source pollution discharges to protect surface or groundwater resources. Objective 1.A Invest in Water Quality Improvement and Education Grants (319(h) Grants) that are likely to provide long-term load reductions and changes in behavior and to achieve watershed-wide improvements in water quality. Strategy 1.A.1 Grant proposals must demonstrate: ►How grant implementation will improve water quality on a watershed-scale basis ►That grantee has sufficient resources, technical skills, and commitments to implement and maintain the grant beyond the grant implementation cycle ►That grantee has sufficient resources, technical skills, and commitments to implement and maintain the grant beyond the grant implementation. Success Indicators 1) Documented long-term grant project success after implementation of this objective 2) More grant proposals fulfill this objective Progress Summary Milestones Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Overall Percent Completion ►Grants and Outreach Program and 1) The grant manual revised to clarify grant The Grants & Outreach (G&O) Unit revised and finalized grant documents for WQIG Cycle 14, which will be released early grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed requirements FY14. Similar to Cycle 13, Cycle 14 documents will focus on the Stewards) implementation of Watershed Improvement Plans (WIPs). 20 20 20 20 80 2) Grant process revised For WQIG Cycle 14, all application forms were converted to a ►Grants and Outreach Program and PDF Fillable Form format. Converting the forms to pdf will grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed allow all applicants access to a universal format as well as allow Stewards) ADEQ to capture information in a more efficient manner. Also, both a mandatory pre-proposal (submitted electronically via the PDF form) and applicant presentations have been implemented. These will help to ensure we are receiving applications of the highest quality as well as give applicants the ability to presesnt their projects to the review panel and respond directly to requests for clarification. This will decrease the amount of time from submittal of applications to awarding of grants. 20 20 20 20 80 3) Technical assistance and training for grantees to improve grant proposals ►Grants and Outreach Program and Grant and TMDL staff reviewed and provided technical recommendations and feedback for all Cycle 13 grant proposals. grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) Projects that were not awarded funding were provided with specific ideas for strengthening their proposals if they were eligible for NPS funding. 20 20 20 20 80 Objective 1.B Encourage management practices that mitigate nonpoint source pollutant loadings. Strategy 1.B.1 Develop a “BMP toolbox” of watershed remediation methods applicable to Arizona’s hydrologic and geologic conditions and provide hands-on educational opportunities for target audiences in implementing these practices. Next 5-year focus: homeowner storm water management, recreation, grazing, septic systems, and shallow lake management. Success Indicators 1) Use of website and tools documented 2) Demonstration sites visited 3) New improvement projects associated with website use and demonstration site visits Progress Summary Milestones Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) BMP toolbox available on website with user-friendly tools This milestone has been completed. ADEQ contracted with the ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Arizona Nonpoint Source Education for Municipal Officials Stewards) (NEMO) program in FY09 to develop a web-accessible BMP manual. This manual was completed during FY11, and can be found online at http://nemo.srnr.arizona.edu/nemo/index_old.php?page=bmpm anual. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 25 75 n/a n/a n/a 17 Overall Percent Completion 100 Strategy 1.B.2 Complete state-wide watershed-based plans for use by local watershed partners that: ►Characterize the watershed ►Identify pollutants of concern ►Determine high-risk sub-watersheds for specific pollutants groups ►Include EPA’s nine key elements for a watershed plan Success Indicators 1) Pollutant loading reductions in watershed because Information in plans used to: a) Initiate new water quality improvement projects b) Institute new land management decisions c) Implement new BMP's Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Final plans for each of Arizona’s ten 8-digit watersheds are 1) Plans completed for the last four available on the AZ NEMO Web site at the following location: watersheds: Colorado-Grand Canyon, Colorado-Lower Gila, San Juan (part of the http://nemo.srnr.arizona.edu/nemo/index_old.php?page=chara cterization Little Colorado), and the San Pedro. ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) ►Watershed Partners 100 n/a n/a Overall Percent Completion n/a 100 60 n/a 80 n/a 100 n/a 2) Education and training about these watershed-based plans for government leaders, resource managers, and other watershed partners The ADEQ website was updated in FY13 to provide direct access ►Grants and Outreach Program and to these plans and to better explain the role they play ADEQ's grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Nonpoint Source Program and how they should be used by the Stewards) public. The content of these plans will be shared and utilized as applicable at the smaller watershed scale. Additional formal workshops focusing on the NEMO WBP's will not be conducted as they do not directly pertain to ADEQ and EPAs updated watershed planning priorities. As such, this milestone as written is considered to be largely complete. The original modeling for portions of watersheds identified as high priorty for future planning efforts will be revisited during FY14; these updates will be shared with local stakeholders. 0 0 20 3) Interactive Mapping Service available on line so interested watershed partners can work with GIS covers used to develop these plans ►Grants and Outreach Program and The IMS is accessible on the AZ NEMO Web site (www.arizonanemo.org). While GIS layers were updated and will grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) continue to be updated by NEMO as new versions become available, this milestone is considered complete for the purposes of this report. 90 0 10 n/a Objective 1.C Encourage the use of legal authorities to reduce nonpoint source contributions to surface or groundwater, rather than relying on voluntary actions. Strategy 1.C.1 Educate watershed partners about potential legal authorities to control nonpoint source loadings to surface or groundwater. Examples include, but are not limited to: ►Existing state and federal regulations (aquifer protection (A.A.C. R18-9), nitrogen management areas (A.A.C. R18-9), pesticide use and disposal (A.A.C. R18-6), hazardous waste use and disposal practices (A.A.C. R18-8), underground storage tanks (A.A.C R18-12), solid waste disposal regulations (A.A.C R1813) ►Federal or state land use or permit restrictions (e.g., grazing permits, off-road vehicle use areas, road closures, MS4 permits) ►Local planning and zoning restrictions – existing and potential ordinances Success Indicators 1) Watershed partners use legal authorities to reduce pollutants of concern Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Education materials and training opportunities for watershed partners (e.g., authorities, process, where best used, and contact for info). G&O staff continued to compile resources to aid in future web site updates to include relevant links and contact information for legal authorities that may be utlized to address nonpoint source concerns. Surface Water staff led and/or participated in meetings on the applicability of MSGP's, CGP's, and PGPs to a variety of municipal, federal, state, and special interest groups with a combined total of over 500 attendees. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards ►Aquifer Protection Permit Program ►Hazardous Waste Program ►Solid Waste Program ►Underground Storage Tanks Program ►Pesticide Program (Arizona Department of Agriculture) ►AZPDES Permits, including Storm Water Management 0 20 40 20 Overall Percent Completion 80 18 Strategy 1.C.2 Identify methods for using land use management and written agreements to assure long-term load reductions for water quality improvement grants (319(h) Grants). For example, use of conservation easements, deed restrictions, Memorandums of Understanding. Success Indicators 1) Land management restrictions are used to assure load reductions. 2) Grant project evaluations show that written agreements incorporated into grant process have assured project effectiveness well beyond the two year grant period. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Education materials and training for watershed partners. G&O staff assisted in the coordination and presentations for first ►Grants and Outreach, including 319 grants annual Ranch Conservation Improvement Techniques (e.g., NEMO and Master Watershed Stewards) Conference held in St. David, AZ. This conference focused on increased land use management to improve water quality. Workshops were also provided in the Benson, AZ area to inform landowners of the benefits of rangeland restoration and its . impacts on water quality In addition, TMDL staff instructed a Master Watershed Steward class on CWA topics. 2) Water Quality Improvement Grant Progress was made on this task during FY13 by requiring ►Grants and Outreach, including 319 grants agreement procedures modified to grantees to identify the expected service life of BMPs and (e.g., NEMO and Master Watershed Stewards) incorporate written agreements that better provide information about and commitment for the long-term assure long-term load reductions. maintenance of projects. These BMP service life estimates were based on information provided by EPA and NRCS. Additional resources for determining expected life and maintenance of BMPs will be researched and incorporated into agreements in FY14. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion 5 0 45 25 75 0 0 20 60 80 19 ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 20 Goal 2: Coordinate efforts of various programs within ADEQ and with agencies and partners to reduce nonpoint source pollution impacts to surface and groundwater. Objective 2.A Encourage public involvement and locally-driven efforts. Strategy 2.A.1 Empower watershed partners to develop and implement watershed improvement and education projects by providing technical assistance, education, and training. Success Indicators 1) 2) 3) 4) Increased knowledge results in more effective project implementation, higher load reductions, and more commitment to continue water quality improvements. Grant proposals submitted by watershed partners require less revision and less direct assistance from ADEQ staff to develop or implement. Monitoring data collected by watershed partners meet Credible Data requirements and can be used by ADEQ for assessments. Modeling, mapping, and GIS analyses available at website are used by local watershed partners to support water quality improvement project development. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Target education grants to provide needed technical assistance, education, and training for watershed partners. 2) Provide education and training opportunities on water quality topics of concern as requested by watershed partners, such as: sampling, credible data requirements, data tracking, field survey methods to identify pollutant sources and remediation projects, GIS mapping and modeling capabilities, grant writing. G&O staff continued to support education-based contracts and grant agreements during FY12. This included: • One Watershed-scale Education and Training Grant (#12-002 Coyote Creek) to provide education and training regarding past BMP effectiveness and future BMP needs for controlling sediment loads to the LCR to local ranchers. • Three contracts with the University of Arizona (EV11-0009, EV11-0010, EV11-0011) to fund AZ NEMO Program, Master Watershed Steward (MWS) Program, and Dr. Channah Rock to provide technical support and training services to ADEQidentified targeted watersheds. This work will continue under one combined NEMO ISA through FY14, providing continued support to existing Targeted Watersheds as well as new priorities. • One additional contract (EV11-0008) with the U of A to fund Project WET Water Festivals, providing statewide youth education regarding water and water quality (project ended 12/12). ►ADEQ Nonpoint Source Programs ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) G&O and TMDL staff worked closely with watershed stakeholders throughout FY13 to provide watershed-specific education and training. Efforts were focused on Targeted Watersheds. ADEQ activities included assiting with BMP selection and review, data interpretation and analysis, and social survey methods. In addition, the U of A NEMO program continues to work with targeted groups on GIS mapping, field survey methods, load reduction modeling, data tracking techniques, sampling plan development and data interpretation methods. ►ADEQ Nonpoint Source Programs ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) Overall Percent Completion 20 20 20 20 80 20 20 20 20 80 Encourage land and resource management agencies and tribal authorities to identify and mitigate nonpoint source pollution impacts in Arizona. Objective 2.B Strengthen working relationships with other agencies and tribes to encourage development of effective water quality improvement projects and avoid projects or practices that would contribute to impairment of surface or groundwater quality. Strategy 2.B.1 Success Indicators 1) 2) 3) 4) New strategies identified and implemented resulting in reduced pollutant loadings. Funds from multiple funding sources used to implement priority water quality improvement projects. More tribal representation in planning and watershed partner meetings. Tribal 319(h) grant proposals reflect a watershed approach to identify priority projects Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Memorandums of Understanding with Updates to the ADEQ/BLM nonpoint source MOU were finalized in other agencies and tribes updated to better early FY13. The ADEQ/USFS MOU, last updated in 2008, was set support this 5-year strategic plan. to expire in Febrary 2013. An administrative extension was granted to continue the MOU in its current state until February 2014; USFS and ADEQ staff will work toward revising the document as necessary during FY14 so that it reflects the goals and objectives of ADEQ's FY15 5-year NPS plan update. ADEQ also began discussions with NRCS during FY13 regarding an MOU detailing each agency's role in the USDA National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI). This MOU will be pursued during FY14 in accordance with recommendations for state/NRCS NWQI agreements from EPA Headquarters. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion ►ADEQ Nonpoint Source Programs ►Federal and state agencies who have signed MOUs with ADEQ ►ADEQ and EPA tribal liaisons ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) 10 5 20 65 30 21 Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY Overall Percent Completion FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 2) ADEQ participation in coordinated resource planning efforts of federal and state agencies (e.g., planning, federal action reviews). 3) Coordinate with other agencies to leverage funding opportunities, especially for priority projects within impaired watersheds (Objective 3.B.1). 4) Tribal participation in watershed planning, educational opportunities, and priority water quality. The WQD provided comments on approximately 89 environmental reviews received from various federal, state, and local agencies The Hillside Mine project continues to move forward, with an ISA to transfer ADEQ nonpoint source funding to ADOA for project management set to be initiated July 2013. Contracting and construction will take place in FY14, with continuted participation from ADEQ staff. Coordination efforts continued in FY 14 with the USFS. The Big Bug TMDL Lite project was a direct result of coordinated planning. The USFS began planning activities within the Pinto Creek Watershed to address sources identified during the TMDL project. ►ADEQ Nonpoint Source Programs ►ADEQ WQD Director's Office ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) G&O and TMDL staff coordinated with NRCS in FY13 to identify ►Grants and Outreach Program and new potential priority watersheds for the USDA NWQI. These grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed replaced less-desireable watersheds chosen by NRCS in FY12 due Stewards) to time constraints. The NWQI mandates that states prioritize 5% of their available EQIP funded (managed and awarded by NRCS) toward impaired watersheds. In addition, representatives from the USFS, BLM, EPA, AZG&F, ADEM, ASLD, ADOA and ADOT contintued to actively participated in planning and implementing WQIG-funded projects during FY13. The TMDL group continues to coordinate annually with USFS to determine where mutual priorities exist across the state. Representatives of the Hopi Nation attended the Improving Riparian Areas on Private and Tribal Lands workshop in Cottonwod, AZ where Grant staff provided information about the WQIG program and its potential for funding projects. In addition, Yavapai Tribe representatives attended Granite Creek WIC meetings throughout FY13. Restriciting WQIG funding to waters that are identified as impaired has limited the potential for funding on tribal lands; however, ADEQ continues to seek pertnership opportunities on lands upstream of impairment listings. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 20 20 20 20 80 20 20 20 20 80 20 0 20 20 60 ►ADEQ and EPA tribal liaisons ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) 22 Goal 3: Identify and eliminate impairments to surface water or groundwater water quality. Objective 3.A Assess water quality of surface waters and groundwater. Strategy 3.A.1 Perform state-wide surface and groundwater quality monitoring according to ADEQ’s Monitoring Strategy (revised 2007) and analyze data to fulfill requirements of the Clean Water Act and state water statutes. Success Indicators 1) ADEQ continues to submit superior quality assessment and impaired waters identification reports that are approved by EPA. 2) Groundwater basin reports complete at least one report per year. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) State-wide surface water monitoring is completed in a two three year cycle. 25 randomly selected sites were sampled as part of a statewide ►Ambient Monitoring Program assessment in FY2013. An additional 25 sites will be sampled in FY14. Note: a change was made in 2011 to complete surface water monitoring in a two year cycle rather than a three year cycle to minimize variables such as drought, fire, and flooding that could impact data quality. a change was made in 2011 to complete surface water monitoring in a two year cycle rather than a three year cycle due to factors such as drought that prohibit collection of water samples. Overall Percent Completion 80 20 20 20 20 0 40 30 30 n/a 100 30 60 5 5 n/a 100 20 70 0 10 n/a 100 2) Groundwater quality is characterized and A final report for Butler Valley and Aravaipa Canyon were ►Ambient Monitoring Program reported for watershed partner use. completed in January and April of 2013, respectively. A final report for the Upper Hasayampa is expected to be completed in early July 2013. 3) ADEQ submits assessment report, assessment database, and list of impaired waters every two years to EPA. ►Assessment Program EPA’s action on the 2010 303(d) List was not completed until June 2013. As a result, the draft 2012 Assessment and 303(d) List were not moved toward the public review process as anticipated. Due to the delays in finalizing the 2010 Assessment, EPA and ADEQ agreed to combine the 2012 and 2014 Assessments. The draft 2012/14 Assessment will be updated based upon EPA’s final action on the 2010 303(d) List and moved to public comment. ►Assessment Program 4) Impaired waters list and supporting GIS maps updated and available on internet. The 2008 and draft 2010 assessment and impaired waters were incorporated into the AZMapper (internal) and eMap (external) GIS applications. Strategy 3.A.2 In-stream water quality sampling data submitted to ADEQ to evaluate effectiveness of grants or treatment, ambient conditions, or impacts from potential pollutant sources: ►Is reliable, scientifically based, and meets credible data requirements established for listing impaired waters ►Is formatted so it can easily be loaded into ADEQ’s database ►Includes supporting metadata needed to properly interpret the water quality data ►Is collected using protocols established by ADEQ, if applicable standards would require these protocols Success Indicators 1) Monitoring data submitted to ADEQ meets credible data requirements, contains supporting metadata, and is easily loaded into ADEQ’s database. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Current ADEQ’s sampling methods and protocols are available over the internet. 2) Components of the Sampling Analyses Plans (SAPs) and Quality Assurance Plans (QAPs) required to meet credible data requirements are either provided in the permit or submitted to ADEQ with all instream surface water quality data. ADEQ's current sampling methods and protocols are available ►Ambient Monitoring Program online at: ►TMDL Program http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/assessment/download/sa mpling.pdf The Permits Unit has developed improved permit language for those AZPDES permits which require ambient surface water quality monitoring in order to ensure the data collected will meet ADEQ credible data requirements. The Permits Unit will continue to coordinate with the Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Programs to ensure appropriate guidance documents are available to permittees and referenced in the permits. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion 100 n/a n/a n/a n/a 100 20 30 50 n/a n/a 100 ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) ►AZPDES Permit Programs 23 Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Overall Percent Completion 4) Guidance documents establish credible Some minor modifications were made in FY 13 but this project is ►Assessment Program data and submittal requirements, including included as part of the Data Committee TMDL GSD and will be completed in FY 14 supporting metadata requirements. 70 0 0 75 5 Strategy 3.A.3 Develop and implement new tools, water quality standards, and sampling methods to support water quality assessments and identification of impairments, sources, and key projects. Success Indicators 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Milestones Arizona assesses a higher percentage of perennial waters. Fewer surface waters must be added by EPA to Arizona’s 303(d) List of impaired waters. Assessment reports are completed in a timely manner. New methods provide scientifically reliable evidence of source contributions New water quality improvement projects significantly reduce pollutant loading and lead to delisting of water quality impairments Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 ►Assessment Program 1) Water quality standards developed or The revised Surface Water Quality Standards Rules were ►Rule Development Program revised in accord with the Triennial Review finalized on January 31, 2009. ADEQ is in the process of Process. identifying proposed changes for the 2012 triennial review. The ►Data Management Program initiation of the formal rule making process is on hold due to the Arizona moratorium on rule making. 2) EPA’s Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) random monitoring approach is adapted for use in Arizona’s arid environment. ►Ambient Monitoring Program 50 random wadeable perennial stream sites were chosen in FY10; sampling occurred in FY12 to provide a statistically valid assessment of Arizona. 3) Arizona’s Impaired Water Identification Rule is revised to incorporate new water quality standards and better reflect EPA’s impaired waters listing guidance. ►Assessment Program Arizona’s Impaired Water Identification Rule established methods and criteria for identifying impaired waters and developing a Total Maximum Daily Load analysis. This rule was adopted in 2002 and revisions begain in 2010 to incorporate new procedures for identifying impaired waters based on violations of narrative water quality standards.There is no timeframe for new rules because all rule development is on hold due to the Arizona moratorium on rule making. Accordingly, progress on this task has been halted. 4) New components are developed for Arizona’s Assessment Calculator (AZAC) to provide computer assisted data analyses for water quality assessments. AZAC was updated to reflect water quality standards approved by EPA during the 2009 Triennial Review prior to running the 2012 Assessment data. Additional minor updates were made to the program utilizing internal staff. No external contract was sought to perform more extensive programming updates. FY13 no additional work on AZAC. 40 40 0 0 0 90 0 10 n/a 40 0 0 0 40 0 15 20 0 35 30 0 20 10 60 n/a 100 ►Assessment Program ►Assessment Program 5) A data submittal process is established so G&O staff worked with the U of A NEMO program during to that external data can be readily loaded develop databased for all WIP grantees so that monitoring data into ADEQ’s Water Quality Database. can be easily loaded into ADEQ's database. A component of the Data Committee TMDL GSD is to expand the use of electronic data uploads whcih will be completed in FY 14 Database development for all current WIP grantees was completed during FY12. ADEQ and U of A. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion 24 Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 6) New methods developed to survey watersheds and to identify sources and key project sites that will significantly address impairments. 7) Develop new databases to track field survey data and new methods to interpret field survey data. G&O and TMDL staff worked with all WIP grantees to updated ►TMDL Program watershed survey methods as needed. FY13 assistance focused ►Grants and Outreach Program on assisting with the development and review of social surveys for watershed stakeholders. The TMDL Unit has begun using GIS to identify target areas for additional monitoring by looking at perennial waters to see if samples have been collected near potential pollution sources (historic mines, grazing, etc.). In addition, they have also begun looking at the watershed scale at which TMDLs are completed to determine if concentrating at a smaller scale would lead to greater implementation potential. As a result of the TMDL/319 Kaizen and 319 funding constraints ADEQ inititiated a combined TMDL319 effort to implement WQ imrpovement project as soon as possible. We will implement a new effort to target priority watersheds by using GIS, watershed modeling and the willingness of loacal stakeholders to determine target watersheds. ADEQ and U of A staff assisted all four WIP groups in the interpretation of field data tracked in the new databases, and the translation of this data into BMP recommendations for the WIP documents in FY13. This Task is considered complete. 20 20 20 10 20 10 50 20 Overall Percent Completion 70 ►Grants and Outreach Program n/a 100 Target resources in watersheds with impaired waters to identify sources and implement plans to reduce pollutant loadings. Objective 3.B Establish an intra-agency team and an external partnership for each impaired surface waters to help identify and implement new strategies to mitigate impairments. Strategy 3.B.1 Success Indicators 1) New strategies are developed and implemented that result in water quality improvements. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) High priority impaired watersheds are identified for targeting resources such as 319(h) Grant resources, educational opportunities, and potential legal authorities. 2) Two types of teams are created to identify resources and potential actions for high priority watersheds: a) A multi-programmatic ADEQ team with a focus on legal authorities. b) A multi-agency team with watershed partners to identify and implement other strategies. Grants & Outreach and TMDL staff continued to work with EPA ►Grants and Outreach Program Region 9, ADOA Risk Management, and ASLD to initiate an ►TMDL Program ►ADEQ Permit Programs (AZPDES, APP, etc) implementation plan and secure funding for projects at the ►Monitoring and Assessment Programs Boulder Creek/Hillside Mine site. Freeport MacMoRan Bagdad ►Federal and State Agencies with MOUs agreed to provide soil cover, rock, and water toward capping the lower tailings pile. Ongoing activities at this time include scope of work and land access negotions with ASLD and ADOA, project design development, determination of donated materials value for match purposes, planning for biological and historical surveys, and sourcing of additional construction water. TMDL and Grants staff identified new methods to target priority watersheds by using GIS, watershed modeling and the willingness of local stakeholders to determine target watersheds. This will be implemented in FY14 to identify future watershed planning priorities. ADEQ’s internal team, consisting of TMDL and G&O, continued ►Grants and Outreach Program to focus on project development at the Boulder Creek/Hillside Mine site. In addition to the external team consisting of EPA Region 9 Nonpoint Source and Superfund staff, ASLD, and ADOA formed during FY11, Freeport MacMoRan Bagdad was also included as an external partner (see above for additional details). No additional priority watersheds were selected for FY13. The Impaired Waters table was updated based uon the draft 2010 303d list and recent activity within the watersheds. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion 10 15 20 20 65 10 30 10 20 70 25 Assist locally-driven efforts to develop and implement Watershed Improvement Plans (WIPs) in targeted watersheds that identify water quality improvement projects, education and training needs, and other actions needed to mitigate impairments. Strategy 3.B.2 Success Indicators Milestones 1) Watershed plans fulfill EPA’s nine key elements for a watershed plan. 2) Implementation is initiated locally-driven efforts. Progressthrough Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Watershed Improvement Council establishment and education. 2) Volunteers trained to conduct field surveys and water quality sampling. 3) Methods for field surveys and sample collection are developed, approved by ADEQ staff, and implemented. 4) Field surveys, sample collections, and other information are analyzed to identify key project sites. 5) Project sites are prioritized and best options for mitigating pollutant loading identified. 6) Planning documents are finalized. 7) 319(h) Grant fund used to implement plans, as appropriate. WICs have been established for all current Targeted Watersheds. ►Grants and Outreach Program and ADEQ and WIC members continue to reach out to watershed grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed stakholders to encourage active participation and input. G&O Stewards) staff will continue to meet with WICs to educate them about ►TMDL Program ►Assessment Program potential BMPs and the future for their completed Watershed Implementation Plans. 20 20 40 10 20 20 40 20 90 All volunteers necessary for field surveys and water quality sampling have completed training as of the close of FY13. Future training needs will be re-assessed. ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) ►TMDL Program ►Ambient Monitoring Program Updates to field survey and sample collection methods for the San Pedro watershed were reviewed as needed by G&O, TMDL, and contracted U of A staff during FY13. G&O staff began reviewing survey methods utlized by completed WIPs in order to develop templates for more streamlined surveys for future planning projects. This work will continue into FY14. ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) ►TMDL Program ►Assessment Program 20 20 40 10 90 Analysis of field survey and sampling data for hte San Pedro WIP continued during FY13. G&O and TMDL staff reviewed the final the Granite Creek and Oak Creek WIPs and made suggestions regarding data interpretation and BMP selection. Staff reviewed all completed WIPs in late FY13 to identify high-priority projects for Cycle 14. ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) ►TMDL Program 20 20 20 20 80 0 20 40 20 80 0 20 40 30 90 20 0 20 30 70 Staff reviewed and approved final recommendations for project ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed prioritization for the Oak Creek and Granite Creek WIPs. Final Stewards) recommendations for the San Pedro WIP document are being reviewed concurrent with the development of this report, and are expected to be finalized Fall 2013. In addition, G&O staff reviewed BMP recommendations and requested associated revisions for the Coyote Creek BMP analysis being conducted under WQIG# 12-002. The Coyote Creek BMP analysis and future recommendations will be completed during FY14. Oak Creek WIP - Finalized September 2012, Granite Creek WIP - ►Grants and Outreach Program and Finalized December 2012, San Francisco River WIP - Finalized grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed June 2012, San Pedro River WIP- Under final review Stewards) A grant was awarded in each of the watershed where a WIP has ►Grants and Outreach Program and been finalized in the FY13 grant cycle. The grants were for grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed specific projects identified in the WIP documents to reduce Stewards) pollutant loading. Strategy 3.B.3 Develop and implement TMDLs to identify source contributions and load reductions needed to meet standards. Success Indicators 1) EPA approves ADEQ’s TMDLs. 2) TMDL implementation results Summary in pollutant reductions Progress Milestones Overall Percent Completion Responsible Parties n/a Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Scientifically-based TMDLs are developed Four TMDLs were completed and submitted to EPA for approval in FY13. according to the TMDL schedule. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 ►Federal and State Agencies with MOUs ►ADEQ Permit Programs (AZPDES, APP, etc) ►Monitoring & Assessment Programs ►TMDL Program ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) 0 40 20 100 Overall Percent Completion 80 20 26 Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Generalized TMDL Implementation plans were included with the ►TMDL Program 3) Public involvement in TMDL Implementation Plan (TIP) development and Gila River SSC, San Pedro E. coli and LCR E. coli and SSC TMDLs. implementation. Although the TIPs contained no specific projects we have continued to pursue opportunities to develop more specific implementation plans with local stakeholders. We have been in contact with the new watershed group that was formed in the lower San Pedro and have had discussions with the upper Gila Watershed group about building upon the sediment control structure project they have been working on. The upper Gila and Silver Creek (major tributary to the LCR) watersheds are being considered for pilot projects to test our new Water Quality Improvement Plan development. This combined TMDL/Implementation approach was a major recommendation that came from our Kaizen event held in April. 4) Nonpoint Source Grant funds used to implement TIP as appropriate. TMDL and Grants staff continued to work throughout FY13 toward implmentation of the Boulder Creek TIP at the Hillside mine, as described throughout this report. WQIG funds will be expended on this project in FY14. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion 0 10 40 30 80 0 0 30 30 60 ►Grants and Outreach Program and grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed Stewards) 27 ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 28 Goal 4: Evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the Nonpoint Source Program and communicate success. Evaluate ADEQ’s Water Quality Improvement Grants (319 Grants) and TMDLs to determine their effectiveness at creating long-term reductions in pollutant loadings. Objective 4.A Strategy 4.A.1 Evaluate past grant projects and TMDLs to determine conditions that lead to project success or reasons why pollutant loads have not diminished sufficiently to allow the pollutant of concern to be delisted. Success Indicators 1) Grant evaluations lead to adjustments in grant funding decisions. 2) TMDL evaluations result in adjustments to TMDLs. 3) Water quality improvements are documented. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) ADEQ staff will evaluate effectiveness of education and on-the-ground improvement projects several years after the final project closeout. 2) TMDL effectiveness is determined five years after completing the TMDL based on samples collected during critical conditions when past exceedances had occurred. 3) All grant projects have a monitoring component that measures water quality improvements and/or determines long-term behavioral changes. 4) Submit load reduction reports for nutrients and sediment reductions to EPA using their Grant Reporting and Tracking System. ►Grants and Outreach Program A framework for evaluating closed projects was developed during FY09. Staffing shortages have continued to limit site visits beyond those conducted for active and recently closed out projects during FY13. During FY13, G&O staff revisited the FY09 framework. Work was done to update project lists and create an Access database that will allow project information to be easily cross-referenced with other information including current impairments, TMDL development and effectiveness monitoring, and existing sampling locations. From this, a Master Target List (MTL) of waters that have had WQIG and/or TMDLrelated improvement activities was created. Waters on the MTL will be prioritized for effectiveness monitoring efforts over the next five years to help meet ADEQ’s Water Quality Division performance measure. In addition, a portion of the funding for WQIG #13-001 will support the continued evaluation of past BMPs in the LCR Headwaters watershed. This evaluation began under WQIG #12-002, and will inform future funding decisions and BMP recommendations. Overall Percent Completion 10 0 10 20 40 20 20 20 20 80 20 20 20 20 80 20 20 20 20 80 TMDL Effectiveness Monitoring (EM) continued on the Tonto and ►TMDL Program Christopher Creek and Turkey Creek TMDLs. Additional samples were collected along the Verde River in conjunction with the ambient monitoring program. The Wallow Fire delayed additional sampling along Nutrioso Creek and LCR. TMDL EM efforts in FY13 were similar in scope and extent as previous efforts in FY12. FY13 efforts focused on the Tonto and Christopher Creek and Turkey Creek projects. Data analysis on the Tonto TMDL project is on going. Staff will be reassigned in FY14 to continue EM on priority projects which will include Boulder and Pinto Creeks as remedial projects are completed. All applications received during FY13 were required to provide ►Grants and Outreach Program and plans for long-term maintenance and monitoring. G&O staff will grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed work with grantees to appropriately modify and implement Stewards) these plans as the projects progress. G&O and TMDL staff continued to work with grantees througout FY13 to adapt existing monitoring plans and provide monitoring resources, including training and equipment. ►Grants and Outreach Program and Load reduction estimates were entered into GRTS for eight projects during FY13. The load reductions associated with these grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed projects totaled 2,991 lbs/yr of nitrogen, 1,468 lbs/year of Stewards) phosphorus, and 800 tons/year of sediment. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 29 Communicate Nonpoint Source Program successes and lessons learned. Objective 4.B Strategy 4.B.1 Document “success stories” or “lessons learned.” Success Indicators 1) Stories increased public awareness of these programs. 2) Grant proposal methods reflect past successes and lessons learned. Milestones Progress Summary Responsible Parties Percent Completion per FY FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 1) Grantees provide information and graphics in their final reports for these stories. 2) Grant and TMDL effectiveness documented and communicated to the public. All final reports submitted to ADEQ during FY13 were in ►Grants and Outreach Program and accordance with the final report format revised in FY09. This grantees (e.g., NEMO, Master Watershed format follows the EPA 319(h) Success Story format to allow for Stewards) smooth transition between final reports and success story submissions. Success stories were drafted for Alum Gulch, Pinto Creek and ►TMDL Program Turkey Creek. Future success stories will be developed from the “Master Target List” that the TMDL and WQIG programs developed to track the 2014-2018 ADEQ Strategic Plan WQD performance measure of “improving water quality on 50% of the monitoring streams over five years”. Project summaries will be developed to provide updated real-time project information to stakeholders. This was recommended during the TMDL/319 Kaizen event. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Overall Percent Completion 20 20 20 20 80 20 20 20 20 80 30 Appendix B: Impaired Waters Table Update ADEQ has a comprehensive strategy for improving water quality on Arizona’s impaired waters that will lead to these waters meeting standards. The TMDL and WQIG programs bring together the resources needed to move the surface water through a series of steps or levels until the impairment has been mitigated and the stream or lake is meeting standards for the pollutants of concern. The Impaired Waters Table is tool utilized to track surface waters based on Management Strategy and Priority Level. The following table is a slightly abridged version of the tool utilized by ADEQ. This table has been updated based on Arizona’s Draft 2010 Integrated 305(b) Assessment and 303(d) Listing Report. It is primarily organized based on ADEQ’s Prioritization Level. Waters are prioritized in one of the following ways: High priority for attaining standards Potential for improvement in the near future (color coded green) Explore opportunities (color coded yellow) Potential de-list (color coded pink) Not an implementation priority/primarily point source in nature (color coded white) In the far left column, the table notes the Management Strategy that applies to each surface water. Since the Management Strategy informs ADEQ’s prioritization scheme, there is some overlap in the six Prioritization Levels and the six Management Strategies. Please note that the Management Strategies were updated in FY13 based on the process improvement activities described in (chapter 1?), and will differ slightly from those described in the FY12 NPS Annual Report. The six Management Strategies (Level A through F) are: • • • • • Level A – Requires further investigation. Most impaired waters start in Level A. The TMDL Program will develop further monitoring data to determine the extent of impairment (e.g., seasonality, area), likely sources, and develop a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) that indicates the load and waste load reductions needed for the surface water to meet standards. (Ditch this one completely?) Level B – Develop a plan or other strategy that identifies and prioritizes effective water quality improvement projects. This step is key to diminishing the pollutant sources and impacts. Potential plans or strategies may include developing an full or abbreviated TMDL, a cooperative Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) that lays out an implementation plan for addressing the impairment, pursing compliance action, or going straight to project implementation. WQIPs, TMDLs or other formal strategies developed must include EPA’s nine key elements of a watershed plan. These plans include a load or waste load reduction estimation, although not at the level of sophistication of a TMDL. Level C – Implement the plan or other strategy. Surface waters move to Level C when a WIP, TIP, WQIP, or other strategy is being implemented. Implementation may take years and require multiple phases. Level D – Re-evaluate impairment due to watershed improvements, new standards, or natural conditions. The impairment decision will be re-evaluated when water quality improvements are implemented, when relevant water quality standards change, or when preliminary data indicates that pollutants are solely due to natural conditions. New data are collected during this stage during critical conditions (conditions when exceedances have occurred in the past). Level E – Request removal from Arizona’s impaired water list. If the data evaluation indicates that the surface water is no longer impaired by the pollutant(s) of concern, ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 31 • the surface water moves to this level for a short time. This level reflects the reality that surface waters must be officially removed from the impaired waters list, and this may take time. Level F – Assign to EPA because ADEQ lacks jurisdiction (e.g. pollutant source are entirely in Mexico). When all pollutant sources are outside of Arizona, particularly in Mexico, EPA will be notified and will be expected to take the lead in implementing pollutant mitigation actions. The spreadsheet shown in this appendix is a tool to coordinate efforts between several of ADEQ’s programs and help focus efforts and funding opportunities with other federal, state, and local agencies. Improving water quality on all surface waters listed as impaired is a high priority for ADEQ, so the level does not infer a priority. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 32 Surface Water Management Strategy Internal Prioritization Targeted Status Watershed Assessment Unit Pollutants (First Listed) Humboldt Canyon (Headwaters to Alum Gulch) Cadmium (1996) Copper (1996) Zinc (1996) Low pH (1996) Assessment Category TMDL Development Previous Projects and Other Comments Cadmium (1996) Alum Gulch and tributaries . D Note: Cross-program coordination required (NPS/ Compliance) Alum Gulch (Headwaters to Tributary at 312820 / 1104351 ); CrossCross-program coordination required (NPS/Compliance) Potential Measure W/SPW/SP-12 SC Copper (1996) Zinc (1996) Low pH (1996) Alum Gulch (Tributary at 312820 / 1104351 to Tributary at 312917 / 1104425) Cadmium (1996) Copper (1996) Zinc (1996) Low pH (1996) Alum Gulch (Tributary at 312917 / 1104425 to Sonoita Creek) Cadmium (1996) Copper (1996) Zinc (1996) Low pH (1996) TMDL sources identified: Remediate mining sources. 4a TMDL completed in 2003 TMDL identified sources: Hillside Mine upper, middle and lower tailing piles; adit at middle pile. Arsenic Boulder Creek (Wilder Creek - Butte Creek) Boulder Creek C . Note: Cross-program coordination required (NPS/ Compliance) High NPS focus for attaining standards ADEQ NPS Funding Target AND Potential Measure W/SP12 BW Copper 4a Completed TMDL in 2004 Completed TIP in 2005 4a Completed TMDL in 2004 Completed TIP in 2005 Zinc Arsenic Boulder Creek (Butte Creek - Copper Creek) Copper Zinc Granite Creek/Watson Lake B/C High NPS NPS focus for attaining standards ADEQ NPS Funding Target Granite Creek (Headwaters to Willow Creek) DO (2004 - EPA) E. coli (2010) Miller Creek (Headwaters to Granite Creek) E. coli (2010) VR Nitrogen Watson Lake 5 TMDLs to be completed in FY14 Low DO Ammonia Low DO Lakeside Lake CrossCross-program coordination required (NPS/Compliance) Potential Potential Measure W/SPW/SP-12 High pH SC Lakeside Lake Chlorophyll-a 4a TMDL completed in 2005 Nitrogen Phosphorus Little Colorado River D ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 High NPS focus for attaining standards ADEQ NPS Funding Target LC Little Colorado River (West Fork Little Colorado River to Water Canyon) Little Colorado River (Water Canyon to Nutrioso Creek) Little Colorado River (Nutrioso Creek to Carnero Creek) Little Colorado River (Coyote Creek to Lyman Lake) Turbidity 4a Turbidity See comment above [Boulder Creek (from Wilder Creek to Butte Creek)]. This reach is below Hillside mine; implementation activities at Hillside should reduce loadings to this reach. WIP to identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs finalized in FY13. Future updates to compare projected load reductions with TMDL-identified reductions necessary to meet standards. DO listing on Granite may come off in the 2012 assessment. . Stormwater inputs are a major concern; NPS staff will coordinate with Stormwater Permit and WQD Compliance staff as appropriate to ensure known issues are addressed. TMDL identified: Further treatment of effluent (tertiary or constructed wetland); provide more well water (not effluent); reduce storm water entering lake, dredge lake to remove nutrients in sediment; upgrade aeration system in lake; use alum to remove phosphorus from water column; use algaecides; and drop lake level in spring to minimize algae growth. New permit indicates that city will not be discharging effluent to the lake. WQIGs: Treating lake with Alum to remove phosphorus Turbidity Turbidity ADEQ coordinating with ASLD, EPA, ADOA and Freeport McMoRan to address lower tailings pile. Construction expected in Spring 2014. BLM currently developing plan to address upper pile. Middle pile, under private ownership, also has an adit discharge (owner has been contacted by Compliance staff). WQIGs: 1. Retention basin improvement and street sewer education program (2007) 2. Granite Creek channel recontouring in Watson Woods. 3. Granite Creek riparian improvement in Watson Woods (Watson Woods is just above Watson Lake) 4. Granite Creek Watershed Improvement Plan (2009) 5. Granite Creek Watershed Stormwater Demonstration Project (2013) High pH (EPA 2004) D . Note: Cross-program coordination required (NPS/ Compliance) USFS has remediated Worlds Fair Mine and Humboldt Canyon Mine. Remaining sources are Humboldt Canyon and January adits (point sources), and are a low priority for USFS at this time. Tiny subdrainage of Sonoita Creek 1505030102 TMDL, including TIP completed in 2002. Need to reevaluate using SSC standards, so will sample for SSC and turbidity in 2009- sampling continues Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Implementation plan has been developed for the Coyote Creek subwatershed as part of grant #3 listed below. WQIGs: 1. Coyote Creek sediment reduction (1998) 2. Big Ditch project (2000) 3. Coyote Creek Targeted Watershed Improvement Grant (2010) 4. Big Ditch Extension Project Phase II (2013) 33 Surface Water Oak Creek and Spring Creek Management Strategy B/C Internal Prioritization High NPS focus for attaining standards Targeted Status ADEQ NPS Funding Target Watershed VR Assessment Unit Pollutants (First Listed) Oak Creek (Dry Creek to Spring Creek); E. coli (2006) Oak Creek (West Fork Oak Creek to Tributary at 345709 / 1114513); E. coli(2006) Oak Creek (Tributary at 345709 / 1114513 to Slide Rock State Park); E. coli(1994) Oak Creek (Slide Rock State Park to Dry Creek); E. coli (2006) Oak Creek (Headwaters to West Fork Oak Creek); E. coli (2006) Spring Creek (Coffee Creek to Oak Creek) E. coli (2006) Assessment Category TMDL Development WIP to identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs finalized in FY13. Future updates to compare projected load reductions with TMDL-identified reductions necessary to meet standards. 4a TMDL completed 2011 Pinto Creek (Headwaters to Tributary at 331927 / 1105456) Pinto Creek San Francisco River and Blue River A C High NPS focus for attaining standards High NPS focus for attaining standards Potential Measure W/SPW/SP-12 ADEQ NPS Funding Target SR UG Previous Projects and Other Comments Pinto Creek (Tributary at 331927 / 1105456 to West Fork Pinto Creek) Gibson Mine Tributary (Headwaters to Pinto Creek Copper (1990) Pinto Creek (West Fork Pinto Creek to Roosevelt Lake) Copper (1990) Selenium (2004) 4a (*also 5) Blue River (Strayhorse Creek to San Francisco River); E. coli ( 2006 ) 5 San Francisco River (Blue River to Limestone Gulch); E. coli ( 2006 ) 5 San Francisco River (Limestone Gulch to Gila River) E. coli (2010) 5 4a Phase 1 completed in 2001. Phase II under development. TMDL waiting for a site-specific copper standard. Selenium TMDL not yet completed. WQIGs: 1.Sediment traps - Guardian Project 2000. 2. 10 Septic systems 2000-2002 3. Don't trash Slide Rock 4. Sediment catchments 2000-02 5. Slide Rock education and outreach (1997) 6. DNA Genotyping (1999) 7. Septic systems (1998) 8. Outfall pipe (2000) 9. Septic survey (2001) 10. Trailhead toilets and riparian improvements (2002) 11. Red Rock State Park constructed wetland (2006) 12. Oak Creek WQIG (toilets and campground improvements) (2006) 13. Oak Creek Watershed Improvement Plan (2010) TMDL indicated sources: 1. Mining, especially at Gibson Mine. 2. Survey area to identify other abandoned mining operations and prioritize for remediation. WQIG: 1. Gibson Mine remediation (2006) 2. NPS Reduction of Copper to Pinto Creek (2010). ADEQ is attempting to set a site specific copper standard -UPDATE? Small scale riparian improvements, fencing, and alternative water sources for cattle have been funded piecemeal throughout the watershed. Developing a WIP to identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Locally-driven WIP determined to be a more effective route to implementation. WQIGs: 1. Martinez Ranch riparian improve and grazing BMPs 2. Kaler Ranch erosion control Phase I (2006) 3. Cole Creek and White Mule Creek sediment reduction (2004) 4. San Francisco/Blue River Targeted Watershed Improvement Plan (2009) 5. Kaler Ranch erosion control Phase II (2010) 6. Clifton Restroom Project (2013) Developing of WIP to identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs wrapping up end of FY13. Drainage includes NWQI Target Watershed(s). Watershed(s) San Pedro River Tonto Creek and Christopher Creek C B High NPS focus for attaining attaining standards High NPS focus for attaining standards ADEQ NPS Funding Target ADEQ NPS Funding Target AND Potential Measure W/SP12 SP SR Initiated in 2006. TMDL currently on hold due to WQIG/WIP development. San Pedro River (Babocomari Creek to Dragoon Wash) E. coli (2004) 5 Tonto Creek (Headwaters to Tributary at 341810 / 1110414 ) E. coli (1998) Low DO (EPA 2004) Nitrogen (1998) 4a Tonto Creek (Tributary at 34180 / 1110414 to Haigler Creek) E. coli (1998) Low DO (EPA 2004) Nitrogen (1998) 4a E. coli(2004) 4a Phosphorus (2006) 5 TMDL not yet scheduled 4a TMDL completed in 2008. ADEQ is doing effectiveness monitoring. TMDLs for nitrogen and E. coli were completed in 2005 Christopher Creek (Headwaters to Tonto Creek) Turkey Creek D Note: Cross-program coordination required (NPS/ Compliance) ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Not an implementation implementation priority/primarily point sources. Potential Measure W/SPW/SP-12 MG Turkey Creek (Tributary at 341928/1122128 to Poland Creek) Copper (1992) Lead (2004) WQIGs: 1. San Pedro urban sediment reduction (Sierra Vista, 1995) 2. San Pedro sediment reduction (1997) 3. Borderlands upland improvements (2002) 4. Fort Huachuca road closure & crossing improve (2002) 5. San Pedro Watershed Improvement Plan (2010) TMDL identified sources: Inadequate septic tanks and recreational sources. County and local communities must make a long-term, large-scale plan for addressing septic concerns in order to focus implementation efforts toward a specific goal. WQIGs: 1. Gila County septic system upgrades (2006) 2. RBar-C Boy Scout septic improvements (2007) 3. Tonto Baptist Camp septic upgrade (2008) 4. Tonto Watershed Improvement Grant (2010) (CANCELLED - lack of organization at the local level) Completed: US Forest Service has remediated tailings at Golden Belt and Golden Turkey mine sites. Doing effectiveness monitoring. MSGP may address sources from Blue Bell mine. 34 Surface Water Alvord Park Lake Gila River Management Strategy A A/B Internal Prioritization Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity Potential for improvement in the near future/some future/some activity Targeted Status N/A N/A Watershed MG UG Assessment Unit Pollutants (First Listed) Assessment Category TMDL Development Previous Projects and Other Comments Alvord Lake Ammonia (2004) 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Known source from a landscaping/garden business; explore opportunities for NPS funding. In general for urban lakes: impairments are due to in-lake issues, so WQIG eligible projects are limited. Gila River (Apache Creek to Skully Creek) E. coli (dissolved) (2010) 4a TMDL not yet initiated. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Gila River (Skully Creek to San Francisco River) Selenium (2004) E. coli (2010) 4a Selenium delisted in 2010 based on recent data collection. E. coli TMDL not yet initiated. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. E. coli (draft 2006) 5 Gila River (New Mexico border to Bitter Creek) Suspended sediment concentration (2006) 5 E. coli TMDL completed in 2012. Sediment TMDL to be completed FY13. E coli (2004) Gila River (Bonita Creek to Yuma Wash) Suspended sediment concentration (2004 by EPA) 5 E. coli TMDL completed in 2012. Sediment TMDL to be completed FY13. A Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity E. coli (2004) N/A LC Little Colorado River (Silver Creek to Carr Wash) 5 TMDLs to be completed in FY13 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL. EPA contracted with Tetra Tech in FY12 to compile a data summary and determine potential level of NPS contributions to E. coli impairment. Sediment (EPA 2004) Nogales and East Nogales Wash Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity Ammonia (2004) N/A SC Nogales Wash (Mexico border to Potrero Creek) Chlorine (1988) Copper (2004) Nutrioso Creek (Nelson Reservoir to Picnic Creek) Nutrioso Creek (from Nelson Reservoir to Little Colorado River) D Pena Blanca Lake D Portrero Creek (Interstate 19 to Santa Cruz River) F . Note: Cross-program coordination required (NPS/ Compliance) Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity activity Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity N/A Potential Measure W/SPW/SP-12 SC Completed TMDL in 2000 and TIP in 2002 Turbidity (1992) LC 4a Nutrioso Creek (Picnic Creek to Little Colorado River) Turbidity (1992) Pena Blanca Lake Mercury in fish TMDL completed in 1999, included TIP. 5 EPA contracted with Tetra Tech in FY12 to compile a data summary and determine potential level of NPS contributions to E. coli impairment. Low DO (2010) N/A SC Potrero Creek (Interstate 19 to Santa Cruz River) E. coli (2010) ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Delisted upper portion (headwaters to Nelson Reservoir). 4a Chlorine (2010) Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. WQIGs: Silver Creek sediment reduction (1994) E. coli (1988) F . Note: Cross-program coordination required (NPS/ Compliance) WQIG: 1. Duncan Valley canal replacement (2007), 2. Gila Watershed Stewards Ph. I (2008), 3. Gila Watershed Stewards Ph. II (2010) WQIGs: Gila River clean up (2006) Lead (total) (2010) Little Colorado River Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Explore possibility of working closely with NMED to identify and fund projects in New Mexico. Infrastructure (point source) upgrades must be accomplished to properly address primary sources. Proposed: Identify, prioritize, and implement sediment sources and implement appropriate BMPs WQIGs: 1. EC Bar Ranch grazing projects (pasture and riparian improvements, alternative water (2000-2007), fencing, etc) 2. Rogers Ranch improvements (riparian and upland improvements, alternative water, fencing (2000), 3. Murray-Saffel Canyon sediment controls (2001) 4. Greenwood sediment reduction (2003) TMDL identified: Remove tailings at St Patrick Mine Ball Mill site and reduce sediment to lake. USFS has completed the remediation of ST Patrick mine. USFS dredged lake in 2009 to remove mercury recycling in lake sediments. Lake has been refilled and restocked, but it will take more monitoring over several years to determine new fish tissue levels. 35 Surface Water Management Strategy Internal Prioritization Targeted Status Watershed Assessment Unit Pollutants (First Listed) Assessment Category TMDL Development Narrative nutrient (weeds) (1992) Rainbow Lake C Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity N/A LC Rainbow Lake High pH (1992) 4a Completed TMDL and TIP in 2000 Low DO San Pedro River (from Aravaipa Creek to Gila River) A/B San Pedro River A Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity EQIP Priority Watershed Potential for improvement in the near future/some activity N/A SP SP San Pedro River (Aravaipa Creek to Gila River) San Pedro River (Mexico border to Charleston) E. coli (2004) Selenium (2004) E. coli (2010) 5 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 (In In AAR as of 5/13; UPDATE). Selenium impairment dropped in 2010 due to a change in the application of the standard. TMDL not yet scheduled Talk about opportunities N/A UG Luna Lake 4a Narrative nutrients (1998) TMDL completed in 2000, including TIP Ammonia Santa Cruz River (Josephine Canyon to Tubac Bridge) Santa Cruz River (Canada del Oro to HUC 15050303 Boundary) Santa Cruz River A Talk about opportunities Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. WIP being developed for the middle San Pedro (2010 Targeted Watershed) will likely be able to be used as a guide for identifying sources in this reach. ASARCO land swap taking place to mitigate loss of other riparian corridors may help. - UPDATE WQIGs: 1. Aravaipa Canyon riparian restoration (2000) 2. San Pedro riparian improvements (2000) 3. Wildlife habitat restoration (2003) 4. San Pedro cleanup trash (near St David) (2003) 5. 3 Links Farm riparian restoration (2005) 6. S.P Initiative identified sediment controls in The Narrows (2000) 7. Manzanita Erosion control (2006) Drainage includes NWQI Target Watershed(s). Copper (dissolved) (2010) Low DO (1998) B Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources not identified in the TMDL and prioritize implementation. ADEQ conducted preliminary monitoring to determine if dredging would be effective. WQIG funds can't be used for in-lake treatments until all watershed contributions are addressed. Stormwater runoff contributions are still a concern. Watershed group has focused its efforts on herbicide application for the past few years, and is currently pursuing grass-eating carp as an in-lake treatment. Completed: Sewering the area WQIGs: Rainbow Lake Water Quality Improvement Project (2008) --installing buffer strips around lake. High pH (1998) Luna Lake Previous Projects and Other Comments N/A SC Santa Cruz River (Nogales WWTP to Josephine Canyon) Santa Cruz River (HUC 150303 Boundary to Baum) Eliminate nutrient discharges from Alpine Sanitary District (potentially coordinate with WIFA). Explore opportunities for grazing BMPs. TMDL identified: Upgrade septic systems, grazing BMPs, urban BMPs, filter strips, riparian improvements, weed harvesting, dredging, and raise lake levels (reducing water diversions). WQIG: Luna Lake septic system upgrades (2001) Ammonia (2010) E. coli (2010) 5 Ammonia 4b Chlorine 4b TMDL not yet initiated. Moved to 4b; impairment should be addressed via treatments practices in place Roger Road/Ina Road Treatment plant should address impairment The Nogales International Wastewater Treatment Plant has been upgraded and fully operational since 2009. The facility is now capable of meeting all effluent discharge permit limits. Effectiveness of chlorine removal by the new treatment plant will be determined in 2012 assessment. Roger Road/Ina Road Treatment plant should address impairment Roger Road/Ina Road Treatment plant should address impairment Roger Road/Ina Road Treatment plant should address impairment Copper (dissolved) 4b Lead (dissolved) Santa Cruz River (Roger road WWTP Outfall to Intermittent Reach) Ammonia 4b Cave Creek (from headwaters to South Fork of Cave Creek) D Delist/Potential Delist N/A UG Cave Creek (Headwaters to South Fork Cave Creek) Selenium (2004) 5 Initiated in 2006. New monitoring shows no exceedances. More monitoring needed. Crescent Lake A Delist/Potential Delist N/A SR Crescent Lake High pH (2002 - EPA) 5 TMDL de-prioritized based on potential de-list. More monitoring needed. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Possible dede-list. Rose Canyon Lake A Delist/Potential Delist N/A SC Rose Canyon Lake Low pH (2004 by EPA) 5 May be natural low pH values (occurring 4 meters deep in this 7 acre lake.) Likely de-list. Proposed: Identify, prioritize and implement appropriate nutrient BMPs. Agua Fria River A Not Categorized N/A MG Agua Fria River (Sycamore Creek to Big Bug Creek) E. coli (2010) 5 TMDL not yet initiated. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 36 Surface Water Management Strategy Internal Prioritization Targeted Status Watershed Assessment Unit Alamo Lake A Not Categorized N/A BW Alamo Lake Alamo Lake A Not Categorized N/A BW Alamo Lake Apache Lake and Canyon Lake and Salt River below Saguaro Lake A Arivaca Lake C Not Categorized N/A Arnett Creek A Not Categorized Bill Williams River A Not Categorized Black Canyon Lake Apache Lake A Not Categorized Not Categorized Pollutants (First Listed) Mercury in fish (2002 by EPA) (ADEQ had it listed prior 2002) Ammonia (2004) pH (1996) DO (2006) Assessment Category TMDL Development Previous Projects and Other Comments 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 Proposed: Identify, prioritize, and remediate mining sites in drainage, especially adjacent to streams and washes. 5 No plans to initiate TMDLs at this time. Proposed: Identify and prioritize nutrient sources and implement appropriate BMPs. 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL Dissolved oxygen (2006) Canyon Lake Dissolved oxygen (2004) Salt River (Stewart Mountain Dam to Verde River) Dissolved oxygen (2004) SC Arivaca Lake Mercury in fish (1992) 4a TMDL completed in 1999, included TIP. N/A MG Arnett Creek (Headwaters to Queen Creek) Copper (dissolved) (2010) 5 TMDL not scheduled N/A BW Bill Williams River (Alamo Lake to Castaneda Wash) 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 (combined with Alamo Lake TMDL) N/A N/A SR WQIGs: Trees for the Rim (after wildfire) Ammonia (2006) High pH (2006) LC Black Canyon Lake Ammonia (2010) 5 TMDL not scheduled Beryllium (dissolved) (2010) 5 TMDL not scheduled 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 5 TMDL not yet scheduled Boulder Creek A Not Categorized N/A BW Boulder Creek (Tributary at 344114/1131800 to Wilder Creek) Chaparral Lake A Not Categorized N/A MG Chaparral Park Lake DO (2004) E. coli (2004) Colorado River A Not Categorized N/A Selenium (total) (2004) 5 Selenium (total) (2010) 5 TMDL not scheduled 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL 5 TMDL not yet scheduled Proposed: Identify and prioritize mercury sources and implement appropriate remediation. 5 Data collection complete TMDL development ongoing Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Not Categorized N/A CL Colorado River A Not Categorized N/A CL Colorado River (Imperial Dam to Gila River) N/A CG Colorado River (Lake Powell to Paria River) Selenium (total) (2010) Selenium (total) (2006) Selenium (total) (2006) Colorado River A Not Categorized N/A CL Colorado River (Main Canal to Mexico border) Low DO (2006) Selenium (2004) Colorado River A Not Categorized N/A Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL A Not Categorized Proposed: Identify and prioritize nutrient sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Colorado River (Bill Williams River to Osborne Wash) Colorado River A TMDL sources identified: Manage lake to reduce production of methylmercury. Possibly dredge lake sediments CL Colorado River (from Hoover Dam to Lake Mohave) Colorado River Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Impairments may be addressed by narrative nutrient standard. CG Colorado River (from Parshant Canyon to Diamond Creek) Coors Lake A Not Categorized N/A BW Coors Lake Cortez Park Lake A Not Categorized N/A MG Cortez Park Lake Suspended sediment concentration (2004) Mercury in fish (EPA listed in 2004) Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Identify source loads contributed from other states. Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Identify source loads contributed from other states (how remediate these?). Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Identify source loads contributed from other states. Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Identify source loads contributed from other states (how remediate these?). WQIGs: 1. Kaibab Moccasin Wash range and crop BMPs (1997) 2. Fredonia (Pratt Tank) riparian improvement 3. Milkweed riparian restoration (Hualapai) (2000) 4. Mohawk Canyon (Hualapai) 2000 5. Red Springs fencing (Hualapai) 1998 6. Bank stabilization at Spencer Beach (2007) 7. Road Stabilization at Diamond Creek (2008) DO (2004) High pH (2004) ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 37 Surface Water Management Strategy Internal Prioritization Targeted Status Watershed Assessment Unit East Verde River A Not Categorized Categorized N/A VR East Verde River (From American Gulch to Verde River) Pollutants (First Listed) Assessment Category TMDL Development Previous Projects and Other Comments 5 Initiated in 2007; to be completed FY14 Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Recent data shows no exceedances. 5 TMDL in progress; to be completed FY14 Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. 4a Completed in 2004 Identified in TMDL: Remediate mining issues at Zonia Mine Identify, prioritize, and implement appropriate BMPs at other mines. 5 TMDL in progress; to be completed FY15 5 TMDL in progress; to be completed FY15 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL Arsenic (2006) Boron (2006) East Verde River A Not Categorized N/A VR East Verde River (Ellison Creek to American Gulch) French Gulch B Not an an implementation priority/primarily point sources. N/A MG French Gulch (Headwaters to Hassayampa River) Gila River A Not Categorized N/A MG Gila River (Centennial Wash - Gillespie Dam) Gila River A Not Categorized N/A CL Gila River (Coyote Wash to Fortuna Wash) Gila River A Not Categorized N/A MG Gila River (San Pedro River to Mineral Creek) SSC (2006) Unnamed Trib to Harshaw Creek (Headwaters to Harshaw Creek) Cadmium Selenium (2004) Copper (1994) Zinc (1994) Cadmium (1994) Selenium (total) (2004) Boron (total) (1992) Selenium (2004) Boron (total) (2004 relist) Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Selenium from ag return flows is a point source, but these flows are exempt from permit requirements. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. WQIGs: Trees for the Rim (after wildfire) Harshaw Creek B Not Categorized N/A SC Harshaw Creek (Headwaters to Sonoita Creek) Hassayampa River (Headwaters to Copper Creek) Hassayampa River and tributaries B Not Categorized N/A MG Cash Mine Creek (Headwaters to Hassayampa River) Unnamed Tributary to Cash Mine Creek (Headwaters to Cash Mine Creek) Lake Mary A Not Categorized N/A LC Upper Lake Mary Lake Mohave A Not Categorized N/A CL Lake Mohave Lake Powell A Not Categorized N/A CG Lake Powell Long Lake (lower) B Not Categorized N/A LC Long Lake (Lower) Lyman Lake/Reservoir A Not Categorized N/A LC Lyman Lake Low pH 4a TMDL completed in 2003 4a TMDL Completed in 2002 Identified in TMDL and Proposed: Remediate abandoned or inactive mine sites (McCleur Mine) contributing pollutants, including tailings and adits at these sites. TMDL completed 2011. TIP under development. Proposed: Identify and prioritize mercury sources and implement appropriate remediation. Cadmium Low pH Cadmium (1992) Copper (1992) Zinc (1992) Low pH (2006) Cadmium (1992) Copper (1992) Zinc (1992) Cadmium (1992) Copper (1992) Zinc (1992) Mercury in fish (2002 by EPA) Selenium (total) (2010) Mercury in fish (2010 by EPA) Mercury in fish (2004 by EPA) Mercury in fish (2004 by EPA) 5 TMDL not yet scheduled 5 TMDL not yet scheduled 4a TMDL completed 2012; TIP in progress 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 5 Consent decree requires mine to meet all surface water standards; therefore, TMDL has not been initiated. Selenium (2004) Mineral Creek C Not an implementation priority/primarily priority/primarily point sources. Copper (1992) N/A MG Mineral Creek (Devil's Canyon to Gila River) Low DO (2006) Mule Gulch and tributaries, including Brewery Gulch A ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Not Categorized N/A SP Brewery Gulch (Headwaters to Mule Gulch) Copper (dissolved) (2004) Mule Gulch (Headwaters to above Lavender Pit) Copper (dissolved) (1990) Mule Gulch (Above Lavender Pit to Bisbee WWTP discharge) Copper (dissolved) (1990) Low pH (EPA 2004) Mule Gulch (Bisbee WWTP discharge to Highway 80 bridge) Cadmium (dissolved) (1990) TMDL sources identified: Remediate mining area by: removing or filling over mining residue; redirecting runoff away from mining deposits; removing mine wastes in the stream bed or combine with neutralizing materials; and constructing wetlands to treat mine discharges. Proposed: Identify and prioritize mercury sources and implement appropriate remediation. Proposed: Identify and prioritize mercury sources and implement appropriate BMPs. ASARCO is looking at ways to mitigate selenium contamination and low dissolved oxygen occurring in mining tunnel constructed to direct surface water around mining operation. ASARCO has mitigated manganese and the majority of copper pollutants. WQIG - Gibson Mine Mineral Creek - far upstream; not likely to impact this reach. Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. 5 Developing site specific standards (for (for Cu and Zn?) Completed: FMI has re-routed stormwater and seeps to minimize impacts to Mule Gulch ADEQ is working on a site-specific copper standard 38 Surface Water Management Strategy Internal Prioritization Targeted Status Watershed Assessment Unit Pollutants (First Listed) Assessment Category TMDL Development Previous Projects and Other Comments 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Identify source loads contributed from other states (how remediate these?) Exceedances possibly primarily due to natural conditions (sandstone) 5 TMDL to be completed in FY13 Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. 4a TMDL Completed in 2001, including TIP TMDL sources identified: Improve riparian conditions to remove sediments that might add more nutrient loads. Lake is on private (Freeport) land; ADEQ has no current samples. Copper (total and dissolved) (1990) Low pH (1990) Zinc (dissolved) (1990) Paria River A Not Categorized N/A CG Colorado River (Lake Powell to Paria River) Suspended sediment concentration (2004) E. coli (2006) Mercury in fish (2004 by EPA) Parker Canyon Lake A Not Categorized N/A SC Parker Canyon Lake Peck's Lake B Not Categorized N/A VR Peck's Lake Pintail Lake A Not an implementation priority/primarily point sources. N/A LC Pintail Lake Ammonia (2010) 5 TMDL not yet scheduled EDW Puerco River A Not an implementation implementation priority/primarily point sources. N/A LC Puerco River (Dead Wash to Ninemile Wash) Copper (dissolved) (2010) 5 TMDL not yet scheduled EDW Queen Creek (from headwaters to Superior WWTP) Copper (dissolved) (2002) Lead (total) (2010) Copper (dissolved) (2004) Copper (dissolved) (2010) 5 Model is being update to include recent data collected, site specific standard will likely no be developed Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. 5 TMDL to be initiated in 2015 High pH (1998) Queen Creek and tributaries Salt River Soldiers Lake and Soldiers Lake Annex A A B Not Categorized Not Categorized Not Categorized N/A N/A N/A MG SR LC Queen Creek (Superior WWTP to Potts Canyon) Queen Creek (Potts Canyon to Whitlow Canyon) Tributary to Queen Creek (Headwaters to Queen Creek) Unnamed tributary to Queen Creek (Headwaters to Queen Creek) Unnamed tributary to Queen Creek (Headwaters to Queen Creek Salt River (Pinal Creek to Roosevelt Lake) Soldier Annex Lake Low DO (1998) Copper (dissolved) (2010) Copper (dissolved) (2010) Copper (dissolved) (2010) Suspended sediment (2006) E. coli (2010) Nitrogen (2010) Phosphorus (2010) Mercury in fish (2004 by EPA) WQIG: Trees for the rim (wildfire) 4a TMDL completed 2011 Proposed: Identify and prioritize mercury sources and implement appropriate remediation. 5 ADEQ to extend EDW, which would eliminate the DO impairment Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. WQIGs: 1. Audubon septic system improvements (2002) 2. Cattle exclosure at Audubon research (2002) 3. C6 Ranch grazing BMPs (on Red Rock Canyon) (2002) 4. Red Rock grazing improvements (2006) Zinc (2004) Sonoita Creek A Not an implementation priority/primarily point sources. N/A SC Sonoita Creek (1600 feet below Patagonia WWTP discharge to Patagonia Lake) Low DO (2006) Low DO (1998) Stoneman Lake D Not Categorized N/A VR Stoneman Lake Narrative Nutrients (1998) 4a TMDL Completed in 2001, including TIP B Not an implementation priority/primarily point sources. N/A LC Telephone Lake Unnamed Tributary to Cox Gulch (Headwaters to Cox Gulch); Three R Canyon and tributaries (Cox Canyon) B Not Categorized N/A SC Cox Gulch (Headwaters to Three R Canyon) Three R Canyon (Headwaters to Tributary at 312819 / 1104556) ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Ammonia (2010) Cadmium (1994) Copper (1994) Zinc (1994) Low pH (1994) Cadmium (1994) Zinc (1994) Low pH (1994) Cadmium (1994) Zinc (1994) Copper (1994) TMDL sources identified: Septics. Increase water sources for lake. . Lake is ephemeral; low/fluctuating water levels make it difficult to meet standards. WQIGs: Replace septic systems, create grey water use systems, and construct sediment catchments. High pH (1998) Telephone Lake Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. 5 4a TMDL not yet scheduled Show Low WWTP Lagoons; point source, not an implementation priority TMDL completed in 2003 TMDL sources identified: Remediate mining area by: removing or filling over mining residue; redirecting runoff away from mining deposits; removing mine wastes in the stream bed or combine with neutralizing materials; and constructing wetlands to treat mine discharges. 39 Surface Water Management Strategy Internal Prioritization Targeted Status Watershed Assessment Unit Unnamed Tributary to Three R Canyon (Headwaters to Three R Canyon) Three R Canyon (Tributary at 312835 / 1104619 to Tributary at 312827 / 1104712); Three R Canyon (Tributary at 312827 / 1104712 to Sonoita Creek) Pollutants (First Listed) Assessment Category TMDL Development Previous Projects and Other Comments Low pH (1994) Cadmium (1994) Zinc (1994) Copper (1994) Low pH (1994) Cadmium (1994) Zinc (1994) Copper (1994) Low pH (1994) Cadmium (1994) Zinc (1994) Copper (1994) Low pH (1994) Note: 10560105-013B is also listed as Category 4a previously in this table 15060105-013B 15060105-011 Tonto Creek A Not Categorized N/A SR Mercury in fish (2010 by EPA) 5 TMDL not yet scheduled Verde River (Bartlett Dam to Camp Creek ) Arsenic (total) (2010) 5 TMDL not yet scheduled Colorado River (Lake Powell to Paria River) Selenium (2004) Suspended sediment concentration (2004); 5 Loss of resources has delayed the development of this TMDL 15060105-009 15060105-008 15060105-006 15060105-004 Verde River Virgin River A A Not Categorized Not Categorized N/A N/A VR CG E. coli (2010) ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Proposed: Identify and prioritize sources and implement appropriate BMPs. Identify source loads contributed from other states (how remediate these?). ADEQ has very little data on this reach. 40 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROJECTS (Open Project as of June 2013) § ¦ ¨ 15 " Page Colorado / Grand Canyon " " " Peach Springs Little Colorado / San Juan § ¦ ¨ " 40 Kingman 13-002 Oak Creek Outreach Project Colorado / Lower Gila " " Verde 13-004 Upper Granite Creek Project 40 Bagdad Parker Camp Verde 12-002 Coyote Creek Watershed-scale Education/Training Grant " " Congress " § ¦ ¨ 17 Salt § ¦ ¨ 10 Middle Gila " Colorado / Lower Gila " Yuma " Wellton Buckeye " Winslow § ¦ ¨ Bill Williams " Moenkopi 11-004 Wenima Wildlife Area Stream Restoration Project Glendale po 12-008 NPS Reduction of Copper to Pinto Creek " San Carlos 13-003 Clifton Restroom Project Upper Gila § ¦ ¨ 8 " San Luis § ¦ ¨ San Pedro Impaired Lakes Native American Reservations 19 Major Highways This map is for general reference only and may not be all inclusive. More detailed information and specific locations can be obtained ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02of Environmental Quality. by contacting the Arizona Department · " 0 10 10 " § ¦ ¨ Impaired Streams § ¦ ¨ Benson 12-003 San Pedro Watershed Implimentation Plan Targeted Watershed Projects po po 12-006 Gila Watershed Steward Project, Phase II Santa Cruz Open Grant Projects op po 13-001 Big Ditch Rehabilitation Project 10 po Show Low 20 Sierra Vista 40 60 80 100 Miles 1 in = 42.92 miles 41 Name: WQI_Grant_Projects_jun2013 ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 42 Appendix D: WQIG Budget for Projects Active During FY13 Closed on or before 6/30/13 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 C9-969984-07-0 C9-989613-08-0 C9-979596-09-0 C9-989613-10-0 C9-989613-11-0 C9-989613-12-0 C9-989613-13-0 NPS 22 NPS 23 NPS 24 2006 NPS 17 NPS 18 $ 804,731.00 Total Award Title Project End Base Inc. 11-004 $ 11-006 $ 11-007 $ Wenima Wildlife Area Stream 74,145.00 Restoration Middle Fossil Creek Water Quality 211,825.00 Improvement Project Sediment Reduction from Runoff Using 37,452.85 Best Management Practices 11-T01 $ Granite Creek - Watson Lake Watershed 12/31/2012 520,500.24 Improvement Plan (EV09-0035) $ $ San Francisco - Blue River Watershed 290,894.18 Improvement Plan Grant (EV09-0035) 11-T02 11-T03 $ 536,545.36 12-002 $ 494,087.60 12-003 $ 265,551.00 12-004 $ 163,396.20 12-006 $ 44,200.00 12-008 $ Base 6/30/2013 $ 24,000.00 9/30/2012 $ 25,999.83 Inc. 6/30/2012 $ 792,900.00 Base $ 500.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 78,363.99 $ EV11-0008 $ EV11-0009 $ EV11-0010 $ Arizona Master Watershed Stewards (MWS) Educational Outreach and Technical Support Program Continuation 6/30/2014 210,588.00 (2010-2012) EV11-0011 $ EV12-0005 $ 13-001 $ Arizona NEMO - Training and Analytical 12/31/2012 59,482.00 Support Program 2010-2012 250,000.00 DEMA Wallow Fire Mitigation Funding 387,800.00 Big Ditch Rehabilitation Project 13-002 $ 13-003 $ Oak Creek Restroon Facility and 253,326.00 Outreach 128,906.00 Clifton Restroom Facility 13-004 $ 455,895.00 Prescott Creeks Stormwater Project NPS 20 792,900.00 Inc. $ 792,900.00 Base $ NPS 21 792,900.00 Inc. $ 10,723.19 $ 117,145.57 $ 10,000.00 $ 1,783.80 $ 109,262.82 $ 72,751.98 109,159.64 $ 42,873.98 $ 17,367.09 $ 32,144.65 $ 139,990.71 $ 130,000.00 $ 43,600.10 $ 26,855.35 $ 83,823.77 $ 1,795.21 $ 45,151.48 $ 15,482.26 $ 39,291.43 $ 12,276.59 $ 5,355.36 $ $ $ $ 6,403.01 29,978.60 139,083.50 $ $ $ 23,398.16 $ 30,979.24 $ 50,000.00 $ 103,102.81 $ 24,000.00 $ 15,141.48 $ 57,976.57 $ 12,776.37 $ 24,398.97 8/31/2013 $ 792,900.00 Inc. $689,000.00 Base $ $689,000.00 Inc. $1,326,629.00 Base Inc. Program $ 5,896.93 $ 197,721.93 $ 14,103.07 $ 25,668.29 $ 37,452.09 $ 0.76 $ 24.42 $ 377,893.42 $ 142,606.82 $ 290,894.18 $ $ 117,490.21 $ 200,000.01 279,826.54 $ 5,863.71 $ 8,809.32 31,587.23 $ $ 345,741.92 $ $ 136,461.78 $ 494,087.60 $ - $ 210,777.31 $ 265,551.00 $ - $ 163,395.52 $ 0.68 $ 44,200.00 $ - $ 701,470.00 $ - $ 29,261.87 $ - $ 334,183.00 $ - $ 210,588.00 $ - $ 14,566.62 250,000.00 $ $ 12.79 $ - 3,480.40 383,505.26 141,291.63 $ $ 4/30/2014 $ 113,469.95 7,727.25 12,698.82 $ 387,800.00 78,263.10 4/30/2014 $ 253,326.00 $ - $ 128,906.00 $ - $ 455,895.00 $ - $ 3,876,054.74 $ 455,895.00 $ 198,863.27 $ 594,842.46 $ 669,537.72 $ 222,369.14 $ 724,796.90 $ 683,971.02 $ 387,800.00 $ 291,270.08 $ - $ 455,895.00 Total Closed and Open $ 804,731.00 $ 804,730.00 $ 792,900.00 $ 792,900.00 $ 792,811.39 $ 620,535.92 $ 724,796.90 $ 683,971.02 $ 387,800.00 $ 291,270.08 $ - $ 455,895.00 $ 88.61 $ 172,364.08 $ 68,103.10 $ 108,928.98 $ 301,200.00 $ 397,729.92 $ - $ 870,734.00 - $ - Total Un-allocated Funding 387,800.00 128,906.00 490,725.13 $ $ 162,364.08 $ - 59,469.21 250,000.00 $ 17,631.95 $ $ $ 190,803.44 $ $ - - 6.46 $ $ - $ 18,956.66 $ Unassigned 74,145.00 $ $ Total Assigned 24,021.81 4/30/2015 Unallocated $1,024,500.00 Watershed Projects $ $ 38,138.20 792,900.00 91,514.87 9,132.37 $ $ Base 14,900.00 701,470.00 NPS Reduction of Copper to Pinto Creek 6/30/2013 Arizona Water Festivals - Building on an 12/31/2012 29,261.87 Effective Education Model Arizona Nemo Nonpoint Source 6/30/2014 334,183.00 Education for Municipal Officals $ $ 12/31/2012 Oak Creek Targeted Watershed 09/30//2012 Improvement Plan (EV09-0035) Coyote Creek Watershed-scale 12/31/2014 Education and Training Grant San Pedro River Watershed 6/30/2013 Implementation Plan Community Stewardship Model for Green 10/31/2012 Streets The Upper Gila Watershed Steward 6/30/2013 Project NPS 19 $ 804,730.00 $ $ - $ - $ 1,024,500.00 2,943,648.69 Pending Projects Remainder ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 Hillside Mine $ 1,350,000.00 WQIG Cycle 14 $ 1,200,000.00 $ 393,648.69 43 ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 44 Appendix E: FY13 Water Quality Improvement Grant Awards and Press Releases In October 2012, the Water Quality Improvement Grant (WQIG) program released a Request for Grant Applications (RFGA) announcing the availability of $1.6 million in Clean Water Act Section 319(h) funding for nonpoint source pollution reduction projects within the state of Arizona. Projects were limited to two categories: 1. Watershed Improvement Plan (WIP) Implementation Watershed Improvement Plans (WIPs) have been developed under previous grants with ADEQ. These improvement plans have investigated and identified the BMPs that have the highest success potential for reducing pollutant loading in their impaired watersheds. 2. Watershed-scale NPS Management Watershed-scale Nonpoint Source (WNPS) Management projects must be able to demonstrate a high likelihood of reducing nonpoint source pollution in a watershed with an impairment or demonstrated nonpoint source water quality issue. These projects are appropriate for situations where the applicant is proposing to utilize a watershed-based approach to identify critical pollutant loading sites where BMP implementation is needed. To be considered for WNPS funding, the application must demonstrate that a nonpoint source water quality issue has been documented in the area of concern, and that the pollutant(s) and probable source(s) as well as applicable BMPs have been identified. Applications for WNPS projects must include criteria that will be used to determine where applicable BMPs will be implemented and how they will be designed for maximum effectiveness. Due to the complexity associated with accurately identifying all of the relevant pollutant sources, WNPS projects are likely to be most effective when restricted to a 10-or 12-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) area with relatively homogeneous land use. Four projects were selected for award in WQIG Cycle 13: ID # 13-01 13-02 Project Summary Big Ditch Piping Project – This project will build upon a previous grant project to complete the installation of an additional 6,000’ of piping to reduce sediment in the Little Colorado River, and will expand upon previous sediment control analysis and recommendations in the watershed. This project will directly address portions of the Big Ditch that have been documented as over-topping and contributing sediment directly to the LCR. Sediment load reduction estimates have not yet been calculated for this project, but additional sediment control projects throughout the watershed are necessary to fully impact the sediment impairment in the LCR. Oak Creek – Installation of a restroom facility at Midgley Bridge, as well as the installation of 15 pet waste stations throughout Oak Creek Canyon trails and the development of outreach activities such as a Creek Ambassador program to implement outreach at high recreation areas. While restrooms and dog waste station BMPs have been predicted to be capable of reducing as much as 80% of the E. coli loads in this particular reach of Oak Creek, further data regarding the public’s actual use level is needed and will be collected to measure the effectiveness of this project. ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 County Apache Coconino/ Yavapai Award Amount $387,800.00 $253,326.00 45 ID# Project Summary County 13-03 Clifton Restroom Facility – Installation of a restroom facility at a high recreation area north of the town of Clifton to be fully maintained by the Town of Clifton. Load reductions for this project have been estimated at ~1.38*1012 CFU/year. A TMDL for this project area has not been completed, but additional projects to address human, cattle, and wildlife impacts to water quality have been outlined in the WIP as necessary for achieving water quality standards. Upper Granite Creek – Development of green infrastructure projects at the Whipple St. Basin and at the Prescott Community Center. The objective of this project is to demonstrate the utility and effectiveness of green infrastructure BMPs to municipal and residential stakeholders, encouraging an increase in their use throughout the watershed. A TMDL is currently in process in this project area. Greenlee $128,906.00 Yavapai $455,895.00 13-04 Award Amount $1,225,927.00 Press releases describing each awarded project follow: ADEQ Pub# EQR 13-02 46